Usually attributed as an old Arab proverb, The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend is more than just an axiom of warfare, but of the philosophy of politics as well. Or, more accurately, as the philosophy of politics as warfare. It is a philosophy seen throughout history.
During our own Revolutionary War, the French had little reason to love the American Colonies. Those colonies had contributed mightily to the defeat of the French during the French and Indian War, just a few years before. Still, when the colonies revolted against Britain, the traditional and perennial enemy of France, the French became our staunchest allies; instrumental in our obtaining independence from England. The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend
During World War II, it became prudent for the United States to ally itself with Joseph Stalin against Adolph Hitler. By the 1940s this country had ample evidence that Stalin was a ruthless and brutal dictator. Still, it was determined, that Hitler was a greater threat to civilization, and so Russia became an American ally.
And so we come to the 2008 Presidential Election. The Democrat Primary battle between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama provided a veritable Cornucopia of mirth and schaudenfraud for Republicans as the two candidates, through their surrogates and 527s, tore each other apart, while maintaining a facade of party unity.
The primary is now over, and Barack Obama emerged as the Democrat standard-bearer. Now, the Hillary supporters are expected to return to the Democat fold, and support their party's nominee. A significant portion have decide instead, to support John McCain. The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend.
Republican and Conservative websites have become flooded with "disaffected" Hillary supporters who now proclaim their fealty to John McCain. Many of them, I am sure, are the "moderates" that McCain has been courting throughout the campaign. Many are Hillary supporters, angry that the nomination was stolen from her, eager to work for an Obama defeat.
Their support is not for the election of John McCain, but for the defeat of Barack Obama. They do not support issues near and dear to John McCain.
Many of these new-found McCain supporters, in explaining their oppostion to Obama, cite:
A. His inexperience in international politics and seemingly naive attitudes toward, and friendliness toward America's enemies.
B. His questionable associations with friends, supporters, advisors and neighbors of dubious character and integrity, who hate this country, and all it stands for.
C. His Socialist, and perhaps even Marxist views concerning government's role in a command economy, and his antipathy to those private institutions that make that economy work.
Ironically, if these "disaffected" Hillary supporters were honest with themselves, they would find that those same arguments can, and have been used, against Hillary. She is every bit the inexperienced leftist with questionable associations that is Obama. So, clearly, their arguments against Obama are nothing more than strawman arguments to ingratiate themselves with their new-found Republican allies. Still, The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend...
This is certainly playing out into an interesting election, to say the least. I go into greater detail at The Hinzsight Report,
__________________________
<a href="http://theminorityreportblog.com">The Minority Report Network</a>
Basically agree with your conclusion
although of course as a liberal I would frame it somewhat differently: disaffected Hillary supporters are choosing to back a candidate (McCain) who supports almost none of the policies promoted by Hillary over one (Obama) who supports almost all.
I don't see Republicans holding them even if they do vote for McCain this November... not really a natural constituency for the GOP.
A perusal of reader comments finds a common thread: Elect John McCain, so that Hillary can defeat him in 2012!
Thank goodness for Dems that Hillary appears to be doing her best to squash this idea.
Democrats might well do what Republicans cannot do. Democrats might well elect John McCain as the next President of the United States.
Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is a Democratic specialty, but with independents and moderates dissatisfied with the direction of the country under Bush, this election might be safe from the Dems self-destructive tendencies.
__________________________Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
I caused a mini-firestorm
with one of my posts at RedState I titled Does ANY Candidate Want My Vote For President?"
At the beginning of this primary season there were something like 23 candidates announced for president, between the two major parties. At least four of them would have made excellent presidents.
It all boiled down to The Obamessiah and The McCain Mutiny.
__________________________I don't even MIND that I know Hillary will begin her campaign for 2012 the day after the election in November. Because I will be starting the same day to try to find a Conservative to run for the Republican Party.
<a href="http://theminorityreportblog.com">The Minority Report Network</a>
That's the most comments I've ever seen in a RS post
Both sides had their issues with the primaries this year, didn't they? But in the end I think y'all got to have more fun at our expense as the Hillary/Obama contest dragged on and got increasingly heated.
Not to rub salt into the wounds, but I'm not sure the Republican party wants a conservative to run. All of your leading primary candidates were liberal in one way or another. From the outside looking in it appears Republicans don't think they can win by turning out the base in force and are trying to win over moderates... although McCain is also trying to smooth things over with conservatives, of course.
__________________________Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
there IS no doubt
a schism between the blue-blood Rockefeller Republicans and the Conservative Reagan Republicans.
Johnny Mac believes that the conservatives will vote for him -- because they have no other choice. (technically he is right) and he can win with all the moderates and disaffected Dems.
He is probably right -- as the Dem Party has long been a disparate group of minority groups each with its own agenda -- and all allied against the Republicans. It was unfortunate that the first "clean and articulate" black candidate and the first woman with a serious chance at the office, would square off as the last two standing in the cage match.
If I had had MY way, the Democrat primary would have gone all the way to the convention -- and so would the Republican primary.
After the farce of what amounted to a 2 year primary, I would have loved to see BOTH parties forced to select their candidates -- after 3-4 ballots -- behind closed doors, in smoke
filledless back rooms.
__________________________But then, I am a political junkie, and love that stuff.
<a href="http://theminorityreportblog.com">The Minority Report Network</a>
as for the comments
for some reason several of my efforts there have cause those 300+ comments responses.
__________________________<a href="http://theminorityreportblog.com">The Minority Report Network</a>
disaffected Hillary
disaffected Hillary supporters are choosing to back a candidate (McCain) who supports almost none of the policies promoted by Hillary over one (Obama) who supports almost all.
Exactly. And there is a one word explanation for those who do that: "spite". And let's be frank -- I'll go way out on a limb and say that the vast majority of these people are women, particularly older women, who were all psyched up to see a woman become president, and are just being...well, I better watch my adjectives and nouns here..let's say very, very petty and apparently not particularly patriotic or responsible, since they are not choosing a candidate based on who they think would be best for the country (or for the country and the world).
My girlfriend is in her early 30s and doesn't follow politics or policy matters much. She is a liberal except on fiscal policy, on which she's center or perhaps center-right (she doesn't know much about fiscal policy, but thinks she pays too much in taxes and resents it). She was rooting for Hillary from the start, and would never admit that it was simply because Hillary is a woman (and couldn't really come up with reasons why she preferred Hillary over the other candidates, let alone why she wanted so much for her to win -- kind of like how many Obama supporters couldn't explain their support other than saying he was "inspiring" and would bring "change"). She is so pissed off that Hillary lost (just general dissapointment/frustration plus a feeling that sexism played a role) that she either will not vote in November or may even vote for McCain (even though she doesn't seem to have high regard for McCain).
This
probably won't help calm the fury of these women [who feel] scorned!
Hey David,
Welcome, first of all.
It certainly has been, but usually with terrible results. It is a popular philosophy but one with a long history of biting the proponent on the butt some time later.
A better formulation is probably "The enemy of my enemy is a potential tool."
I guess it depends on what you mean by "significant." From what I've seen it looks like the numbers have been in the 10-20% range, but that's also probably a high. As the general gets into full swing I'd suspect that number to dwindle down.
and here's an example of why the number will dwindle. Most of those people will now be in close contact with those who hold very different views at a time when the tendency is to be more extreme in the vocal support of priorities. As a result many are going to realize that the conservatives aren't really the fellow travelers they thought they might be and will drift back.
Of course some will end up voting against their usual party (for both dems and reps) but I really doubt this number will be very much higher than historically.
I don't personally support Obama because I don't feel that he's had enough time in the public eye to justify handing him control of the US military forces (not to mention all the other power of a president). On the other hand, while I'm not all that fond of Hillary, I thiink she has a large amount more experience on the national stage.
__________________________I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
"lesser of two evils"
It seems that you are describing the "lesser of two evils" problem that frequently arises from voting. In my experience, most Americans are rarely thrilled about the two major candidates on the ballot in any election, so they vote for the one that they think is less threatening.
I don't think that it's particularly surprizing that some of Hillary's supporters in the Democratic party would prefer McCain over Clinton.
Anyway, you make some pretty strong accusations against Obama, and I was wondering what you were talking about. I'm most interested in these two:
Even if you are just saying that "they think the nomination was stolen", can you describe why a person might believe this? Frankly, this assertion seems ridiculous to me.
Again, this viewpoint seems ridiculous, especially when it is supposed to be a contrast between Obama and Clinton. On the big economic issue of the campaign (health care), Obama's position was less controlling than Clinton's. This is part of the reason that libertarians universally (as far as I know) favored Obama over Clinton.
What reason is there to call Obama a Socialist (assuming that we are using the word Socialist in the sense that it has been used by self-described socialists historically)? While we're at it, what reason is there to distinguish between Socialists and Marxists in terms of their attitudes towards the state's role in the economy?
__________________________"You have seen how a man was made a slave; you shall see how a slave was
made a man." --Frederick Douglas
People don't want the "wrong
People don't want the "wrong lizard" to get into office
From stinerman's blog
__________________________In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,