The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November

For the sake of America, I hope the Democrats win. In the 5+ years of solid Republican rule, the congress has abdicated its constitutional role as a watchdog. It has become just another cheerleading section for the Republican party and has overseen fraud, waste, criminal activity and the abdication of American values and the abolition of precious liberties. A Democratic congress would at least restore checks and balances and throw a well-deserving butt or two in jail.

For the sake of the Democratic party, the party's long-term viability, and America's long term existence I sort of hope the Democrats lose this November. A win this Fall would be an endorsement of the party's ridiculously idiotic posture and would reward its sniveling cowardice with power. A Democratic win would put a rubber stamp on the feckless leadership and push the party to keep it going into 2008, where we would lose yet again for the third time out of the last four elections.

The Democratic Party apparently has no clue. It seems to believe that 1994-present is just a temporal hiccup, and all they have to do is wait for the Republicans to self-destruct and naturally inherit the earth and the congress. The party is like the child who refuses to learn its lesson, even though the results of 2000, 2002, and 2004 show us that simply wishing is not a good enough strategy for winning.

I thought they would learn. I thought they would learn to keep the message simple, repeat it often and repeat it wherever the media was. The Republicans have mastered this. The phrases they come up with are not magic (as folks like George Lakoff would have you believe) but appeal to people's gut instincts, especially with their repetition ("Head On, Apply Directly To The Forehead" is just the latest iteration of "Flip Flopper"). Democrats refuse to aim for the gut and the heart and prefer to aim for the head. So many Democrats and progressives think simply dropping a mountain of "facts" to "refute" Republican arguments will work in the public's eyes. But if you're responding, you are already losing.

Ever since I've been able to vote, the Democrats have been in response mode. Since 1994 they have steadily tried the same old, same old stodgy techniques, acting as if still in power while the Republicans have adapted and are beating the hell out of the Dems. The Republicans identified a way to get the vote out by sending a consistent message to their base and getting the base to share that message with their friends. Democrats outsource the jobs to the unions and pray that black voters turn out to vote. One of those two strategies is viable in the long term. It's not ours.

The Clinton folks innovated with the war room concept, responding and also introducing new media stories throughout the whole media cycle. They did this in an environment dominated by the three networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) and a handful of papers (NY Times, USA Today, Washington Post, etc.). Yet, even this concept is not being used by today's Democrats and we face a significantly faster and news hungry media environment that encompasses 24-hour blogs, cable news, newspapers, magazines, radio and the like. This is not a question of having a progressive or conservative media, or a question of financial assets. The tools are all there and they don't cost a lot. Democrats are just not willing to do this. Republicans regularly flood the media with new initiatives, attacks on the left, and propaganda in favor of their party and the conservative movement. If you're lucky, sometime in the cycle a Democrat will drop off a press release or someone will say something on the floor of the House or Senate that nobody ever sees. The idea of using friendly contacts in the blogosphere and pushing the media to include a Democratic response or initiative just seems like its too much hard work.

None of this is hard to do, it certainly is not rocket science. The strategy of "hoping" has led to losing, why would it be any different this year? The President is one of the most unpopular in history, while the GOP-dominated congress is at all-time lows. Yet, the Democrats are not benefiting from this. Like the Kerry campaign not capitalizing on a President with middling approval ratings, Democrats are not presenting themselves as the alternative to the Republican brand. People are tired of Brand GOP but Brand Democrat isn't even handing out free samples. You can't blame the consumer for not choosing you if aren't getting in their faces, can you? No.

The Democrats don't deserve to win this election or the next one until they begin to show that they are willing to fight for it. They need to show that they want to fight hard and aren't just going to sit back and relax. They need to show that they believe in their guts on the issues we hold dear (Defending America, Improving America, Uniting America) and aren't so damn scared that Karl Rove and Rush Limbaugh might say something mean about them, and choose to be so damn vanilla nobody gives a damn. America needs a strong Democratic party, but aren't getting it. In the absence of that, Republicans will rule. Because for all their innate evil, racism, classism and cronyism - their is no denying Republicans lust for the role of leaders while Democrats barely seem to want to show up.

Do better, damn it.



Display:


Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (3.00 / 5)

The Democrats don't deserve to win this election or the next one until they begin to show that they are willing to fight for it.

So, I take it you're not a member of the Democratic Party?

If you were a Democrat you probably would be too busy working at the grassroots level to write an extended piece expressing disappointment about centralized, top-down messaging seven weeks out from the general election.

If you are a member of the Democratic Party: be the change you want in the party.

It's seven weeks to the election. If you haven't already done so, find a candidate somewhere, anywhere, you can support. Statewide or local. Then go volunteer.

After all the smoke clears in November and after you've established your bonafides volunteering for a campaign, find out what it takes to run for precinct or ward committee member. Then do it. After you win that election, run for state legislative party committees, and then the state committee. It takes a while, but if you're successful you'll have "crashed the gate" and you just might be able to be the change you want to see in the Democratic party.

If you've already done all this I apologize for assuming otherwise.

I've got to go now. It's seven weeks out from a general election. There are voters to call, doors to knock on, and envelopes to stuff.


543,895 votes
by Michael Bersin on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 06:57:54 AM EST

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (1.00 / 1)

Your reply isn't a rebuttal. It just says "Shut up unless you're an activist like me."

We all have a right to express our opinions and to disagree with those of others. But telling people in effect to shut up unless they do like you doesn't mean anything.

Send all the wasteful junk mail you want. Bother all the people  by knocking on their doors and ringing their phones you want. But don't tell people who critique the Democratic Party's shortcomings in order to make it better to shut up. They have as much business expressing their opinions as anyone.

God, how I loathe activist snobs who think all but they should remain silent.


With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.
by Sitkah on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 12:15:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (3.00 / 1)

God, how I loathe activist snobs who think all but they should remain silent.

As opposed to those who pontificate excessively in the abstract and never get anything done? It's a whole lot easier to wring your hands and complain about eveything, eh, grasshopper?
543,895 votes
by Michael Bersin on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:46:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (1.00 / 1)

Complaining about someone else expressing their opinion is what you were doing, dirt dauber.

Now quit wasting your time blogging and get back to work harassing voters.


With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.
by Sitkah on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 04:17:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

I don't discount the good work people do for the party, I question what the leadership is doing to further our collective cause once people have busted their butts for them.


by owillis on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 01:46:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

This made the recommended list with one recommend?

I like Michael's reply. That's what should get the recommend.


Karl in Drexel Hill, PA
by KB on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 08:42:58 AM EST

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

How DID it get rec'd? In any case, he makes some good points, as does Michael Bersin. I actually changed my registration from Democrat to Indy after the last voting cycle becuase I was so fed up with the failure of the Democratic party.

I am seeing signs of hope, now, and am supporting Democratic candidates I think are worthy and are not in the mold of the likes of Chuck Schumer. But the next 7 weeks will be telling, not only whether candidates like Tester and Lamont can win, but what the Democratic leadership is really all about.


by Whigsboy on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 08:56:44 AM EST

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

This statement is inaccurate.......

In the 5+ years of solid Republican rule, the congress has abdicated its constitutional role as a watchdog.

Democrats controlled the Senate by one vote from 2001-2003. They used control of its committees and process to help cover up the Enron and Worldcom scandals and help Bush achieve more of his odius agenda that he has from the current GOP House and Senate.

But I agree with your statement that....

The Democrats don't deserve to win this election or the next one until they begin to show that they are willing to fight for it.

They may well win, but if so they will only stumble into power ahead of a GOP that can barely crawl.


With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.
by Sitkah on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 11:08:16 AM EST

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (3.00 / 2)

I think you figured out the problem.

From you diary:
'For the sake of America, I hope the Democrats win.'
and later:
'The strategy of "hoping" has led to losing, why would it be any different this year?'

Frankly, this seems like a silly crazy rant that would've been fine to bring up in 2002, but not now.

Honestly - I don't know how long you've been voting, but I remember quitting the Democratic Party when Clinton signed NAFTA. In 2000, when there was little Congressional protest after the Supreme Court stole the election, and then the 'we're behind you 100% Mr. Bush' after 9/11, and then the support for the war(s), and not taking Bush to task for lying, I felt justified in quitting.

But this year, for the first time in 13 years, I registered Dem again. And why? Because I'm actually proud of what the Dems are talking about. The 50-state plan is fantastic, the return to the small donor base is needed, and 'Fighting Dems' like Jay Fawcett in Colorado Springs make me proud to be a part of the party. Democrats across the country ARE standing up. They ARE taking action. Sure there're some hacks in DC, but out here, on the ground, it's happening.

I agree with Michael's comment above -  you don't like the Democrats, well get in and do something about it - don't just complain.

I was phonebanking volunteers for the election last night - one guy I spoke with summed it up nicely.

'I guess if I don't agree to volunteer now, I give up my right to bitch about things later.'


by dirt on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 12:11:53 PM EST

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (3.00 / 2)

This election is not about what the Democrats "deserve".  It is about what our Nation deserves, needs, and wants.  First and foremost, the Nation needs to bring the Bush Administration to a screeching halt.  

If you are unhappy with some parts of the Democratic Party, then take the advice of Michael Berstin get active at the precinct level, then the county level, then the state level, and so on.  Or, I will add, run for office yourself.  

Many of us are trying to build the Democratic Party into a winning team.  My advice:  Get with the team or get lost.


by Airpower on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 12:16:04 PM EST

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

Those who make the Democratic Party better by pointing out its faults are doing as much or more as those who blindly pull the party's wagon wherever they're told to without question.


With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.
by Sitkah on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 12:31:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (3.00 / 2)

First, anybody can point out faults.  That doesn't take any talent or brains.  Second, there is to "they" to tell anyone where to "pull the wagon".  The Democratic Party is us.  

Primary elections are the time for intra-party fights.  The primaries are over (except Hawaii).  

Vote your conscience in the primary election and the party in the general election.

In between election years, get on local and state party committees and help push the wagon where you think it should go.


by Airpower on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:50:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

I for one will go on speaking my opinions of Democrats and Republicans right up to and past election day.

You can disagree with what I say, but telling me to shut up or throwing up straw argumemts about how only activists have a right to speak will be in vain.


With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.
by Sitkah on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 04:26:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (3.00 / 1)

There are days when I feel American has two parties, the evil party and the good people who do nothing party.

I go canvassing every weekend, but it would be a lot easier if my party would stand up to torture.


by Alice Marshall on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 12:18:26 PM EST

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

But this year, for the first time in 13 years, I registered Dem again.....'I guess if I don't agree to volunteer now, I give up my right to bitch about things later.'

During those years you were neither a Democrat nor an activist, did you bitch about the Democratic Party -- even once? Or did you just stew in silence since you don't think you had a right to say anything?


With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.
by Sitkah on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 12:23:10 PM EST

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (3.00 / 1)

No - I spent those years working as an activist on issue-based campaigns initially because I felt like the Democrats had largely abandoned their core issues. At the same time, I volunteered for local candidates who were doing good work, or who I felt could do good work. But on the national scene, I felt largely let down by the party.

Sure, I complained, but I was doing something about it while I complained. I didn't mean to take a pot shot there - I feel I've put my money where my mouth is, and now that I feel like the Dems have noticed the mass exodus from the party, and the horrible ways the R's are destroying this country, they've started coming around again, which gives me hope.


by dirt on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:23:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

some people put their money where their mouth is, some put their time wheretheir mouth is, some put both, and some put neither. But anyway it goes, opinions are no more or less valid based on such circumstances, and trying to shout people down because they might do less than another is a lousey way to rebut an opinion.


With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.
by Sitkah on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 04:21:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (3.00 / 1)

I wasn't shouting this diary down because the author does less or more than me, or anyone else for that matter.

I do think the idea presented in the diary is essentially pretty off base and potentially dangerous.

You gave me a nudge assuming I had done no activism in my 13 years away from the Democratic Party, when in fact my dis-enfranchisement with the party largely drove me to activism - I realized 'my party' wasn't doing jack about issues I cared about. So I did.

Now I'll shout a little - if we're going to take back the house this November, we're going to need (IMHO) more unity and less division. With that in mind, I'm going to exit this conversation stage left, since I don't feel like arguing with people who should be colleagues.

Though, for the record - I do think the more involved you are the more right you have to sit at the table.  


by dirt on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 06:48:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (1.00 / 1)

Though, for the record - I do think the more involved you are the more right you have to sit at the table.

There's a place at the table of talk for everyone, and being an activist or not makes no difference in the validity of ideas. Some may not like it, but that's just the way it is.

This isn't the first blog -- or thread rather -- that I've seen the "what are you doing?" excuse used to try and silence the thoughts of others.

What I wonder is how so many people who say "get off your ass and do something" have time to sit on their asses and blog?


With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.
by Sitkah on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 08:14:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

I go canvassing every weekend, but it would be a lot easier if my party would stand up to torture.

Your party won't stand up to Iraq and corporate bribery either.

For that matter, it would be a lot easier for you if your party even stood upon its own platform.


With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.
by Sitkah on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 12:28:33 PM EST

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

Just curious, are you doing anything for Bernie Saunders or any other liberal who really does fight for whatever it is that you believe in?


by Alice Marshall on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 01:10:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

I don't live in VT. But I put in good word for Bernie whenever I can.


With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.
by Sitkah on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 01:18:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (3.00 / 1)


I think you're wrong.

The basic attitude of the voters who provide the majority has essentially been a paradox.  On the one hand, they resist change and want to stay stuck in what amounts to a rather nineteenth century worldview/world order.  On the other hand they want all the fruits of Modernity and prevailing in the Cold War, i.e. peace and prosperity and being the world elite and the leading, competent, First World country.

One of those two things has to yield to the other.  Or maybe both have to be ruined before a comprehensive revision takes place.

You can pretend that vehemence and willpower and a "message" can really change the fundamental argument.  That's a classical Left dogma that doesn't have a compelling track record.  Neither the classical Right nor the classical Left have truly changed the pace of social and economic evolution, as I see it; they've mostly just upped the count in years wasted or lives destroyed in return for transient periods of seeming control over and manipulation of the pace of real change.  Russia is still backwards relative to the West despite or because of 70 years of ardent Communism that tried to make it the world's leading society.  The U.S. is still somewhere near the leading edge of societies worldwide despite nearly forty years of near-fanatical Right wingers in power trying to constrain, arrest, and sabotage its internal development.

The path of this American argument has been that the center, the compromisers, the 'moderates', and secondary extremes (hardcore conservatives and the American Left) have been tried out and found inadequate over the past 20+ years.  One bloc after another of them have been voted into power and back out in a pretty consistent four year cycle.  Presently we have the two 'finalists', the core bloc of each Party, remaining.

Hardcore Rightists are in power now; they wrongly imagined in 2002/03 that they had no viable competitor remaining.  They're the last element of the Nixon coalition of the GOP that had credibility left, and with their demise the Nixon coalition disintegrates.  Liberals are going to be the last Cold War era political bloc standing in this fight, however.

In this final fight, in which the large central swath of the American political spectrum sees no reason to sacrifice themselves, it's a matter of one or the other side running out of political credibility, grasp on reality, prospects, demographic, appeal, whatever you want to call it.  Neither side is strong enough to conquer the other, it's a matter of internal failures and expenditure of its resources (which are managed to maximal efficiency and effect) reaching fatal proportions that decides who collapses and who, also near fatal exhaustion, gets to stumble over the rubbled defenses and corpses of the other side and plant the flag.

Maybe that's the way it should be.

The Democrats' game this year is purely to keep Republicans on trial with The People.  All the drama queendom about issues that don't materially affect this trial is merely distraction.  So the Republican Party is the party of torture, murder of their Third World enemies, and general barbarism.  What else is new?


by killjoy on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 01:39:26 PM EST

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

I have the same split attitude about the party as owillis.  I have come to the conclusion that those outside the leadership(?) of the party MUST take it over.  I have many issues with those holding office as Democrats, or in the leadership of the party.  I never vote Republican, but have gone off the reservation a couple of times in my life - working for John Anderson in 1980, and voting for Nader in 2000.  I'm sick of having to hold my nose (voting for Clinton twice) because the alternative is worse.  How much worse off are we because of NAFTA/WTO and the Telecommunications Act of '96?

I'm with the Progressive Dems. of America when it comes to putting forward candidates to take on the status quo, but I'm not with then supporting the same old, same old in the general election if the progressive doesn't beat them.  The only way the party changes is to quit rewarding the good 'ol boys (and girls) and let them fall.  I'll not be voting for Steny Hoyer again, after his criticism of Stephen Colbert's lampooning of Bush at the White House Correspondent's Dinner, and his vocal support of the aims of the Zionist organization AIPAC.  I have nowhere to go with this, since there isn't even a Green Party alternative in the MD-5th.  I also will not be voting for O'Malley/Brown, since they are clearly in the developer's pockets in supporting the environmentally ruinous Intercounty Connector highway project in Montgomery and Prince George's Counties, a project that had been all but killed by previous Governor Parris Glendening.  O'Malley Brown also refuse to do anything about illegal immigration in MD, an issue that I care about on a labor/environment basis.  I don't see it as being racist to oppose open borders.  It does not solve the long-term problems of Central/South America to just let anyone who wants to to come here - addressing overpopulation does.  But I am nearly alone as a Democrat in Maryland, at least in terms of expressing an open opinion about it.


"Bipartisanship is another term for totalitarianism." -- Historian Howard Zinn
by 1truthteller on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 01:48:45 PM EST

Re: The Democrats Should Probably Lose In November (none / 0)

I'm already sick to death of hearing about concern trolling.  "Pretend our leaders are competent until after they win" is the worst strategic idea I've heard outside of Washington.

If we lose this time, don't think it's because some blogger wasn't smiling hard enough.  The PEOPLE are working their asses off.  It's the politicians they're killing themselves for who fall down on the job.

If you ask me, I say we witch hunt Washington instead of each other.


by Davis the Texan on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 06:47:15 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.