Dems 2005= Labour 1980's?

Isn't it interesting to watch history repeat itself?

The Dems in 2005 bring to mind Britain's Labour Party in the eighties and nineties. Regardless of public opposition to the Tory rule under Thatcher and Major, Labour just kept self-destructing by moving farther left.

Only when Tony Blair took on the socialist backbenchers and borrowed quite a lot from Thatcher's political and ideological playbook did Labour reverse its fortunes.

While the Dems make silly claims about a close 2004 election result, they also believe Howard Dean is the answer. It's the best news the GOP has had since the successful Iraqi election day.

Is there any sensible reason to pick Dean? Only one: his ability to fire up the extreme radical party base and the resulting superior fundraising that brings to their coffers.

The problem is that Dean takes huge groups of moderate and independent voters away, handing them to the GOP on a silver platter.



(Washington Post via Seattle Times)

WASHINGTON — Two questions swirled around the Democrats as their national committee assembled this week to select a new party chairman: Can Howard Dean cure what ails the party, or is Dean symptomatic of why those ailments may be so difficult to cure?

The former Vermont governor is poised to claim the party chairmanship today. His victory represents a personal triumph one year after his presidential campaign was in ashes and symbolizes the strength of the party's revitalized grass roots in the aftermath of John Kerry's loss to President Bush in November.

But for a party grappling with the question of how it can become more competitive in the red states of the South, Midwest and Mountain West, the decision to elect as its chairman a confrontational New Englander with a liberal identity and a penchant for making controversial statements sends a message in the view of some Democrats that little has been learned from the losses in 2004.