This weekend, I attended an event on Fire Island that featured Sen. Kirstin Gillibrand. Interestingly, a few donors publicly expressed displeasure about the Party's progress on gay issues during a Q&A session.
This got me thinking about why some Democrats are disappointed with the Party - and it goes much deeper than votes on a few key issues. The unease, in my view, comes directly from the Democratic Party's inability to define itself, defend itself and the style in which it communicates.
If one is asked to name five defining issues the Republican Party stands for, it would be easy: Lower taxes (for the rich), Pro-business (corporate welfare), Discrimination (gays, blacks, Muslims immigrants, etc.), Family Values (undermining separation of church & State) and a strong defense (dumb wars we can't afford).
But, if one asks the same question about Democrats, people would be left scratching their heads. Over the past couple of decades, the Party has left us with a series of mind-numbing, ever-changing slogans and strategies.
Sure, many of the Democratic Party's issues are laudable and they have had some success passing legislation. But the merry-go-round of messages has left the Party with an identity crisis. Any experienced salesperson understands that without a solid brand, the product can't easily be marketed or sold.
In the absence of a brand, Democrats have had to disproportionately rely on prodigy politicians, such as Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, as well as scaring voters into believing (rightfully) that Republicans are too radical to govern. Fear will send many Democratic voters to the polls in November. However, spooking people into voting against the bad guys and Mama Grizzlies, while important, will not be enough to win long-term.
Aside from defining, the Democrats are going to have to start defending and stop allowing themselves to be tarred by Republicans. First, Al Gore was painted as a wimpy, serial exaggerator who lacked leadership. Then, we had war hero, John Kerry, who was swift boated as a traitor. Now, Barack Obama has been mercilessly slimed as a communist, Muslim terrorist who wants to march into Middle America and take their guns.
It is frustrating that the Democratic Party can't make Americans remember the disaster of George W. Bush's presidency, a mere two years ago. Yet the GOP still has people remembering the alleged nightmare of life under Jimmy Carter.
Wouldn't the party be much better off if it cast aside its reticence and threw political punches against the GOP in the same way that Rachel Maddow, Keith Olberman and Jon Stewart do each night?
If Barack Obama still thinks he can play nice and make friends with intransigent Republicans, then he is kidding himself. The GOP is already planning, if they win back the House, to undermine the President's legitimacy and effectiveness by launching a series of frivolous investigations.
Of course, the biggest problem the Democrats have is that they often do not know how to talk to voters. In the early stages of my career, when I was in broadcasting, news directors taught that to reach a mass audience, reporters had to write at a fifth-to seventh grade level. The Republicans get this, while Democrats talk to the American people as if they are conducting a college seminar. We hear them yammering about complicated or meaningless terms such as: public option, cap and trade, deregulation, ENDA, and working people.
(Today's real working people would rather be defined by their aspirations, not their current station in life. So, appeal to their dreams, not their present job.)
Here are four quick examples of the way Democratic Party officials and politicians should start talking to voters about key issues:
Deregulation: "Thanks to Republicans, we can't even feel secure having eggs for breakfast because they have dismantled safeguards that protected us from food poisoning."
Alternative Energy: "Every time we go to the gas pump and use foreign oil, we are pumping up the terrorists. This is why we support homegrown energy innovation."
Environment: "We will not allow Republican policies to ruin our heritage by polluting our blue water and skies with oil and smog."
ENDA: "In a free market, the best worker should get the job, regardless of sexual orientation. We have zero tolerance for discrimination because it is morally wrong and it is bad for business."
I know it can be difficult to dumb down the rhetoric. But, it is better than feeling stupid on Election Day, watching Republicans trick the American people into voting against their own interests.
Follow Wayne Besen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Truthwinout
A bunch of Einsteins they truly are.
The point of the article, that a coherent and articulate message needs to be conveyed is a valid argument. The needless insults to the intelligence and will of the American people do not support the argument.
Oh, by the way, I am a liberal too and not at all shy about saying so. :)
For example:
Mission. The Democratic party stands for full employment, equal opportunity, safety, security, and a clean environment for all Americans.
Vision. By leading the world in innovation in such areas as job creation, health care and infrastructure restoration we will improve the lives of all Americans. We will manage our shared resources responsibly and will not shackle future generations with unmanageable financial burdens.
Values. Economic growth. Equal opportunity in jobs and education. Access to adequate health care. Realistic investment in defense. Stewardship of shared resources. Create a better tomorrow for everyone, starting with "the least of us."
These modest proposals are only meant to illustrate why no one can track what the Dems want. It's not enough to be "not the other guys." We must resolutely articulate and STAND BY our mission-vision-values. Any time we seem "just like the other guys" (e.g.,campaign financing) we degrade our message.
Me: Do you think we are stupid? No party in the history of our government has used and abused the filibuster in the same manner the Republicans are now. The Democrats, compared to the Republicans have been willing to cross the aisle. To even make the comparison is offensive, false, and absurd.
The Republicans have made it their goal to make sure the US government is paralyzed. There is no comparable campaign (or few) -- by either party (othside of civil rights battles) in the history of the nation.
The Republican Medicare drug benefit had nothing to do with Medicare, providing a health benefit, or anything else that it was sold as. It was a payback to the drug industry wing of the Republican Party, and it was inexcusable for so many Dems to try to piggyback on that for any reason.
The Obama "health bill" is a pretty straightforward payback to the insurance industry wing of the Republican Party, and it is purely embarassing that the Republics were able to squeeze almost everything they wanted into it, and then outsmart the Dems even further by voting against it (but only after becoming certain that it would pass anyway) so that they could retain the absolutely huge political benefit accruing from acting like they were in opposition.
(Left for a future discussion is the question of exactly who, if any, of the Dem players were actually outsmarted, and which ones are in the great majority of Dems who are actually bought off.)
Wake up and smell the coffee. The GOP has acted like a single voting bloc in Congress to paralyze government. Every now and then - one or two ---ONE OR TWO -- such as Lindsey Graham or Olympia Snowe shows a glimmer of independence. If the GOP wants to stop being judged as a group, they should stop voting uniformly, like robots, to paralyze America's system of government.
What is really sad and dangerous, is when people won't take off their rose colored glasses and see what is happening in front of their faces. Such denial is what is dangerous.
Quite frankly, anyone who is part of the rhetoric on the 'left' or the 'right' wants to keep the clash going. If anything comparable to civil public discourse returns to our nation - they are all out of jobs.
As for the GOP constantly voting against the Democratic agenda, it's no difference than what the Dems did when the GOP was in power. With three notable exceptions the Patriot Act, Iraq and Afghanistan. So basically, the only time the two parties are not divided is when it comes to positive actions that divide our country even more.
You can speak about my rose colored glasses all you want, but believe me I see a much less 'rosy' America than you do. If I were to make a similar 'eyeball' related analogy I would say you see absolutely clearly - but only in one direction.
The main problem with the Democratic Party, however, is that old joke that irt is not organized. The Republicans have pretty much gotten rid of any outlyers except for a handful. The Democrats have no such discipline. A few individual members of Congress control the money. But "blue dog" Democrats are not the only stripe of Democrat, and there is no way to get Democrats to line up for any rational legislation, however compelling the arguments are for single payer, cap and trade, etc.
Lisa Mukowski said of her campaign, "We stayed on the high road."
Guess which candidate lost? The high road, it seems, is the one Murkowski will be taking home in a U-Haul packed with her Senate memorabilia.
Keep talking like a college seminar and we will also be taking the high road home and patting ourselves on the back. While the GOP takes the low road --- all the way to Washington.
DrSnuggles writes: So the GOP stands for evil? I think that is an oversimplification and a fairly partisan one at that. The 'one' you are asking is clearly you. Maybe you actually ask a Republican what they stand for.
Me: Yeah, that matters, because Republicans never lie and always tell the truth about what they stand for. I was watching Rachel Maddow last night and saw all these obnoxious Republican leaders bad mouthing healthcare and the stimulus -- even as they were going to ceremonies with giant check giveaways from the federal government.
Some might call that evil. We can be charitable and at least admit this is hypocritical and dishonest.
Personally, I think generalizing people into groups for whatever reason is dangerous. We should start looking at the individuals instead of the letter after their name.
A month or so back on HuffPo I came across a comment on an article about Obama's stance/reaction to a particular policy question. The comment read ~ "It doesn't matter that he's in the right, it matter that he wins." This particular opinion is prevalent on BOTH sides of the aisle and is a particularly devasting one.
Same concept would apply even more so when speaking with your kids. If your 12 year-old asks you a question about money, will you give a 30-minute dissertation that he will tune out of after 2 minutes, or just the basics? Audiences today have very short attention spans, so any politician has to be able to deliver their message both concisely and effectively. Sometimes that means "dumbing it down" but what it really means is figuring out how to get your message across to the biggest audience possible.
Republicans have been the masters of this concept, but they're not as good as they used to be. It's up to Democrats to capitalize against a party with nothing new to offer America.
>that Republicans are too radical to govern.
That's like saying we need to scare childred into believing rabid dogs will hurt them.
Republicans ARE too radical to govern. Just look at the mess they make every time they seize power. Every Gooper president has been exponentially worse than the last.
So the GOP stands for evil? I think that is an oversimplification and a fairly partisan one at that. The 'one' you are asking is clearly you. Maybe you actually ask a Republican what they stand for.
I'm pretty sure they stand for the same thing the Democrats do, gaining/maintaining power at the expense of our political system.
>same thing the Democrats do
I'm pretty sure you haven't been paying attention for over 30 years.
It's far past time that we start looking at our politicians as individuals and not the letters after their name. When we vote in response to those letters, the letters win (both of them).
Check this link out it a a very brief speech by the man who founded 'Obamacare' in Canada http://spacesofhope.blogspot.com/2009/10/tommy-douglas-speech.html
Pro-Orwellian Government. pro-Government as Mommy, nanny and Overlord.
Crush the Middle Class. Screw everyone.
Class Warefare, envy and hatred.
And call anyone who disagrees with you a rac.ist.
That about sums it up.