The GOP is losing its linchpin

April 4, 2006

As if the corruption scandals weren’t taking enough of a toll on the [tag]Republicans[/tag] this year, they’ve lost their edge on [tag]national security[/tag], too.

[tag]Democrats[/tag] smelling blood in November’s elections had an in-your-face taunt for President Bush’s political sage Karl Rove yesterday, claiming they would win on national security issues. […]

New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, the head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said yesterday that effort would only help his party.

“Americans are looking for a new voice on national security and they’re looking to the Democrats,” said Schumer, appearing with 2008 presidential prospect Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) and candidates taking on incumbent GOP senators in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Arizona.

As proof, Schumer touted a poll commissioned by the committee that found Americans, by a slim 41%-to-39% margin, would vote for Democrats if the only issue were national security.

The [tag]poll[/tag] was commission by the [tag]DSCC[/tag] and conducted by a Dem polling firm, but the question didn’t seem to be slanted: “Suppose for a moment that you were deciding your vote for Congress SOLELY on the question of who you trusted more to protect America’s national security and have the right policies for combating terrorism. If this were the ONLY issue you were considering, would you be more likely to vote for a Democrat or a Republican?” Dems led the GOP, 41% to 39%. Among self-identified independent voters, a 33% plurality sided with Dems, while 23% went with Republicans.

Yes, that’s pretty close, at least among the general population. But this is also the question that Republicans expect to crush Dems on. Indeed, it supposed to be the GOP’s ace in the hole — when all else fails, they can scare people and try and convince them that only Republicans can keep them safe. Not anymore.

A spokesman for the Republican National Committee said, “If Democrats want to discuss censuring the President for fighting terrorism and their dangerous inability to bring forth any workable ideas to win the war on terror, we are happy to have that debate.” Interestingly enough, Dems are happy to have that debate, too.

How did Democrats have an “in-your-face” taunt for rove? Seems like tame political rhetoric, albeit refreshing rhetoric for Democrats, who have been tail between legs for so long.

And the Post ended the article with the RNC rep making a ridiculously inaccurate and misleading statement:

“If Democrats want to discuss censuring the President for fighting terrorism and their dangerous inability to bring forth any workable ideas to win the war on terror, we are happy to have that debate,” said Aaron McLear, a spokesman for the RNC.

I’m not one for blaming media for Democrat’s woes (they have themselves to blame), but can anyone really say this was an accurate statement? How obvious does a lie have to be before it’s pointed out by the journalist? How about pointing out that, as an absolute minority party, Democrats “failure” to bring out a plan couldn’t be “dangerous”? How about pointing out that Democrats have, in fact, released a plan? How about adding a tag-line that, in fact, Feingold wasn’t censuring the president “for fighting terror”? This just seems like no-brainer correction of fact.

  • I think Republicans have their head in the sand on the censure issue. Sure their hard-core never-ever-gonna-vote-for-no-damn-Democrat supporters would side with them, but I think the general populace -at least those that care- would have no problem with this. As for national security, I have never thought that the Republican meme that they are good on this issue has ever been true though it does seem something the the talking heads and much of the general populace does feel is true. I think this is a general waking up to the reality that much of the GOP’s “we are the party of national defense” rah rahing was always just talk. And frankly it is about damn time.

  • Interestingly enough, Dems are happy to have that debate, too.

    I wish that were true. Unfortunately, a lot of Democrats still behave like dogs that have been whipped by that master once too often.

    Interestingly, my wife just got back from visiting Fox-News relatives. Her impression from watching a few days of Fox is that Impeachment is the #1 topic in the country. When I told her it was rarely mentioned, even in the lefty blogosphere, she was quite surprised. Fox is clearly playing a game here. By emphasizing impeachment, they are trying to rally their base. I think there is a potential for that to backfire. The more they talk about impeachment, the more it becomes a topic worthy of discusssion.

  • I think asking which party is better at national security is a stupid question. There are politians that I trust would do a very good job protecting America, and some that I would not. And in my mind, it has nothing to do with the party they are associated with. America would be safer we stopped voting for parties and voted for individuals.

  • If Democrats want to discuss censuring the President for fighting terrorism…”

    don’t you mean FAILURE to fight terrorism? How much safer are we now than we were 5 years ago?

    • Comments are closed.