|Campaign 2004 News Blog News and analysis of the 2004 campaign for president of the United States.|
Thursday, May 29, 2003
Amy Sullivan argues in the Washington Monthly that Democrats need to talk more about religion if they want to have a chance in 2004. While they don't have a chance of winning the Jerry Falwell/Pat Robertson bloc, they could capture the votes of evangelicals who are less committed to the Republican party. She notes that the two Democrats who have been elected in recent years--Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton--both used religious rhetoric during their campaigns.
Wednesday, May 28, 2003
William Saletan of Slate claims that Democrats are becoming more comfortable with "liberal themes," as they demonstrated at an EMILY's List forum. Well, maybe. It's interesting that Saletan considers recent praise by Democrats for Bill Clinton as a sign of "turning left." The Republicans tried for eight years to portray Bill Clinton as some kind of extreme leftist radical, and apparently they fooled Saletan as well. But that aside, two of his four signs of "turning left" pertain exclusively to Dean, and Dean has always positioned himself to the left of the other candidates. Perhaps the Democratic party is swinging slightly to the left now that the Iraq war is over, but Saletan's article doesn't prove this very convincingly.
Tuesday, May 27, 2003
Adam Clymer has two articles in the New York Times: one about the state of the Republican party today, and one about the Democrats.
The Washington Post reports that the Green Party is seriously thinking about staying out of the 2004 presidential race and backing the Democratic candidate instead. This is still not a very popular opinion within the party, not only because of ideological objections to the Democrats, but also because of practical concerns: