Democrats: Still unacceptableIn a recent response to a comment made about an election analysis that I wrote at Where I Stand, I laid out in no uncertain terms why the Democratic Party is still unacceptable to Middle America. I think those thoughts are worth posting here also.
I agree with you that 1) Democrats will pick up seats but probably not take the house or senate and 2) they have only themselves to blame for being a non-option for intellectually honest and consistent conservatives. It's sad really, because as much as I will vote against the Republican party, I'm not sure that the Democrats would deliver on the majority of issues that concern me- deficit reduction, welfare reform, eliminating tax shelters, and promoting fair trade.
I'll just be straight-the Democratic Party has never delivered on those issues on a national level and barring some miracle, I don't expect them to-ever. I was opposed to NAFTA for example, but voted Republican in 1994 and 1996 anyway. The Democrats were doing little or nothing to promote American industrial interests from the beginning. Reagan, apostle of free trade though he was, was not afraid to use the tariff to protect our country's key industries...the Dems (as a party-many individuals were opposed) sold the whole store.The Dems do have an alliance with the militant social Left that they are completely unwilling to give up, however-they are masters at how to make themselves unacceptable to people in the Heartland, which means that in Presidential years to come, we may see more and more bloc voting.
Nonetheless, Democrats do offer us a real alternative when it comes to strengthening homeland security and fighting terrorism. Bush has shown that he is neither competent nor ethical when it comes to fighting the War on Terror. And the GOP, with the exception of a few Senators, has shown that it is nothing more than a rubber stamp.
With the notable exception of Iraq (and even there we can't be entirely sure since Gore was not elected) I do not think the Dems would have reacted to 9/11 any differently. What would have been different is the reaction from Republicans: Gore would have (rightly) been labelled a tyrant worthy of tarring and feathering. Conservative reaction would have been such that these mid-term elections would have all but destroyed the Democrats. So why the difference here? I can't speak for the rest of Red-land, but around here the general mood is "this is bad...a Dem majority will make what has been made bad 100 times worse," and this mood exists because in the past, that has been the perceived outcome when Democrats are allowed majorities at all levels of government.
Hopefully, when Democrats eventually take back the government, they will have the wisdom to make some of the necessary fiscal reforms that although not rallying their base, will give red state conservatives a reason to consider them a viable option come election time.
I'm sure that's a lovely thought to dream, but I must say with honesty that I am not holding my breath.