In 2008, the Democrats are going to be competing for Senate seats in Alaska, Idaho, Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, and Tennessee. The question is, can Democrats win in these states by using a new strategy? Did Jim Webb’s victory represent a fluke, or does it provide a template?
The simplistic understanding of the Allen-Webb contest is that Allen imploded after a series of increasingly bizarre revelations about his racial views, including nostalgia for Confederate memorabilia, an accusation that he stuffed a dead deer’s head into a black family’s mailbox, and the use of an obscure North African slur—macaca—to describe a Webb staffer of Indian descent. After some post-election-day recounting, Webb was declared the winner by 9,331 votes, the tightest margin of victory for any Senate race in the nation and the one that returned the Senate to the Democrats. “The conventional wisdom is that Allen lost because of macaca,” says Bob Kerrey. “But that was just the opening. Webb converted that opening.”
He did so by ignoring the advice of most national Democrats. Webb, whose own son, Jimmy, is a Marine deployed in Iraq, went out on the trail every day in conservative Virginia wearing Jimmy’s combat boots. He railed against the war from the first day of his campaign, back when Senator Chuck Schumer and Congressman Rahm Emanuel, the leaders of the effort to take back Congress, were warning candidates in red states to shy away from Iraq, believing it had cost Democrats two elections in a row. On the economy, Webb bucked the consensus view among Democrats since the Clinton era that they need to downplay class divisions and populist rhetoric and hew to Rubinomics and deficit reduction. In other words, he said things that Democrats actually believe—or used to believe—but during the Bush years have been too scared to say. His victory became a case study in how Democrats could be.
That’s certainly what Webb believes. He takes umbrage at the notion that his victory was a fluke, as is clear from his National Press Club speech. “A year ago today,” he said, “I had literally no money. I had no political base whatsoever in either party. My opponent had just received the highest number of votes in a presidential poll taken during the Conservative Political Action Conference here in D.C. I was thirty-three points behind in the polls.” Not only does he argue that it was his message that overcame these hurdles, but he also insists that his message should now “become the core message of a revitalized Democratic Party.”
It’s an excellent question. I’m not sure about the answer. I’m also not sure how the top of the Democratic ticket will affect the Senate races. What say you?
My 2 cents is Kansas will go Democratic if:
6)It is doable.
Jim Webb won his race – in part – by being honest and straightforward against a competitor who was neither.
more often. I think we might think about changing up rules so that congress and senate could meet all over the country and phone their votes in. I think that more panels, more town hall meetings (not vetted as to participants) more hearings televised, more openness about bills and what is in them. If the blogs had been allowed to read the bills have the shit wouldn’t have stayed in them. We need bills online and a commenting period, just like some of the federal agencies. We need minimal secrecy. I realize that because of the partisan nature of a lot of topics that is going to be difficult. But maybe if debate were open to the public there might be some coming together about some issues or some way to treat issues in a respectful manner. (But I know I am just wishful thinking here!)
That excerpt is such a mischaracterization of events in Virginia that I must speak out.
Webb was nominated by an improbable coalition of netroots and national Democrats. During the primary Webb was endorsed by Schumer, Reid, Dodd, and several other senators. Webb had a cover story in Time Magazine. He was the conventional wisdom candidate.
The day after the primary Webb was within five points of Allen. That deficit grew to sixteen points by the time of the incident in Breaks, VA. That happened because Webb refused to campaign. His schedule had less than one event a week. Neither did he do any fundraising.
The incident in Breaks, VA changed the dynamic of the campaign. It made a national laughing stock of Allen.
Allen’s commercials featuring the former naval cadets were devastating. Anyone working the phone banks can attest that support of women voters melted away.
From the first Webb was unpopular with black voters and never made any serious effort to correct that.
Webb’s current approval rating stands at 49%, this is up from 42% before his boffo State of the Union response.
Webb was a fluke. If Democrats nominate candidates who are radioactive to women and blacks in a futile effort to attract a few more votes from white men the party will implode.
Mark Warner and Tim Kaine represent the future.
There is a whole side to Webb that is important, for him, but that doesn’t really translate to people looking to emulate him campaign. His history with women in the military is an example. His history on Vietnam is another.
In other words, there were real reasons why Webb was looked at skeptically by women and by minorities. But they aren’t the parts of his campaign that might warrant emulation.
It’s the stridently anti-war, pro-military stance combined with a rich streak of economic populism, with, perhaps, a dose of libertarianism thrown in for good measure.
Other people, like Jerry McNerney and Patrick Murphy also pulled off this kind of campaign in traditionally conservative districts.
But, if we are going to win a seat in Idaho or Wyoming, I do believe we’re going to need to emulate Webb in many ways. In the deep south the formula could be different. They seem to trust the government more on issues of national security and therefore railing against the Patriot Act, as Tester did, is not going to work in Mississippi.
But, considering how heavy the south is going to be in the next election, it pays to come up with a meta-narrative that is consistent with our values.
The DLC way of soft-pedaling civil and women’s rights, while being pro-business, and hawkish, is not going to work. And Webb proved there is another way.
Webb’s biggest weakness, his continuing weakness, is his unwillingness to campaign. His campaign schedule was a joke, even during the last months of the campaign.
I would point out that all of the Senators who endorsed Webb were DLC. I don’t know why people think that Webb was the anti-DLC candidate after they all endorsed him.
As for economic populism, isn’t it time we recognized actions rather than those who bloviate on the TV and editorial pages?
The DLC people also wrote hand-wringing column after column bemoaning Webb’s message on economic matters.
They liked him because he was a convert, and tough on national security. A real Bob Kerrey Democrat.
But his populism made them nervous. They wanted a Harold Ford campaign, but they didn’t get it.
Everytime he gets in front of a camera he makes himself look good at the expense of his fellow Democrats. Without Schumer & Co. endorsement Webb would not have been nominated, without some very long suffering Virginia Democrats he would never have been elected. Their thanks is that he slimes them at every opportunity.
His schtick is that he had only to present himself and his message and support magically materilized. I wish I had access to 2006 polling data to expose his lies.
The only politicians he ever praises are JOHN Warner and Chuck Hagel, sound populist to you?
Webb voted for tax cuts for the rich at the expense of disabled children, sound populist to you?
Webb has voted twice to, in effect, continue the Iraq war.
He played netroots for a fool and I want to know when we are going to wake up to that.
As a Southern Democract….
To me the difference between the dems and the repubs in the presidential race has become less and less on the main issues…Iraq,Iran, foreign policy, immigration, trade…which are the central issues. Grownup voters are thinking of the over all economic survival of the US because they know all their other interest depend on that survival, and cleaning up the political system and restoring some real governence in the country first and foremost.
The personal interest issues of gay rights, abortion, religion and etc will come in second among the majority voters in my opinion.
If a dem candidate talks like a “hard liner” and keeps playing the worn out “security card” he/she will lose…if a repub candidate talks like an old time down home common sense conserative he/she will win…at least here in the South.
We could have either the lowest voter turnout in history in the next election because people are disgusted with the establishment candidates or the largest if some candidate is different and lights their fire.
In other words, who knows?…but so far no one is lighting my fire and I am pretty representive of the people who actually get out and vote in my area.