====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/us/politics/06hill.html?_r=1&hp > > > By CARL > HULSE<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/h/carl_hulse/index.html?inline=nyt-per> > Published: December 5, 2009 > > WASHINGTON — Congressional Democrats successfully capitalized on anti-war > anger aimed at the White House in the last two elections. Now the > commander-in-chief presiding over a troop buildup is not a Republican, but > one of their own — a fact likely to add to Democratic difficulties in what > was already looming as a treacherous mid-term election. > At a minimum, President > Obama<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_obama/index.html?inline=nyt-per>’s > decision to send an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan could hold down > the enthusiasm, and perhaps the desire to contribute, of those who supported > President Obama and Congressional Democrats in the expectation that they > would wind down the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. > > Any reluctance to support Democrats in the fall could be problematic. Given > the public backlash to the economic turmoil that is threatening the > governing party, Democrats will need every vote they can get. > > “If the left is as anti-war as I believe they are, why would they turn out > to elect more Democrats who might support the president’s policy in > Afghanistan?” asked Senator John > Cornyn<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/john_cornyn/index.html?inline=nyt-per>of > Texas, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. “It > creates a real split and perhaps demoralizes Democrats.” > > The president’s war plan has already injected a volatile element into > Democratic primaries — even though he made no secret of his intentions > during his presidential campaign — with candidates in developing races > around the country taking sides on what could be a defining issue in fights > to choose a candidate. > > In Pennsylvania, Senator Arlen > Specter<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/arlen_specter/index.html?inline=nyt-per>, > a former Republican who switched to the Democratic > Party<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/d/democratic_party/index.html?inline=nyt-org>earlier > this year, quickly staked out a position against the escalation > while his opponent, Representative Joe > Sestak<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/joe_sestak/index.html?inline=nyt-per>, > a former military officer who has been trying to run to the left of Mr. > Specter, came out in favor it. > > Other House and Senate candidates have seized on the buildup both for and > against, making it likely the president’s Afghanistan policy will be a > central topic in primary races and perhaps the general elections as well. > > With liberal advocacy groups already mobilizing against the troop increase, > the president’s policy could conceivably touch off additional primary > contests against Democratic incumbents, forcing them into races that consume > dollars in advance of a showdown with Republicans. Even if they do not > instigate primaries, some activist groups are expected to run advertising > and stage rallies against Democrats backing the escalation. > > Despite the possible harm, Democrats and other election watchers do see a > potential benefit arising from the party’s division over how to proceed in > Afghanistan. > > For the most vulnerable Democrats — those in more conservative states and > districts — a vote on the troop escalation presents an opportunity to side > with Republicans on a national security issue. At the same time, it would > allow a lawmaker to showcase a split with the liberal forces of the party > and perhaps — depending on her ultimate view — with Speaker Nancy > Pelosi<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/nancy_pelosi/index.html?inline=nyt-per>herself. > > “That will help some Democrats in moderate districts, because it cuts into > Republican opponents running against them as out-of-touch liberals,” said > Martin > Frost<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/f/martin_frost/index.html?inline=nyt-per>, > a former congressman from Texas who headed the Democratic Congressional > Campaign Committee. “It is harder for a Republican opponent to go after the > Democrat in a moderate district who votes with the president on the war.” > > Mr. Frost, who was engaged in voter turnout efforts in the last election, > said a stance in favor of the buildup could spur criticism from some > Democratic constituents. But he said it is unlikely those voters would then > turn around and support a Republican. > > “They might make life difficult for the Democrat, but they are not going to > stay home,” he predicted. > > Some top Democrats played down the electoral ramifications of Mr. Obama’s > Afghanistan policy, saying the president is simply fulfilling his campaign > promise to return the nation’s military focus from Iraq to Afghanistan and > its potential as a base of terror operations. > > According to this view, the real test will come in 2011 when Mr. Obama will > have to choose whether to follow through on his commitment to begin removing > troops from Afghanistan as he presumably ramps up his own re-election > campaign. > > Democratic strategists say that if nothing else, division over the > Afghanistan policy could provide a distraction next year when party leaders > had hoped to be free to focus on job creation and deficit reduction — two > issues with appeal to independents. And a vote on spending $30 billion or > more for the added troops is not likely to come before next spring, pushing > the contentious subject even closer to election season. > > While Speaker Pelosi acknowledged that Afghanistan is a difficult internal > matter for Democrats, she said she does not anticipate that the troop > buildup will be an overriding issue in the mid-term elections. She said > Democrats will be judged more on how they handle persistent national > unemployment and the overall economy. > > “Meeting the needs of America’s families and seeing the progress that they > make is what is important to us and to the president,” she said. “We’ll > measure our success in that way and, hopefully, the American people will too > in the next election.” > ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: [email protected] Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
