No joy for Democrats in the South

NY Times:

The domed courthouse clock tower tolls the hour, but not much else breaks the stillness in this centuries-old county seat where politics seems to have reached equilibrium, balanced between ancient Democratic traditions and newer Republican ones.

Beneath the surface peace, though, in the storefronts, diners and offices around the square, there is unease as Tuesday’s primaries approach. A prosperity that has endowed this city of 34,000 with fancy antiques stores and well-appointed personal investment offices is weakening. Unemployment in Maury County is rising as a nearby auto plant declines, unfamiliar candidates are on the ballot and all the history accumulated here over two centuries, in the middle of a politically middling state, is proving to be an unreliable guide.

In November, Democrats need to win here in this swing county in the hilly Nashville exurbia, just as they need to win in the rest of Tennessee and in its neighbor Arkansas, Southern states that have voted for the winner in the last eight presidential elections. But the choices available in the coming Democratic primary have led to disquiet among independent voters, Democratic-leaning Republicans and even some traditional Democrats, according to interviews here and across the state line in Arkansas.

These states are among four in the South voting in primary elections on Tuesday (the others are Alabama and Georgia) in a region that went solidly for President Bush in the last two elections but where Democrats hope to make inroads this November, capitalizing on dissatisfaction with the Republicans. That hope may be unrealistic, even in the crucial swing states.

“I wish there was somebody worth voting for,” said Buford Moss, a retired Union Carbide worker sitting at the back table of Bucky’s Family Restaurant here, with a group of regulars, in a county seat that — as the home of the 11th president, James K. Polk — is one of the ancestral homelands of Jacksonian Democracy.

“The Democrats have left the working people,” Mr. Moss said.

“We have nobody representing us,” he continued, adding that he was “sad to say” he had voted previously for Mr. Bush. He was considering sitting out this election altogether. “Anyone but Obama-Osama,” he said, chuckling at a designation that met with mirthful approval at the table.

In interviews around the courthouse square, voters stuttered over Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama in matchups with Republicans, particularly Senator John McCain, whose military credentials give him solid regional armoring. Some white voters voiced outright alarm over Mr. Obama, and though he is a Christian, allusions to his supposed Muslim ties were frequent, as were suggestions that he remained a disturbingly unknown quantity.

White men, in particular, expressed general fearfulness — over a possible terrorist attack, over an unnamed threat from Muslims, over Hispanic immigrants and over the weakening economy. These fears led them to reflect positively on Republican candidates, perceived as more hard-line on most fronts.

“I think our greatest fear is our terrorist enemies,” said Waymon L. Hickman, senior chairman of First Farmers & Merchants bank, whose headquarters building dominates Main Street here.

“You get Peloski up there and they say we’ve lost the war, and that just fuels our adversaries,” said Mr. Hickman, incorrectly pronouncing the name of Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

...

The NY Times attempt to cast these guys as disillusioned hicks is evident. The fact is that their instincts about the Democrats are correct. The Democrats are not serious about winning the war against the Muslim supremacist. That should be a concern for everyone including non kook Democrats.

BTW, the "Obama-Osama" label is a play on a mistake Ted Kennedy made when Obama first surfaced in the national arena. The real concern about Obama is that he is a liberal who wants to lose the war in Iraq and has never wanted to win it. Some Democrats think that is a badge of honor, but in much of the south it is a demonstration of Democrat incompetence on national security issues.