Divide and Conquer
By Jermaine Smith
The Democratic primaries are heating up as election time comes near, and candidates are quickly discovering just how fickle the constituents can be.
Sen. Joe Lieberman is all but done, Gen. Wesley Clark is biding his time and Dr. Howard Dean is orchestrating his resurgence for the Democratic nomination. Rep. Kucinich should go home. Meanwhile, Sen. John Kerry has a commanding lead after winning both the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries in impressive fashion.
What happens now?
Should Kerry continue to perform well in the upcoming primaries, he will indeed win the Democratic nomination and have an opportunity to unseat President Bush as Commander-in-Chief, but it is difficult to predict how well Kerry will compete in the South. Southern states, including primary-site South Carolina, are historically more conservative, but experts believe they will lean towards Dr. Dean and perhaps Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.
Kerry’s great success should be surprising given that his more conservative agenda places him to the right of the other Democratic candidates, save for Senator Joe Lieberman. However, the platforms of the other Democratic candidates have pushed the Democratic Party into a more centrist position, a trend many liberal Democrats find disturbing. The Kerry campaign, moderate but effective, overshadows his less liberal characteristics and sets him apart from Gen. Clark and Dr. Dean, whose large deterrent remains their position on the war in Iraq.
These possible scenarios illustrate two key elements of this year’s election: first that the primaries can be unpredictable, and candidates can gain and lose ground with striking swiftness, and, more importantly, the divisions within the Democratic Party. This is evident this year more than recent election years.
This election year, the Democrats find themselves in a unique position. Reaching the White House is only an outside chance for most of the candidates, few of whom seem qualified to be leaders of the free world, and the sharp divide within the party only exacerbates this problem. This rift is rooted in the issues: healthcare, the economy, same-sex marriage and, of course, the war in Iraq. Interestingly enough, this election year is an excellent opportunity for a liberal candidate to make a strong impression; a candidate representing the opposing views of the current president would fare well, but many classify the current Democratic candidates as moderate at best. This lack of definition leaves many Democratic voters with the impression that the difference between Bush and Dean or Bush and Kerry is negligible.
This creates a logistical problem for the Democrats.
Should he win the nomination, the Kerry camp’s main concern will be the intentions of the remaining Democratic voters come November. While Kerry is doing well, there is no assurance that he will secure the votes that may other wise have gone to Dean or Clark; Clark’s campaign is a bit more moderate, Dean’s a bit more liberal, and the two seem to be largely splitting the remaining votes. The worst scenario may actually place those votes in the hands of Bush as voters looking for an extreme liberal may not be satisfied with Kerry, whose greatest draw is simply the label Democrat. In this sense, Democratic votes may be a vote against Bush more so than a vote for the best candidate.
However, with only about 1.5-2% of the delegates decided, it is far too early to label the winner of this race. Regardless, the Democrats must unify behind their nominee if they hope to remove Bush from the White House. Upsetting Bush in November may be a long shot, but it is not a pipe dream. If a single candidate from the party can fuse the gap of liberals and moderates, this year’s bid for the White House will be strong.
By Jermaine Smith
The Democratic primaries are heating up as election time comes near, and candidates are quickly discovering just how fickle the constituents can be.
Sen. Joe Lieberman is all but done, Gen. Wesley Clark is biding his time and Dr. Howard Dean is orchestrating his resurgence for the Democratic nomination. Rep. Kucinich should go home. Meanwhile, Sen. John Kerry has a commanding lead after winning both the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries in impressive fashion.
What happens now?
Should Kerry continue to perform well in the upcoming primaries, he will indeed win the Democratic nomination and have an opportunity to unseat President Bush as Commander-in-Chief, but it is difficult to predict how well Kerry will compete in the South. Southern states, including primary-site South Carolina, are historically more conservative, but experts believe they will lean towards Dr. Dean and perhaps Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.
Kerry’s great success should be surprising given that his more conservative agenda places him to the right of the other Democratic candidates, save for Senator Joe Lieberman. However, the platforms of the other Democratic candidates have pushed the Democratic Party into a more centrist position, a trend many liberal Democrats find disturbing. The Kerry campaign, moderate but effective, overshadows his less liberal characteristics and sets him apart from Gen. Clark and Dr. Dean, whose large deterrent remains their position on the war in Iraq.
These possible scenarios illustrate two key elements of this year’s election: first that the primaries can be unpredictable, and candidates can gain and lose ground with striking swiftness, and, more importantly, the divisions within the Democratic Party. This is evident this year more than recent election years.
This election year, the Democrats find themselves in a unique position. Reaching the White House is only an outside chance for most of the candidates, few of whom seem qualified to be leaders of the free world, and the sharp divide within the party only exacerbates this problem. This rift is rooted in the issues: healthcare, the economy, same-sex marriage and, of course, the war in Iraq. Interestingly enough, this election year is an excellent opportunity for a liberal candidate to make a strong impression; a candidate representing the opposing views of the current president would fare well, but many classify the current Democratic candidates as moderate at best. This lack of definition leaves many Democratic voters with the impression that the difference between Bush and Dean or Bush and Kerry is negligible.
This creates a logistical problem for the Democrats.
Should he win the nomination, the Kerry camp’s main concern will be the intentions of the remaining Democratic voters come November. While Kerry is doing well, there is no assurance that he will secure the votes that may other wise have gone to Dean or Clark; Clark’s campaign is a bit more moderate, Dean’s a bit more liberal, and the two seem to be largely splitting the remaining votes. The worst scenario may actually place those votes in the hands of Bush as voters looking for an extreme liberal may not be satisfied with Kerry, whose greatest draw is simply the label Democrat. In this sense, Democratic votes may be a vote against Bush more so than a vote for the best candidate.
However, with only about 1.5-2% of the delegates decided, it is far too early to label the winner of this race. Regardless, the Democrats must unify behind their nominee if they hope to remove Bush from the White House. Upsetting Bush in November may be a long shot, but it is not a pipe dream. If a single candidate from the party can fuse the gap of liberals and moderates, this year’s bid for the White House will be strong.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home