<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d32209663\x26blogName\x3dSideways+Mencken\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLACK\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://sidewaysmencken.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://sidewaysmencken.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d2412354670652716332', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

Politics and Assumptions.

Don't assume.

Three points I'd like to make for any Democrats who may read this blog.

1) The party is overreaching on Iraq. I know it looks like a 'slam dunk' that Iraq will still be a disaster say, 20 months from now, but it isn't. Yeah, the odds are it will be. But maybe not. Maybe it will look like the surge bought Maliki just enough space to work a compromise with the Sunnis. Maybe it will look like the little bit of peace the surge could bring, gave Ayatollah Ali (medieval old bastard, but not virulently evil) Sistani enough of a breather that he could rein in Muqtada (the fat little creep) Al Sadr and reassert his own authority. Maybe pacifying Baghdad freed enough resources to put a serious hurt on Al Qaeda in Al Anbar. Maybe Maliki's deal-making undercut the Sunni insurgency.

Yeah, not likely. But not impossible.

In short, we may just get a reasonable facsimile of limited success. Enough for the American people to breathe a sigh of relief and get back to obsessing over missing/exploited/dead blondes.

Hillary is probably wise to equivocate. Edwards has bet it all on American failure. Obama likewise. The House Dems ditto. Dems need to remember that the American people, even if they expect failure, are not going to reward the John the Baptists of Defeat.

Or is that Johns the Baptist of Defeat?

2) There's a name out there that Democrats don't want to think about that they should be thinking about. That name is Jeb.

The conventional wisdom is that Jeb can't run. The conventional wisdom is wrong. It's magical thinking. It's faith-based politics.

If we can have a second Clinton we can have third Bush. The Right loves him. If it were not for the fact that his idiot big brother is at 35% Jeb would be shoo-in. So what if I'm right about point #1 above? And what if George W. gets his dead cat bounce and is sitting at 45% six months from now? Still think Jeb can't run?

The Right doesn't like McCain, won't like Giuliani when they get to know him, and probably can't swallow flip-flopping, magic-Mormon-underwear-clad Romney. But they love Jeb. Jeb is their Republican Messiah. A savior with Florida in his pocket. All Jeb needs is one well-crafted line to put some air between himself and his brother. Don't count him out.

3) Yo, Hillary. (I'm sure she reads this blog religiously.) One word for you, sister: Gore. Obama is already fading. Edwards is weaker than the pundits make him. Bill Richardson, who probably should be president, and Joe Biden, who should probably be Secretary of State are not gaining traction.

Gore would sweep up the crunchies and the peaceniks. He'd have money. He has experience. He's already won one presidential election. And I suspect the voters will be more interested in competence than in likability this go-round.

“Politics and Assumptions.”

  1. Anonymous Anonymous Says:

    Damn.

  2. Anonymous Anonymous Says:

    I have to agree with you re: Iraq. It's not enough for the Dems to sit back and wait, passing non-binding resolutions. They have to take an active role in either ending this war or changing the game so we have a better shot at winning. They weren't given control of Congree to "stay the course".

  3. Blogger amba Says:

    You're so right about the Dems. And they're only pandering like mad to where they think "the people" are to get the White House in '08. But if things change -- and you have to hope like hell they do, you can't want to sacrifice another 25,000 Iraqis to the defeat of George W. Bush's party -- the majority of the people will change. Most Americans like to win.