|
| quote: | Originally posted by Renegade
Good point, but I think the issue about Dean being "too liberal" has been overblown somewhat. Admittedly, being an Australian, I wouldn't understand the mindset of the average American voter as well as perhaps you or the average American political commentator would, but surely if we argue that Dean is going to lose votes for being "too liberal" we could also argue that Bush is likely to lose votes for being "too conservative"? Is there any reason the logic couldn't be applied both ways?
|
Well, under a normal set of circumstances I would probably tend to agree. However, in post 9/11 America I think a lot of people tend to associate "conservatives" as those who would take proactive steps in increasing security against additional attacks while they tend to look at "liberals" as those who would be too lax to enforce stringent security measures. I forget the poll that I saw this in, but I fear that many in America would erroneously label a candidate who is "too" liberal as one who would shirk their responsiblities in improving security. Personally I don't think Dean is too liberal at all. I would save that label for members of the green party and what not. If I considered him too liberal than I wouldn't even consider him a serious candidate. I do consider some of his policies as being "too" liberal however, (economic stance and his desire to roll back ALL tax cuts) and I'm afraid that many would be somewhat apprehensive at what else he would do. If Dean is the opposite of Bush, I think that many would be fearful of having swung one way for 4 years and then voting in a candidate who is going to completely swing the other way. I think many people would be far more comfortable with moderate steps in the other direction rather than a complete 180 degree turn. Therefore I think that many moderates/undecided would naturally swing to the conservative side when confronted with a candidate who is so different. So I guess he would be defined as radically liberal by conservatives who are used to Bush's conservativism.
| quote: |
Having said that, I agree that Clark may be more likely to win the moderate/centrist votes than those to the left (Kucinich, Dean, etc.) and right (Lierberman, Gephardt, etc.) of him politically, but whether he can inspire people to turn-up and vote in the same way that someone with the charisma of Howard Dean may be able to is another issue all together. For instance, didn't the Gore/Bush election have one of the lowest voter turn-outs of all time? Gore may have been moderate enough to satisfy the criteria we may say are necessary to win the centrist swing votes you talk about, but if he doesn't inspire people to turn out and vote for him (this includes liberals, centrists and moderate rights) then these "moderate" policies may well count for nothing.
I know that Clark and Gore are different personalities, but the point is that the Democrats mustn't be so caught up in trying to win over these "swing" votes that they forget about the grass-root liberals (easy votes to pick up from the Greens and Independents if the candidate is right) or about selecting a leader who - quite apart from possessing policies that people may agree with - inspires the voters to turn up to the polling-booths. I don't know enough about Clark to say whether he is likely to possess this quality or not, but I thought it might be worth keeping in mind (as sadly, in elections, policies aren't always the most decisive factor). |
Well I agree somewhat that the democrat party should appeal to its own supporters and inspire people to come out to vote, but I really don't see that becoming a problem in this election. I think that the disatisfaction with Bush ALONE will compel liberal voters to come out in droves. That being said, are there enough liberals to counterbalance the number of conservatives in the country? Plus are extremist liberal votes going to be wasted on the green/independant parties? But at any rate, I think Clark could capture not only a lot of liberal votes but conservative votes as well. But I'm hedging my bets on the moderate/undecided vote making the difference in this election, and I think that Clark would have enough support from nearly all sides to win the election. Oh well, we'll see. Should be an exciting election race.
___________________
Retro ...
Last edited by occrider on Sep-26-2003 at 15:56
|