Reid: Democrats failed to take message to rural America, Nevada

RENO, Nev. (AP) - Sen. John Kerry lost the presidential election partly because Democrats "neglected rural America," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said Wednesday.

"I think around the country people just thought they could win in the cities," the Nevada Democrat told The Associated Press.

Reid said he expects new Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean to help reverse that trend, especially in the South and West, and he predicted Democrats will close the gap Republicans hold in the Senate in the off-year elections.

"We are going to pick up Senate seats in 2006, it's only a question of how many," Reid said at a Reno news conference before his scheduled address to the Nevada Legislature in Carson City.

"First of all, history is on our side. Secondly, George Bush is on our side," he said.

"I don't like to give grades to the president. It's kind of early in the term, but it certainly wouldn't be a good grade at this stage," Reid said.

more...

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nevada/2005/feb/23/022310075.html

The point is that everything about Bush is a lie. His words, his image, his faith, are all phony.

The only way to deal with Bush, and with his successor, is to attack them relentlessly and to offer no quarter. This is a war to the death!

Have we heard this one?

and he predicted Democrats will close the gap Republicans hold in the Senate


2002? 2004?

But they continue to get their ass kicked.

:toast:

I'd just like to hear HOW they plan to do it...

Last election, I followed all the projected polls and races for contested senate seats, and I was feeling pretty positive about them tipping the Senate Democrat, but it didn't happen. I recall this same prediction in 2002.

OK, maybe I did get up on the wrong side of the bed.

The DNC is forming a caucus made up of members from rural areas. It's time to get back to basics ALL over the country.

...even our cities are rural, and we hold the state house and senate. :)

yeah... look at CO, they know what they're doing...

But the demographics are changing in that state, aren't they?

failed to reach rural AND inner city America. I said that while watching Kerry stumping on someone's door step in some upper middle class neighborhood...

I don't remember seeing Kerry giving appearances in farmlands or inner city districts often or at all...

The subject line was "middle class, middle class, middle class' et al..

Hopefully, that tactic will change this time around. ;)

I am sorry but people have gotten so lazy that unless a candidate spends a fortune on commercials and visit them a million times....they don't vote for the candidate.

America...presidential races and most political races are not beauty contests or film showings....they affect your lives....you need to read and seek out information on your own...otherwise you are left voting based on PR...and when you find out that your farm subsidy is gone...well it's your fault because you let the rhetoric of hatred steer you away from voting for your own best interests.

John Nichols in an article in The Nation in September or October of last year entitled "Ominous Pattern" described problems that probably led to the loss of Iowa and was symptomatic of Demo problems in rural areas that are essentially not as innately backward as the deep south and thus winnable.
Anyway, things are turning now, I have overheard discontent among farmers and other rural people saying things like "I voted for Bush but now I'm really upset about what he's doing.", referring to the cuts and the SS dismantling initiative. One prominant person who has many contacts among rural business people, farmers, church leaders has said the same thing and another leader he was speaking with agreed. The disconnect between the rhetoric and what he is trying to do to fragile rural economies is worrisome to many. An opportunity to Dean and the DNC.

"First of all, history is on our side. Secondly, George Bush is on our side," he said.

Good for you, Harry. I'm glad you realize George Bush is the best thing to ever happen to the Democrats and the liberals. Until 2000, we were lackadaisical, lazy, moribund, clueless, uninspired, and unchallenged. Now we have an enemy so vile that we are almost certain of eventual victory.

I'm heartened to see the Democrats getting a bit more feisty, but they have a LONG way to go before they match the anger of a majority of their constituents!

-- because votes defaulted not once, not twice, but three times to Bush on electronic voting machines, because all the electronic voting machine companies are owned by rabid Republican partisans who refuse to allow independent oversight and validation of these machines, because Republican goons trashed new voter registrations with "Democrat" checked off and performed other "goon-ish" tasks, because Kenneth Blackwell (a misnomer if there ever was one) made sure to do everything possible to "deliver Ohio to Bush" by disenfranchensing as many voters as he could with as many tactics as he could -- and because Nancy Pelosi, Tom Daschle and even Kerry himself refused to address any of this even as it was happening under their own noses for all the world to see.

EVERY state, including those in the liberal northeast, the ice-blue North Central states and the St. Louis/Memphis-blue central Mississippi/Arkansas River valleys need attention.

It is STUPID to focus on the south and/or the west to the exclusion of the rest of the country.

idea at the time and sure enough it backfired.

AND we need to remember how to talk to rural people and people in small towns and so-called red states. This means holding actual conversations without sneering and going beyond a spurious goose murder to discuss issues that matter to local people.

That goose murder ticked me OFF.

AND I agree too that the poor (inner city, so forth) were BARELY mentioned. There was much pandering to the middle-class - which was more or less defined as people making less than $200,000/year.

HUH? By me, $200,000/year is RICH. Demographically I'll bet there are FAR more people earning $40,000 and under or even $30,000 and under - or LESS - than $200,000.

Which really makes me wonder how the hell we LOST.

But what do I know:)

people are people everywhere and astute politicians should be able to talk to them, I believe.

BTW this means the far left might have to stop flaming every politician who tries to reach across the educational/philosophical divide. People who have different values are not necessarily wrong all the time and in any case, the farmer is just as valuable as the intellectual, in the great scheme of things. The strength of our nation lies in its very diversity and supporting leaders who can talk to LOTS of people is vital.

IMO:)

As an academic I read and absorbed without careful association stories about percentages of population attending colleges/universities and earning degrees. My general perception, based on nearly 20 years experience is that there is no difference on this among states.

There ARE demographic differences among students who seek different degrees, but to my recollection they have nothing to do with urban vs suburban vs. rural origins.

Nonetheless, I don't trust my own recollection and I'll check on that.

Bob Shrum was zero for seven in presidential campaigns. He soon was zero for eight. The working Dem consultants don't have a great track record in recent election cycles.

in the WH were most important.

how are we going to get the votes counted next time ? They didn't count the votes this time and they are going to try and not count our votes again.

screw rural america, the heart of xenophobic willful ignorance.

the suburbs are where the votes to tip this are.