We are a new and as yet unrecognized phenomena, a byproduct of Bush Administration position and policy gone astray, if not renegade. We feel the GOP has left and abandoned us.
For purposes of the 2008 Presidential election, a DMR is neither Republican nor Democrat. A DMR is a Disenchanted Moderate Republican, representing the pivotal, make or break, must have, deciding factor voting block in the 2008 Presidential election. We're not a majority. Rather, we're just enough - to win.
DMR's have yet to organize and many, perhaps most, have even yet to realize who indeed they are, and just drifting for a political home. This article and the next two years will crystallize that profiling identity and galvanize their new position when it comes time to "pull the voting lever".
In football field terminology, each is defending their own red zone, inside the twenty. That is not where a DMR wants our country to be. We want to see our nation in good, flexible field position, i.e. starting between the 45's, on either side of the 50.
Ronald Reagan won on a strong right position because the country had had enough of the far left positioning of the Carter administration and its embarrassments, most notably the Iranian hostage rescue debacle. But like everything extreme, there is a pendulum effect, and sooner or later a swing the other way. Even a far right position wears thin on the moderates.
Clinton came in on a less liberal and more moderate Third Way approach and pushed even more so to the middle during his first two years in office as the Republicans drifted further and further right, completely abandoning (vacating) the center in 1994 under the directional leadership of Newt Gingrich. Clinton astutely seized the middle and held it the next 6 years of his Presidency.
So what do DMR's want?
Effectively, we want neither left nor right, but rather a "balanced middle", and a stop to the perpetual left-right pendulum swing.
In that context, let me focus on the four major DMR deciding impact themes/issues of the 2008 Presidential election in no particular order except starting with a for sure number 1: Iraq, and probably number 2: foreign policy:
1. Iraq: This will be the central driving issue of the 2008 campaign. An immediate, sensible "3 for 1 and Done" controlled withdrawal (plan), sympathetic with the liberation based theme we approved the initial invasion upon.
2. Foreign Policy: One that promotes and leverages good relations with our allies, for the benefit of our strategic and economic interests both short and long term. One that too constructively collaborates with our allies to unite and stand together to collectively address threats to global peace, whether vis a vis preferred diplomacy or last resort military action. We want America seen as a constructive world leader, one who listens and acts responsibly for not only our own, but for the good and betterment of the global community. The message "we stand alone and/or go it alone" must end. We want our country to be viewed by the world as a partner, not independent agent.
3. Domestic Policy: Responsible Citizen Concern and Incentive. Continue the direction initiated by the Clinton Administration as evident for example the case of welfare reform. There should be concern for all citizens, yet also the tools and incentives for not only government but most importantly for the people to help themselves. Also, some recognition that as the world economy and security become more globally integrated, domestic policy will be increasingly driven by foreign policy, and how can we best leverage that to maximize benefits for our citizens.
4. Taxes: In what I'll coin the "income clock" factor, we want the clock turned back, or at worst, held steady at 1PM. If you look at a typical 9-5 work day, from approx. 9AM-1PM we work for the government (taxes). The remainder of the day's rewards goes in our pockets. We want to spend more of the day working for our families, not Uncle Sam.