From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: The Republicans are confusing me again...
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 16:56:22 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS, New Orleans, LA

fehr@ms.uky.edu (Jeff Davis) writes:

> Edward J. Branley writes:
> >Jeff Davis writes:
> >
> >> Edward J. Branley writes:
> >> >
> >> >As for Republican racial strategy, don't forget David Duke.  It is my str
> >> >belief that George Herbert Walker Bush should offer Pat Buchanan his choi
> >> >jobs in a second administration (behind James Baker, of course).  For all
> >> >the bashing that Buchanan gave Bush in the primaries, it was infinitely b
> >> >than what the Democrats would be doing to him now had Duke been able to s
> >> >it out.
> >>
> >> It has always been my belief that Buchanan was a rabbit to keep Duke out o
> >> the race. Nothing Buchanan said during the campaign or at the convention
> >> has made me change my mind. Duke got "finessed" out of his day in the sun.
> >> Which isn't all that bad, actually, but can one imagine how much more "liv
> >> the race would be, say, with this slate of candidates: Clinton, Perot, Bus
> >> and Duke in the race until the end. Who would have won? Either Clinton or
> >> Perot, I'd think.
> >> --
> >
> >The Democrats would have been able to make a lot of hay out of Duke in the
> >race until the end.  I can't speak for other states, but racism has a habit
> >really galvanizing blacks here in LA. ....
> >
> >The same would have happened with Duke in the race.  It wouldn't matter that
> >Bush would have put him down long before the primaries were complete.  His m
> >existence would have fired up the black community.  If that were to happen i
> >more states (say Illinois, Michigan, California), it would have spelled real
> >trouble for Bush.  Since blacks appear to be merely lukewarm in their suppor
> >of Clinton, this would have been a welcome boost for him.
> >
> I don't know if this is a "yes, Buchanan was a rabbit" or a "no, Buchanan
> was no rabbit." ("Bugs Bunny is a friend of mine...and Mr Buchanan, you
> are no wabbit.") My feeling is that once Duke had been defeated in the
> primaries, he would have tried to get on the ticket in the South,
> and in a number of the racially troubled states in the Northeast (Mass,
> NJ, New York) and some of the MidWest where George Wallace had run
> strongly in 1968 and 1972.
>
> I agree that Duke in the race would have been a plus for the Democratic
> ticket, but only if mavericks like Perot stayed out. A large number
> of traditionally Democratic voters share that I-don't-know-what-I-want-
> but-I-don't-want-that feeling that has nothing to do with the typical
> liberal-conservative debate of the 70s and 80s.
>
> Personally, I would love to see a re-defining of the political parties
> and a segmentation of the electorate into more modern interests. What
> religious fundamentalists, redneck race-baiters, and the white suburban
> bourgeiosie have in common is more than I can understand. The Republican
> Party has become as odd as the Democratic Party.
> --
> Jeff Davis <davis@keats.ca.uky.edu> Write when you get the chance.

No doubt that Dukkke would have run as a third-party candidate.  The guy is a
professional fund raiser, and he raises money best when he's running.  He would
have bolted right after the GOP convention, since there's no way in hell they
would have let him speak.  No matter how vitriolic Buchanan, Robertson and
Marilyn Quayle can be, Dukkke would have been suicide.

Perot's polls among black voters weren't so hot.  His performance before the
NAACP was a disaster.  The black vote would have become more focused and much
more single-issue had Duke lasted longer in the race.  He would have been more
of a defining factor.  What's ironic is that there's not much different about
the GOP whether or not Duke is there, but he's a potent symbol of the
hatemongering that exists within the GOP.

I'm waiting for the day when many of the conservatives that think like George
Will and are getting sick of the pandering to the religious right decide to
split into a new conservative party.  Or, maybe that faction of the GOP will
re-assert itself and the religious crazies will go form their own new
'Christian' party.  The two factions seem to be more and more irreconcilable,
increasing the odds of a major split.  Especially if Bush loses, there will be
a lot of finger-pointing within the GOP as to who screwed up the election.



|Edward J. Branley                         elendil@mintir.New-Orleans.LA.US|
|Seashell Software                                UUCP:  rex!mintir!elendil|
|3508 North Woodlawn Avenue                          Compu$erve: 71237,2227|
|Metairie, LA   70006       voice: +1-504-455-5087     bbs: +1-504-455-8665|
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:2780 talk.politics.misc:41730 alt.politics.clinton:2899 alt.politics.elections:11473