Will he or won't he switch
May 21, 2001 11:20 AM   Subscribe

Will he or won't he switch is the question for Vermont Sen. Jeffords. If he does, the Democrats gain control of the Senate. But this Washington Times article seems to be pleading Sen. Jeffords to remain within the GOP. If he is such a stalwart conservative, why the all propaganda from the Times?
posted by Rastafari (14 comments total)
The Times is of course a moonie owned paper (rev moon) and as Consortium News reported, much money went to the Bush family via Rev Moon, the "all perfect father," as he is called by his cultish lickspittle followers.
posted by Postroad at 5:05 PM on May 21, 2001

If he was really a stalwart conservative, he'd never consider switching sides in the first place. He's a RINO, and the Party would be happy to see him go if it weren't for the 50-50 split.

Postroad's conspiracy theory, while amusing, is rather unnecessary. This story's been all over the press for the last few days.
posted by aaron at 5:24 PM on May 21, 2001

Jeffords is what passes for a conservative in Vermont. Now that the GOP doesn't have a much of a home for "Rockefeller Republicans," and the Democrats have a bunch of DLC types trying to turn their party into moderate Republicanism, Jeffords may have more of a home there. (You Nader types can feel free to chime in at any time.)
posted by rcade at 5:34 PM on May 21, 2001

Party Switchers don't do that well. The party that you get doesn't really trust you, and the party that you left absolutely hates you. Michael Forbes in Long Island lost the Dem Primary after he switched. Phil Gram has never quite made it as a Pres candidate.

He will never have a serious primary challenge as a Republican, as he basically is the Republican party in Vermont. But as a Democrat, he could expect a strong challenge.
posted by brucec at 5:58 PM on May 21, 2001

Jeffords isn't switching parties any more than Zell Miller is. Which is to say that if one does, so will the other, but neither is likely to.
posted by drothgery at 6:30 PM on May 21, 2001

Heh I was just thinking of Zell Miller. He might as well be a Republican while Jeffords and Lincoln Chaffee are basically Democrats. Not surprising since their states were carried overwhelmingly by the other party's candidate.
posted by gyc at 6:57 PM on May 21, 2001

I hate people switching parties. Even if it would give the Democrats Senate control, to me it says the person has no real ideology and is just surfing a media wave.
posted by owillis at 6:59 PM on May 21, 2001

I've had severe ideological changes in my life...so it is possible.
That being said, it probably is just for the polls.
posted by Doug at 8:17 PM on May 21, 2001

Speaking of Zell, am I the only Georgian seriously disappointed? I was ready to yell "Give 'em hell Zell" all term, but I really haven't had the need. Sigh. At least he was a kickass Gov. All hail the Hope Scholarship.
posted by trox at 8:37 PM on May 21, 2001

I've had severe ideological changes in my life...so it is possible.

I have to ask ... what were you before?

But then, who am I to ask. I used to be such a Democrat that I voted for Jesse Jackson in the 1988 primary.
posted by aaron at 8:48 PM on May 21, 2001

If it happens, it might push Strom over the edge and create a twofer...
posted by machaus at 8:50 PM on May 21, 2001

owliss: *American* political parties had very little to do with ideology, per se, until some people tried to make it that way in the late 1960s. And though both parties have become more ideologically cohesive, American parties aren't as cohesive (ideologically, or any other sense) as most Western European parties. The Dems. are still much less cohesive than the GOP is in any case. What the parties have been tied around over the years is more issues, sectional differences, being predominantly immigrants/blue collar/ethnic v. old money/white collar/business and industry. But that oversimplifies matters, considerably. It's more issues (although still not to the degree in Europe) and a certain state of mind. The issues wars between Repubs and Dems. in the 21st Century started with the Dems' cooption of populist issues, by the way, which were of course tied to America's entering an industrial age, but related cultural changes and racial justice factor in too.

That said, on the "issues" thing . . . a conservative issue in America can become a liberal one overnight sometimes, practically. It depends on the moment, a certain vibe, and maybe a few manipulative moves of a charismatic political figure, or the actions of a charismatic movement.
posted by raysmj at 9:11 PM on May 21, 2001

Aaron: I hope you're joking.


posted by owillis at 10:01 PM on May 21, 2001

"If it happens, it might push Strom over the edge and create a twofer..."

But didn't Strom switch political parties a long time ago? In fact, he once ran on the Dixiecrat ticket in 1948, whose entire platform was to "keep blacks 'in their place'".

Not surprising, considering this is the same guy who attempted to deport John Lennon nearly thirty years ago.
posted by lannie628 at 10:12 PM on May 21, 2001

« Older   |   Are YOU prepared for the icy hand of death? Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments