Watched a bit of Zell Miller -- unfortunately, my senator -- on Meet the Press this morning. As much as I think that somehow he's forgotten the platform he got elected on, he made a valid point I'd like to debate:

What's a viable Democratic Southern strategy?

Do you appeal to the liberal and black voters in the cities and annoy the suburban white conservative voters or the rural voters? In the cities, the main concerns are crime, poverty, schools, and traffic.

Do you appeal to the "pickup truck" rural voters who are more interested in jobs, jobs, jobs, and see the city folks as being liberals and "those people (wink wink)"?

Do you appeal to the soccer moms and lawyer dads who live in the 'burbs and hate the absurd traffic they have to face, but don't want public transportation anyway, think their taxes are too high (especially property taxes), but want the government to do more to ensure their security?

Can you appeal to all of them with a successful message? Can you undermine the tendency of the latter two groups to vote for Republican conservatives (regardless of the candidate) and still appeal to the city folks?

amf-

Having just watched the same interview I was going to post a similar thread.

The comment made by Dean regarding the confederate flag waving truckers seemed to be a bit ridiculous if not condescending and Miller, having a better knowledge of this part of the country than Dean, took issue with the idea that Dean "doesn't know Southeners."

So really where IS the Democrats focus? How DOES an anti-war Dem candidate make points with an area of the country known for their "pro-america" patriotism? Can a Democrat really win a presidential election during wartime? Can a Dean really win the south? I imagine that, regardless of geography, that each Democrat's policy on the WOT will be looked at very closely in the days leading up to the election and will ultimately be THEE issue of priority since the economy has now been showing slow but steady progress.

Sorry to have posed all these additional questions in your thread amf. These were just some of what were running through my brain as we were listening to Miller.

Speaking as one who has lived in the American South for about fifteen years now, I offer some very general guidelines on how to score political points in this area of the nation.

1. Score big on religion. Conservatives, emphasize your support of posting the Ten Commandments in public places, support for school prayer, and for "equal time" for creationism in public schools. Liberals, emphasize the New Testament's message of peace and charity. Both, be seen going to churches.

2. Stay connected with the locals. Minimize connections with Washington, DC. If possible, talk about how you (or your ancestors) used to work on a farm. It's an advantage to be born in the South, and a stronger advantage to have your ancestors born in the South. This area of the country tends to have a stronger sense of itself as a distinct region than others, I think.

3. Emphasize patriotism. Use lots of flags at your rallies, use lots of phrases like "this great nation."

4. Play up your strong points in this region. Conservatives, speak strongly for guns and against abortion; be a "cultural conservative." Liberals, speak strongly for agricultural subsidies and against tax breaks for the rich; be a "populist."

5. Avoid certain issues like the plague. The Confederate flag is number one; you can't win, no matter what position you take. If forced to take a position, say "let the people decide." Other issues to avoid are state lotteries and the tobacco industry.

Checked Zell Miller's voting record? I have. Over the years he's consistently right about 50/50 on liberal vs. conservative (as rated by Americans for Democratic Action and the American Conservative Union). That's about as centrist as it is possible to be. He could very easily be either a Democrat or Republican, though certainly he wouldn't be the favorite of the hardliners in either party.

Oddly enough, Joe Lieberman, who people often think of as a centrist Democrat, has about a 90% liberal voting record overall. I'm afraid what Lieberman is is a liberal who deviates enough on certain hot buttion issues to annoy other liberals, who appear less tolerant of ideological diversity than conservatives, who are generally quite happy to consider a 90-percenter as one of their own.

As to how all this plays in the South, I'd have to agree with Victoria if we're generalizing about the South as a whole, but the South is pretty diverse these days, and it matters a lot whether you're running statewide or local, and in which state,

I didn't watch Chris Matthews yesterday so I didn't hear Dean's comment, but I infer that Dean referred to "confederate flag waiving truckers" when talking about Southerners. I'm really sick of people from the Northeast taking about people from the South in this manner. It's like referring to Vermonters as dope smoking dead-heads. It's insulting.

If the Democrats could put away their pride for just one second what they would realize is that Zell Miller laid out exactly what they need to do to win in the South.

Fortunately I dont think many Democrats listened.

Actually, listening to Zell and reading what he wrote, I don't believe he actually laid out a real "strategy" for taking back the south.

What he says is that the Iowa and NH primaries coming first is forcing the Dem field to lurch to toward the unions (who can get out the vote quite well) and personal issues (which is what happens when you sit in people's kitchens to get them to vote for you) instead of thinking nationally.

He actually even went so far as to mention Dean in his book -- talk about putting an expiration date on your book! -- and complain that Dean wasn't the answer because Dean is angry and being angry doesn't win you an election. Gee. What insight. So his further complaints about the pickup truck quote -- which has been misquoted so many times now as to be amusing to those who read what he actually said -- doesn't surprise me at all.

Miller also claims that the south is more of an economic engine than the rest of the country realizes, which may be so, but on a population percentage, the cities are only half of the population of the whole state, so ignoring the rural vote isn't a workable stategy. And the cities are what is most definitely driving the economic engine.

Is the unifying strategy exactly what Clinton figured out: that it's all about the economy? Or about demagogy wrapped in patriotism or religion? I've seen both strategies work here. Or is the really big strategy to change the primary system to take away the magic spell of Iowa and NH?

The Democratic strategy in the South is to win Florida plus one, maybe two states. Clark could carry Arkansas and perhaps Kentucky. Dean will be lucky to grab Florida. Besides that the Democrats are more concerned with winning the southwest and northern midwest. Bush has pretty much shored up Democratic support in all the Northeastern states that went blue in '00. Add to the CA (which they have to assume, since losing it means the election so contingency plans are meaningless) Oregon and Wash. To put it in a phrase the Democratic strategy is win one lose none. Almost no blue states have drifted to the right and they only need one or two red states from the last election to cross over. NJ just gave the Democrats complete control of the State government last night. PA is drifting left as well.

The Democrats won't say so but they'd be glad to win only one or two deep south states. Its no use going to the right to win over people who won't vote for you anyways. Not exactly Clitonian optimism, but none of them have Clinton's skills either.