Ted,
I think Republicans under estimate the anger this last election generated; then again, I may be overestimating.
You are probably not overestimating the anger of the leftists (maybe 1/3 of the electorate), but you are greatly overestimating the memory of the voters. In 4 years, half the country will forget who the Democrat candidate was in 2000. How many people do you think remember Dole, Dukakis, Mondale?
However, if my instincts are right, it would have served Bush well to create a gov't within which there was a good mix of Democrats.
By this I am assuming Ted Kennedy Democrats. People like Bennet, Jean Kirkpatrik, even Reagan himself were once Democrats.
I just don't see any reasonable scenario or reason for Bush to do this. It will not make you, or the rest of the 1/3 of the hard left vote for him, and I don't see how Teddy Kennedy would bring the 1/3 in the middle to Bush's column, so I just don't see the incentive.
Bush is IMO a conservative, but a very pragmatic one. Why should he throw it away, capitulate, and govern as a centrist or a liberal? That's not why he ran. I know you think that you think he is stupid, but he is not that stupid and do what you suggest.
Joe |
