Serious Strategic Question: Should we gloat in certain situations?

[tedoll78]

First of all, I know that this is a longshot, but please stick with me on it..

Remember in 1991 when Poppa Bush nominated "Stealth Liberal" David Souter to the Court? And remember when Souter revealed himself (through various ensuing opinions) to be a lefty? Remember when the Religious Right went bonkers over this?

What if the Chimp were to make a similar move in 2005? (like I said.. a longshot)

Should we gloat for the purposes of rubbing it in? Would such a move enrage the fundies to the point where they want electoral revenge on us? Or would they take-out their anger on the GOP by sitting at home on the following Election Day?

Or, for another situation, let's say that Bush nominates someone between O'Connor and Kennedy. Pretty conservative, but sometimes submitting a surprisingly-moderate opinion.

Should we gloat in this situation? Better yet, should we send-out gay/pro-choice/PFAW activists on TV as our surrogates praising how "moderate" Bush's nominee is? I can imagine the reactions of most of those inbred bigots.. they'll see the gay dude on TV lavishing praise upon Bush, and they'll transfer the anger onto Bush.

Would this work.. us taking advantage of their hatred in such a manner? I'm wondering if such a tactic would serve to suppress the GOP's TaliBornAgain turnout in 2006/2008.

Hell, I'm wondering if we can head-fake the Religious Right and claim a victory when Bush's first nominee is named, no matter who the nominee actually is! We Dems could order our surrogates to pick-out two or three things from the nominee's record and focus on those things like a lazer beam, ignoring the other 98% of the nominee's record with which the fundies agree. We'd drive a wedge, if you will. The fundies in response will act like greedy little jealous children: "if The Other Side is happy, Our Side is NOT!" Or, another way of putting it: "A nominee who agrees with us 98% of the time is not enough - we want 100%, dammit!"

I hope this is making sense..

My theory? They'll get pissed just at the mere television broadcase of happy Democrats/"sodomites"/pro-choicers/etc on their, and they'll transfer their anger onto the man who made them happy.. Bush. Then, Election 200x comes-around, and 10% of them stay at home, hurting the GOP big-time at the polls.

So.. could it work?

[Anarcho-Socialist]

1. It is an interesting thought to ponder

[Selatius]

2. Gloating is for the arrogant and the proud

We should only move after careful thought and contemplation except in cases of emergency. I would rather move while things are settled than to do things to further polarize politics.

[rman]

3. gloating = rubbing it in; it's devisive

-

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. I'd Settle For A Court Full Of O'Connors Or Kennedys

rather than roll the dice and get a Scalia or Thomas...


Anyway that's how I like me justice;temperate and down the middle....