it looks like my very own congressman read bush the riot act yesterday.
not that i think bush can do much about improving the situation in iraq as long as he continues to rule out any withdrawal. so the only real question is whether gerlach et. al. will follow through on their threat to "desert him" in the fall. the so-called moderates have threatened to walk away from bush's war position in the past, but with a just a few exceptions, they haven't done it yet. the reason this time might be different is if they really expect to lose in 2008 unless they flip on iraq.
on the other hand, i thought the 2006 elections would have been reason enough to get more northeastern democrats to flip two years ago. i was wrong then. the republican line on iraq mostly held even as polls showed support for the war was falling. but in retrospect, i think that republicans thought that even if the war was unpopular, voters wouldn't throw them out over that issue.
maybe republican losses in 2006 have changed their minds. or maybe not. as i've said before the republican party will break with bush at some point before next year's election. it's inevitable. the break will mean that republicans start trying to distinguish themselves from bush. the question is not whether it will happen, but when. how long the bush loyalty will hold out in the face of dismal polling data before individual politicians start looking out for themselves. it's also not clear whether iraq will be the issue they break over.
i think it is and i think the break will happen this fall. that will give republicans facing the electorate in 2008 a whole year to remake themselves as a "maverick." if they wait much longer than that, then they're doomed to go down with the ship.
