Democratic Senator will vote for Bush in 2004

God Bless you perception I shall burn a candle at church in gratitude for your concern <sniffle>

Sofia:

Please elabortate. . . .

OK, but I'm going to use very general terms to share my opinion, based on my perceptions. This is not a fact sheet.

The dem party used to be the party of the blue-collar guy. The Dems owned 'family values' and the interest of the 'working stiff'. In the seventies, it seemed all the special interest groups co-opted the party--and what used to be the 'party of the people' morphed into the party of the angry special interest groups. They went from pro-America, but trying to improve things for the 'basic American family' (I know--define that)...to being the 'angry at America from all corners, special interest groups.'

The basic blue collar guy with a family couldn't see himself represented on the floor of the Democratic National Convention anymore. They felt disenfranchised.

I'll also hazard to say that the interests of the NOW and Gay Rights (at least at that time) didn't gel with 1970's middle American blue-collar types.

Zell Miller's main complaint was that the Democratic party has completely given up on the south.
It's true. It's the big tent but they aren't letting the southern WASPs in. Howard Dean talked about his though he called them "guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks."

Obviously, this declaration was followed the publication of his book "A National Party No More", where attacked the Democrats.

While Miller was airing thus his grievances before a national audience, a Republican colleague indicated he, too, might cross party lines in 2004. However, he drew little attention. Asked whether he would vote for Bush's re-election, Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee said only "I'm a good Republican".
That's not a yes.

Interesting, but you took the wind out of my joke's sails (a variation of the notion that it's no surprise, it's Georgia).

Sofia:

But what that any different from the coalition of Religious and Free Market fundamentalists, 2nd Ammendment Absolutionists, Cold War Veterans, and yes--even "Neo-Confederates" (Lott, etc) that run the GOP?

I just remembered why I posted here in the 1st place.

On the Daily Show, Zell Miller was saying how we're in the midst of a Clintons vs. Gores power struggle over who will hold sway over the party.
Gore recently backed Dean and it is believed by some that Clinton will back Clark.

What do you think about that?

ye11o:

That there also may be a gap between the Leadership(DLC) and the "Grassroots"(Dean 'Bloggers, etc).

Like it or not, the GOP has managed to not only keep its coalition of Fundys, etc together and its leadership on the same page.

1) I don't think there is a power struggle between Gore and Clinton.

2) I think the best thing the Democrats can do is to simply write off the South and use their resourses in other, truly swing areas. The South no longer is a swing area -- it is solidly in the Republicn camp.

3) I absolutely think the Dems CAN win without the South.

4) I think it is unfortunate that we've come to these circumstances.

5. I think Bush is a shoo in in 2004.

6. It makes me want to cut my wrists.

7. I feel sorry for my children and grandchildren.

8. When I get old and sick just throw me a party and send me out on an ice floe.

I not only think it's possible to take back at least a portion of the south like Jimmy Carter did but I think it's a must for the long term survival of the party.

The problem is that Minnesota is the only solidly Democratic state though Washington DC has been solidly Democrat also. That's why the Republicans can have 49 state sweeps. The Democrats wouldn't dare dream of such a victory.

The following states haven't voted Democrat after 1964:
Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Virginia, Oklahoma, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Alaska

The following states haven't voted Democrat after 1976:
Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas

Washington DC has always voted Democrat. Minnesota is the only state to have always voted Democrat since 1976, 1980, or 1984.

Giving up the solidly Republican states would be giving up 17 states or 135 electoral votes! Exactly half the number of votes needed to win. Meanwhile the Democrats only have 1 solidly Democratic state plus the District of Columbia for a total of 13 electoral votes.

Go team!