|
Edited on Thu Apr-07-05 01:05 AM by Heaven and Earth
Given the circumstances, any dealing with those we have come to define as "the enemy" can be construed as betrayal, requiring whatever punishment can be mustered.
I read that Liz Dole was so incompetent as head of the Republican 2006 Senate Committee that Hillary is running unopposed at this point. Schumer is rock solid, and kicking Republican ass as Dole's counterpart, although I wish he had kept Rep Langevin in against Chafee in Rhode Island, who was our best chance to take that seat. Don't forget that at this point, based on the polls that are intermittenly posted at Daily Kos, Spitzer is going to be governor.
Al Sharpton? How much influence does he have in New York and can he really be flipped as easily as giving him a fox news gig? I imagine he is wealthy already, and that for someone like him, principle would count for more.
My bet is that Texas left for the same reason the rest of the south left: The Voting Rights Act of 65, and that is why dems flipped, not special GOP efforts. No, the strategy Rove has chosen is already out there for all to see, and that is to use the cultural issues to shave off groups from the Dems. That isn't likely to work in cosmopolitan, multi-cultural New York. If it didn't buy Bush's National Security pitch after actually being attacked, it won't flip because of Al Sharpton.
It has nothing to do with thinking that they wouldn't go that far. No doubt they would love to have New York. But the fact of the matter is they are not omnipotent, and they can't get New York, because of who they are and the strategy they have chosen.
Also, I am not convinced when people say "just look at x". Each situation is unique, with its own circumstances and variables. The things they are doing with Wolfowitz and Bolton have little, if anything, to do with taking New York.
|