Matt Gunterman February 10th, 2008
Interesting. Gov. Mike Hukabee (R) is doing very well against Sen. John McCain (R), the presumptive GOP nominee, in Kansas, Louisiana, and Washington state.
As I’m writing at 2am ET, the only contest that McCain has a chance of winning is Washington, and if he wins it, it won’t be with much more than 26 percent of the vote. That’s not a resounding victory for a man whose coronation too place this week among the GOP elite.
I find it fascinating — and perhaps very telling — that the week that deeply embedded establishment GOP figures like our very own Sen. Mitch McConnell (R) “rallied” (however sheepishly) around McCain as the Republican standard bearer for November, the rank and file of the Republican party has undoubtedly decided it’s not going to follow the top’s lead.
And, you know, the Republican party enjoys and indeed revels in its reputation for having a legion of party members who do what they’re told, when they’re told.
Now, what’s likely happening here is that many GOPers around the nation are simply disgusted with their choices in the primary and especially with certain prospect of McCain as the nominee. Thus, with these “mainstream” Republican voters being so mentally anguished and not turning out to the polls as a result, the determining factor in these Republican elections is coming down to dedication. And Huckabee is picking up — and will continue to pick up — a sizable portion of those the dedicated Republicans.
The GOP, in other words, is going to have big problems with the democratic process over the spring, I suspect. It’s not that the process is going to defeat McCain. That’s very unlikely to happen. It’s just that the whole process is going to humiliate McCain. That’s the problem. It’s going to make him appear weak to the world. He’s already won the nomination, and he can’t finish off this foe. It’s really embarrassing.
There is great dissatisfaction right now among rank-and-file Republicans for sure, and I’m quite gleeful about that.
There’s a similar dissatisfaction plaguing Kentucky Democrats, or a significant element thereof, and that is a circumstance that does not make be gleeful. It concern me, in fact.
Larry Dale Keeling of the Herald-Leader picked up on it in his February 4 column (be sure to read the whole thing, if you haven’t already; it’s excellent):
[...]
That “non-endorsement” endorsement Beshear gave Bruce Lunsford in the Senate primary was also a mistake. Lunsford’s wealth makes him the instant favorite in the race. All Beshear’s statement did was needlessly alienate supporters of other D candidates.
###
There have been so many mistakes by the Kentucky Democrats since Beshear was inaugurated in December.
Mistakes are forgivable, of course, especially in these early stages (when they are to be expected), but what’s really disheartening is that these mistakes are revealing two unfortunate qualities about the present Democratic leadership.
First, it’s not learning from its mistakes. Second, it has no interest in leadership, only holding onto power.
The Democratic Leadership simply doesn’t understand the dynamic of how the political landscape in the state is evolving, internally or relative to the nation.
Essentially, a lot of these state Democrats assumed that they could play nice with the burgeoning progressive wing of the party in 2007, then immediately move hard to the right once back in power and governing.
By moving to the right so aggressively, these Democrats assuage the state’s conservative cultural warriors that the Kentucky Democratic party is on their side.
In short, the KDP pays lips service to progressive causes, and give full service to conservative causes.
And, this strategy of pandering to Kentucky’s basest cultural elements — like the anti-choice legislation that passed with massive Democratic support in the state senate, or the ban on same-sex partner benefits at state universities that similarly enjoyed the eager support of Democrats — will almost certainly work in the short term.
But it’s not a strategy that works in the long term. In the long term Kentucky as a state loses on economic, educational, and cultural terms. Why? Because when you treat people who are bigots, hate-mongers, sexists, anti-intellectual, and anti-science as if their creeds are legitimate pathways to a prosperous future, you lose.
That’s a fact. Kentucky has played nice with churlishness for more than a century now, and Kentucky has lost in the process. We are poorer, dumber, and all around less dynamic as a people and state because we’ve empowered and placed a strange prestige and honor on redneck culture.
And, as some of our more prosperous neighboring states have shown, having state government dominated by political conservatism doesn’t necessitate that it embrace backwards-looking redneck culture. The difference is in which faction of conservatives dominates the government: pragmatic fiscal conservatives or crazy, foaming-at-the-mouth social conservatives who think the whole world should revolve around premillennialism.
And, in the long term the Democratic party of Kentucky will be deeply divided. Progressives won’t be so easily wooed next time. The enthusiasm likely won’t be there. And that leaves the door wide open for Republicans to reorganize and take advantage.
Progressives are being betrayed by their party. We’re not talking about isolated incidents of rightward movement here. We all understand that concessions must be made; there is such a thing as Realpolitik. Yet Kentucky Democratic leaders aren’t conceding to the right-wing on a need-to basis. They are leading the charge to the right.
Their movement is systematic, and it is a movement of their own initiative and design.
Who is the leader of Kentucky Democrats? I see leadership in people like Sen. Kathy Stein, Sen. Ernesto Scorsone, Rep. John Yarmuth. They are demonstrating consistency and gumption in their politics, and I’m sure they’ve made their fair share of concessions in their political careers.
But when push come to shove, these sorts of leaders are at least looking to the future and are governed by principle.
Too many of their fellow elected Democrats are governed by fear of losing the power they’ve only recently regained, and in being so governed they are only setting their party up to lose it exactly so.
