« Computers and Culture | Main | Pressure »
One Way
Wes Pruden lays it out: Kerry and Edwards are a couple of pansies, picking up a meme I've also seen on The Corner and Drudge. Somehow I don't think this is the way to pull Andrew Sullivan back into the fold. Speaking of which, and of Jacob Levy's recent conversion, I've noticed that all the converting lately seems to be going in the same direction. A few weeks back The Note wrote that there seemed to be a lot of people who voted for Bush in 2000 but wouldn't vote for him in 2004, and no one who backed Gore in 2000 who was backing Bush in 2004. Hugh Hewitt had a good time kicking that assertion around -- there's Zell Miller, for one -- there are actually quite a lot of Democrat-leaners who decided they were supporting Bush based on his perceived national security creds in late-2001 and (especially) 2002. Over the past twelve months, though, all the motion's been in the opposite direction.
July 11, 2004 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345160fd69e200d834564e8269e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference One Way :
» Flower power from All Day Permanent Red
and there is pansies . [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 11, 2004 1:52:31 PM
Comments
I rather suspect that, assuming a Kerry win come November, we will see a lot of the same thing in 2008.
He won't have the ABB progressive vote a second time around.
It would not surprise me to see this pendulum swing back and forth for the next handful of elections. Anyone But Incumbent!
Posted by: Jaybird | Jul 11, 2004 10:18:06 AM
duder,
come check out palm beach county. the jews down here have deluded themselves into believing bush is better for israel. the GOP has been courting rabbis (just as, incidentally, they were courting churches) and it's been a somewhat successful venture. the shitty part is that with so many jews, only 10% of PBC, or roughly 24,000 people, need to believe bush is better for israel for the entire state to go red. i doubt it will happen, but kerry needs to do a better job of shoring up israel support down here. otherwise, there will be plenty of gore folks who go bush.
given the cuban (i think) heritage of the site's proprieter, though, i would be curious to know if he has any sense of how the cuban community will tilt in light of the travel restrictions. it occurs to me that regardless of how badly bush screwed that up, cuban turnout is significantly lower than that of jews, so its compensatory power shouldn't be overstated.
Posted by: Marc | Jul 11, 2004 10:27:17 AM
Andrew Sullivan posted an interesting letter on his site today saying basically that if Kerry and Edwards win the GOP could have a crackup. Interesting reading from the minds of a libertarian Republican.
Posted by: tammy34 | Jul 11, 2004 10:35:32 AM
OT, but I just wanted to call attention to this post at This Modern World:
Here
It's about the children who were abused and tortured at Abu Ghraib. The rest of the world is talking about this. Where is the American media?
Posted by: G C | Jul 11, 2004 10:37:29 AM
One can never go wrong by assuming that projection is at play when encountering Republican arguments.
That raises the uncomfortable possibility that Wes recognizes that Cheney and Bush have a mad crush on each other.
Unfortunatley, they only way they have of expressing their love is like the doomed lovers of Dr. Strangelove.
Posted by: djohnson | Jul 11, 2004 10:41:20 AM
Wasn't Henry Hyde employing those 23 people he took to Europe?
Posted by: OT | Jul 11, 2004 11:42:47 AM
Well there's objectively pro bin laden Glenn Reynolds, and LGF-lite Roger L. Simon, and Michael Totterer, and you can never tell what idiot and failed TV critic Jeff Jarvis will do (he only has a ganglial knot you know!)
All of these guys would claim to have been Gore voters now voting for Bush because 9/11 changed everything and because Kerry is the devil.
I wonder if that's because the exercise of the blogosphere tends to solidify view points and makes it hard for people to retract from prior positions.
Posted by: jerry | Jul 11, 2004 12:09:45 PM
Well, I'd say there is some sort of realignment going on. I mean, three or four yousta bees with weblogs can't be wrong, right?
Posted by: praktike | Jul 11, 2004 12:11:28 PM
Where did Hewitt do this? Zell Miller, and the other 30-some odd Democrats in Georgia that support Bush instead of Kerry, are probably the exceptions to the rule. Or more likely, they are going through a trend that is independent of Bush and Kerry: leaving the Democratic party and becoming Republicans entirely.
I haven't had exposure in the same way that a political reporter has, but I haven't talked to a single person who voted or supported Gore that now goes for Bush.
Posted by: Brian | Jul 11, 2004 12:37:22 PM
Marc,
I don't mean to doubt your sincerity, but do you have any factual data to back up your claims? I say this because a lot of things can seem like trends but really don't constitute anything big.
The Jewish influence on the Democrats has, I believe, always been overstated. If I remember correctly, something like 35-40% of Jewish voters identify as Republicans. So while they make up a good chunk of the base, they aren't nearly as solid as blacks.
I think, however, that you are right: if he can successfully poach a small number of Jews, he could very well take it. But at the same time, he's supposedly losing a lot of Cuban support, and the overall Hispanic vote is solidifying for Kerry more and more. And let's not underestimate the fact that Edwards could take some votes from more conservative and/or rural areas.
Actually, does anyone know how many Muslim voters are in Florida? I imagine it's not that many, but if they don't make the difference in Florida, they could help a lot in Michigan, in places like Detroit, where they number in the hundreds of thousands. They went for Bush last time, but supposedly, a lot are going for Kerry this time.
Posted by: Brian | Jul 11, 2004 12:44:59 PM
Brian--
Quite right that I don't have any solid data. But I go to a lot of meetings and events in this area. As an example, I went to see Sen. Lautenberg do a surrogate event in front of a group of seniors. One woman, not particularly senior herself, stood up to ask: "Don't you think, Senator, that the Iraq war has done a great deal to secure Israel by taking out Saddam?" From the audience, more grumbles of agreement than groans of disagreement could be clearly discerned.
I do know that 90% of the Jewish community here does identify as Democrat, which explains why the county goes 65% Dem in every election. (Honestly, I think it could be much higher this time around, since our ground operation is significantly better and there are far more pissed off people willing to do anything for GOTV.) That said, the GOP evidently has enough confidence in chipping away at this demographic that they have people on the ground with the specific charge of undermining Jewish support in the local media and in places of worship. Check out the Palm Beach Post if you'd like...almost daily letters supporting the removal of Saddam for the benefit of Israel.
So, yes, it's partially anecdotal, but I do know the demographics of this county very, very well. And again, only a sliver of this area's Jews need to be converted, and many of them are doctors as it is, many of whom are royally peeved at the selection of Edwards. My father, a doctor and a liberal, will be swallowing bile to pull the level for Kerry.
In any case, it's just one of many things to look out for. But as far as this county is concerned, it is THE big worry.
Just a general note, too. The real media indicators of who will win the election are, unsurprisingly, local outlets and not the nets. All politics being local, more people read their local papers than read any of the nationals. If you really want to know how well a candidate is doing, a quick scan of the Columbus (OH) Dispatch, the Palm Beach Post, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Kansas City (MO) Star, and others are your best bet.
Posted by: Marc | Jul 11, 2004 1:42:57 PM
P.S. in my first comment, i misstated something. 10% of PBC is not 24,000. That's 10% of the Jewish Democratic vote.
Posted by: Marc | Jul 11, 2004 1:44:40 PM
Matt,
I recall the comment about Bush voters who weren't going to vote for him again and Gore voters who wouldn't switch to Bush, but I thought it came from Josh Marshall and not The Note. The guys at ABC are way to skeptical of their own (perceived) media biases to make that much of an assertion. The guys at The Corner discussed the issue though and produced some anecdotes of Gore voters who were going to support Bush this time around.
Posted by: RobertG | Jul 11, 2004 1:52:11 PM
Reynolds and Simon are hard-core Bush supporters, protestations of libertarianism and liberalism aside. Totten will probably support Bush, though he toyed with the idea of backing Edwards. Jarvis, like Sullivan, isn't supporting Bush but is not at all supportive of Kerry.
Posted by: SamAm | Jul 11, 2004 2:14:10 PM
i hope the GOP really runs with this "Kerry and Edwards Sitting In A Tree" thing. really, i hope they really go out of their way to court that 10th grade boys locker room demographic.
Posted by: cleek | Jul 11, 2004 3:27:10 PM
I don't like Kerry at all, especially because I'm pro-life -- in fact, I see abortion as a great evil on the same scale as antebellum chattel slavery. Nevertheless, I decided last week that I'm going to hold my nose and vote for him. We really must not have four more years of this "postmodern president," to whose administration the concepts of "truth" and "evidence" have no value whatsoever. I hope I'm not alone.
Posted by: Drew | Jul 11, 2004 4:03:45 PM
"And again, only a sliver of this area's Jews need to be converted, and many of them are doctors as it is, many of whom are royally peeved at the selection of Edwards. My father, a doctor and a liberal, will be swallowing bile to pull the level for Kerry."
If we can believe Al Hunt in The Wall Street Journal, doctors don't really have a lot of reasons to be pissed at people like John Edwards. Perhaps he can be more effective in communicating that.
As for Bush and Israel, I don't see why the Democrats can't effectively grab a lot of those people on the fench and put them back into their column. After all, despite lobbing some usually very legitimate criticisms at the Bush administration, Kerry and Edwards both voted for the war.
But even if they aren't willing to come back, I doubt we have that much to worry about. For one thing, are there really people basically trying to manipulate public opinion? If so, how do the newspapers let that happen? Additionally, unless the Jews leave the Democrats in droves, like if they basically flip the current levels of support, is it going to really make that much of a difference? As you said, there are enough people that are pissed off about Bush to probably counteract the people who are going to support him, even begrudginly so, because of Israel and Saddam.
Posted by: Brian | Jul 11, 2004 5:03:09 PM
"really, i hope they really go out of their way to court that 10th grade boys locker room demographic."
Interestingly enough, for all the talk of women swooning over him, Edwards is doing very well among men. He and Kerry just about tie Bush and Cheney. And if that sort of support can be seen all over, even by just a few percentage points, we could very well run away with this election.
Posted by: Brian | Jul 11, 2004 5:04:48 PM
"a lot in Michigan, in places like Detroit, where they number in the hundreds of thousands"
Michigan is no longer even in play. I doubt the Bush campaign spends a cent there. The Muslim vote is indeed part of the reason.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | Jul 11, 2004 6:46:01 PM
I think it is at least arguable that Zell Miller voted for Gore in the last election. During the campaign, he went out of his way to distance himself from the Veep, and immediately after the election, was one of the only Democrats to call on Gore to abandon his recount efforts in Florida. As for the bloggers mentioned, none (with the possible exception of Roger L. Simon, who dates his disenchantment with liberalism to the OJ Trial) were public figures before 9/11, so we have no real way of knowing what their political views actually were, much less who they voted for.
Posted by: Steve Smith | Jul 11, 2004 8:00:43 PM
"Michigan is no longer even in play. I doubt the Bush campaign spends a cent there. The Muslim vote is indeed part of the reason."
Well, first, let me say that there aren't that many Muslim voters in Michigan, or even in the US. All in all, I read that there are about 500,000. But there are quite a few of them in key states, like Michigan, and yes, Florida. And from what I've read, a lot of them are going to give the Democrats a try.
Now, as for how Michigan is supposedly in the bag, I don't agree. Yet I will say that Kerry is probably in better shape there than he is in other swing states. I know Gov. Granholm is very popular, and while I don't know how well people like Sens. Stabenow and Levin, I highly doubt that they are very unpopular. Besides, all of the latest polls have him leading Bush, although one is inside the margin of error. They can't take the state for granted, but perhaps they are in a strong enough position to put more time into, say, Ohio.
Posted by: Brian | Jul 11, 2004 10:14:58 PM
Armed Liberal (now often seen at Winds of Change) is a Gore voter leaning Bush for the War on Terra.
You know, only Bush, Cheney, and their manliness stand between us and Sharia.
Posted by: Andrew J. Lazarus | Jul 11, 2004 11:01:17 PM
Wes "Moonie" Pruden? You are really digging.
Posted by: raj | Jul 12, 2004 6:14:48 AM
I think there are a huge number of potential Kerry voters out there who are simply so totally scared after 9-11 that they are going to stick with Bush out of a misguided belief that Bush has made us safer than we were. I think the single most important thing Kerry must do in order to win the election is to talk directly to these people and get them to understand that they are NOT safer with Bush in the White House - in fact, Bush has made us all much LESS safe.
I wish I could talk to Kerry and his people - I think if he were to concentrate on this issue, he could bulldoze Bush out of office by October.
Posted by: Tom Beck | Jul 12, 2004 12:47:44 PM
Peraps I'm deluding myself here, but for all of the comments on places like this about people switching, it's about people leaving Bush and voting for Kerry. This is something that people in the press have noticed, too. It's anecdotal, of course, so it can't be taken to the bank, but as The Note said, things like this happen before the storm hits, or whatever comparison that publication made. There are bound to be some people who do the opposite, but if they aren't as numerous as the people who voted for Bush and now plan to vote for Kerry, which is what the anecdotal evidence that I've seen reveals, then it won't make that much of a difference.
Posted by: Brian | Jul 12, 2004 6:32:24 PM
