Even if we do as he says, even if we "treat them as our friends, our neighbors, people we share a country with," they're still going to vote Republican.

Clinton urged the party to craft a clear employment program, saying that while the nation needed a long-term debt-reduction plan, but said, “that doesn’t mean austerity is the right response.”

“If you do not have growth, you cannot fix this debt problem,” Clinton said

He also cautioned Democrats not to “walk away” from healthcare as an issue just because the overhaul they supported is now enacted into law. Implementation of the law would be important to the party’s future success because, he said, “we Democrats now own health reform for good or ill.”

If the healthcare law needs to be changed, Clinton said, Democrats “need to be caught trying to change [it].”

“Stay with this. Make it work. Prove that we were right to do it,” he said.

one repub. That was Gerry Ford and I regret not having a perfect record.
You should not make assumptions about gun owners, white old men because millions of us vote Dem.

But you are also, not a swing voter; you're not on the fence. You didn't sit around trying to decide whether to vote for Obama or Romney, and you didn't base your ultimate decision on a single issue.

Clinton suggests crafting policy and policy discussion to appeal to a sliver of voters so tiny they probably don't exist. There are single-issue voters, who make up a tiny percentage of the voting population; there are swing voters, who make up a small but important segment; and Clinton is saying that appealing to the fabled single-issue-swing-voter is more important than enacting legislation to protect our kids and our families and communities.

We can't afford to lose sight of the big picture. As Obama said, he is the President of ALL Americans. That includes the gun owners.

Please!!

getting ready to throw the entire leftward push on the whole Democratic policy agenda under the bus over drone programs.

The 1% have NO political party, so at least some of what we are seeing about opposition to drone programs, NDAA/AUMF, all of that, could be more about defeating the whole Democratic agenda (the right to organize, pressure for single payer, ALTERNATIVE ENERGY, appropriate free public education . . . . ) and that "at least some" that I'm referring to in the first sentence in this paragraph, would have to be the most financially powerful portion of the push to get Obama, over drone projects/NDAA etc., and throw the entire Democratic drift to the left under the buss in the process.

SO, we could end up with drone programs et all anyway and even LESS social and economic justice than we currently have anyway.

And pardon me all to hell for being pragmatic, btw.

over drones? I doubt that.

What will they do, vote Republican?

The big midterm problem is simply getting people to vote in a non-presidential election - it's always been a challenge.

I see no evidence that the drone issue will play any part in it.

of the issues, and how things work, is concerning to say the least.

I believe they can change, but I'm also afraid some of us could get thrown under the bus, before they get around to understanding and choosing their responsibilities more fully.

simply because it's a mid-term election. it'll be hard to tie it to a particular issue, and I've seen nothing that says drones will be responsible.