I've been read a lot and thinking a lot about the future of the Democratic party. So I'm going to write a summary of what I think should be the strategy for the next Presidential election.
First, I think it's clear that we lost big in rural America. We need to do better. I remember when Clinton was first in the White House, everyone kind of thought he was a country hick. We need another country hick, preferably a very religious one. If there was a white Rev. Al Sharpton out there, that would be perfect. I really respect Sharpton, but he has too much baggage from his activist past. I know a lot of people want Hillary to run, but she is totally wrong for this, and conservatives, and even many liberals dislike her.
Second, I think we need to be more socially conservative. Much as I hate to say it, and much as I think most social conservatism is just a more socially acceptable kind of bigotry or misogyny. However, I think it is clear that gay marriage is a dead issue. The most we can hope for is to not have a constitutional amendment. Against the advice of Clinton, Kerry didn't back local bans on gay marriage. One thing is for sure, Kerry's principled stand didn't matter much to gays - while 25% backed Bush in 2000, still 23% backed him in 2004.
Similarly, I think we can make some compromises on abortion. If the country gets more liberal in the future, we can always have gay marriage and partial-birth abortions later. But that probably won't happen. Although some say that the younger generation is less socially conservative, I think this will be balanced out by increased Hispanic immigration. Plus, there's no guarantee that young people will stay socially liberal as they get older. If they do, then great, we just move back over to the left.
One of the books I heard about before the election, but pooh-poohed, was What's the matter with Kansas? by Thomas Frank. It's a book about how Kansas was once one of the most radical, left-wing places in the country, but the GOP co-opted the populist message, and turned Kansas against the "liberal elites". The GOP, who of course are nothing but elites themselves, thereby kept persuading Kansas to vote for things that are not in the people's interest. It is something the left has always wondered, how the GOP manages to persuade poor rural people to vote for things like tax breaks to rich businessmen. The argument seemed unconvincing to me, but after the election it is obvious he was right on target. I haven't read the book yet, but I mean to.
Posted by ahyatt at November 6, 2004 09:17 AMI think you're mistaken. It is time for a liberal backlash, if anything. It makes me nauseous when I read W say the word "mandate". shudder. The good news is that the pendulum is about as far right as it's going to swing (if not, Welcome to the National Socialistic Republic of 'merica). If the democratic party was smart, they'd position themselves for when the pendulum starts swinging the other way and be ready to add momentum as it passes. They need to hammer on the environment, save up a big sack of "I told you so" and pray for bad weather. They need to spin every hurricane, every year of drought, every record high temperature, into another nail in the coffin of the environmental denial america seems to be suffering from. I still have a faint glimmer of hope for America. I believe that when people realize that environmental change is imminent and it's our own damn fault, that Americans will quickly be leading the way towards fixing it. The Democrats need to prepare a plan along the lines of a Manhattan or Apollo project but for Global Warming. A 5 cent per gallon gas tax would fund a lot of solar panel, wind, CO2 sequestering projects. I'm telling you Dres, this is not the time for the Democrats to become conservative--quite the opposite. We've lost the last two elections because of timidity and lack of vision. I'm sick of having my country in the control of corporations and right wing religious nut jobs. I'm not the only one. The republicans have programmed 51% of America with a simple formula: repetition, repetition, repetition of a strident party line (and repetition). The democratic party needs to take a page from their book and amp up the rhetoric, rinse, repeat.
Posted by: Greg on November 14, 2004 07:31 AMI agree about the rhetoric. Not only that, but the Republicans have great organization, great planning, a cable network, talk radio and more, and they don't have moral qualms about using all of this to smear whoever they want to. The Democrats need to do this too.
And I agree about the environment. Not only is it incredibly important, it is also a popular cause with most Americans. It is something we could capitalize on. I'm just saying if we need to move rightward in social issues, so that the country can move leftward in non-social issues, then I think that's not a bad deal. Remember, you can always change the laws about gay marriage, abortion, etc. But if the environment is fucked, that is much harder to fix.
Posted by: Andrew Hyatt on November 14, 2004 10:29 AM