the other big turner- again not something that the dems should embrace- is there brand of evangelical christianity- again- i say their brand- i know norheast evangelicals who are democrats. and except for blacks, who are often evangelicals (though you analysis doesnt include them) there are few white southern evangelicals who will vote democratic- why dou think this is the case? why would black evangelicals who are not liberal vote for kerry this time?

see these arguments work as long as people don't think too much on what the code words mean.

why are we making head ways in states like NC and VA- one quick answer- they are becoming less and less - old south- and that's got nothing to do with kerry or the left or the republicans for that matter. its demongraphic shifts. more latinos, more northerners moving south, the rise of the big corp interests that want higher educated work forces such as in charlotte nc or the tech corridors. and multiple other factors. these changes want happen in the short run- but  by 2012 va will be ours as will several other states. whats not going to work is the short term strategy of "appealing" to the south- because who are we talking about appealing to?

The Republican Party has the earmarks of a market bubble these days, if the dems will fight and confront them on their emerging majority corruption and shafting of working families.  The dems had a majority bubble that ended in 1994, and now the other side is getting visibly fat, corrupt and incoherent.

It will take time to rebuild the democratic coalition, now that it's clear that the New Deal momentum was completely over in 1994, we can get on with rebuilding liberalism and knocking out the cobwebs, making it relevant to the 21st century.

Look at the movement the right wing built starting with Goldwater:  they took a deep look at their failings and built a long term movement that overtook our majority, not by imitating us, but my rebuking us sharply, and by building their movement on all fronts:  thank tanks, grass roots, ideological moorings, etc.

Now, they made so many compromises with their ideological principles on the way to acsendancy that conservatism now stands for big government and fundamentalist moral elitism.  That's not a movement Goldwater would recognize.

They'r ripe for a good, hard push back.  And that's what we're talking about.

The polling outfit that had the best record in the last election was Pew Research.  They've debunked the notion that "moral values" voters were proportionally any higher this time out than in 2000.  But Kerry got creamed on "leadership" issues:  "knowing that he stands for," "sticking to it" and "being honest about his convictions."

That's what people around here are talking about.  Moderating on issues has not been a majority coalitionbuilder, not even with Clinton.  He won pluralities when there was a strong 3rd party candidate.  Polls already show people favor dems on the issues.  But the don't trust that liberals have balls, and that's why we have not won national elections.

But that's about to change.  That's what we're advocating around here.  If you mean that liberals can't win because people equate "liberal" with "wuss," then fine.  But what if a liberal is not a "wuss?"

And while Kerry was no "wuss" in fact, he did run a cautious campaign, and he was never abvle to overcome his Senate-speak, which made him look to convoluted and weak.

We have work to do:  building a grass roots revival, the think tanks, the ideological articulation of liberal principles in the modern world, etc.  But Evan Bayh?  He's not the guy to do it.  Sorry.