Is Matthew Dowd A Wuss?

Every person who pulls the lever for a candidate has a certain investment in that politician. Maybe a bad press cycle can turn the voter away from the candidate, or maybe the level of investment is so high that they will stick with their guy through thick and thin -- including, for example, a deeply flawed war.

That's what makes Matthew Dowd's highly public defection from the Bush team notable. Here was a guy that led the charge for W. during two presidential campaigns, who was highly invested in Bush, as a person and a politician -- and he finally decided that enough was enough.

So what does The New Republic call Dowd? A "wuss." Well, I guess that it fits in with their determined effort to be contrarian. It is true that Dowd was never really seen as the genius behind Bush's success, let alone an evil one.

More important, I think, is Dowd's reasons for ditching Bush. Like most Americans, they turned on the President when they realized his war was a failure. They still believe that Middle Eastern politics and culture needs to change radically; they just don't support a defeat. Dowd daydreams about atoning for his sins in the jungles of the Congo; he still wants to play a hands-on approach to solving the problems of the world.

That's a very healthy sign, if you ask me. And it also shows that, even if the balance of political power shifts, basic realities stay the same.