Lessons for Democrats - WWBD

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Adam's Apple, Jan 2, 2005.

  1. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    Lessons for Democrats
    By E. J. Dionne Jr., The Washington Post
    December 31, 2004

    MIDDLETOWN, R.I. -- Except for the glorious victories of the Red Sox and the Patriots, 2004 was a disappointing year. But bad years offer useful lessons. Here are a few:

    • Relentlessness pays off. President Bush won reelection by ignoring the conventional wisdom that vicious attacks on your opponent don't work and turn off voters. As soon as John Kerry won the Democratic nomination, Bush's campaign went on the attack and never stopped. It worked.

    Kerry was painted as arrogant and privileged, compared with an arrogant president who was far more privileged.

    Kerry was made out to be a flip-flopping liberal, and never mind asking how someone can be a flip-flopper and an ideologue. Kerry, who shot people in battle and was wounded himself, was painted as weaker than Bush, the guy who said he supported the Vietnam War but was not willing to fight in it.

    The sheer negative genius of the Bush campaign is worthy of close study. Face it: Liberals and Democrats are way too sensitive to elite editorial page opinion that asks more responsibility from the side it supposedly supports than from the side it supposedly opposes. Liberals worry themselves sick that if they fight Bush's cockamamie idea of borrowing billions for a shaky Social Security privatization scheme, those editorial writers will savage them. A lead opinion is likely to demand that they enter into negotiations with the president, even if the very act of doing so is certain to give Bush the upper hand.

    Memo to Democrats: Forget the editorial writers and ask yourselves: What Would Bush Do? If you are not as tough as he is, he will crush you -- again. Memo to liberal commentators: Why bend over backward to demand of your own side what you don't demand of the right, or of Bush?

    • Cultural hypocrisy should be exposed. I cannot understand why liberals who regularly criticize the excesses of the economic market let conservatives get away with being the advocates of "traditional values."

    When television networks and Hollywood exploit sex to make money, why aren't liberals asking why the free market so revered by the right wing promotes values the very same right wing claims to despise? The coarsening of the culture that traditionalist conservatives denounce is abetted by the very media concentration that economic conservatives defend. Why are liberals so tongue-tied in exposing this contradiction?

    • Class matters. Bush and the Republicans condemn "class warfare" -- and then play the class card with a vengeance. Bush has pushed through policies that, by any impartial reckoning, have transferred massive amounts of money to the wealthiest people in our country. Yet it is conservatives, Bush supporters, who trash the "elites," especially when it comes to culture. Class warfare is evil -- unless a conservative is playing the class card.

    Somebody has to call this bluff. Why is it taboo to talk about a Wall Street "elite" that has benefited from Bush's tax cuts and would win big-time from Social Security privatization? Why is it just terrible to point out that pharmaceutical industry and HMO "elites" were paid off handsomely in the Medicare drug bill? Why is it so dreadfully radical to denounce corporate "elites" when conservatives can denounce "the Hollywood elite" with impunity? Why does the right wing get away, year after year, with this double standard on elitism and class warfare?

    • Stand for something. Bush won this year because of those attacks on Kerry. But he also won because swing voters who didn't like him very much were nonetheless quite certain that he knew what he wanted to do and would try to get it done.

    One line of attack against Bush is to say that his certainties are mistaken and that he never, ever questions them. That's true. It's also inadequate. Those who oppose the direction in which Bush is leading us need to propose an alternative.

    They need to demonstrate that we could be much safer -- and fight a more effective war on terrorism -- if so much of the world did not mistrust us. They must create a realistic narrative about a more just and prosperous society. Policies on jobs, health insurance, child care, education and taxes should be more than a list. They ought to form a coherent picture of how things could be better, for everyone.

    The long-term need for alternatives should not stop the loyal opposition from being tough. But the short-term need to be tough should not stop the opposition's search for alternatives. For Bush's adversaries, 2005 will be a difficult year. It also could be exhilarating.
     
  2. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,534
    Thanks Received:
    8,160
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,149
    They just dont get it. It doesnt matter how many times you explain it they just dont get it.

    Maybe thats because Kerry is an Arrogant priveleged elitist who cares more about himself and his own power than he cares about his own flippin wife. Besides which how exactly is the richest man who has ever run for President less privileged that President Bush? How is this difficult to figure out?

    Well maybe cause traditional values arent handing sovereignty to the UN, protected fish over human life, punishing hard work, killing innocent children, and unnatural sexual practices. Since thats what liberals stand for its kinda hard to be the advocates of traditional values.

    Maybe its because liberals arent stupid enough to critisize their base which has the deviant values. Is this woman so stupid that she doesnt understand that hollywood has a monopoly on entertainment that the left controls? I like any other conservative is all for free market media. problem is they dont give us any moral choices on television anymore. hence why i stopped watching.

    This is exactly why the left will never be incontrol as long as the American people remember we have to fight a war on terror. Most of the world does not mistrust us and frankly the part of the world that does IE the terrorist and other thug like dictators should mistrust us. We are going to undermine their regimes in favor of freedom someday. Evil people have to be afraid of the people because for the most part the people will reject evil. When that isnt true then we have to worry.

    Liberal whining about jobs, with no plans to create them only to continue taxing those who produce jobs, socialist medicine, encouraging parents not to take responsibility for their children and let others do it, refusing to educate our children and raising taxes on people who earn money doesnt help us protect our country. the fact that this writer seems to think any of this stuff is important when dealing with national security shows how out of touch with reality she is and why liberals will not win elections.

    The fact is liberals were rejected because of their message not because they failed to get it out, but because they succeeded.

    Oh and being the only political party to support the draft in congress while trying to scare kids into thinking they other party was doesnt insure confidence in your military abilities.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  3. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    If they ever "get it" they will have to assume resposibilty----they simply "won't" get it-----responsibilty is a dirty word to them and it's soooooooo hard to say " I'm Wrrrrooooooooonnnnnnnngggggg"
     
  4. Jimmyeatworld
    Offline

    Jimmyeatworld Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,239
    Thanks Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    America
    Ratings:
    +223
    What you said.

    I'll just add that the author of this piece seems to be one of the many that think the Bush campaign was the only one doing any bashing and trying to paint a picture of the opponent. Not only were the Democrats (mostly John Kerry, Howard Dean, and Al Sharpton) running a hateful campaign straight out of the gate, the Democrats have pretty much been trying to paint a picture of President Bush since the election finally ended in 2000.

    That's okay. I'm to the point I just let these people stay in their own little world. They are good for a laugh occassionally.
     
  5. Flying Duck
    Offline

    Flying Duck Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2004
    Messages:
    303
    Thanks Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +50
    Lesson #5: (Should've learned from Clinton)

    Don't let people know your wife is a bitch until AFTER your'e elected.
     
  6. no1tovote4
    Offline

    no1tovote4 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,294
    Thanks Received:
    616
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Colorado
    Ratings:
    +616

    And if she is, get her handlers to shut her up!

    However, M. Moore helped a great deal with his propaganda film. And the whole CBS debacle helped Bush get reelected. I think Bush should send them both a nice "Thank You" card.
     
  7. Jimmyeatworld
    Offline

    Jimmyeatworld Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,239
    Thanks Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    America
    Ratings:
    +223
    That's not a bad idea. If I can find a mailing address, I might send Moore one myself. I'll have to let him know what a fine editor I think he is as well.
     

Share This Page