I don't understand the south (how to win)

OK, aside from a 10 month stint in Boise I've lived in the northeast. I grew up in a Philly suburb and, as such, I tend to be blunt, even for a northeaster. As such, I love Dean's "tell it like it is" attitude and I think what he's said about the south, republicans and race NEEDS to be said. So here are 2 conflicting feelings on that same premise:

This is from a Time article on Dean:
"Second, he says, he will tell Southern whites, "You have voted Republican for 30 years. Tell me what you have to show for it. In South Carolina, there are 103,000 children without health insurance. Most of those kids are white. Tell me about your public schools. Are you happy that the legislature cut $70 million or $80 million out of the public school system in South Carolina? ... Has your job moved to Indonesia? ... And the answer is, if you don't like the answers to those questions, maybe you should think about voting Democratic." A solid argument but one that failed for Al Gore, himself a nominal Southerner, four years ago. And it may come across as insulting to tell people they are poor—and then tell them their own votes are to blame.

This is from Newsweek's The Left's Mr. Right article:
"Merle Black, a political-science professor at Atlanta's Emory University, says Southerners would have "no use for him at all" and predicts that many Democratic officeholders in the region would fail to campaign with him. But Black thinks the problem is more stylistic than related to his position on particular issues: "He's a New Yorker. He's very aggressive. For voters who are not ideological, they look at candidates and see if they think he's a nice guy. I don't think Dean is that nice guy."

Yet, in The Nation Jesse Jackson Jr. says what I feel to be the case, that being nice hasn't worked so it's time to try something else:
Jackson is particularly critical of Democrats who think the South can be won simply by placing a white Southerner on the ticket. "The Bob Graham and John Edwards campaigns positioned them to be the Southern guy on the ticket," says Jackson. "That is the approach that has plagued the party for years. It is the opposite of addressing the education, healthcare and jobs issues that could build a real coalition."

and

While Jackson acknowledged that Dean might have chosen his words more carefully, he applauded Dean's willingness to open the discussion about race and the Democratic Party's future. (He wrote an article defending the candidate, "Dean's New Southern Strategy," at www.thenation.com.) Jackson says Dean is forcing the party to be more realistic about the work that must be done to overcome racial divisions. "We have to stop kidding ourselves as Democrats: If we're ever going to become a majority party, we are going to have to start fighting to win back Southern working-class white voters,"

So, as a blunt northeasterner, I'm dumbfounded. On one hand are southerners saying that Dean is too aggressive to win and the other is people saying, what I feel, that we've been passive too long and need to be aggressive. I note for discussion's sake that Jesse Jackson Jr. is from Illinois I believe. If we can't win in the south one way, and we can't the other, how the hell can we win anything there? Frankly, I'm not sure if a Clark/Edwards ticket could win back any of the red states and we shouldn't just write off the whole bible belt.

Sorry if I sound ignorant and I hope I didn't offend anyone. Thanks.

... by Earle and Merle Black, and they have some great charts about the decline of the Democratic party down here (I'm in SC). I'm going to try and post these in the next couple of days - they will explain a lot of what's going on down here.

--Race. All politics in the South is about race. There is no mystery as to how and why the South went in about 20 years (a blink of an eye in electoral time) from solid Democratic to solid Republican: it was because the Democrats aligned themselves with the civil rights movements and the black population was voting straight Democrat. Haley Barbour won 80% of the white vote in Mississippi.
I am working for Dean here in South Carolina, but I think there may be a lot to say for writing off the South as an election strategy. The Democrat only has to carry the states that Gore won and one more. The South is probably a generation or two behind the rest of the nation when it comes to race relations, and I don't see any Democratic ticket making big inroads into the South until further in-migration dilutes the Bubba vote. Democrats in SC feel kind of like a guerilla band who can tie down enemy troops while the real army fights in other areas. You guys were stupid not to get SC out of the union when you had a chance to 140 years ago.

Glad to see a comrade here. Hope to see you on the barricades around town.

... in district 2?

I'm afraid that seat is Joe's until he's as old as Strom. The district is probably 60% republican, and Joe's aw-shucks lap-dog-to-Bush attitude plays well here. He's done nothing to make anybody mad so far, and the White House would give him a ton of support were he ever in trouble.

first of all, they've been voting for both parties for 30 years.

They voted against someone in a landslide who had an anti-war minority foriegn policy platform, someone who had a middleclass tax raise platform, and somebody who was a stereotypical liberal new england governor who disagreed with them on a major social issue

Dean has all of those qualities, and none of them ever reenforced his disconnect with them again and again so shocklingly often.

What is implicit in what Dean is saying is that Southernors not voting for democrats is all about race, something that could very well be construed that southernors don't vote for democrats because they are racist.

I'm sorry but that is a slap in the face to all southernors and it's just another reason why he is such a horrible general election candidate

Jimmy Carter ran for Governor of GA because he was apalled by racism, and he won.

Republicans use race as a wedge issue to get poor white people to vote against their economic best interests. Democrats who are able to speak directly to issues of economics are often able to drive that wedge out of their natural constituency (middle and working class people, black and white).

When race doesn't work, Republicans run on values (ie, Religion). Democrats who appear to be good christians are able to drive that wedge out.

That's the struggle.

If a Democrat wants to win the south, that Democrat needs to speak directly to the economic issues that southerners care about, and they have to be able to drive back the wedges of race and values.

the democratic party has a seat deficit in the house now for one MAIN reason, the republicans are seen as the tax cutters and the dems as the tax raisers.

The vast majority of southern independants dispise racism, but they dispise Northerners stereotyping them as ignorant racists even more. Dean has already done that in his lefty-red-meat primary campaign again and again

Race is used by the right to dirve a wedge into a demographich which shouldn't be voting for Republicans. If that doesn't work, they use values as the wedge issue. If values doesn't work, they use patriotism...and on and on.

What I'm trying to say is that any democrat who can drive home the message about economics, and isn't weak on race, values, patriotism, etc., is going to do well in the south.

I've lived in SC all of my life, and I will contend that a large majority of white South Carolinians are ignorant racists, and their vote is determined solely on that basis. The suburb I used to live in never had any democrat in any race pull more than 30% of the vote; that is the definition of a massive landslide.

Greenville and Lexington Counties - go the South Carolina Election commission, ane they have some statistics on past races - those two counties make up about 1/6 of the State's population, but often account for up to half of the vote differential in statewide elections. Bush got 70% in Lexington, and close to that in Greenville. That makes it just about impossible to overcome in the rest of the state - like Richland County which is actually (more narrowly) Democratic.

what was the race for? selectman? state rep?

saying a that large majority of south carolinians are ignorant racists is just as moronic a statement as someone from SC saying that a large majority of Vermonters are dirty hippies

... but "a large majority are Republicans" is right on - and BTW, are you from SC? I would say that during the Rebel Flag debacle, the concept of 'Southern Heritage' was reborn, and race was a significant force in the realignment with the GOP.

I'm from Forest Acres.

I'm friends with people from all across the south including one close friend and his brother who are from Charleston(and I went there last year).

It's just as ignorant to say that a majority of SCan's are racist as is to say all republicans or even most republicans are racist. How narrow-minded can you get? Even more narrow minded than Dean.

It's that black and white thinking that is shrinking the democratic party.

dupe

I'm a 52 year old white professional who has been involved in SC politics since I was 14. And, it is my very strong opinion that a majority of white South Carolinians are racist. About half (the Rush Limbaugh crew) will admit it proudly; the other half (the country club republicans) actually don't think they are racist; they think it's just a coincidence that they have never voted for a black candidate. Some of them will admit to hating poor people, but they are, at the core, just as racist as the redneck with the rebel flags on his truck. If anyone else said this it would likely piss me off, but this is my backyard and I know these people.

Listen you admit you are for a woman's right to choose and then shut up. The fundies will not vote for you anyway.

You are for hunters. Half of your PR photos in the South be you with a shotgun in your hand beside a nascar racing car.

Pump up the volume on tax credits for the working poor and closing loopholes for those rich folks who don't want to pay their taxes.

You talk about conserving nature for future generations of kids to enjoy. Talk about keeping the water clean to fish in and places for people to hunt.

Talk about connecting people to jobs. Getting folks off of welfare and into the workforce in a real way, a compassionate way. Dumping folks with no hope just makes no sense.

Talk about targetting education spending to those rural schools that have been left out and unfunded for too long.

Talk about small business initiatives and getting tough with corporations that want to run rough-shod over the small towns.

Talk about helping out family farmers with loans and subsidies to protect them because all the foreign farmers are protected the same way.

Talk about fiscal responsibilty and the need for the government to pay its bills and not borrow and spend its way into debt.

Wrap yourself up in the Bill of Rights and talk about getting government out of their personal lives.

You wrap progressive politics around a populist voice.

If you want examples look up Mike Warner's campaign in VA. He aimed his message at the people and in a Repuke dominated state came up tops.

... "how come you democrats only care about blacks?"

A Democrat can survive without being a bastard Zell Miller lookalike.

I have lived my whole life in the South and have seen it happen.

when they became more outspoken about Civil Rights. While FDR carried "The Solid South", Truman proposed a civil rights bill in '48 and lost four southern states to the Dixiecrats and while FDR advocated some of this the saying was, "well, Truman means it." There was never another Solid South again except for a near sweep by southerner Jimmy Carter in '76.

So what does it mean. Blacks vote overwhelmingly for Democrats in the South while whites, particularly white males vote predominately Republican. This has occured because over a coarse of time when Democrats have become identified with civil rights and republicans with state rights--a racist code word.

I think Dean is correct to challenge the white south on what decades of basing their votes on racial prejudice has actually gained for them. Where are the better jobs? better schools? and health insurance for their own kids?

where do people like me - southern white female who has always voted Democrat - fit in the plan for the south? Maybe it is up to us and any men we can round up who have done the same to make a big effort in speaking to those he is trying to reach.

My biggest problem with that is understanding exactly who that is.

right on the money. Johnson as he was signing the bill said "I just gave the South to the Republicans." He knew it was about racism.

sorry about having to raise my voice there...

BUT- just look at the map, folks.
Gore won in 2000, and the only southern state that he carried was Florida*.
But if he would have carried just 1 more non-southern state, (and NV is pretty pissed about Yucca Mt.) he would have won without the south.
we can forgo the south, and concentrate on holding the blue states, plus any one more.
Screw the south. every dollar we spend there campaigning for president is a waste. extra spending should be reserved for contestable house/senate races.



*New Mexico isn't really considered "south", so much as west or southwest.

of angry red folks saying "President Dean".

many of whom refuse to say President Bush.

The 2000 census skews toward the red states slighly. If the 2000 election would have been based upon the NEW apportionment the final electoral vote would be 278 for Bush.

Please let us not rehash Florida 2000 except to say even with the new apportionment all it would take would be Florida to win (or Tennessee, or Georgia).

That was the good news. The bad news is that incumbants always have an advantage. Getting people to switch horses in mid stream is hard to do. The last election fovored Gore, the economy, the continuation of successful 1990's etc... and it was fought to a dead heat in so many places. This time the Dem nom will HAVE to be so much more appealing to the electorate, not just in the South, but everywhere.

I can tell you that it's a tough nut to crack, but not impossible for a Democrat. I point you to the election of 1992 with the example of my home state and my current state of residence: Georgia and Florida, respectively.

In 1992 Bill Clinton won Georgia and George Bush won Florida. In 1996 Bob Dole won Georgia and Bill Clinton won Florida. So you can't say that either is a Republican or Democratic stronghold. In 2000, Bush won Georgia and we all know who won Florida...

Politics is local, and the best approach is to decentrallize the marketing spin message to each little area. Use a huge database to determine the demographics of the target audience, just like in corporate marketing and then tune direct messages and issues to each local little hamlet... and in public speaking for "global" issues stay on message for national concerns that unite the localities.

The search to discover a constant message that will sell in all areas is futile... don't bother.. use computers to segment broadcasting and media to each demgraphic and let them all see what they want.

Sadly, modern technology in media is sooooo effective, not using it and trying 19th century simple national messages is a sure route to fail.

The south is filled with a bunch of people that really just want to be left alone. It has been this way for a couple of hundred years now. The South really believes in States Rights (that whole 10th Amendment thing).

The Civil War was about State's Rights. Many people will tell you that it was about slavery, but they are wrong. Withouth argueing the point, and staying on topic, from the perspective of the Southeners, the Civil War was about the the Feds telling the states what they had to do. Now, the South lost the war and like most cases of wars, the victors were not that nice to the conquered.

If the South did not feel like the the Feds were telling them what to do before the War, they certainly adopted that belief during Reconstruction. They did not celebrate the 4th of July in Vicksburg (and other cities in the South) until World War II. The Democrats in the south that fought integration and civil rights did so on the grounds of States Rights.

To this day it is why southeners like their guns. It's not to hunt, it's so they can defend their home from the feds.

All that to say the South wants to feel comfortable with a candidate that they think will not send down the oppressive hammer and medling had of Uncle Sam.

The democratic party has a really hard time in the South because they are perceived as being the party that will tax you, make federal regulations to burden you, tell you what you can do in your own house (i.e. guns), appoint judges that make rulings out of whole cloth, overturn state laws with federal regulations/laws/executive orders, and then make fun you for going to church and believing in God. Throw in weak on Defense for good measure and there is no way the typical southern voter will vote for a national democrat.

And with all due respect, I think that race plays a far less important roll in Southern life than in many other places. I went to a very white high school and they voted one of the few black student to be Mr. High School.

The strategy that the Dems to to have is one of hands off. And I think that Dean is off to a good start saying (basically) that he is going to leave gun laws to the states. More stances like that are necessary.

"And with all due respect, I think that race plays a far less important roll in Southern life than in many other places. I went to a very white high school and they voted one of the few black student to be Mr. High School."

If I may give an anecdote along similar lines:

I grew up in a small south Georgia town that was very much racially mixed. In fact, I never heard the term "black neighborhood" and "white neighborhood" until I moved to Cleveland, Ohio when I was fifteen. In my south Georgia town there were interracial couples on every street and black families and white families in many cases were the same family. In Cleveland they had what they called a "white" high school and a "black" high school, and I can tell you they were exactly that. What most people don't realize is that some of the most segregated places in America are northern cities. But the segregation happened without the benefit of Jim Crow laws. It was a more subtle, economic segregation. Am I saying that the North is racist and the South isn't? No, of course not. What I'm saying is you can't just chalk the South up as racist and the rest of the country as non-racist.

Don't 'ignore' the South, but don't prioritize it either. I think we need a longer-term Southern strategy, and it's going to be along the lines of the Clinton-Dean approach- "it's the economy stupid" or "it's jobs and education and healthcare, stupid" or something like that.

I've been down in SC and GA a bit over the last 3 years, and I agree that these states are not going Dem in 04. The GOP has become the party of the South; if we go too hard there, we risk alienating the rest of the country.

I think we go hard after Arizona, Nevada, Ohio, Indiana, and Florida, and concentrate on holding the North, Northeast, and West. The Republicans seem intent on refighting the Civil War, let them. The North will win again.

Than in some of the western and mid-west Repuke states.

Please keep this in mind. Many of the border states can be won with the right populist message delivered by the proper leader. Clinton actually won GA in 1992.

Redneck hate has become an excuse to write off black voters and lots of women and a few of us progressive thinking Southerners.

That is pure bullshit.

Will you just leave us Democrats who live down here to fend for ourselves? That is just some more of what I have read on here about the Democratic party not being able to pull together. Let them take us over down here and continue to run us in the ground? NO THANK YOU!
As I posted above, maybe some strong southerners should be involved in devising a strategy to reach those voters down here who are not on our side. People who don't understand CAN NOT do it.

You might find some inspiration.

It is named Understand where to be progressive.

sorry to jump so quickly. There's just been too many of those threads about forgetting about us.