Days of Change

Day 375 – The Art of War

If you are physically incapable of voting for a Republican, stop here. Seek professional help.

Elections have consequences. When the Democrats took the House and Senate in 2006, Bush fired Rumsfeld the next day. Less than a year later, the economy went in the toilet. In 2008, the Republicans nominated a Conservative who didn’t want to market himself as a Conservative against a jackass who only wanted to market himself.

Of the voters in that election, there were two quantifiable and diametrically opposed groups who had an impact. Social conservatives had dreams of an epic defeat that would lead to triumph. PUMAs had a nightmare nominating process that used the letter of the law and manipulation of events to rob them of the rightful outcome. Those social Conservatives stayed home and the PUMAs voted for any number of third-party candidates and for McCain as a last resort.

What they hopefully learned is that you punish someone by voting for the other person, not by staying home. Abstaining is a vote lost, but voting against a candidate is two votes lost. In the end, both groups lost.

Here’s the redemption. In 2010, everyone can vote for a member of the House and many can vote for a Senator. When you get to that booth, you vote for the Republican candidate. Don’t even read the name.

How dare I thwart democracy by such a request? Well, all of the people who say both parties are the same won’t be getting an independent to vote for anyway. If they’re the same, vote for one. Her’s what you get with a massive Democratic defeat.

1. Democrats who listen to you. Since the beginning of the year, Reid and Pelosi have used “we won” as an excuse for ignoring the peons who are their bosses.
2. Hillary becomes the savior of the party. She can legitimately resign from SOS and declare that she wants to revitalize the Democratic Party the way her husband did. When those Democrats start to listen to you in defeat, they sure as hell will listen to Hillary, too.
3. Gridlock isn’t so bad. Reagan and Clinton had it, and they left office mostly liked. Bush had six years without it, and that lack of accountability hurt him. He didn’t get rid of Rumsfeld until after the 2006 election, but he also proved that the Democrats were cowards on stopping the war. Had he done that earlier, blame would have been shared.

Then there’s the inevitable claim that Republicans are heatless/evil/sexually inadequate/foul-smelling and generally bad people. Think about this.

1. Jackass will still be president. He can bitch and moan all day about the Republicans trying to stop him, but he can still veto the bills.
2. There are so many Republican Senators up for re-election, it is mathematically impossible for them to regain the Senate in 2010. At best, the Republicans will win the House.
3. The Republicans can read exit polls. If a loose coalition of Jackass’ opponents put them over the top, they may consider that group persuadable. How would you like the GOP to change their abortion platform to match the many pro-choice Republican officeholders? It’s not going to happen voting for Nader.

This is, for lack of a more PC term, war. While some battles are painful, this strategy has a great deal of upside and very little downside. Take your righteous political anger out on the real problem, the people in charge right now.

---