 |
| TRUMP: Is it really all about him? |
There
were those special elections held this week to fill Congressional vacancies in
Georgia and Kansas, and Dem political operatives are eager to see signs of
future victory – even though Democratic Party candidates didn’t win in either
place.
WE’RE
HEARING TALK of strategic victories because they showed Democratic candidates
can be competitive in districts that typically lean Republican because there is
great uncertainty about the stability of the Trump administration.
In
the Georgia election (the Atlanta suburbs, to be exact), the Democrat actually
came close to winning outright a bid to replace a Republican congressman who
gave up the seat to become a Trump cabinet member. A runoff election will
decide the outcome.
While
in Kansas, Republican Ron Estes will be sworn in to his new post later this
month.
These
particular areas are political districts that lean so typically Republican that
they’re usually not the kind of places that Democrats spend time trying to win
elections. Meaning that areas where Democrats are more competitive are more
likely to provide Dem victories in future elections.
OR
AT LEAST that’s the analysis the Washington Post gave to the two elections on
Wednesday.
Yes,
we’re getting the political fantasies of a 2018 election cycle in which the
national electorate repudiates Donald J. Trump and sticks him with at least a
Democrat-led House of Representatives – if not an entire Dem Congress!
That
would be hysterical to watch, because you just know Trump would go ballistic
nearly every day if he had a government with the authority to be openly defiant
of his absurd whims. As it is, what makes the current government scary is that
it is more than willing to indulge Trump’s whims, so long as they reinforce
their own authority within the federal government.
But
strategic wins aren’t wins unless you actually get more votes!
WHICH
MAY BE the lesson we learn from the recent Bolingbrook mayoral election. That’s
the suburb in Will County where the mayor, Roger Claar, had to go shooting off
his mouth last year about how wonderful Donald Trump was.
He
even went so far as to organize a Trump fundraiser for Trump at a time when
Illinois Republican political operatives were desperately trying to avoid
having anything to do with The Donald. His opponent was a commissioner on the
Will County Board, and she used Trump against Claar big-time during her
campaign.
Finally,
this week, all the provisional ballots were counted and we can now say
definitively that Claar won re-election to a ninth term in office with 151 more
votes than his challenger.
So
is the lesson to be learned here that Claar probably would have had an
overwhelming victory (in the past, he has often ran unopposed) if he had only
eased up on the Trump talk and kept his support down to merely voting for him?
I
KNOW SOME political operatives have tried claiming similar lessons from Claar’s
case as they’re now trying to see in the congressional elections – there are
significant numbers of voters who feel contempt for the current occupant of the
White House who can be used to support candidates who oppose the thought of the
Trumpster.
But
as noted earlier, we don’t have Democratic victories in Georgia or Kansas. And
I’m pretty sure Claar is going to forevermore think of this election cycle as
the one in which he had to endure some political harassment, but came out ahead
in the end.
Could
it be that in the end, people will put aside their distaste for the president
and not let it impact their future votes? Or are too apathetic to get that
worked up?
It’s
all about the spin one wants to put on the issue. Actual truth gets lost in the shuffle.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment