Why Vulnerable Democrats Should Run Away From the Party
Matt Lewis
Columnist
Posted:
09/6/10
On "Fox News Sunday" this week, Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine said it would be "foolish" for Democrats to run away from their political party. But that, in fact, is exactly what is happening.
With unemployment ticking up to 9.6 percent, and with Gallup showing Republicans taking an "unprecedented 10-point lead" in the generic ballot, running against the policies of President Barack Obama and Speaker Nancy Pelosi seems prudent.
And several Democratic incumbents have taken this tack. For example, Rep. Joe Donnelly of Indiana ran a campaign ad bragging that he "voted against Nancy Pelosi's energy tax on Hoosier families." It may be disingenuous, but it seems like smart politics for a man struggling to survive.
This, of course, makes me wonder about Kaine's comments. Could it be he has already written off many of these Democratic incumbents, and would just prefer to see them go down gracefully, without throwing Obama and Pelosi under the bus on the way out? Could it be that this long ago was a foregone conclusion?
After the stunning election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts this year, it seems Obama had a choice to make: He could either listen to the public, back off health care and focus on the economy -- or he could ram through his unpopular health care proposal and let the chips fall where they may. Either decision would have had consequences, but the predictable result of pushing through an unpopular liberal agenda would be losing seats in swing districts this year.
Could it be that the national Democrats view losing these vulnerable incumbents as mere collateral damage -- dutifully sacrificed on the altar of what Republicans have called Obamacare?
Regardless, it seems clear that if you are a vulnerable Democrat, your best move is obvious -- run away, and run fast. In fact, I was on Fox News on Sunday afternoon with a liberal political science professor, discussing this very topic. She and I both agreed that running away from the party was a smart move for vulnerable Democratic candidates trying to hold on to their seats.
You can watch the video here:
With unemployment ticking up to 9.6 percent, and with Gallup showing Republicans taking an "unprecedented 10-point lead" in the generic ballot, running against the policies of President Barack Obama and Speaker Nancy Pelosi seems prudent.
And several Democratic incumbents have taken this tack. For example, Rep. Joe Donnelly of Indiana ran a campaign ad bragging that he "voted against Nancy Pelosi's energy tax on Hoosier families." It may be disingenuous, but it seems like smart politics for a man struggling to survive.
This, of course, makes me wonder about Kaine's comments. Could it be he has already written off many of these Democratic incumbents, and would just prefer to see them go down gracefully, without throwing Obama and Pelosi under the bus on the way out? Could it be that this long ago was a foregone conclusion?
After the stunning election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts this year, it seems Obama had a choice to make: He could either listen to the public, back off health care and focus on the economy -- or he could ram through his unpopular health care proposal and let the chips fall where they may. Either decision would have had consequences, but the predictable result of pushing through an unpopular liberal agenda would be losing seats in swing districts this year.
Could it be that the national Democrats view losing these vulnerable incumbents as mere collateral damage -- dutifully sacrificed on the altar of what Republicans have called Obamacare?
Regardless, it seems clear that if you are a vulnerable Democrat, your best move is obvious -- run away, and run fast. In fact, I was on Fox News on Sunday afternoon with a liberal political science professor, discussing this very topic. She and I both agreed that running away from the party was a smart move for vulnerable Democratic candidates trying to hold on to their seats.
You can watch the video here: