Quote:
Originally Posted by joshbaumgartner
On the other hand, this is a win-win situation for the Democrats. The Dems get to take some credit for anything positive that Bolton does in the post. They can claim that their denial of confirmation forced Bolton to be deprived of a mandate and thus have to be on his best behaviour in order to show he was worthy of the appointment. However, if there is a meltdown at any point, Dems can highlight it as evidence that they were right to challenge his nomination. Only if Bolton does a sterling job and is able to build a willing coalition within the UN to forward US interests will the Dems be in danger of looking like they we were wrong about him.
Josh
|
I'd personally say this is a more dangerous slippery slope for democrats then republicans on the Win/Lose variables. If Bolton sucks, well, good for the Democrats - They called it correctly.
On the chance that he does a great job, things go smoothly, things start working out how they should, then all the words used against Bolton will be thrown right in the Democrat's face. Basically it would show that the Democrats were wrong to deny the right man for the job and to deny America a good UN ambassador to the job over petty politics. Making this a huge potential lose situation for the Democrats.
__________________
I got in a fight one time with a really big guy, and he said, "I'm going to mop the floor with your face." I said, "You'll be sorry." He said, "Oh, yeah? Why?" I said, "Well, you won't be able to get into the corners very well."
Emo Philips
|