When New York Democrats go to the polls to cast their votes for their party's presidential nominee, they will probably decide in March whether George Bush will win in November. The 2004 presidential election is arguably the most important political race in our nation since the end of World War II.
Party voters in any primary election, whether it be the mayoralty of Ithaca or the presidency of the United states, must balance two questions; which candidate do they prefer, and which candidate is more electable. When the stakes are high and the differences between the parties are very great, the balance must tilt decisively towards electability. Responsible Democratic primary voters must remember that electability depends more on how favorably Republican and independent, rather than Democratic voters will respond to their candidate.
In making their decision, Democratic voters should keep in mind the following facts: In the 13 presidential elections since World War II (excluding the 2000 election, where the actual winner is still a matter of debate),
The incumbent won six of the nine races in which a president sought a second term.
Democrats who were generally perceived as liberal won 3 presidential elections, and lost 6. Democrats perceived as middle-of-the-road won 4 elections and lost 1.
Democratic candidates from southern states won 4 times and lost once; those from mid-western and eastern states won once and lost 6 times. (The 1948 Truman victory is not included, since Missouri is both southern and mid-western.)
No Democrat ever won the presidency without winning at least 5 southern states.
Polls consistently show that the American people have more confidence in Republicans to manage our national security
Since 1948, the fraction of voters declaring themselves Democratic has declined from about 50% to about 30%. The Republican fraction has stayed constant at about 30%.
These historical data portend a grim 2004 race for Democrats. To win, the Democratic candidate will need everything going for him (alas, there are no longer any "her" possibilities this year). The ideal candidate will have southern roots, have strong national security credentials, and will not begenerally perceived as a "standard democratic liberal". He will have to draw votes from outside of the basic Democratic base, and must win back those Democrats who are concerned with the dangers of a post 9/11 world.
Of all the possible candidates, I believe that Wesley Clark comes closest to the ideal Democratic standard-bearer. His weaknesses in the primary become strengths in the general election...
http://magazine.14850.com/0402/whywesleyclark.html 
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
