Prasanth: “Am I correct
in feeling that there is a sense of panic among Democrats that this election,
which seemed so winnable, is getting away from them?”
F There have been bumps, but we are going to
win.
I. Issues
We’re going to win, first of all (before
getting into turn-out, the Electoral College, Florida and all of that), because
over the next 46 days, as voters begin to really focus, they will conclude that
on the issues they care about, President Bush has not served us well.
Take jobs.
After 9/11 and after he knew we were in a recession and
after the eruption of corporate
scandals, President Bush announced that his policies would create 6 million new
jobs during his presidency. Instead, we
will have lost 1 million jobs – a
swing of 7 million worse than he promised – not least because it turns out that
giving the biggest tax cuts to those who need them least is not the best way to rev up the
economy. (Could anyone, including President Bush,
actually have believed that it was?)
We didn’t reelect Herbert Hoover – the last president to lose jobs on
his watch – and we’re not going to reelect George Bush.
Take living standards. Millions slipping into poverty . . . millions
more without health insurance . . . new jobs that pay less than the old
jobs that were lost . . . Medicare recipients hit with a 17% hike in premiums
(on top of 13% last year) . . . median real household income – which was up $5,489 in the Clinton years – down $1,314.
Voters know presidents aren’t omnipotent
(although they usually boot even good presidents from office when things are
not going well). But they must also
sense that a president who fights for a higher minimum wage and a higher earned
income tax credit and the Family and Medical
Leave Act and 100,000 more cops on the street and after-school programs and
universal college loan assistance and health insurance – and pledges to save
Social Security first, as Clinton did and Kerry would – is just fundamentally
different from a president who, with his party, opposes all those things and makes his main focus repeated tax
cuts for the very rich.
Over the next 46 days, John Kerry will make
it clear that – as he has said all along – the first $200,000 of income will not be more heavily taxed under the
Kerry Administration. Indeed, he will
propose more middle-class cuts. But that, yes, on income above $200,000,
we’ll be back to paying taxes more or less as we were under Clinton because we have a war on terror to fight
(Bush is the first president ever to cut
taxes in time of war). And because we are running a $600 billion deficit
(when you include the amount by which Bush promised not to raid the Social
Security surplus but has). And because it’s not just “our money,” as Bush
is so fond of saying (those $300 tax refund checks or even the $1,500
reductions many families got), it’s
also our debt. A $600 billion
deficit works out to $8,000 for each family of four. You got your $300 or your $1,500 tax
reduction, but you borrowed $8,000 to do it.
I grant you that people’s eyes glaze over at
numbers – which is how Bush got away with this in the first place and managed
to win nearly as many votes as Gore.
(“By far the vast majority” of the help from his tax cuts, he looked
into the camera and lied, would go “to people at the bottom end of the economic
ladder.”)
But if voters tune out the details, as they
surely will, many will intuitively sense that the swing from a $5 trillion
projected surplus (which is how then Governor Bush initially justified his tax
cuts) to a multi-trillion-dollar projected deficit
does not make us a stronger, more secure nation.
Voters will sense that our increasing
dependence on borrowing from China, Japan and elsewhere to
finance our deficit does not brighten our children’s future, even if it did
allow the issuance of those $300 checks – and an $800,000 tax reduction to folks
like my friend who gets $3.2 million a year in dividends from a stock he
inherited.
And yes, there are the assault weapons
President Bush has allowed back on the streets, the stem cell research
he works to impede, the environmental regulations he has rolled back and
the developing global climate crisis he has ignored. The tax incentives for
buying $100,000 Hummers, the Supreme Court (!!!!!) – and more.
But what this election will largely turn on
are the War on Terror and – separately – the war in Iraq. And on these the President’s record is
abysmal:
·
He
ignored urgent warnings about Osama Bin Laden before
9/11 and, having done so, failed to kill him two years ago, after 9/11,
before al-Qaeda had a chance to regroup and
metastasize.
·
He
pulled resources off that
mission-not-accomplished to attack Iraq, breaking his
pledge to invade only as a last resort.
·
He
lost the goodwill of the world and played right into the hands of Osama Bin Laden, helping to recruit thousands of new
terrorists.
In short, as John Kerry has said all along,
he rushed to war without a plan to win the peace, badly weakening our country –
with no end in sight. Now that we’re
there, we have a huge commitment (“you break it, you own it,” Colin Powell
presciently advised, to no avail).
But why on Earth would we reelect a man whose reckless, cocky
misjudgment could have allowed for such a disaster?
So I think that as people start really
thinking about these things, as they watch the debates and as they get to see
more of John Kerry, they will decide it is time for a new team.
II. Process
But forget all that. What about the horse race?
Here are a dozen reasons to take heart:
1. We’re much, much stronger on
the issues – see above.
2. We won last time when Democrats
were largely complacent. Things always seemed to get a little better every year (it’s human nature for the previous eight years to feel like
“always”) so what difference did it make?
Well, now the difference is
apparent. Democratic turn-out will be enormous. We saw unprecedented turn-out in the
primaries and we are seeing direct-mail results that have direct-mail consultants
slack-jawed. We are depositing 50,000
checks a day. Millions of new voters are
registering, and Democrats who haven’t voted for years plan to come out this
time. Writes a friend:
Jay and I got a phone call last week from Jay's uncle, a Vietnam
Vet and a resident of South Carolina who has NEVER voted in his entire 55+
year life. Well, this year he has
registered to vote and will be voting for John Kerry. I cannot stress how much of a miracle this
is. As much as I want to believe that
all the complacent non-voters will get off their behinds this year, I am now
actually seeing it and it is very encouraging.
3. Last time we got 51 million votes
– 537,000 more than Governor Bush – despite 3 million votes that went to Nader. Nader voters are almost all well-meaning and
smart. My firm belief is that – in swing
states where it matters – they will not fail to do all they can to fire George
Bush. As reported here Tuesday,
two-thirds of Nader’s 2000 leadership group have already signed
onto a statement urging everyone in
swing states to vote for Kerry.
4. So we’re going to get millions
more Democrats than we got last time and we’re going to get Nader
voters where it counts. But what about Bush voters? Last time, 50 million people voted for Bush,
and I am willing to stipulate that 90% or perhaps even 95% of them are just
thrilled. Bring it on, baby!
(Democratic
presidents couldn’t stand up to Hitler or to the residents of Hiroshima or to
Khrushchev in the Cuban Missile Crisis or to Milosovich
in Kosovo – only Dubya has the guts and brains to get
Bin Laden and keep us safe. Look how
well he mocks Kerry and how shrewdly he leaves it to others to mock Kerry’s bronze
star and silver star! Dubya
is one tough warrior.)
Okay – we’re not going to get those
voters.
But if 5% of the 50 million who voted for
Bush last time feel betrayed (consider, for example, this Seattle
Times
endorsement of John Kerry) . . .
Four
years ago, this page endorsed George W. Bush for president. We cannot do so
again — because of an ill-conceived war and its aftermath,
undisciplined spending, a shrinkage of constitutional
rights and an intrusive social agenda. The Bush presidency is not what we had in
mind. Our endorsement of John Kerry
is not without reservations, but he is head and shoulders above the incumbent.
. . . that’s
millions more votes for Kerry, millions fewer for Bush.
And I think it’s at least 5%, because it feels as if I’ve gotten e-mails from almost
that many. Here’s one I got just today:
I
I grew up in a Republican
household, have almost always voted Republican, and voted for GWB in '00. This November, however, I am firing the
incumbent. Here's why, in no particular order. Obviously, some items are more
important than others:
1. Saudi prince was told of Iraq invasion
before Secretary of State Colin Powell
2. Steel tariffs (imposed by an MBA!)
3. Environmental policies
4. The Supreme Court appointments in
next four years
5. Against
women's right to choose
6. Military not prepared to go to war
(e.g., humvee's not properly armored)
7. Opposes using science to protect me
and my family (stem cell research)
8. Underestimated prescription drug
benefit cost by a mile
9. Cheney's secret energy task force
10. 43 says
he didn't speak to 41 before going to war (where is Freud when we need him?)
11. Demonization
of Max Cleland
12. Lied re who put up "mission
accomplished" sign on aircraft carrier he landed on
13. Mixing church and politics
14. Assault weapons
15. Constitutional amendment to ban
gay marriages (I am hetero)
If you post this, please do not use my
name. I do not want to argue politics with anyone.
5. More than half the country believes
we are on the “wrong track” – and the proportion is even higher among undecided
voters. Incumbents don’t get rehired
when most people think we’re on the wrong track.
6. So why isn’t any of this
reflected in the polls? Well, to
begin with, there's this, hot off the
newswire:
Bush Convention Bounce
Fades; Race A Virtual Tie-Pew Poll
DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
September 16, 2004 4:00 p.m.
WASHINGTON
(AP)--The GOP convention gave President George W. Bush a double-digit lead, but
the race has settled into a virtual tie,
with voters still worried about the economy and Iraq, according to polling by the Pew Research Center.
The first of
two national polls by Pew, done Sept. 8-10, reflected the president's post-convention
bounce. Bush was ahead of Democrat John Kerry 52-40 among registered voters and
by an even wider margin, 54-39, among likely voters, a narrower group.
By the second
poll, done Sept. 11-14, the Bush lead had evaporated. In that poll, Bush and
Kerry were knotted at 46% among registered voters. Among likely voters, Bush was at 47% and Kerry at 46%.
"There is
a great deal of instability and uncertainty in the electorate," said
Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. "This
poll finds a lot of the positive impact Bush had in the convention remains. But
Bush's vulnerabilities on Iraq and the economy continue, and these
have anchored the race."
After the Republican convention and its
well-orchestrated criticism of Kerry, Bush grabbed a lead ranging from 5 points to 11 points in
various national polls. That lead appeared to be shrinking in some polls by
late last week, and a Harris poll out Thursday showed the
race even.
A poll sponsored by Investors Business Daily showed the same thing.
So Bush is slipping fast.
I am the first to admit we haven’t done
everything perfectly and that we face a tough fight. But we are going to win, and you need to keep
these numbers in perspective:
Following their conventions, sitting Presidents who went on to win a
second term have led by an average of 27 points. Even including the LOSERS, elected
incumbents leave their Conventions up an average of 16 points.
So whether Bush left his convention up by 11,
as Newsweek had it, or by the 5 or 6
points most others deemed more likely, either way, it was way sub par. Incumbents do not go on to win when a
majority of the voters think the country is on the wrong track and their
convention lead is so far below the 27-point average.
7. We’ve begun to fight back. If you saw James Carville on the Today Show last
week or have heard Paul Begala lately or caught Joe
Lockhart on TV, you know the Campaign has expanded to include some very
talented tough veterans of the Clinton
campaigns. Was this a shake-up? Whether you call it an expansion or a
shake-up, Carville cut to the heart of it:
John Kerry sees a problem and fixes it. George Bush sees a problem and denies
it. What kind of leader would you rather
have?
8.
There is a great deal of
frustration among Democrats – Prasanth for one – that
we waited too long to fight back. But
what we were hearing from undecided voters was that they really didn’t want a
lot of negative stuff from us about Bush, they wanted us to take the high
road.
And we did.
At our Convention, there was no mocking of Bush, and the Campaign
purposely toned down some of the speeches.
Mine, for example. The only requested edit to my speech had to do with being
less negative about Bush. (“But there’s
so much to be negative about!” I
pleaded.)
With hindsight, I don’t know whether this was wise
or not. I like to think it was. But either way, it reminds me of one of
the most tried-and-true plot lines in all of human drama. You’ve seen it countless times:
The good guy is taunted by the bully and just moves
on. He is taunted and mocked some more –
but avoids confrontation. Then they take
his bookbag and throw it into the lake. Still nothing.
By now the audience is screaming, *HIT* THE
SONOFABITCH! And when he finally does
(a) everybody thinks it’s justified; (b) everybody remembers the high road he
tried to take; (c) a lot of fair-minded people (read: undecided voters) are
rooting for him.
If the good guy had hit the bully at the first
taunt, or even the second, what kind of crowd pleaser would it be? And might not some folks have figured he was
just as petty as the other guy, and too prone to get into the mud?
Well, whether this was literally the plan or not I
don’t know. But I think we have now
earned the right to hit back, and I think we will. So buck up, Prasanth.
9. Our guy is a fighter, and his
pattern, in campaign after campaign, is to hang back – and finish strong. And win.
Mock his Navy years if you will, while insisting that Bush served
honorably. (Bush had no doubts about the
Vietnam War – he was all for it, so long as he didn’t
have to actually fight in it.) But this
is a guy who volunteered to face death for months and who turned his boat into oncoming gunfire and attacked the enemy
head on. So he may not be quite the indecisive wimp Dick Cheney
and the rest of the team are having so much fun portraying him as.* (Click here
for a compilation of 30 Bush policy flip-flops . . . or here
to print it out as a poster.)
*The famous $87 billion vote? THEY were against it before they were for
it! Flip-flop! They were against it when it would have required
rich folks to pay for a portion of it with a partial rollback of their tax cut. Flip-flop!
Flip-flop! Click here.
10.
In several of the key battleground
states (albeit not Florida),
the governorships have switched from Republican to Democrat since
2000. This is a good sign for two
reasons. First, it suggests more people
in those states were voting Democratic than Republican. Second – as Jeb
Bush showed in Florida –
it helps to have the governorship.
One of you will correct me if I’m wrong, please, but
I don’t think any swing state governorships have flipped from D to R since 2000
(California
is not a swing state). But here are some
crucial states that have flipped our way: PENNSYLVANIA (21 electoral votes), Ed
Rendell . . . MICHIGAN (17 votes), Jennifer Granholm
. . . ARIZONA
(10), Janet Napolitano . . . NEW
MEXICO (5), Bill Richardson . .
. WISCONSIN (10),
Jim Doyle . . . TENNESSEE
(11), Phil Bredeson . . . VIRGINIA
(13), Mark Warner . . . and I may be leaving a couple
out.
11. So what about Florida?
We will win Florida because:
a. We won it last time.
b. Against the 537 margin of victory
they claimed, I believe we will get many of the 97,488 votes Nader got in Florida last time.
c. Also, many of the estimated 45,000
gay Florida votes Bush got
last time (which count double, because a switch from Bush adds one to our
column AND subtracts one from theirs).
Note that the Log Cabin Republicans have decided they cannot abide Bush
either.
d. Last time, Florida's
African-American community did a spectacular job of turn-out with a program
called ARRIVE WITH FIVE. This time, they
will Arrive with SIX.
And because Florida now allows
early voting – beginning October 19 – those who have not managed to arrive with
six the first day can keep working at it until they've met their goal.
e. Last time, 50,000 likely Gore-voters
were shamelessly disenfranchised by Katherine Harris, then Florida Secretary of
State (and chair the Florida Bush campaign).
Not this time.
(You don't know that story? Click here.)
f. Last time, African-American voters
were sometimes asked for two or even three forms of photo ID, and otherwise
intimidated. This time, we will have
lawyers at every polling place.
g. The latest Bendixen
numbers show the Cuban-American vote swinging significantly in our direction.
h. Some moderate Republicans, who
expected compassionate conservatism from a uniter,
not a divider, will switch sides. As
will true conservatives like Andrew Sullivan and Walter Olson, who now rail
against Bush.
i. Turn-out in
the minimum-wage community will be high because there is an initiative on the
ballot that would raise the minimum wage.
j. And let us not forget the 16,000 Palm Beach "Jews for
Buchanan." No confusing butterfly
ballot this time.
In short: we are going to find those 537 votes. We are going to win.
So the next time you are feeling low, SNAP OUT OF IT. Feeling low plays right into Karl Rove’s hands. Write
a letter to the editor or get on the horn to some distant cousin or classmate
and make sure she’s registered to vote.
12. Finally, we’re going to win
because, in the words of the Reverend Theodore Parker, “the arc of the moral
universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”
And because as Bush himself
has said (watch
for yourself): “There's an old saying . . . fool me once, shame on – shame
on you. Fool me – you can't get fooled again.”
And because the taller guy almost always wins.
[To contribute, click here.]