DLC Influence Killed this Race ... Not Racism -- Ms. Smith Goes To Washington
MS. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON
BuzzFlash,
I think it was in the Mailbag one day that I read where a woman said that Ford was not her favorite because of what he was running on (paraphrasing).
This is an interesting article because Tennessee does have some racial problems, but I really do believe that what this article has to say pertains, too, to losses past. Democrats need to take a closer look -- and look to the future of cleaning up this party, so that people can recognize the Democrats for who they are and what this party has always stood for, and not for those who want to be Republicans but just don't have the courage to do so.
While it is too early for us to call the winner for Senate, does it really matter?
When it comes to the issues, Harold Ford Jr. and Bob Corker are too similar, giving Tennesseans few options to choose from. The problem is that both candidates have been vying for the votes of conservative southerners, making the election moot for moderates and liberals.
The reason for this lack of choice is partly due to the obsession to see which political party will be in power, making the Tennessee Senate election a national fiasco for all to watch, and thereby ignoring the issues that Tennesseans should be discussing to improve both the state and the nation.
When the debate centers around who is going to take the House or the Senate, the issues become drowned and the details lost. For example, consider the war in Iraq. You have Ford vaguely advocating Sen. Joe Biden's (D-Delaware) plan to divide Iraq into three divisions and Corker distancing himself from Bush and his own party. [more]
Senate winner remains uncertain; Tennessee's the real loser, though - MTSU Sidelines
Thanks BuzzFlash,
Shirley Smith
MS. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
Buzz this on Buzzflash.net




Technorati Tags:
bad combination
harold ford impressed me when i first saw him give a great speech at the democratic convention. however, when i got to know a something more about him, i found that there was little for me to like about his politics. he reminds me of two ugly aspects of politics: demogoguery and social conservativism.
that he is also african-american was a plus for me, but i cannot help to think that it was also a liability in a statewide election.
so, why are we surprised that he failed to resonnate with the voters? from an outsider's view, there appeared little difference between corker and him. harold ford does not represent a democratic party of which i can be proud--for example, his exclusionary position on homosexual marriage is an anathema. that same conservatism played well in other senate races where there is was no issue of color. therefore, was it merely a bad combination that lost the election? i guess many will debate the issue.