I am for a Democratic political strategy the features strong contrast with the Republican Party. I dubbed my view the
Lincoln 1860 strategy, after Lincoln's Presidential campaign of 1860 and his February 1860 speech at Cooper Union especially.
Schiavo, Dobson and the Nuclear Option provided a real opportunity.
Ed Kilgore provides some analysis that I see as evidence that my view is correct:
It's no big secret that the Bush/Rove
polarization approach to politics and policy is predicated on the belief that since self-identified conservatives handily outnumber liberals, destroying any middle ground will force moderates to choose sides in a competition where Democrats have to win a huge, disproportionate number of them to stay even. But as a new Washington Post survey shows, Democrats may soon be well-positioned to do just that.
According to the survey, while four of five Democrats think Bush is focusing on the wrong priorities, and nearly as many Republicans disagree, an astonishing 68 percent of self-identified political independents agree with Democrats on this question. And let's be clear: it's not that they worry about Bush's particular approach to this or that issue, or don't know enough about it--they think he's focusing on the wrong issues entirely.
Can Bush turn this around? Kilgore provides the primary reason he can not:
Since the dominant conservative wing of the GOP is now deeply, and probably irreversibly, invested in Bush's current agenda, it will be very difficult for him to change gears dramatically, even if he did have something relevant to offer on the economy, health care, or Iraq, which he doesn't.
The Republican Party is the Party of Dobson.
The Democratic Party is the Party of FDR, Truman, Kennedy and Clinton.