I read a Thomas Friedman column this week that really required a smackdown. So I supplied one at New York:
How much political capital should Democrats invest in a probably doomed effort to save the political career of Liz Cheney? Earlier this week, Never Trump Republican Linda Chavez penned a column urging Wyoming Democrats to take a dive this November in order to give the incumbent a chance to survive as an independent, assuming (as it safe) that Cheney will be purged in her own party’s primary. And now, in an apparent coincidence, in comes New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman suggesting a far more radical step by Democrats to align themselves with the small slice of Republicans who follow Cheney’s example in repudiating Donald Trump. He wrote:
“Is that what America needs in 2024 — a ticket of Joe Biden and Liz Cheney? Or Joe Biden and Lisa Murkowski, or Kamala Harris and Mitt Romney, or Stacey Abrams and Liz Cheney, or Amy Klobuchar and Liz Cheney? Or any other such combination.”
Friedman phrases this as a question, but clearly he thinks it’s a good idea given the “existential moment” America would face if Trump is allowed to regain the presidency in 2024. It’s a bit of a loaded question, too, since it postulates that nothing short of a previously unimaginable “sacrifice” by Democrats and Never Trump Republicans alike can stop Trump — and that it would, in fact, succeed in stopping Trump.
I certainly agree that Democrats dumping Kamala Harris to give their vice-presidential nomination to a conservative Republican who opposes legalized abortion and is a militarist by conviction and heredity would be a “sacrifice,” to put it very mildly. It would also be very, very weird. Friedman cites the recent establishment of a mind-bending coalition government in Israel to thwart Bibi Netanyahu as a development comparable to what he is suggesting. But as he acknowledges, Israel has a parliamentary system in which multiparty coalitions are the rule rather than the exception. A presidential system in which parties invariably run separate tickets for the top job is another thing altogether.
The U.S. has had exactly one example of multiparty fusionism in a presidential election. In 1864, in the midst of the Civil War, Republicans nominated Democrat Andrew Johnson of Tennessee — then serving as U.S. military governor of Tennessee — to run with Lincoln on a “Union” ticket. The experiment did not turn out well, beginning with Johnson’s drunken inaugural address in 1865 and continuing with the racist solidarity he exhibited toward ex-Confederates after Lincoln’s assassination, culminating in his impeachment and near removal from office. There are important reasons politicians sort themselves out into major parties, which should be apparent in an era of polarization over issues other than the scofflaw behavior of Donald Trump.
Is the threat of Trump’s return to the White House the equivalent of the U.S. Civil War? Not in itself, I would contend, though that horrific development could lead eventually to grave conditions comparable if not equal to a civil war. The premise that a Biden-Cheney fusion ticket would uniquely doom Trump to failure is even more dubious. There has never been much evidence of a mass following for Never Trump Republicans, and such as it is, it is mostly composed of people who would (and did in 2020) gladly vote for Biden and Harris. The baleful effect that replacing Harris with Cheney on the ticket would have on Democratic turnout could easily offset or exceed the alleged benefits of bipartisan and trans-ideological fusion.
So Democrats should say thanks, but no thanks, to Friedman for the idea of submitting their party to some sort of unwieldy and unnatural coalition of national salvation, so long as there is the slightest possibility of beating Trump the old-fashioned way. Liz Cheney deserves great respect for the courage she has shown in defying Trump at the expense of her own career, and if Biden is reelected with her support, perhaps she deserves an ambassadorship, a minor Cabinet post, or a major sub-Cabinet position. But she has no business being at the top of the line of succession to a Democratic president.
You’re cherrypicking polls in Minnesota. Yes, the Star Tribune poll showed Kerry up by nine points, but a Pioneer Press poll also released today showed Bush up by a point, 48-47. Here’s the link (must register):
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/politics/10058538.htm
Don’t know which is right but the Star Tribune poll has overestimated Democratic support in recent elections.
On MPR,
Minnesota Poll calls it for Kerry
Mason Dixon calls it close….
I think Kerry will ultimately win in MN but I anticiapte a long night
I’m from North Dakota….a supposedly solid red state…but the wolf commercial is running here—both on radio and TV. Seems like a waste of money to spend in a traditional red state with few electoral votes????? Makes me wonder what their polls are showing.
The selection of that commercial also seems bizarre….this is a rural gun state and we aren’t afraid of wildlife or trees.
Another note: Listening to sunday morning services on TV (from Aberdeen, Tom Daschel’s hometown) they were saying things like “I won’t say it’s a sin not to vote, but it is a Christian responsibility). More bizarro world. This isn’t an evangelical area. It’s religious, but established religion.
If Virginia goes for Kerry, the race is over. I don’t think it will so I discount that particular poll. I live in New Hampshire, where in the latest Concord Monitor poll, Kerry leads 49-46. However the Monitor is skewered left with it’s opinion pieces, so I call it to close to call. The battleground states will be New Hampshire, Iowa, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and Michigan. Kerry will have to win Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota to get in if Bush wins the rest. My final electoral vote gives Kerry 280, Bush 258. However, I can see Bush getting as much as 290 votes if some states break his way. Bottom line, it is WAY TO CLOSE TO CALL. Have your rolaids at the ready and get on board for the ride. It’s going to be either a fun ride if you candidate wins, or a total bummer if he loses.
These numbers are making me feel better. The Osama tape made me wonder which way people would go. It seems to me the public should begin to realize if Bush can’t protect us from the flu, how can he protect us from terrorists.
I also wonder how people wil feel when they hear that Osama believed only the first plane would be successful. Many possibly died because Bush sat in a chair looking like a deer in the headlights.
VA has 3 groups who have lost out under Bush:
1) Techies who lost jobs under 2001 recession and failed to get jobs to due to outsourcing 2003-4.
2) Federal workers-who are under the threat of privitazation which is French for getting fired.
3) Military and ex-military types-they are angry at the are in Iraq.
Tennessee going Kerry??
from diarist at dkos
Huge Early Vote Numbers to support anecdotal analysis, concluding a small 29000 vote margin in favor of Kerry –
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/30/45946/384
worth some independent verification