2006: A Hard Road Ahead
When the subject is 2006, one thing is certain: Republicans have everything to lose and very little to gain. Indeed, most observers, at this stage, would be satisfied to merely hold control over the House and Senate. Many underlying historical trends are in our favor; unfortunately for us, people don’t go out and vote for underlying historical trends. Right now, we’re bleeding.
A long, excellent cover story from National Journal covers 2006 like a blanket, and rather than regurgitate the analysis within, I highly recommend you read it. My own quick analysis on the fly, not of the numbers, but of the needed strategy, follows.
2006 is not a lost cause, but the alarm bells should be ringing. The national Republican strategy should include, but not be limited to, the following elements:
Sell Iraq hard. Always. Unceasingly. The President has been doing a much better job of this. He can’t let up. The constitutional election appears to be heading towards a vote of approval. If that is the case, every high Administration official, including Bush himself, needs to hit the talk shows and the road in that order and trumpet the victory to the heavens. If the constitution is not approved…well, let’s cross that bridge when we get there. Needless to say, it will be a huge setback for our Iraq policy. The upcoming trial of the Butcher of Baghdad should help ease pressure somewhat; if the election is lost, we need to push hard for a quick start to the trial. Perceptions matter.
Tout strong economic numbers, and talk about confidence. People are hurting at the gas station and nervous about disaster handling after Katrina. They need to be reminded that the economy is quite strong and has been for some time, while at the same time assured that we understand that hasn’t always translated into strong job growth. The economy will play a big role in 2006.
Tom DeLay and Bill Frist should be defended vigorously, or cut loose. There can’t be any waffling. Come out strong or don’t come at all. Myself, I think the charges against the two are trumped up, and I say come out swinging. Never lose a chance to point out the partisan motives of Ronnie Earle. Press the SEC for a speedy resolution of the Frist case. Again, hit the talk show circuits.
Overall, sell, sell, sell…push, push, push…and play to win. Forget this partisan bickering over the Miers nomination, it doesn’t look good. If you must oppose her on principle, well, I’m a big fan of principle…but if you’re opposing her to please the base, forget the base. The base will come around; we’ve got to make sure we hold the center. Does that advice make me a moderate? Hardly…it makes me a Republican who wants to win in 2006…2008…and beyond. Keep your eye on the big prize: not a victory over one conservative issue, but a gradual continued movement of the center to the right. That’s what we should be fighting for, if we really believe our principles are best for this nation. It’s the long game that counts.
I’d say your strategy re DeLay and Frist is on the money. For me, I’d stick up for Frist and cut DeLay loose. I understand what you’re saying about Earle, but just because virulent partisans are attacking you doesn’t mean your innocent (was the 1993-2001 era really the most ethical Administration in our nation’s history).
To me, the final straw with DeLay was the call to the Department of Homeland Security to catch wayward Texas Democratic legislators who didn’t want to grant a quorum that would allow the redistricting map.
Here in California, a man was arrested for putting out an “Amber Alert” to retrieve his stolen car (he falsley claimed his two nieces were in the car when it was stolen, so he could get it back faster). DeLay’s conduct (and I do believe he authorized the call) should have ended his career right there. And if not that, his asinine claim that he’s done a great job cutting pork and there is nothing left to cut would have done it. Maybe Earle is the wrong person to take DeLay down, but down he must go.
Honestly Mark, I think that you just gave the best possible reason to put this Miers nomination behind us, accept it and move on to more important things. After reading that, I am most definitely back on the chillin’ side of the fence, although I was savering a bit there for a while. If the GOP doesn’t stop tearing Bush down and bickering with itself, Miers will look like Robert Bork compared to whoever bush has to put up there next in order to get them through a Democratically controlled Senate. Plus the Administration (read: Bush) needs to constantly push the message Bush was sending in his recent War on Terror address. It’s been a crappy summer, but the summer is over. Bush needs to start making up ground, and fast. He’s done it before, he needs to do it again. The fact of the matter is the GOP will live or die based on how the public sees the Bush Administration.
Or, to state it differently, Harriet “Souter in a dress” Miers is a better trade off than Nancy “Speaker of the House” Pelosi or Harry “Senate Majority Leader” Reid. And if we keep up this internicene squabbling, we might wake up one day with Hillary “President of the United States” Clinton to deal with.
Yep, the pick has been made; let’s move forward now…
In terms of Colin’s making-up-ground point, have you looked at the rolling Rasmussen numbers recently? This might be happening under our collective schnozzes (sp?). There’s a slow but steady trend in the President’s favor over the last couple of weeks–I just posted them because it’s a funny thing when the President is getting pummelled from both sides yet gaining popular support.
Actually, I don’t think the GOP is in horrible shape, definitely room for improvement, but the elctions are a 13 months away.
The Democracy poll(skewed left) had a generic congressional poll before the election of 2004:Results-43-R, 48-D.
At the end of Oct 05-It’s 38-R 48-D.
http://realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/generic_vote.html
The recent move to the left by the dems, has frozen them out. They have a small group of people to draw from, who are willing to associate with Dean/Pelosi/Reid. The dems are in terrible shape, searching for a national identity, but in reaching out to the anti-war left, they limit their base.
The Republicans are not bound by any commitment. As much as the dems would like to give Frist/DeLay as the face of the party, less than 17% of the population can tell you who they are.
A ‘fresh’ Republican can still run ‘against’ his party, with-”Send me to DC to stop the spending” message. Looking at the GOP senators and reps who have kept their ‘heads down’, they can still play either side. The Pelosi/Reid/Dean machine in promoting themselves, has done themselves incredible damage to their party. The public knows who they are, just tie your local dem to them. If they fight the association, they will be spending half their message to disascociate form these clowns. (Funny how they are trying to make Frist and DeLay brands names, but winding up fetting motre face time…)
Look at the Hackett race-He got only 5000 more votes in his Ohio run, than the dem in the 2002 race(an off year).
Looking at the results of the
Looking at the zogby , poll, (its all I have right now, and don’t have a lot of faith in it) but, here goes.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-flash05a.html?project=elections06-ft&h=495&w=778&hasAd=1&mod=blogs
Surprise?
Florida-Harris is within 4 pts, and the incumbent has only a 48%. I’ve seen Harris, and she has more than a good chance. Florida is heavily Bush Country. (In the 2002 Governor’s election Zogby had it to close to call, Bush won by Double digits…)
Maryland-Steele will likely nullify the African/American vote. Zogby has it tied.
Kean will win NJ on his name.
DeWine will win/retain in Ohio.
Losses?
Santorum. He is definitely not out. Strong support from Lynn Swann would help. Troop draw down-vringing Nationalk dems out to declare “Iraq is lost, in the face of returning vets is going to be a factor.”
GOP can still raise money. The dems can’t. They are stuck hoping for the wind at their back from Soros and Moveon. 2000 showed the success that breeds. The dems don’t have the money locally. The splitting of the Unions, also palys strongly to Santorum. He’s losing because he is unpopular, not because of his opponents stand.
GOP, as it stand right now, looks to pick up two to three seats.
Worth looking at: Wisconsin and possibly Minnesota.
The dems are still vulnerable, very vulnerable. Without a national leader who can come in and endorse…
You can tell how much trouble the Democrats are in when one of their leaders (was it Reid?) last week stated that they will definitely be standing for something by next year. I can’t wait for the Contract with America ’06 version-D to come out. Item # 10: We promise to stick our heads in the sand regarding Social Security until it goes bust on someone else watch. Item # 9: We promise to handle world problems just like Hollywood superstar handle their problems, we’ll hire someone else to do the dirty work. Item # 8 We promise to take corporate money out of politics by accepting donations only from Socialist- leaning billionaires…..
MtL: Your polling expertise makes me feel like a one-trick hack.
Yes, the elections are 13 months away, but as I think about the dynamic a pro-Bush polling trend over the next weeks will create, I conclude that if he tops 50 by Nov. 1 will any Republicans going up for re-election feel comfortable voting against Miers?
They just gave the first campaign ad for 2006.
Drilling our own oil in ANWR, and building more refineries.
If the Hurricanes haven’t demonstrated some of the problems we face…when the price of oil is down a year from now, a gop candidate can point to this bill(which will be a little misleading, but ehhh…) and say that it is the cause. The dems won’t be able to claim any success, even if the price is higher than current levels. Chances are it will be down 25-40%.
Yesterday’s congressional vote was telling. Every dem voted no. Against an energy bill. How stupid is that? It makes every dem rep look beholden to the National Party agenda-and even their constuents could be forced to ask-”Is my rep voting for the distrcit or the National Party?”. It reeks of far left controlling the reigns of the the party.
Tough to complain about a War for Oil, and then trying to explain why you don’t want to take steps to address our current and future needs. This is going to kill reps in red states, who will have to explain why they are voting as they are told. Pelosi is in love with her power to ride herd on the other reps, but if you are the minority party, you never get to lead your herd to water. If they won…but they didn’t. She picked a fight that she and EVERY DEM, who voted for it, look foolish.
Hat tip to Tom DeLay, getting two moderates to change thier vote. The republicans had to give on some of what they wanted to their own party. I have mixed feelings on that, but it demonstrates a party that is willing to change their position because it is not tied to the whims of its leaders.
The DeLay indictment is drawing a lot of attention, but this isn’t great news for the dems. Particlularly, if there is not a successful conviction-any other outcome can be spun as an over-zealous prosecution. Hutchison will be used to augment this case. Sorry media matters, Earle may have indicted dems as well, but they weren’t ‘name’ dems.
AE, thanks for the tip…mark, the lesser, it must always be noted that Earle prosecuted mostly Dems because Dems dominate Travis County government and have dominated the state government as well, up until 2002 – and that’s what the Delay indictment is about, in more ways than one…
AE-you are dead on about that 50% number. If Bush is over it, gop gains 2-4 Seante seats, 5-12 in the house. If he is below it, it will still be evry man for himself, and show little over change. Pelosi is not Newt.
DeWine and Santorum are the only two who are in trouble, regarding Senators.
Santorum will vote with Bush on Meirs, DeWine will read the tea leaves.
Bill Press was on Scarborough last night, wondering what the dems were thinking. There is a strong chance, especially if she is as mindless as Frum would have us believe, she is more likely to vote with Thomas and Scalia. He sees it as more of a big loss for dems, than Bush.
The fight starts when the Ralph Neas comes out aginst her, as being pro-life. There will have to be five GOP Senators who openly oppose her, which is what the dems are waiting for. If she looks like she has the votes, the dems will have to move into action. If she lays an egg in the hearings, DeWiine can buck the Pres.
DeWine is in trouble for local reasons, and there is a more legitimate climate, that could be called ‘corruption; when considering Gov. Taft and that coin scandal, and signifciant job loss/unemployment. DeWine doesn’t have to worry as much about the President or Meirs, as he does the economic plight, and potential for backlash, or as shown in Hackett’s race, apathy.
If the base turns out, the dem message is irrelevant.
[...] You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your ownsite. [...]
Mark,
Great piece, and I agree with your three bolded items of emphasis. You have identified the most effective strategies to pursue.
However, I disagree with one part.
With all due respect, I think this line comes from the fact that you are more of a centrist, and as such you think the key comes from appealing to folks like you.
But it simply is not true. But before you think I am doing the same thing, thinking it comes down to folks like me, let me continue my point.
Success won’t come from holding the center. It also won’t come from holding the base. We have to do both. Things are too evenly divided right now to choose one or the other.
It is a terrible mistake that the minority of Republicans, the moderates, tend to make, thinking that the base has nowhere to go and as such will come around. You may be right for the majority of ‘the base’, but that is not enough. There is a portion of the base which simply won’t turn out if it feels ignored, or will find somewhere else to go, consequences be damned. Ask George H. W. Bush. Ask Bob Dole.
And while those who are not in lockstep with the base might think this to be a mistake on the part of the base (an assessment that I agree with, actually, in a close call) it is not a slam-dunk obvious truism. Look, for example, at the black caucus within the Democratic party. They continue to monolithically support Democrats, and as such have been taken for granted by the Democrats. They have empowered the Democrats with their loyalty, but really have not empowered themselves much at all. Labor is starting to realize this; part of the reason for the recent schism in the AFL-CIO is because some labor leaders are starting to figure out that if they are perceived as having nowhere else to go, they are powerless.
Conservatives are an independent bunch. They are stubborn. They cannot be taken for granted. When the Republicans do, they lose.
We have to do both, and the sooner all factions within the Republican coalition come to grips with this, the better. The assumption by conservatives that the moderates will remain loyal is a poor one, but it is an equally poor assumption by moderates that conservatives will remain loyal. All factions need to have their core concerns addressed, lest the coalition fail. The mindset that “they have nowhere else to go, they will come around” is one which is a ticket for permanent minority status.
Gerry, I appreciate your comments, and I probably do go too far in this post in taking the base for granted. Doubtless, the internicine warfare over the Miers nomination is taking its toll on all of us, and I think I am letting my disgust over the Miers reaction spill over.
It’s odd that I find myself taking the centrist view so often, since I don’t think of myself that way…perhaps it is because I live in such a bastion of liberalism (odd for a Texan to say, but that’s Austin for you!), so compared to my friends and co-workers, I’m about as conservative as can be.
Still, your points have resonance, particular the parallel with the Democratic treatment of minority voters. Well said…
Thanks Mark.
“Doubtless, the internicine warfare over the Miers nomination is taking its toll on all of us, and I think I am letting my disgust over the Miers reaction spill over.”
I know myself well enough to know that part of the reason I am getting increasingly angry with Bush and increasingly opposed to Miers’ confirmation is because this was entirely self inflicted. The toll we are taking on ourselves was 100% avoidable. It was stupid for Bush to do this, and I think that short term consequences be damned, it is in our interests, long term, to demonstrate to future Presidents that it is stupid to incite warfare among our own factions. It is the same reason I cannot ever support John McCain, even if he is good on the war and has been good on judges throughout his history and has been good on spending.