Schumer Asserts Iran War Would Destroy G.O.P.
Plus, Chuck Says Clinton Would Help at Top Of Democratic Ticket
Bombing Iran, says Chuck Schumer, would be a big political loser for Republican candidates in 2008.
“It would change the landscape against them, big time,” Mr. Schumer, the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said about a scenario in which the Bush administration launches a military attack on Iran before leaving office. “I don’t think they are likely to do it, because they are so weak—not because they are chastened—but I also think it is very likely to be a negative political for them.”
Despite all the Bush administration’s saber rattling, the 56-year-old Brooklyn native believes the president’s political footing is too weak to build the case for another war, especially when the public is “far more skeptical of that the second time around.”
In an interview in his Third Avenue offices on Oct. 29, the top Democratic political tactician in Congress expressed unwavering optimism in his party’s chances to increase its majority in the Senate, even in the case of a traumatic event like war with Iran. He evinced similar confidence about the prospect of having the ostensibly polarizing Hillary Clinton at the top of the Democratic ticket, and about his Senate candidates having to campaign against the supposedly moderate Rudy Giuliani.
“The wind is at our backs as Democrats,” he said.
Mr. Schumer said that his internal polling showed that the country now preferred Democratic to Republican candidates by a “double-digit” margin, and that the low approval rating received by the Democratic-controlled Congress was really a reflection of the country’s frustration with the inability of senators to stop George Bush. (He said that the single most potent line he had against Republican incumbents was “that they have voted 96 percent of the time with George Bush.”)
“It’s wider than it’s ever been,” said Mr. Schumer, about the lead of his prospective candidates in their respective races. The support for Democrats, he added, was “higher than ’06.”
Although Mr. Schumer was careful to say that there’s no real way of accounting for the impact of unforeseen events on an election that’s a year away, his optimism is not unreasonable.
In the course of his pitch, Mr. Schumer pointed out that there are 12 Democrats facing reelection in 2008 compared to 22 Republicans. And he said that states with Republican incumbents—Oregon, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Maine, Virginia and New Mexico—were leaning a little or a lot Democratic.
He figures his party’s prospects are especially promising in New Hampshire and Virginia, the latter of which Mr. Schumer said would be “pretty hard to lose” because of its strong candidate, Mark Warner, who Schumer helped convince to seek a Virginia Senate seat. (Mr. Warner was reported to be considering a run for governor or a vice presidential nomination.)
He expects the gains to come despite setbacks in his attempts to recruit second-tier presidential candidate Bill Richardson to run in New Mexico and New School president Bob Kerrey to run in Nebraska.
“Nebraska is one of the five or ten toughest,” Mr. Schumer said, referring to Democratic prospects of winning that seat, which is currently held by Republican Chuck Hagel. “With Bob Kerrey it became a much better race. I think he made the wrong choice, and I think he is going to regret his choice, but you have to respect it.”
Just as Mr. Schumer dismissed the potential political cost to Democrats of a Republican-initiated war, he made light of another rumored worst-case scenario: the nomination of Hillary Clinton for president.
“I think Hillary Clinton will help,” said Mr. Schumer, who added that he thought she was in the “process of gaining” respect around the country.
The idea of a Clinton-led ticket posing a threat to Democrats in conservative and swing states has been raised by at least one of her presidential opponents. (At an event in Chicago this summer, John Edwards suggested in a speech to donors that he would be more helpful as a nominee to candidates in places like “Montana and Georgia and Missouri” than either Mrs. Clinton or Barack Obama.) Next Page >
- Poll
- Obama (D)
- McCain(R)
- Spread
- RCP Average
- 46.4
- 41.6
- Obama +4.8
- Candidate
- Favorable
- Unfavorable
- Spread
- Obama
- 55.7
- 32.7
- +23.0
- McCain
- 52.4
- 34.7
- +17.7
Seeing and hearing this person brings only one thought to mind: God help us.
Way to go, Chuck. Nice of you to pull the rug from under our administration yet another time. I'm sure the Iranian government likes to be reassured that they are safe to do as they please.
I do political polling for a living. I don't know where Senator Schumer is getting his information. Maybe his polls are taken at DailyKos and MoveOn.org. The everyday folks I talk to are not favoring democrats. I find the opposite to be true. I guess honesty is a bit too much to ask in an election year.
The current congress has the worst polling numbers in history because it is the worst congress in history. The new democrat leadership acts as if every media outlet is still willing to support democrats at all costs. That just isn't the reality anymore. In the old days the democrats could say whatever they wanted to be believed and they could count on no one in the media opposing them. Those days are long gone and it is hurting the democrats. It seems the democrats are not able to operate in the light of day.
And to think the same state that gave us Senators Robert Kennedy and Daniel Patrick Moynihan now give us Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer. No this is not my Fathers Dem party.
Chuck Schumer may well be the most dangerous man in America. He is a man who believes that any lie repeated 3 times becomes the truth and he is out there telling lies as if there is no tomorrow. He has concern only for power and winning a political game and cares nothing for the nation or its people.
Well there is the difference between Dems and Reps right there. Dems base their national security policies on political expediency and not on NATIONAL SECURITY. Leaders don't follow polling data, they follow convictions; the Dems have none.
Does this guy even fathom the role of our Government in protecting us? This jerk is all about personal power and politics. He, and the rest of the Democrats are either complete morons or completely self centered liars. They are running this country into the ground. If he wants an Iran with Nukes, then all of the subsequent deaths are on him!
Senator Schumer says Democrats are polling better than Republicans in his polls. Which Democrats, which Republicans? I' m betting that names are not mentioned, just D or R.
His party and the Old Media have blasted and lied about Republicans (in General) for so long that they have convinced many of the sheeple that pay attention to them that Republicans are Satan. However, when an actual human name is placed by the R, the attitudes change considerably.
Chuck just doesn't get it. The job of the President is to protect this country. Here we see a clear difference - Chuck and his party govern through short term sound bites and rhetoric in an effort to gain power while President Bush takes action to fill his constitutional duty to protect our country and worries less about the latest the poll and more about the future of America. History will judge Bush very favorably while Shumer will be forgotton.
DemocRATS don't give a hoot about national security....only power! They have sold out the United States every chance they get. Schumer is a spinless IDIOT that HATES America...as most democRATS do!
Chuck Schumer appears to be soley concerned about the Democratic Party with no concern about citizens (in US or any other nation). His focus on polls is excessive given that polls can change very rapidly. My expectation is that Hilary will, in fact, win the election. She will order the US military to eliminate a nuclear threat from Iran. This action will be followed by a oil shortage induced global recession that results in public dissatisfaction with Democrats and return of Republican governance or even a new political party.
There sure are a lot of people on here slamming Schumer as a coward or idiot and backing Bush like he knows how to protect America. This is total nonsense. Yes, Iran is dangerous but do you really think we can afford another war?? If yes, better just sell one of the states to China or give up Social Security and Medicare. Iraq/Afghanistan is going to cost over $2.4 TRILLION! Stop being security sheep to Bush. If he gave a crap about security, he'd do something to secure the borders and ports. Don't be fooled by the pigs that want more war because the war with Iran will create an oil crisis that will make 1979 look like a joke.
The NY Senator is right for the wrong reasons. Piling on the only female candidate further insures her victory as the "victim" sympathy vote swells and swells. The GOP has great people running but they are too old, too male and too white and don't reflect the country's demographics. They would all be better in a support, er cabinet position. One will become the leading loser, the Dems will have a hard time snatching defeat from this victory. Bottom line, GOP needs a new "uniting" candidate, very sooooon.
The one Schumer backer who weighs in sums up the head in sand posture held by democrats. Brent insists the defense of the nation should take a back seat to the maintenance of social programs in America which really undermine our freedoms. The only true autonomy in this world is hard earned money. These programs which liberals demand eclipse the defense of the nation are nothing more than socialist redistribution schemes. Charlie Rangel tipped the democrats hand as to the direction a, god save us, democrat dominated federal government will go. These communists will not stop until they kill the goose!
If Iran continues on it's track toward nuclear weapons, we will loose the oil from the region anyway. Iran will hold the bomb over Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and any other country in the region that sells oil to us. I also believe that they will try to use the bomb on Isrial, if they can get a bomber through the air defense.
One thing that we can do to protect ourselves is to take out Iran's nuclear capability.
Another is to open the ANWAR oil fields and drill off the California coast. We need to develop our own resources where we do no have to rely on foreign oil.
It will only take 10 days of bombing to destroy Iran's nuclear program, this can happen after the election and before the new president takes office.
To Lief, is there something wrong with being old, male and white. Sounds like you might be a bigot. Don't forget that it was old white men that gave us this great country. Let's see people of color south of the border have giving us Hugo Chavez, Che, Castro, etc... Like they know or even care about this country and our proud history. Give them power...not on your life.
Your posts are all amazing. You may not like Schumer but all the conservative and Republican blogs have their head in the sand: you don't see it coming. The democrats will win, will win big and will win long, for three reasons.
First, whatever your blinded hearts may tell you, the Democrats are carefully listening to the electorate and tailoring their messages to what people want. Look at any poll.
Second, you have not noticed that the sick and twisted conservatism of greed, selfishness, race-baiting, corruption, secrecy and militarism is already dead.
Third, the coming wave of demographics have every population: white, Hispanic, Asian and black with the largest majorities against Republicans in history.
You may not want to see it now, but you will see it in 2008. Republicanism is shrinking and dying. It won't be missed. Keep your heads in the sand: it only helps you feel less urgency to do anything about it.
You and your fellow democrats crack me up. All things in this world are polticial to you. Bush has his problem but stll has higher ranking than the new democrat controlled congress. Where do you think the problem lies? Gee, that's a tough one!
This is why it would be dangerous for any Sexocrat to be allowed back in the White House. We must protect the child of this country from any future problems, such as Iran, Syria...
yes, than the new congress, but NOT the democrats in congress. Second, congress is blamed for its inability to end the Iraq disaster, but since you are quoting polls you will know that the public by about 65-70% margins wants to end the war. They are smart enough to know who is stopping that, and who seems to be preventing it happening: it sure isn't the Democrats! Hence Mr Bush's 25% rating.
Yes, your irony is well-taken: clearly the problem lies with the president and the public understands that. And every testing of that proposition speaks the truth of my words.
Yes everything is political, you think you're not political?
I say again: you are so lost, enjoy, your time is running out.
Hard to believe but Harry Truman would probably be a Republican today. I can't see him under the same tent as Clinton and Schumer. He would be more at home with the party that created the huge medicare drug program than these far out, socialist whackos. Remember, before her handlers got her to back track, Hillary was the one talking of attacking Iran.
Open-eyed progressive - you just prove the reason why so many on the left are "pro-illegal immigrant": you believe that promises of money and benefits to illegal aliens will help to bring them in to vote for you. Spitzer's attempt to give licenses to illegals is just one more idea to quickly give the illegals a chance to get registered (while still illegal) and then the chance to vote (you hope). There is no respect for our country, security, or traditions. Crime from illegal immigrants as a whole is over 30% of our total crime problem. In CA, TX, and other border states, it's even higher. However, whatever it takes for you dems to get power, that's all that matters.
By the way...what are you all going to do when you can't bash Bush anymore? Last night's debate would have been 15 minutes if you removed every anti-Bush line. It's just so tiresome and predictable.
With the Democrats now in charge we are starting to see the beginning of an age of darkness the likes of which the world will have never seen before. Although America will likely not explode all at once into chaos as it did in the past two world wars, it will likely rot into chaos. It will probably become like a festering fruit abandoned in the muck and rain, once plentiful, ripe, and full of life, now unpalatable...shame on you Americans, shame on you for allowing these parasites of Democracy take over the House and Senate.
With the Democrats now in charge we are starting to see the beginning of an age of darkness the likes of which the world will have never seen before. Although America will likely not explode all at once into chaos as it did in the past two world wars, it will likely rot into chaos. It will probably become like a festering fruit abandoned in the muck and rain, once plentiful, ripe, and full of life, now unpalatable...shame on you Americans, shame on you for allowing these parasites of Democracy take over the House and Senate.
since you are quoting polls you will know that the public by about 65-70% margins wants to end the war
but 75% of this group wants to WIN the war, that is the basic difference. All signs show 2008 is going to be a rude wake up call to the left in this country. It seems the elitists in the northeast and west coast have decided to ignore reality. We will begin withdrawing troops from Iraq as victors and that presents a huge problem to leftist candidates who have been claiming the war is lost for the last few years. Couple that with the failures of the current congress to pass any legislation and the socialist candidate that they are likely to run and the gop looks pretty good in the general election.
It would be a telling contrast in motivation between Sen. Schumer and President Bush should the US take military action against Iran.
The irony of these times is incredible. In terms of approval ratings, George Bush's most closely resemble those of that great liberal icon, Harry Truman. How has history viewed Give'em hell Harry? Yet it was the Truman doctrine of the United States acting as the world's police force that gave us Viet Nam, Bosnia, and the Gulf Wars. History will view Bush as acting in defense of this country, in response to an elusive and embedded enemy, and acting with principals and fortitude. If he would have truly been a conservative, he would have utilized his veto power years ago. He would have been aggressive in securing our borders---in addition to prosecuting illegals who are already here. His tax cuts have been a blessing to all who pay taxes. In retrospect, Bush was saddled with having to clean up the mess left by his father, Bill Clinton, and most especially that ethical cesspool known as the U.N. The reason the guy's standing pulse rate is 52 is because he knows that inspite of those treasonous swine subverting national policy...he is trying to do what is right.
Jonathan
you don't know what you're talking about, I didn't even mention illegal immigrants, and I am as against them as you are. WE should have a legal and verifiable system of immigration
Interesting that Mr. Schumer should say that! He goes to the houses of some of THE shadiest upper east side/Park Avenue Iranians who live like billionaires like the Taghinia-Milani family, Hasan Nemazee, etc., all who are actually sympathetic to or supporters of the Islamic regime here in the U.S. where they fundraise for Mr. Schumer. Mr. Schumer has yet to listen to poor Iranian/American democrats who have voted for him time and time again. Schumer better offer a good solution to dealing with the Mullahs of Iran otherwise, he's far from worthy of being taken seriously. Playing politics with countries around the world to score points at home is very crass and disgusting Mr. Schumer. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.