What If You Want To Vote Them All Out?

CBS’ Meyer: The ’06 Elections Unlikely To Really Shake Things Up

(CBS)  For the Democrats to win the Senate, Democratic voters will have to hold their noses and vote for candidates they don't much care for. In Tennessee, for example, voters who have never elected a black to statewide office will have to vote for Harold Ford Jr. In Pennsylvania, they'll have to embrace an anti-abortion man, Bob Casey Jr. In Connecticut, they'll have to unite behind Lamont.

In contrast, Republican primary voters, encouraged by the White House, have just rallied around Lincoln Chafee, the most liberal Republican on the Hill and a guy who didn't even vote for Bush. They had a true-blue conservative option on the ballot but scorned him.

Chafee is more out of sync with the GOP core than Lieberman is with the Democratic. Yet party activists in Connecticut and around the country trounced Lieberman, while Republicans bit the bullet on Chafee. Republicans argue that this is a sign of how pragmatic and sophisticated their voters are. Republican professionals believe Republicans and independents who have leaned Republican in 2002 and 2004 will not abandon ship.

The third brake on predictions of Democratic landslides involves money and ruthlessness. The Washington Post reported, for example, that the National Republican Congressional Committee will spend more than $45 million on negative ads — and that's just one organization. Meanwhile, for example, Howard Dean is feuding with Congressional leaders over whether the Democratic National Committee will fund a serious "get out the vote" drive. The belief that Republicans' smartest decision is to run against Democrats runs deep.

I am not in the prediction racket. But my own hunch that this will be a status quo election comes from believing that this is a hard year for non-partisan or anti-partisan voters — the majority of voters — to cast meaningful protest votes.

Congress is almost as unpopular as the president. Voting for Democrats, if you're independent-minded, is a lousy way to protest. Many "unpartisans" — most, I'd wager — think their post-war posturing and preening has been so transparent, so craven and so lacking a positive agenda that they almost seem like the Republicans' enabling spouse. Together, they bicker, they blame and that's the whole game.

That's how I see it. So even if the Democrats do capture the House or the Senate, I don't think it will mark a big change for the country.

---

Dick Meyer, a veteran political and investigative producer for CBS News, is the editorial director of CBSNews.com, based in Washington, D.C.

E-mail questions, comments, complaints, arguments and ideas to
Against the Grain. We will publish some of the interesting (and civil) ones, sometimes in edited form.

[ademeyer]

Jane, I disagree with you. I think Kerry lost the election because people didn't want to change leaders during a time of war. And I do remember the Vietnm War. I remember most men did what they could to avoid going. (See Cheney, Bush and Clinton.) And It's a fact Kerry reached into the water and pulled out a man while under fire. "Swift Boating" is now synonymous with aggression by deceit. Republicans used embittered Veterans to smear Kerry's service. Its very sad for all concerned. It doesn't change the fact Kerry saved a man's life. Where is the "intestional fortutude" in belittling that?

[loneduck4]

The major reason I would vote to ensure control of the House or Senate changes hands is to give Bush a harder time since can't stand the direction he is taking us. He needs challenged more on the issues instead of a House or Senate that push everything through he wants. (Except the recent issue.)

[bornoffire]

The real reason nothing will change. GET OVER IT! Find it on the web for the whole article.

A Princeton University computer science professor added new fuel Wednesday to claims that electronic voting machines used across much of the country are vulnerable to hacking that could alter vote totals or disable machines.

In a paper posted on the university's Web site, Edward Felten and two graduate students described how they had tested a Diebold AccuVote-TS machine they obtained, found ways to quickly upload malicious programs and even developed a computer virus able to spread such programs between machines.

[carlylaine]

zerocp

You got it on illegal immigration.

[ronniehm]

"For the Democrats to win the Senate, Democratic voters will have to hold their noses and vote for candidates they don't much care for. In Tennessee, for example, voters who have never elected a black to statewide office will have to vote for Harold Ford Jr."

Wow. Imagine Rush Limbaugh had said that.

[timandsu]

Shame on you for saying Tennesseeans will be forced to vote for a black man if we are to elect a Democratic senator. Harold Ford Jr. is intelligent, well-spoken, dynamic and from a powerful Memphis family. He is running a close race against former Chattanooga mayor Bob Corker. You insult all of us in Tennessee by assuming we won't vote for him simply because he is black. We may be southern, but we're not stupid, nor are most of us a bunch of racists.

[ronniehm]

Looks like the white flags are coming out early this election. We're already getting the excuses for losing.

[sd4david]

Wow, talk about bad analysis. I can think of 3 big reasons it was bad.1) Chafee is in a BLUE state, and if he lost the primary, the Republican Party said they were not going to fund the candidate, because he was too conservative to be elected. So the ONLY chance Rhode Island was going to have a Republican senator was if Chafee won the primary. Lieberman is also in a BLUE state. If Lieberman wins as an independent, he will caucus as a Dem. If Lamont wins, there will be a Dem that represents the values of the Democratic party better, and who doesn't backstab his Democratic colleagues. Either way, the seat technically stays Democratic, 2) Conneticuts primary was only for registerred Democrats. Rhode Island's, I believe was for any party affiliation, or at the very least Republican and Independents. I'll bet you if it was for just republican's, Chafee would have lost his primary also. 3) BOTH incumbents, Lieberman and Chafee, had the vast majority of their party's dollars and vocal support behind them. The voters, however, felt differently.

[peaceforusa]

Stand up and re-take America. It is ours. The Government works for the people and we have the right to decide who works for us and who don't. The voters of America need to take a stand and let your voices be heard. We will no longer tolerate having America broken down by people in the ACLU...these are evil people. We can no longer support candidates who are in the pockets of special interest groups who do not fight for, and believe in America and Freedom. These freedoms are being taken away and we must stand up to be heard and counted. This is the time to get back to American values and rid the USA of the infestation of those that demoralize it. Illegal Aliens, ACLU, Affirmative Action, all need to be dealt with and only we can do it. Harsher prison sentences for child killers/rapists/molesters and criminals overall. We need to fight or this government and these special interest groups will bring America to its knees and weaken us for others like the Muslims to take over. Get with it America...this is reality..Think about what is going to be left for your kids and grandkids if we allow all this insaneness to continue. If they don't want we want then vote them out. It is your constitutional right!

[zerohcp]

My vote is going to candidates that will uphold our laws by keeping illegals out of our country. It's time to do the right thing and keep Mexico from importing their poverty and sucking our schools & health system dry! I am so tired of political correctness! It's time for term limits in the House and Senate to protect us from professional politicians who do not have the backbone to stand up and do the right things for us the American Citizens!

[random_radar]

I have worked for one of the major political parties, and I can assure you that voting doesn't matter much. If you really want to change America, you need to participate in the party apparatus that determines who gets on the ballot. You can have good people in office if you get involved on more days than election day and support those good people.

Politics is a nasty business because money and power attract ruthless people. If you want to see America be a land of peace, freedom, justice, and opportunity, you are going to have to fight the selfish powermongers. The reason our nation is in decline is that not enough people value their liberty enough to protect it. So get a lot more involved or prepare for the coming totalitarian tyranny.

[ademeyer]

I'd love to see Kerry kick some Swift Boat Veterans' ***. After what they put him through, and the price the country is paying for their lies, I think they have it coming. PS Brace yourself for the '06 Republican attack ads, I hear they have spent millions on them.

[ger12342]

People need to start voting for any political party other than the Democrats or Repulblicans. That is the only way the direction of this country will ever change. Stop wasting your votes by voting for the DNC and RNC.

[pelepoe]

Surely we need a revelution in this country at this time if not to save it for our children. but wedont need to shoot bullets we need to shoot ballots. I am a veteran, I supported Lebenon I tried to get the hostages out of tehran. Lets get out of there and let them do there own homework. get out there and vote. pelepoe

[MizQue]

Joe Lieberman is not the "Independent" candidate for senator from Connecticut. The Independent Party has a senate candidate, John Mertens. Mr. Lieberman, made atrocious anti-American remarks after losing the primary, likening primary voters who voted for Ned Lamont to supporters of terrorism, and said "For the sake of our state, our country and my party, I cannot and will not let that result stand". He then did the unforgivable thing of thwarting the will of the voters, refused to concede like a gentleman, and instead created his own party, "Connecticut for Lieberman" - which is essentially a party of one.

The people of Connecticut were sick of Joe Lieberman's support for the Iraq war, his involvement with selecting "heluva Job Brownie" to head FEMA, his meddling in the Terri Schivao affair, his bleating about decency, and his foray into the national spotlight with a Vice Presidential run without resigning his senate seat first. Had he been elected VP, the Republican governor of Connecticut would have been able to appoint a replacement senator, most likely a Republican. For these reasons, the Democratic voters of Connecticut wanted change, and they voted for this. Joe Lieberman's refusal to accept the will of the majority of voters in his party will forever tar his legacy. Why did he spend 6 million dollars plus on a primary if he did not intend to respect the results? He so richly deserves to lose in November, and the people of Connecticut deserve a change!

[barnowl14]

What unspeakable idiocy to equate good policy and effective propaganda. If this columnist thinks it's better to spend billions of dollars a week for a bloody post colonial dustup in Iraq instead of seriously addressing the difficult problem of stateless international terrorism, he's entitled to vote for whomever he pleases. Unless he recommends sitting on our hands, that would have to be the GOP,the "ideas" party, the party of ethics, fiscal probity and sterling innovations in Social Security , disaster relief, and comprehensible drug programs for seniors.He can imagine that five bucks and some change is a living wage, the "Healthy Forests"initiative is not double speak, and that a manichean foreign policy geared to pull the heartstrings of 30 percent of the electorate should determine the future for the rest of us. In the unlikely event there is no change in governance, as he suggests, good luck to the USA, which will be enjoying the same severe hangover they've suffered since 2004, on the order of "I can't believe we fell for this again." After two more years of horrific cronyism, amateurism and the unchecked reign of boobus americanus they might in two years be even more willing to take scalps than they are now. But I don't think we will have to wait that long.

Do you ever think we, the American people, are stuck eating political leftovers for the rest of time? Republican/Democrat where are the best minds of our generation going? I will tell you where they are not going; they are not going to run for political office. They may still fundamentally change this country like they have in the past, but they won't do it from inside the government and they are not going to save us from ourselves.
Ask yourself this question (and I don't care what party you are for.) when you walk into the booth and cast the ballot, is this the best person for the job? Or is this a leftover%u2026..

You see, in my opinion, our forefathers were the smartest minds of their generations. They were not perfect, they liked getting drunk and womanizing as much if not more than our politicians of today. The difference was that wasn't what they went down in the annals of history for. They went into history having formed a nation, and creating a system that has withstood the test of time since it was created. One, who came a bit later, even saved us from ourselves literally.
What will our politicians be known for out of this generation? Perhaps destroying all that hard work?
I can say I am of the disenfranchised generation of voters. The voters that can't see what politicians can do for them. I can understand why the best and brightest stay out of the game. I am just hoping that one day very soon the players of the game realize how badly we need better than their best.

[long_rider]

Americans have to do a little research on the people running for office. Ignore the handsome, well spoken person before the camera, and look at who is backing them, and why (this is where the pork-barrel is going to go, as well as political favors), look at their past political record- if people would have done this with the chimp he never would have been elected.

Americans have to care enough about who we elect, and hold them accountable after they get into office. We have to monitor their voting while in office %u2013 hold them accountable.

Face it, the American voter wants a canned package, do all the work for me and I will trust you, and I will vote for anyone you put before me.

The people we have put in office are liars, cheats, crooks, give up our constitutional rights to an idiot president, break their sworn oath, support heir backers, and what do the American people do, not one thing %u2013 this is sad. No wonder everyone wants to run for office, free trips, bribes, paid for political favors, and no one cares.

So why is it so important that we have republican this or democrat that they are still going to do the same things, and we let them get away with it.

America is going down hill fast, controlled media and complacency, and laziness is really eating at this country. We have a president who is just about a king of America, we have party politics supporting him, and no one even cares.

We deserve what we get.

[Syndicate]

As a moderate Democrat my party has left me no where to go but to the Republicans. I don't want to elect people who are going to look back on 9/11 and apollagize for our buildings being in the way.

[elcoyote711]

Ok, let me see if I have this right: So *** Meyer says that main problem with Democrats is that they are talking, debating and even bickering among themselves, while the monolithic Republicans are ruthlessly marching in lock-step to the GOP "pied pipers" of Rove, Frist and Baynor.
But wait a minute...last time I looked in a history book, the whole point of a "democracy", all the way from ancient Athens to Philly in 1776, was to debate, discuss and even bicker over our common issues and solutions.

I get very, very nervous and uneasy when politicians offer me "sound-bite" solutions on a platter [e.g. binLaden+911=Iraq], and then tell me I have to swallow their pablum whole or I risk being labelled a "defeat-o-crat" or a "white flag-waving" traitor or worse!

If the GOP is offering me pre-digested neo-con solutions to the problems that they created by not thinking before they acted [in Iraq, unaffordable tax-cuts, putting FEMA under DHS, etc] versus the messy, sticky process of solution finding in whcih the Dems are engaged. Then I for one will go with messy and sticky.

The real question in the 2006 election is does the average voter want a party that will ask them to think and contribute as a citizen...or do they want the party that tells them to sit-down, shut-up and prepare to be fleeced...as sheep.
Helpfull Hint here: Winter is coming...
Take care, EC