Let’s elect former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as the next president of the United States, effective immediately.
If it was not abundantly clear that she is the crown-bearer for the Democrats before the first debate, her performance Tuesday should resolve any doubt.
Without question she won the debate – and even those who disagree with her views, or who are engrossed with her seemingly unethical scandals, must admit that she at least did not lose voters. Since she will win the nomination, she will win the presidency.
Let me explain why.
The most important lessoned learned from the first Democratic primary debate is that the Democratic Party machine is back, “bigger, badder and uncut.”
The Democrats took a beating in the past couple of congressional elections, and Democratic National Chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz made it known it would not happen again, and that they would maintain the presidency and gain back some seats in both chambers of Congress.
They will succeed.
The Democratic field was brilliant in not attacking each other very aggressively in the debate, for the most part, and rather focused their attention on the Republican Party’s vision of America. What should have been a fairly large ideological strife between a traditional liberal in Hillary Clinton, and a Social-Democrat in Bernie Sanders, was largely absent as Clinton tilted further left.
THIS WAS NOT just tactical to gain primary voters, but strategic in that the party itself wants to present a fairly unified, consistent, compassionate (via big government) face to the voters.
And they were successful in this Tuesday night.
Their first principles were largely universally shared, excepting some fringe topics held uncommonly by Jim Webb and Lincoln Chafee. But at the sake of sounding cold-hearted, who cares, because they are irrelevant at this point. Webb is too conservative for the Democratic base, and did not earn himself any voters from his performance. Chafee is unsure of who he is, has always been unsure, and destroyed his chance of future success by announcing he didn’t know why he voted the way he did in the Senate for the first time, and to not be so mean about it. He would be wise to drop out and avoid any further torture to his very dignified soul. He just isn’t cut out for the game.
The larger theme that many pundits have missed is that Republicans are portrayed as evil for not wanting the government to take care of every individual and/or group in the United States, whether here legally or not.
The debate itself did an amazing job at type-casting the Republican Party. They set the narrative, they all agreed to it, and they pulled it off. This was the purpose of the debate. To make Americans hate Republicans, by stating that Republicans don’t like immigrants; that Republicans don’t want poor people to go to college; that Republicans are racist for insisting that all lives matter; that Republicans are sexist by suggesting fetal tissue should not be for-profit, and for being pro-life more generally; that Republicans are not only in the 1 percent, but that they have created a cabal with billionaires to control the political process and corporate world.
THEY SOLD THE message that Republicans are not compassionate people, and that they are all against The People.
The Progressive Democratic agenda now is: If you don’t have something, it is not your fault; you are not responsible for the way your life has turned out. The system is against you, always has been, and always will be if Republicans are in charge. The government exists to create equality of conditions, or in their language, a society where everyone gets their fair share.
If you are not for big-government intervention, you can’t be for the people, and are against them.
The night casted Republicans as the boogeyman, except that this boogeyman is racist, sexist, filthy rich, full of machismo, anti-poor, anti-science, anti-you.
The Democratic strategy is to sell this message. And they have succeeded.
The recent Republican show of disunity in Congress more generally, but concerning the speakership specifically, does the job for Democrats. So, too, do the presidential candidates themselves, who engage in ruthlessly attacking each other. They appear disunified, and the Democrats are unified because of this.
It may be too late for the Republicans to rebrand their image in lieu of this ingenious assault by the Democrats. But this is only my supposed opinion.
If I am wrong, it’s not my fault anyway but, somehow, George W. Bush’s. Please don’t hold me responsible for my views, for they were created for me.
(The writer is an assistant political science professor at Augusta University. You can follow him on Twitter – @polscountrydoc.)