logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!

> Welcome to the America's Debate Archive!

Topics that have had no new replies in the last 180 days are moved to the archive.

New replies are not accepted once a topic is moved to the archive, and new topics cannot be started in the archive.

> Where do we go from here?, Now what?
Where do we go from here?
You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Total Votes: 58
Guests cannot vote 
nebraska29
post Nov 4 2004, 01:19 AM
Post #1


*********
Only siths speak in absolutes.

Sponsor
November 2005

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,712
Member No.: 1,871
Joined: November-29-03

From: York, Nebraska
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



Being very active in local politics, I'm now trying to set up fundraising and other events. Understandably, people are disappointed, but I never knew how much people are just dejected about the election until I talked with about five others. I'm not thrilled about it, don't get me wrong, but there are a lot of us who are facing a political-existential crisis of sorts. I post this in relation to the Kerry "losing" thread because while I want to continue discussing why Kerry lost, I want to know what we can look forward to in '08
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Cube Jockey
post Nov 5 2004, 05:55 PM
Post #21


*********
Now with more truthiness

Sponsor
May 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,799
Member No.: 1,224
Joined: September-16-03

From: San Francisco, CA
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



My question is really just - how do we make the party listen? I am skeptical that these career politicians will come up with anything new and exciting for 2006 and 2008. As nighttimer said, the quickest thing that is going to anger me is for them to push something like Lieberman 2008. If they are going to do something like that why don't we just admit defeat now and have one big political party. dry.gif And actually Clinton 2008 would be just as bad because they would prove one thing to me, they haven't learned anything.

I too think the growing zeal of the religious right is cause for concern, but I still don't think that is why we lost. I am convinced that we lost because we were voting against Bush and not for John Kerry. The conservatives coined the phrase "ABB" and then used it against us, and to a certain extent it was true.

For me, I was voting for Kerry largely because Bush was the greater evil. I did believe that some of the things he was saying were correct and I was on board with him, but if I could have picked any of the Democratic candidates he would have been among the last choices. I think all of us probably feel that way to varying degrees.

We need a candidate that is real, charismatic and that can inspire the American people with a vision for the future. If we had that person this election, I think we would have won hands down because the Republicans were overwhelmingly playing off people's fears about a wide variety of issues.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lesly
post Nov 5 2004, 07:38 PM
Post #22


********
'Bryos before Hoes!

Sponsor
May 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,477
Member No.: 2,838
Joined: April-1-04

From: Columbus, OH
Gender: Female
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(Cube Jockey @ Nov 5 2004, 12:55 PM)
My question is really just - how do we make the party listen?  I am skeptical that these career politicians will come up with anything new and exciting for 2006 and 2008.  As nighttimer said, the quickest thing that is going to anger me is for them to push something like Lieberman 2008.  If they are going to do something like that why don't we just admit defeat now and have one big political party.   And actually Clinton 2008 would be just as bad because they would prove one thing to me, they haven't learned anything...

We need a candidate that is real, charismatic and that can inspire the American people with a vision for the future.  If we had that person this election, I think we would have won hands down because the Republicans were overwhelmingly playing off people's fears about a wide variety of issues.
*
Make it listen by pressing honest evaluation. I am not, and never have been, so timid about constructive criticism in my affiliation to a liberal party that my knees turn to jello. The Democratic Underground is a mess at the moment playing the blame game. Such a waste of good energy.

It is very tempting to bounce off ideas for the next presidential nominee with Cheney's departure and a fresh crack in four years, but I won't. This places too much emphasis too soon after a striking defeat on one person to "save us" or define us and draws attention away from internal fissures. While I hope the Reps will incite an electorate revolt from their own success I won't count on it. That's not to suggest I think we should wait until the 11th hour to start looking, but while the dust settles, some time for reflection couldn't hurt. Distracting ourselves with defeating the ghost of GWB will not make the black eye hurt a little less. Not to mention we'll have to steel ourselves for the upcoming judicial battles and coach and monetarily support winnable candidates for the upcoming Senate race.

I think the problem we face is one of identity. It isn't just that parties in power grow comfortable with time, but we have lost our voice and Republicans aren't to blame. As the GOP has shown to be willing to support social responsibility recently Democrats sound more like Republicans, or Republicans sound more like us, take your pick. We must find common ground within the party and reach a consensus. It is possible to establish a distinct identity without swinging either right or left. If we do, it will be a good thing for us in the long run. (On that note of social responsibility, while we rightly consider ourselves the real social champions I think the most discouraging effect of losing all three branches has been witnessing the GOP machine trash international institutions we’ve helped forge like the U.N. year after year, be forced to watch them thoroughly botch the art of diplomacy now that they’re at the helm, and wear their indifference like a badge of honor.)


QUOTE(Cube Jockey @ Nov 5 2004, 12:55 PM)
I am convinced that we lost because we were voting against Bush and not for John Kerry.  The conservatives coined the phrase "ABB" and then used it against us, and to a certain extent it was true.
*
What does that tell you about Kerry? Seriously, with so much anti-Bush sentiment out there a garden gnome should have defeated him. Kerry's shortcomings aside, his campaign was divided from the getgo between the shrill anti-Bush crowd and level-headed strategists that took over near the end. I am very proud of the enormous get out the vote effort the party put forward. I am not so proud of the chokehold we've given Republicans over us by not moving past the "deer in the headlights" shock of losing all three branches.


QUOTE(Cube Jockey @ Nov 5 2004, 12:55 PM)
For me, I was voting for Kerry largely because Bush was the greater evil.  I did believe that some of the things he was saying were correct and I was on board with him, but if I could have picked any of the Democratic candidates he would have been among the last choices.  I think all of us probably feel that way to varying degrees.
*
I voted for Kerry as well. I'm not so sure about picking the wrong candidate when I think the party was so focused on defeating Bush—I agree with the reasons behind the efforts—that it lost sight of the People. Middle America doesn't give a rat's behind about party loyalty. We've been so focused on recapturing our past majority status I think the party has lost sight of the reason why it seeks to wield power and influence to begin with.

On the other hand, if Democrats find their identity, their voice, and decide to walk the walk, not just talk it, we may be in for some tough times, tougher than even now. For instance, we may need to wean ourselves off corporate donations and possibly lose even more elections in the process. We’re as much a whore of corporate America now as Republicans have been for years.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Beladonna
post Nov 5 2004, 07:54 PM
Post #23


*******
Resident Beach Bum

Sponsor
July 3, 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 868
Member No.: 545
Joined: February-26-03

From: Florida
Gender: Female
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Democrat



This is the first time I have posted in the Democratic thread that I can recall. I never felt comfortable posting here because my views are completely out of line with most Democrats who post here at AD. It also seems I have the reputation of being a DINO (Democrat in Name Only). That may be true to a certain extent, however, what many of you may not know is that I voted for Clinton twice and for Gore in 2000.

You see, I believed in Clinton’s agenda. Of course, most people recognize that many of Clinton’s policies were of a conservative nature, thus his success. I thought (mistakenly) that Gore would continue with Clinton’s agenda. However, I now feel that the Democratic Party no longer represents my views. I feel the Democratic Party is not in line with mainstream America or with my views of how to get our country to a better place.

I received an email from someone that I respect asking me to share my thoughts about which direction the Democratic Party should head in order to win back Southern Democrats, like me. Before I do that, let me tell you a little bit about what many other Southern Democrats and I believe.

We lean right on security. The Michael Moores of this world only make us plant ourselves more firmly in our support for the President and the troops. I personally believe the President could/should have handled things differently concerning the number of troops, disbanding the Iraqi army, and Abu Ghraib, but hindsight is 20/20. Monday morning quarterbacking is for those who aren’t having the make the decisions to start with and although constructive criticism is welcomed, finger pointing and the blame game is a complete turn off and does nothing to help the situation. Many times, (although I want to believe it is not the intent) the criticism seems to reflect on the troops. I have no doubt it affects the troops to hear the criticism.

Many of us lean right on fiscal issues. We support the tax cuts. We believe that money in our pockets is better spent. We believe money in our pockets moves the economy. We have seen the tax cuts improve our lives. You see you cannot tell me that the tax cuts did not help middle income earners. I am one of them. I know I got more money in my paycheck and I have done things with that money, e.g. remodeling my kitchen, new carpet, remodeling my bathroom. In addition, for the first time in a while, I am looking to buy a new car. Therefore, when John Edwards tried to convince me that there were two Americas, I did not believe him. There was no hope in his speech – only divisiveness.

We believe affirmative action was a wonderful tool at one time, but should be reformed (not done away with) to coincide with the times. People should look at what Jeb Bush has done in Florida. We did away with AA and replaced it with a system that works, a system that puts more minorities in college.

We want to stop the outsourcing of jobs. Many of us believe we should allow drugs to be purchased from Canada. I personally believe strongly in gay marriage, support abortion with limits (I believe in trying to prevent abortions) and there are a lot more like me out there. We support the No Child Left Behind program, desire tort reform, and do not believe in socialized medicine.

Now, for my opinion as requested by my friend. The Democratic Party is in serious trouble. Most Democrats don’t realize it, but in my opinion, it started in 2000. I find it astonishing that Gore lost that election. Compare the 2000 election with the 1988 election. Both had the incumbent VP running for the top of their respective tickets. Both were following hugely popular Presidents that presided over great economies. Gore should have been easily elected, as George H.W. Bush was in 1988.

However, he was not, and from the Democrats behavior the last four years, they have not a clue why. However, I do. Moreover, it is really simple.

Americans have rejected the Democratic Party's platform because Democrats keep moving left, and the electorate, shall we say, has slapped them with a "market correction".

I will try to make this as simple and clear as possible. DEMOCRATS WILL NOT WIN THE POTUS BY RUNNING A NORTHEAST LIBERAL. Keep repeating that until it is embedded in your brain. At least remember it eight years from now, when Democrats MAY have another legitimate chance to win. (This depends on how the first term of the Rudy Guliani/Condi Rice ticket goes. w00t.gif )

A few other things:

Run a candidate that does not talk down to the electorate the way Gore did. Run a candidate with a positive message, not a fear-monger like Kerry – and yes he did try to instill fear in Americans by telling people Bush would reinstate the draft (when only Democrats had proposed and voted for this) and telling seniors that Bush would reduce their social security checks (a complete lie). Most of all run a candidate that is sincere. If Democrats cannot do that, at least get one that can fake sincerity.

In addition, if this President takes a position on a matter of national interest, do not automatically take the opposing position. Many of Bush's incentives are very progressive. Work to make the USA a better place, and when that happens Democrats can take joint credit.

It appears to many of us, including me that the Democratic Party is trying to divide the American people. The more Democrats preach two Americas and the more Democrats rely on what appears to me to be hatred of the opposition (an elitist attitude), the more Democrats will be voted out of office. Stop being as angry and contrary as you have been the last four years.

And most of all listen to mainstream America. We are trying to send you a message. You may disagree with me, but one has only to look at the EC map to see that the current Democratic ideas don't play well in the South.

Move back toward center.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cube Jockey
post Nov 5 2004, 08:09 PM
Post #24


*********
Now with more truthiness

Sponsor
May 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,799
Member No.: 1,224
Joined: September-16-03

From: San Francisco, CA
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Lesly @ Nov 5 2004, 11:38 AM)
QUOTE(Cube Jockey @ Nov 5 2004, 12:55 PM)
I am convinced that we lost because we were voting against Bush and not for John Kerry.  The conservatives coined the phrase "ABB" and then used it against us, and to a certain extent it was true.
*
What does that tell you about Kerry? Seriously, with so much anti-Bush sentiment out there a garden gnome should have defeated him. Kerry's shortcomings aside, his campaign was divided from the getgo between the shrill anti-Bush crowd and level-headed strategists that took over near the end. I am very proud of the enormous get out the vote effort the party put forward. I am not so proud of the chokehold we've given Republicans over us by not moving past the "deer in the headlights" shock of losing all three branches.
*


I'd very much agree Lesly, which is why days after the election I'm sitting here wondering why we lost. A garden gnome should have prevailed against Bush, but we had a decent alternative and he didn't succeed. If I had to give a top three list as the reasons why he failed the reasons would be:
1. His campaign was horribly run. They couldn't find their message, couldn't stay on message and they couldn't effectively counter Republican attacks. It isn't even like they didn't have money, I think Kerry raised the most money for a Democrat ever.

2. Kerry wasn't real, he wasn't honest about who he was. As I said before I think this was transparent to people truely on the fence. He was liberal but he tried to appear moderate. He was initially for the war in Iraq but then when Dean gained ground by going it against it he switched.

3. The vietnam factor. I can excuse Kerry for thinking that playing up his war experience would make him appear to be tough on defense and terror, but what I can't excuse is that when it started going badly he continued to play it up wacko.gif Were I running that campaign I probably wouldn't have even mentioned it knowing it was going to bring up 35 year old feelings from every veteran out there and now they were going to blame him for all of their problems (perceived or real) simply because he was talking about it and he was anti-war after the he returned home.

Edited to add: Comforting words from Mark Morford. I think you'll enjoy the article (ok, rant), but this passage is important:
QUOTE
The bottom line: Don't disband the newfound army just because one ugly battle was lost. Mourn, commiserate, lick wounds, lick each other, drink heavily, spit out your stale gum of disappointment and pop in a fresh clove of laughter and spiritual heat and then regroup and sober up and take an even deeper breath and watch in hot wet spiritually emboldened amusement as the cosmic circus unfolds.

It's far from over. The tunnel is just a little darker -- and longer -- than we imagined.


This post has been edited by Cube Jockey: Nov 5 2004, 09:32 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cube Jockey
post Nov 8 2004, 09:11 PM
Post #25


*********
Now with more truthiness

Sponsor
May 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,799
Member No.: 1,224
Joined: September-16-03

From: San Francisco, CA
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



The following is a very interesting analysis of the newsletter campaign waged by Bush and Kerry in the final weeks before the election - email news letters rated. There is also a good follow-up article here: Newsletters during the final week.

QUOTE
.......................Bush....Kerry
Give Money.....8%.....57%
Get Out the Vote.....38%.....29%
Issues/Events.....54%.....14%

In summary, Kerry used his newsletter to collect money during the final week. Bush used his to increase voter turnout, and he won because he was better at turning out his base. Understanding the strength of email newsletters thus directly contributed to Bush's victory, so his Internet team can claim some credit for the outcome.


I definitely think there are some lessons to be learned here in both articles. For one, why the heck was Kerry asking for money with more than 50% of the newsletters which were the week before the election? I mean seriously, what did he need money for?

These two articles further reinforce my belief that the campaign was just run with incompetence and that as far as playing the game goes, the Republicans just beat us. It doesn't have anything to do with issues, they are just better at the game. In fact, given what the issues were this time, it becomes plainly obvious.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nighttimer
post Nov 9 2004, 06:11 PM
Post #26


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,660
Member No.: 504
Joined: February-16-03

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



QUOTE(Beladonna @ Nov 5 2004, 02:54 PM)
You see, I believed in Clinton’s agenda.  Of course, most people recognize that many of Clinton’s policies were of a conservative nature, thus his success.  I thought (mistakenly) that Gore would continue with Clinton’s agenda.  However, I now feel that the Democratic Party no longer represents my views.  I feel the Democratic Party is not in line with mainstream America or with my views of how to get our country to a better place.

I received an email from someone that I respect asking me to share my thoughts about which direction the Democratic Party should head in order to win back Southern Democrats, like me. 

Americans have rejected the Democratic Party's platform because Democrats keep moving left, and the electorate, shall we say, has slapped them with a "market correction".

I will try to make this as simple and clear as possible. DEMOCRATS WILL NOT WIN THE POTUS BY RUNNING A NORTHEAST LIBERAL. Keep repeating that until it is embedded in your brain. At least remember it eight years from now, when Democrats MAY have another legitimate chance to win. (This depends on how the first term of the Rudy Guliani/Condi Rice ticket goes.  w00t.gif )

It appears to many of us, including me that the Democratic Party is trying to divide the American people.  The more Democrats preach two Americas and the more Democrats rely on what appears to me to be hatred of the opposition (an elitist attitude), the more Democrats will be voted out of office. Stop being as angry and contrary as you have been the last four years.

And most of all listen to mainstream America.  We are trying to send you a message.  You may disagree with me, but one has only to look at the EC map to see that the current Democratic ideas don't play well in the South.

Move back toward center. 
*



For anyone trying to figure out how Democrats recover from last week's debacle, it would be foolish to ignore the complete domination of the South by President Bush and the concern of disaffected Democrats like Belladonna.

Almost 56 million people voted for John Kerry. Bush won with more votes than any candidate for president ever received. Kerry lost with more votes than any candidate for president ever received. Bringing those people back in 2008 and making the party a place where disaffected Democrats can feel welcome and respected must be a top priority. It isn't enough just to nominate a pretty face and someone who can raise a lot of money. It helps to have a presidential candidate that stirs our passions and doesn't just cater to fear and division.

As of today, I don't know who that candidate is. I don't know who the candidate is that can convince Democrats as diverse as Artemise, Wertz, Suzy Steamboat, Cube Jockey, BOF, Beladonna, Lesly or myself that he or she can unite us, appeal to disaffected independents and Republicans (like Dayton Rocker).

I respectfully disagree with Beladonna that it would be certain death for the Dems to nominate another Northeast liberal as POTUS. I don't think the party will, (Sorry, Hillary), but that doesn't mean they shouldn't. Al Gore wasn't a Northeast liberal and his window of opportunity seems to have closed for good (or has it?). Was it John Kerry's liberalism that turned voters off or was it that he was such a stiff and uninspiring candidate?

The Democrats had a cross-section of candidates from various factions of the party to choose from during the primaries. There was the anti-war new kids like Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich. There were two black candidates in Carol Mosely-Braun and Al Sharpton. There were moderates like Joe Lieberman and Bob Graham. Fresh faces like John Edwards. Old pros such as Richard Gephardt. Bona fide war heroes in Wesley Clark and John Kerry.

Now out of that group, tell me who gets the nod to champion the cause following the defeat of Kerry?

There is plenty of talent within the ranks of the Democratic Party. Both in its potential leaders and the grassroots, but somehow they have GOT to get on the same page.

Right now it's important to start asking the questions. The answers will come as the debate goes along.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Christopher
post Nov 9 2004, 07:35 PM
Post #27


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,352
Member No.: 1,696
Joined: November-9-03

From: Phoenix AZ
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Private



QUOTE
The Democrats had a cross-section of candidates from various factions of the party to choose from during the primaries. There was the anti-war new kids like Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich. There were two black candidates in Carol Mosely-Braun and Al Sharpton. There were moderates like Joe Lieberman and Bob Graham. Fresh faces like John Edwards. Old pros such as Richard Gephardt. Bona fide war heroes in Wesley Clark and John Kerry.

Now out of that group, tell me who gets the nod to champion the cause following the defeat of Kerry?


Hopefully none of them. They are weak and wouldn't win. None of them is inspiring. Well except for Sharpton--but he would be a disaster as a candidate.

Evan Bayh comes to mind--well respected by both sides of the isle.

Barack Obama, Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, and Virginia Gov. Mark Warner. as mentioned earlier would be great candidates.

As a recent convert to being a Democrat I find myself firmly in agreement with Beladonna. A centrist or moderate would be a good choice to win. I just do not see the Left being able to provide a candidate who can win. Hell Clinton was a centrists and he only won the first time because of Perot. Without him there would be a solid line of Republicans presidents since Carter.

Dems had better start thinking more about the needs of middle class America and like it or not there has to be a loss of the scorn so many of the Liberal Dems have for people of faith. The scorn and hate is almost venomous at times and I'm glad to say that THAT tactic only works for Republicans.

Democrats need to seriously look at the way they approach issues.

Biggest thing IMO--government--big government that is-- is NOT the answer. Policies that place the ability to help directly in the hands of your fellow citizens would help rekindle the lost sense of community in America.

Support for small business should become the priority economically. Small business does not outsource and they remember that their employees are important--not numbers to be crunched. Assault companies that do outsource or try to move their HQs offshore to escape taxes--yet still reap the rewards of being American. Not calling for protectionism in anyway, but stop rewarding thieves.

Tax relief for working families--as in stop ripping off my paycheck to pay for programs that aren't affordable. Its also criminal that a one paycheck family can not raise a family--I'm not talking about a Waltons size family here-- but most Americas see their children less and less and right THERE is where your drug and pregnancy problems come from. We need to start fighting for families in this nation--and if you fail to do so you leave them no where else to go but the Republicans.

The border--secure it. Sorry folks but it is getting ridiculous out here in the west...
Fail to do something and you will lose the west. Fail to do something soon and innocent people who are just trying to support families will continue to be treated like servants.
Pressure needs to be exerted on Mexico to make changes to their government and stop MAKING their citizens into peasants forced to flee to try and find work.
Guest worker program, guest worker program Guest worker program--any questions?
Heavy fines for employing illegals. whether a company or a home owner. $$$$$
Find out which companies profit from this and hurt them with boycotts. Also find out where members of the Mexican government invest the money they rape from the Mexican people and make them pariahs to the financial community.

Education is a failure. for all those whining about how stupid Americans are and the "Dumbing down of American society"--you elitist prigs mad.gif -- Its the Dems who have had control of the education of Americans-- so the Dems have failed and have no one else to blame.

Where is the response to the republican smear and propaganda machine--cable and talk radio? Why are Democrats so horrible at taking the past words of Republicans and smacking them upside the head with them?
With limbaugh as an example, he has said in the past that the way to fight the drug war is to nail the "Rich white elitist--read Hollywood Liberal-- who always get away with using drugs and then getting their influence to get them out of it. Should have been able to beat him down with past comments like that.
But NO--not a peep.

There definetely needs to be a build up in organizing a response to the Limbaugh/Hannity clones who function as the Republican rally monkeys 24-7 365.
The Democrat silence has been deafening.
and for crying out loud BOYCOTT any and all Fox Cable shows. Cut them off and avoid. If they try to corner you--talk baseball and smile politely. it will drive them beserk.

Finally be careful who represents you. Moore is offensive and his insults towards America make me want to slug that fat bloated blowhard. He does more damage than good IMO.

Don't worry though my new Democrat brothas and sisters. It is no defeat but an opportunity for rebirth and new ideas.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TennesseeDemocra...
post Nov 10 2004, 10:48 PM
Post #28


***
Junior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Member No.: 3,913
Joined: November-9-04

Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Democrat



I agree with what belladonna was saying, we need to get back to the center. But look, We lost nationally by almost 4 million votes. We only won 18 states, we got killed in the senate races. Spin it as you may like, but it was a devastating defeat. Also, look at the southern and midwest states that voted againsit us overwhelmingly, Clearly there is a message in that. Our party has fallen outside the mainstream. Argue against me if you like, but you cannot deny that we are slowly shrinking towards nothing more than an opposition party.

We have lost 5 out of the last 7 elections.

What more needs to be said?

And in those losses, we lost by nominated mostly liberals. Learn your lessons my fellow democrats, learn your lessons.

Bush increased his vote among woman, increased his vote among african americans, increased among hispanics, increased among asian americans

We can argue how or by what means, but we need to rethink our message clearly.


I for one agree that we need to stop promotiong a big government philospophy. Dont focus on universal healthcare that would require too much money, focus on tax relief and benefits to help families afford healthcare. Focus on raising minimum wage more, Focus on economic policies for the working man and small businesses. Your typical working white male is who we need to get in touch with again.

This post has been edited by TennesseeDemocrat: Nov 10 2004, 10:52 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cube Jockey
post Nov 10 2004, 11:04 PM
Post #29


*********
Now with more truthiness

Sponsor
May 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,799
Member No.: 1,224
Joined: September-16-03

From: San Francisco, CA
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



I am going to continue to disagree with you that we lost because we are "too liberal". There are many reasons we lost, and being liberal isn't one of them. I have listed several in previous posts:

- Our candidate didn't know the art of "message" and couldn't communicate his agenda to the American people.
- Our candidate made plenty of campaign blunders as illustrated by a few posts here but particularly in response letting Republicans define him (i.e. the whole swift boat thing)
- Our candidate had a long history in the senate, there is a reason why very few senators have been elected president - voting records

I could go on, but I'd be repeating myself.

We are not losing because we are too "liberal", we are losing because we don't know how to play the game well. The Democrats have to stop trying to be Republican-lite and actually have an identity of their own. They have to stop protecting old social programs like social security and welfare and dare to allow the American people to dream of better solutions. We need to play the game better than the Republicans do and reframe the national discourse in our favor.

If we take the lessons learned from this election and decide to move to the center, we may as well just disband the party and let one half become Republicans and the other half join any number of independent parties.

The Republicans are changing too, by heading to the right and departing from their traditionally fiscally conservative ways. If we want to make a comeback we do two things:
1. Push fiscally conservative policies to court moderates and independents.
2. Correctly frame a progressive social agenda and sell it to the American people.

In my opinion TD you are expressing a defeatist attitude and assuming that because we lost, the American people have somehow completely rejected our agenda. That is patently false, in fact Bush's margin of victory for an incumbent president was the second closest in history. To me that doesn't say that we are ideologically flawed, it says that we didn't bring our "A game" when it mattered.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TennesseeDemocra...
post Nov 10 2004, 11:39 PM
Post #30


***
Junior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Member No.: 3,913
Joined: November-9-04

Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Democrat



well you said we lost because of not being able to articulate a message. I am saying that we need a better message to win. Liberals do not win national elections is my belief. Mcgovern and dukkais had a message, but they got creamed. Its not in my view so much about articulating a message, more or less it is changing the message to something that better represents our beliefs, and can resonate with the rest of the country that we are not reaching.

I dont understand why moving to the center is a bad idea to you. Would you prefer we move farther to left and become a version of the greens?


It is okay for us to disagree on this, what is good is that we recognize problems and want to see the party do a better job of reaching voters.

I will say it again, I do not want to become a republican lite party. It is however naive to think that we can win with a liberal no matter how clear the message is. I think we need to do a better job of stressing our beliefs of equality in terms of race, education, and economically without being divisive, and promising oodles of socialistic policies. I have personally benefited from affirmative action, and even I recognize the program needs some reform. That is not by any means to say it does not work, it perhaps could just be re-defined so single white woman are not receiving more of the benefits than african americans or hispanics.


Like someone before me mentioned, policies of pro small business growth, tax relief for education and healthcare instead of handouts, and increased emphasis on minimum wage for those struggling are winning issues for the party. I just think we need to be more identified as people of values for the working class and the poor again, instead of a laundry list of social program promises.

Also, i think kerry being a liberal did hurt. Look at 92 and 96, and before that with carter, we were able to win in Tennessee, Missouri, Arkansas, Colorado, Virginina, West Virgina, Louisiana, Arizona, etc etc.. if not win, at least be very very competitive in these states. And nominating a liberal doesnt effect the social conservatism in these areas? I mean, c'mon man. you know it affects us harshly in these areas.

I saw a map on msnbc news, all the rural counties in america, it looked like a big sea of red. That is precisely the problem i am alluding to.


Feel free to disagree, but this is in no way a suggestion of being like the republicans.

This post has been edited by TennesseeDemocrat: Nov 10 2004, 11:53 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BoF
post Nov 10 2004, 11:53 PM
Post #31


**********
Giga-bite: "I catch mice & rats - 2 & 4 legs."

Sponsor
October 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,128
Member No.: 3,423
Joined: August-14-04

From: Texas
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(TennesseeDemocrat @ Nov 10 2004, 06:39 PM)
I dont understand why moving to the center is a bad idea to you. Would you prefer we move farther to left and become a version of the greens? I will say it again, I do not want to become a republican lite party.


In general, I think it's too early to be calculating strategy for 2008. I do, however, think that Bush will move so far to the right in his second term, that the middle might go to Democrats by default.

So, the trick may well be building a coalition slightly left of center. Who would be able to do this or just how it could be done is the question.

This post has been edited by BoF: Nov 10 2004, 11:55 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cube Jockey
post Nov 11 2004, 12:04 AM
Post #32


*********
Now with more truthiness

Sponsor
May 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,799
Member No.: 1,224
Joined: September-16-03

From: San Francisco, CA
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(TennesseeDemocrat @ Nov 10 2004, 03:39 PM)
well you said we lost because of not being able to articulate a message. I am saying that we need a better message to win. Liberals do not win national elections is my belief. Mcgovern and dukkais had a message, but they got creamed. Its not in my view so much about articulating a message, more or less it is changing the message to something that better represents our beliefs, and can resonate with the rest of the country that we are not reaching.
*


I think it is incorrect to say that liberals don't win national elections. The values liberals hold dear can resonate with middle America if we could actually get someone that knew how to sell them. As an example, I'll demonstrate a liberal value that could easily be sold to America.

The Environment - Protection of the environment is and has been a liberal value. The problem with it is that many of the groups people think represent the environment are extremist groups. Saying that PETA generally represents most liberals is the same as saying that nuts who shoot abortion doctors represent most conservatives. The problem here, as with most things is image and we have allowed the Republicans to frame the debate in their advantage.

So, as Democrats we should promote this liberal value by having an agressive environmentally friendly program that doesn't completely cripple corporate america. You cannot tell me that middle america doesn't care what condition we leave this world in for our children. Their concern is that it'll cost jobs and there is of course the image problem. When you say environment they picture hippie tree huggers and PETA folks throwing paint on fur coats - that isn't what we are about.

At the same time we'd need to expose the fact that the Republicans are gutting the environment by weakening legislation, giving corporations a break, etc.

Now I know that the environment isn't an issue that resonates strongly with most people, but it is clearly a "liberal" value and it was easy for me to illustrate it. What we need to do is just go down the hit list of every issue out there: civil rights, medicare, welfare, social security, education, etc and do exatcly the same thing but in a very detailed fashion. We need an answer and in most cases serious reform for almost all of these.

The Democrats have to be presenting a vision of the future and they have to inspire people. When people are inspired and can see you have a clear plan to accomplish your vision, you'll get their vote. None of that involves compromising liberal values and retreating to the center. It is all a question of who is the better salesman. This past election, George W. Bush was apparently the better salesman. It doesn't always have to be that way.

I even saw that coming as the campaign progressed. Kerry had some great opportunities to really sell his plan and at the same time hammer Bush on his failures and he squandered them time and time again. Several times I was sitting in my living room cursing at the TV about it. If you continually make mistakes and miss opportunities then you simply don't deserve to win.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TennesseeDemocra...
post Nov 11 2004, 12:04 AM
Post #33


***
Junior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Member No.: 3,913
Joined: November-9-04

Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Democrat



All I am saying is that we cannot afford another visual like this on election day.


go look at this link from USA TODAY


http://images.usatoday.com/news/politicsel...4countymap3.gif


You see the middle of the country? Where is all the blue? this is the heartland of america, if we cant appeal to the center of this great nation, we are in trouble. I agree no matter the message however, we need a leader who is insipring and can deliver the message without getting killed on the wedge issues and appearing soft on important issues to rural voters such as crime, terrorism, etc.. We need to not get too discouraged, and continue to fight for what we believe in. The trick is, finding common ground on that subject regarding who we are as democrats, and what we all can agree on as goals.



However, I really think that many of the far left supporters of kerry or ones who hate bush have given the party a bad name; definately have done more harm than good.

Check out this link for more of what i am refering to.

Here is a chunk of kerry's supporters in liberal land san fransicso.

(From a liberal leaning newspaper site)


http://www.zombietime.com/sf_rally_november_3_2004/

Someone explain to me how that kind of anti american activity isnt harmful to us?

This post has been edited by TennesseeDemocrat: Nov 11 2004, 12:09 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cube Jockey
post Nov 11 2004, 12:47 AM
Post #34


*********
Now with more truthiness

Sponsor
May 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,799
Member No.: 1,224
Joined: September-16-03

From: San Francisco, CA
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(TennesseeDemocrat @ Nov 10 2004, 04:04 PM)
All I am saying is that we cannot afford another visual like this on election day.


go look at this link from USA TODAY


http://images.usatoday.com/news/politicsel...4countymap3.gif


You see the middle of the country? Where is all the blue? this is the heartland of america, if we cant appeal to the center of this great nation, we are in trouble.
*


And that kind of map is misleading, because it counts land mass as more important than population. Winning an election is a simple matter of geography and math. There are some very populous states out there with a lot of electoral votes. If you win them, you win the election. I could care less what people in Oklahoma think about the Democrats. What I care about (given our current system) is the Northeast, the West Coast and places like Ohio, Florida and the midwest.

This is a map that carlitoswhey shared with me, and it is a little more accurate as far as interpreting the counties we won - map.

Re: the protest pictures. You can't be serious with that, there were tons of people angry about the results of the election and these people chose to express themselves in the manner they did as is guaranteed by the Constitution. Are you trying to suggest that protest isn't American DT? Often times the people on the opposite side of the message don't like what they are hearing, that should be no surprise in a protest. If you have ever been to one (on either side of the political aisle), this kind of display shouldn't be shocking to you.

And to make things worse, you are trying to paint the entire liberal ideology as evil with your generalizations. You will notice that a good number of those people are anarchists, not exactly people that I would consider part of the Democratic party or the liberal ideology. We have enough people on the right trying to define us by the extremist elements that align themselves with us, do you really think it is productive to help them out?

Oh and as an aside, these people don't represent San Francisco either. I'd suggest not making generalizations about a place you haven't lived in. And I am making an assumption here, but an educated one. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TennesseeDemocra...
post Nov 11 2004, 01:05 AM
Post #35


***
Junior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Member No.: 3,913
Joined: November-9-04

Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Cube Jockey @ Nov 10 2004, 04:47 PM)
QUOTE(TennesseeDemocrat @ Nov 10 2004, 04:04 PM)
All I am saying is that we cannot afford another visual like this on election day.


go look at this link from USA TODAY


http://images.usatoday.com/news/politicsel...4countymap3.gif


You see the middle of the country? Where is all the blue? this is the heartland of america, if we cant appeal to the center of this great nation, we are in trouble.
*


I could care less what people in Oklahoma think about the Democrats. What I care about (given our current system) is the Northeast, the West Coast and places like Ohio, Florida and the midwest.



*








That is the kind of thinking that is dangerous. That is too narrow a path to the whitehouse. Without the south, we are maxing out around 285-290, and thats if we can win florida or ohio. Please do no be so quick to judge the south as irrelevant. Guess how many demcorats have won an election without winning a soutern state? ZERO. Its that kind of northern mentality that hurts democrats down here. You seem like a smart and good natured democrat, and im sure you dont have any anger towards the south, but I urge you not to dismiss it, historically, we need some southern states to be in control of the white house.

On a personal note, I admire what you are doing for AIDS, and will be making a personal donation very shortly. I realise my example of that rally was an exgaration, i was simply proving a point that the far left crowd that calls bush a terrorist and a murderer do not help our cause.

In regards to the south, we arent gonna alabama or missippi, I am more refering to Missouri, Arkansas, Florida, Tennessee, Virgina, North Carolina. It is inexcusable not to be competitive there. We have great demcorat operations on the ground here in Tennessee. We just need a candidate who will actually visit us down here and make the republicans sweat.

there is 11 EV's here, there is 6 in AK, there is 11 in Lousianna, do not forget about us.

We can put the party over the top.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cube Jockey
post Nov 11 2004, 02:27 AM
Post #36


*********
Now with more truthiness

Sponsor
May 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,799
Member No.: 1,224
Joined: September-16-03

From: San Francisco, CA
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(TennesseeDemocrat @ Nov 10 2004, 05:05 PM)
Please do no be so quick to judge the south as irrelevant. Guess how many demcorats have won an election without winning a soutern state? ZERO. Its that kind of northern mentality that hurts democrats down here. You seem like a smart and good natured democrat, and im sure you dont have any anger towards the south, but I urge you not to dismiss it, historically, we need some southern states to be in control of the white house.
*


If I have lead you to believe that we should ignore the south, I apologize for that. That isn't what I'm trying to say. What I was trying to say is that being liberal isn't a bad thing and if we can successfully take that word back then some of the people in southern states might find they agree with many of our positions. But it is very important to take a hard look at the party platform, because it definitely needs improvement. We need to talk to people and find out what the real issues are and come up with innovative solutions. That also means we need to consider getting rid of some of the big government programs that aren't effective too.

QUOTE(TennesseeDemocrat)
On a personal note, I admire what you are doing for AIDS, and will be making a personal donation very shortly. I realise my example of that rally was an exgaration, i was simply proving a point that the far left crowd that calls bush a terrorist and a murderer do not help our cause.

Thanks flowers.gif And I would very much agree with you that there are elements of the left wing that give the rest of us a bad name. At the same time I don't believe those people should be silenced, they are exercising their Constitutional rights to speak. How the Democratic party should counter it is to prove with action, not words that we don't all buy into that.

When people hit us with the "far left" attack, we should have a platform powerful enough to counter it and make it an ineffective attack. The attack works right now precisely because the platform is weak and because this last election was basically conducted with an ABB mentality for a lot of folks.

QUOTE(TennesseeDemocrat)
We have great demcorat operations on the ground here in Tennessee. We just need a candidate who will actually visit us down here and make the republicans sweat.

That is also true, and I think that there are a lot of places the very diverse Democratic party can meet in the middle on and appeal to these voters. But most importantly, we need to redefine ourselves such that our programs appeal to everyone as well.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TennesseeDemocra...
post Nov 11 2004, 08:43 PM
Post #37


***
Junior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Member No.: 3,913
Joined: November-9-04

Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Democrat



If we want to know where to go from here, take a look at this transcript from the O'Reiley Factor On Fox News.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,138135,00.html

This is what I have been saying for days now. The far left of michael moore, and george soros cost us big time. People do not like being lectured and told who to vote for.


We cant forget about the left by any means, but we need to realise the center is the key to national success; the left is but a minority coming along for the ride.

Harsh? Maybe. But it is true, and there is something for everyone in the party as it is.

We just need to be wiser in our direction and vision.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cube Jockey
post Nov 11 2004, 08:49 PM
Post #38


*********
Now with more truthiness

Sponsor
May 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,799
Member No.: 1,224
Joined: September-16-03

From: San Francisco, CA
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(TennesseeDemocrat @ Nov 11 2004, 12:43 PM)
If we want to know where to go from here, take a look at this transcript from the O'Reiley Factor On Fox News.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,138135,00.html

This is what I have been saying for days now. The far left of michael moore, and george soros cost us big time. People do not like being lectured and told who to vote for.
*


First, why would we want to put in place anything that O'reilly suggests? The man is about as right wing as they come, and something tells me that neither he, nor FOX News has the best interests of the Democratic party at heart. We will not and cannot just give up and become Republicans.

Secondly, regarding the "People do not like being lectured and told who to vote for" comment: How are the Republicans and right wing talking heads innocent of this again?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TennesseeDemocra...
post Nov 11 2004, 09:56 PM
Post #39


***
Junior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Member No.: 3,913
Joined: November-9-04

Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Democrat



Please do look at the link. It is not what O'Reiley said, it is what his guest said about where we need to go as a party.

He made some valid points and i just want to add that next time we have an election, we would be wise to distance ourselves from left wing propagandinsts like michael moore.

This post has been edited by TennesseeDemocrat: Nov 11 2004, 09:57 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nighttimer
post Jan 13 2005, 05:01 AM
Post #40


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,660
Member No.: 504
Joined: February-16-03

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



Just came across a great link to a great article. Had to share it with ya'll.

“If a company like General Motors had the same image problem that the Democratic Party does, they would fire the guys responsible,” Gerstein told me. But not Democrats. “We don't just hire those guys,” Gerstein said, “we give them bonuses.”


http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/...1.sullivan.html thumbsup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: January 18th, 2020 - 09:33 AM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.