If Democrats want ultraliberals to speak for their party, "they risk the (presidential) election of 2008," said California GOP spokesman Patrick Dorinson. "A slice of Democratic voters in a blue state like Connecticut bought it, but I don't think that message sells across America."
It's just too bad Dorinson is a California GOP spokesman and not one from Utah, one of the few remaining states where Bush has a positive net approval rating.
First of all, this is typiacl of any spin: they hide the premises so that when they make their conclusions sound reasonable.
If ultraliberals were in fact taking over the Democratic party, it would be a concern for 2008. Lamont isn't an "ultraliberal." There's problem number one. Second, Lamont's position on the war agrees with 60% of Americans, something pointed out in the article.
And the war is not popular in California, and neither is Bush.
"...the state's GOP described the outcome as symptom of a party out of touch with middle America."
Again, unfortunately, this is the Left Coast, not middle America. Maybe they should worry about how it plays here!
I don't give Angelides much chance in this election. If he's going to make a run at it, he'll need to confuse Arnold and Bush, which shouldn't be that hard. Part of doing that would be to reverse this spin.
P.S. Send an email to Lisa Vorderbrueggen complimenting her on that article. She actually consulted experts (ie REPORTED) instead of just copying down the he said she said. |
