Chris Orr links to some interesting data on a leftward (or Ron Paul-ward) shift in political contributions among military families. It's far too small a sample size to be dispositive in any way, but it's at least suggestive that the Democrats have a chance to regain some of the ground they lost in the 1970s and '80s, when the post-Vietnam collapse in military morale, followed by the Reagan-era restoration, pushed the military's political allegiances rightward.
But of course, for that to happen, liberals would need someone to play Reagan to Bush's Carter.
But why try exactly? Military families make up less than 1% of the voting public, and only senior officers get paid enough to donate substantially to campaigns. The embarrassingly small totals of even the leaders, $27k for Obama and $19k for Paul, tell the whole sad story. Combined, that's the dollar equivalent of 10 people giving the max donation.
Unfortunately, all the actual political power of the military lobby is concentrated in the so-called 'military-industrial complex', where fat cost-plus contracts drive political affiliation. There's only one thing that moves that lobby: increased military spending. Needless to say, that's not somewhere Democrats can nor should compete.
Posted by Bo | September 13, 2007 6:30 PM