I'm angry

[LadyJeanne]

The Democratic party, it seems to me, is acting like a British Captain in the 18th century. Prepared to stick to their principals and not budge an inch and in doing so go down with the ship, rather than roll up their sleeves and help the others bail.

I'm deeply disappointed in the Democratic Party and have been for many years. All the things the Republicans did well - developing a vision, a strategy, and a tactical plan, which they then articulated clearly and repeatedly to their constituents - the Democrats did extremely poorly, if at all. I believe that's why the end result turned into people voting for or against the Republican vision. At least we understood what Bush and the Republican Party intended.

And that still hasn't changed even though the election should have been a wake-up call for the Democrats. They made Howard Dean the DNC Chairman and he's talked a great deal about contesting every election race at ever level, but I wonder if his own 'fringe' status will help or hurt.

I do totally apologize if the tone of my earlier posts made it seem personal.

No apology necessary. I started this thread because of all my emotions that boiled over at the London bombings, which suddenly reminded me how personal this is to all of us.

 

[BlackShanglan]

You've hit the nail on the head, my friend. I remember during the Democratic debates, after everyone already decided that Kerry was the most 'presidential' of the bunch, that Dennis Kucinich was practically laughed off the stage each time he wanted to focus on domestic issues such as jobs and health care. I'm not saying he was the best candidate, but he sure had some substantial things to say and no one wanted to listen. I don't doubt that he received a similar brush-off when the Party was developing its platform, whatever that mysterious process might be. Not because he wasn't making sense, but because that kind of thing doesn't sell.

That's the most depressing thing, to me - when you can actually see the internal party selection process weeding out people of substance and ideas in favor of those best able to instill fear of the opposition and produce snappy catch-phrases. I'm not familiar with Mr. Kucinich, but I'm disappointed that anyone prepared to discuss real goals and methods was shouted down. It's happening on both sides of the aisle, and it's an ugly thing to see. But it's so much more convenient to destroy them, in the long run.

Eventually, as Orwell points out - and as Limbaugh seems to prove more strongly with every broadcast - the political appeal that is left, that sort of fervent, angry, fear-based response, loses all rooting in ideas or thought and becomes not only irrational but actually transferable. Anyone who's listened to Rush Limbaugh try to argue against judicial activism on civil liberties and for the legitimacy of the Supreme Court decision on the Bush election has seen double think in perfect practice. It's not possible, logically, to support both of those actions, as they are the antithesis of each other. But he'll do it, and his fans for the most part will cheer him on - not because what he's saying could ever be rationally consistent, but because the emotional message is what they are paying attention to. Damned liberals are a threat and a menace and the court is there to protect you from them because they want to DESTROY AMERICA! Ergo we are right about everything.

And we've always been at war with Oceania, damnit.

Shanglan

 

[BlackShanglan]

I'm deeply disappointed in the Democratic Party and have been for many years. All the things the Republicans did well - developing a vision, a strategy, and a tactical plan, which they then articulated clearly and repeatedly to their constituents - the Democrats did extremely poorly, if at all. I believe that's why the end result turned into people voting for or against the Republican vision. At least we understood what Bush and the Republican Party intended.

And that still hasn't changed even though the election should have been a wake-up call for the Democrats. They made Howard Dean the DNC Chairman and he's talked a great deal about contesting every election race at ever level, but I wonder if his own 'fringe' status will help or hurt.

Maybe there is some hope. I really do keep hoping that the Dems will run someone I can vote for. I was optimistic after Gore's loss - by less than the margin of third party voters - that they might have looked at that situation and thought, "Wow, whole lot of liberals who felt like they couldn't vote for us. We better address that." Unfortunately, that didn't come through. This time I am less optimistic, but still hold out some hope that they might step back and say, "Hey. People really did want some specific plans. Well, damnit, I guess brand identity isn't going to be enough after all."

The cynic in me says that this will go on forever, because it's too damned convenient not to. But the optimist is sincerely hoping that there are people of good will and good wit, like you, operating in the DNC headquarters, and that they will eventualy say something like "Oh, all RIGHT then. We're just going to have to make a platform and enunciate signficant concepts in a way that is somehow palatable to the average American. Damnit, this politics stuff is hard work!" What gives me hope is that the things you enumerate, vision, strategy, and tactics, have some hope of returning toward a discussion of ideas, ideology, and meaningful issues. They might not; I fear that they will obsess over strategy and tactics in terms of fund-raising and media spin control, which would take us back to a meaningless exchange of meaningless phrases. But there's some hope that someone will say, "You know, maybe people actually want to hear more about what we have planned and how it's going to make the world a better place."

Here's hoping.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I think it's a good indicator of how successful the Republicans have been at demonizing the Democrats and liberals in general that a thread that started out with legitimate complaints about how the current administration has bungled the "War on Terror" turns into a spirited criticism of the party out of power.

From the comments above, you'd think the London Bombing was the Democrats' fault.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I think it's a good indicator of how successful the Republicans have been at demonizing the Democrats and liberals in general that a thread that started out with legitimate complaints about how the current administration has bungled the "War on Terror" turn into a criticism of the party out of power.

From the comments above, you'd think the London Bombing is the Democrats' fault.

I believe that the point was that it's important to ask why one is not in power and to address a political process that leads to resutls that no one is happy with.

As for the last comment, I am sure that you don't intend the implication that they are the fault of the Republicans, but it's a shame that it could be read as communicating such a repulsive suggestion at such a thoroughly inappropriate moment.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I think it's a good indicator of how successful the Republicans have been at demonizing the Democrats and liberals in general that a thread that started out with legitimate complaints about how the current administration has bungled the "War on Terror" turns into a spirited criticism of the party out of power.

From the comments above, you'd think the London Bombing was the Democrats' fault.

Well Doc, you can complain till you are blue in the face. If you don't have a majority in either house, freindly courts or the presidency, you are wasteing your breath. those in power will continue to screw up, and they will merilly ignore you, pooh p[ooh you and call it sour grapes.

If you're really angry at the way things are being mishandled, then you will eventually have to face up to the fact it's happening, unchecked, because there is no counter in place.

In real terms, this thread, while opening legitimately, turned into an attack on people who voted Bush, before it became a thread on the problems of liberals or democrats. Unless you think it's legitimate to claim anyone who didn't vote against Bush claims to have been abducted by aliens? Or has seen elvis?

I pointed out, rightly I think, that liberals fall to that with ease and all too often. And that's one reason you are so impotent in your rage now. You aren't listening, you're screaming. You aren't speaking to those who you disagree with, you're belittleing them, mocking them, dismissing thier views out of hand. And if you keep it up, your rage will be just as impotent at the next republican president as it is with this one.

 

[Guest]

This is so frustrating.

Shang's and particularly Colly's posts are good political food for thought. I have taken their words to heart and have examined my own reasons for feeling and for voting the way I do.

I do not feel, however, that they express the majority of the opinion of the people who do not vote Democrat.

Let me explain.

I've spoken with many people, some on-line, some colleagues, some family members, some acquaintances, and the majority of them who vote Republican are not as well-read as Colly. Far from it, in fact.

There are so many people in this country who are easily swayed by the hate-filled rhetoric, who believe the warped "facts", who use a single issue (be it gays in the military, gay marriage, a flag-burning amendment!) as their sole reason for voting the way in which they do.

There are so many people in this country who watch FOX News. And only FOX News. They believe everything Rush Limbaugh spouts from his venomous trap. They believe the talk of fear - for taxes, for morality, for god and religion. So much of talk-radio (I won't say most) is far right-wing, and those folks at home who tune in get an ear full of twisted history.

Of course there are brilliant minds who disagree with the Democratic platform and vote their conscience with thought and precision.

But there are a great many people who do not vote with thought and precision (on both sides, of course). And the well-oiled machine of the GOP has been playing up to those folks for forty-some years.

I'm not trying to cause more argument here. But not every voter who votes against the Democratic platform is a scholar.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

This is so frustrating.

Shang's and particularly Colly's posts are good political food for thought. I have taken their words to heart and have examined my own reasons for feeling and for voting the way I do.

I do not feel, however, that they express the majority of the opinion of the people who do not vote Democrat.

Let me explain.

I've spoken with many people, some on-line, some colleagues, some family members, some acquaintances, and the majority of them who vote Republican are not as well-read as Colly. Far from it, in fact.

There are so many people in this country who are easily swayed by the hate-filled rhetoric, who believe the warped "facts", who use a single issue (be it gays in the military, gay marriage, a flag-burning amendment!) as their sole reason for voting the way in which they do.

There are so many people in this country who watch FOX News. And only FOX News. They believe everything Rush Limbaugh spouts from his venomous trap. They believe the talk of fear - for taxes, for morality, for god and religion. So much of talk-radio (I won't say most) is far right-wing, and those folks at home who tune in get an ear full of twisted history.

Of course there are brilliant minds who disagree with the Democratic platform and vote their conscience with thought and precision.

But there are a great many people who do not vote with thought and precision (on both sides, of course). And the well-oiled machine of the GOP has been playing up to those folks for forty-some years.

I'm not trying to cause more argument here. But not every voter who votes against the Democratic platform is a scholar.

It could be just as easily pointed out that a huge proportion of the urban poor who vote democrat do so without any concern for, nor understanding of the issues. they vote that way because the GOP is the enemy, they have been raised with that belief, and to be honest, it's probably a legitimate position.

So you have uninformed voters on both sides. You can't speak to them. Nothing I say is going to convince someone living in the heart of Chicago or New York that the GOP has something good to offer. Nothing you say is going to convince someone sure that their religion is under attack by the democrats that they should vote democrat.

There are, however, informed and semi informed voters on both sides of the divide and you can talk to them. But you can't talk down to them, you can't lecture them like children and expect a reaction other than them being resentful. And you can't dispute the evidence of their own eyes and senses.

It is that informed and semi informed group that we all try to speak to. If you open the debate however, with the assertion they are all toothless redneck racist homophobe bible thumpers, you aren't likely to make much headway after than no matter what facts you present.

 

[oggbashan]

Adapt or Die

Many of the arguments about US political parties are familiar in the UK. For years the Labour Party here was unelectable because it had not adapted to the changes in British society that it had helped to implement.

Gradually it moved away from its historic principles and policies towards a newer approach. The process was painful and still divides many people inside the Labour Party. However it made 'New' Labour acceptable to people who would never have voted for the old version.

Now the tables have been turned. The Conservative Party is unelectable. Whoever is their leader, they have not adapted to the new reality. They are still fighting internal battles for control and not addressing the need to appeal to voters who are not committed to the Conservative 'vision' as it now is.

That is the point. Governments are elected by people who are not committed to a political party, the so-called 'swing' vote. Whichever party wins the uncommitted voters will win as long as their own party faithful are not alienated by the appeal to the uncommitted.

The situation in the UK is the exact opposite of the US. We have a government that seems to be far more liberal than your Democrats. Actually, they aren't - they just look as if they are. In government, the Labour Party was been 'conservative' with a small 'c' and has taken over some of the policies that Conservative governments left them. That is the threat to the Conservative Party - their natural policies have been hi-jacked by Labour. If they respond by going further to the Right they will lose the middle ground of uncommitted voters. If they go to the Left they lose the difference between themselves and Labour. They need to sell a message that they are different and have solutions for the nation's problems that are not Labour's solutions. They have no such solutions because Labour has used them.

Conservatives in the UK and Democrats in the US have to reinvent themselves as innovators with a credible set of policies that seem to be better than the current government. Then they need charismatic leaders that appeal beyond their natural voters. As yet neither has found the policies or the leaders.

Those who regret that the US is governed by Republicans need to help the Democrats to find policies that appeal to REPUBLICAN voters. Attacking the Republicans is no way to win friends.

Those who regret that the UK is governed by Labour need to help the Conservatives find policies that appeal to LABOUR voters. Attacking Labour is no way to win friends.

Og

 

[BlackShanglan]

That is the point. Governments are elected by people who are not committed to a political party, the so-called 'swing' vote. Whichever party wins the uncommitted voters will win as long as their own party faithful are not alienated by the appeal to the uncommitted.

One might add, as well, that in the US (and I would suspect in the UK) the largest block of voters to move are those who didn't to vote. Sinking turnouts are often a sign of voter dissatisfaction; people don't see anything to rally behind. The party that can enunciate a truly enspiriting platform has 40% of the nationwide vote up for grabs - people who can't be bothered to show up because they don't see anything that's worth showing up for.

Shanglan