What if the Democratic Party moved to the center right ...?

to counter the far-right radicals of the Republican Party? What if the Democratic Party platform called for "fiscal sanity" and spending constraints in our economic policies? What if we denounce the high deficits and the record spending of the Republicans that are driving our nation downhill and into bankruptcy? We are the Party of "fiscal discipline.

What if we defined ourselves as the "pro-life" Party that believes abortions should be rare and uncommon but that we also defend the woman's right, as a citizen, to be able to choose what she does or doesn't do to our body and no person can dictate she do something against her will and best interest. But we are the "pro-life " Party -before and after birth - make no mistake about it.

Also, we change our policy in regards to the 2nd Amendment. After all, many Democrats own guns and we have changed to reflect the changes of our times. We still do not believe that guns should be in the hands of criminals or children, but we understand the wishes of many Democratic voters that have requested we change our position on the 2nd Amendment. We are now totally in support of the 2nd Amendment - except when it deteriorates into insanity. We support the right to own guns.

Just a sample of the direction we could go?? Would it steal anything from the Repubs if we did that and would it strengthen our Party? But isn't that how the Repubs play the game? They actually call themselves "compassionate conservatives". So we can define ourselves however we want. And then govern however we want when we win..

Take a look around- it's already there- and has been there for nearly a decade.... That's why there were shadow conventions in 2000.

You would also need to deal with the gay marrage issue. What is the best answer on this one?

but we truly believe in freedom and democracy for the American people, not just the Iraqis and the people in the Middle East. We cannot call ourselves free when we deny that freedom to other Americans. We will continue to support the American family but we will also defend every American's right to equality and rights, without exception, as guaranteed by our Constitution.

that gay couples can't list their "spouse as beneficiary on insurance policies and they can't carry the other on their health insurance because they are not related. The marriage would allow them to look after their loved one as anyone else can. In some cases after the death of a gay person, their estate goes to the nearest relative and that relative might hate the fact that they were gay; so they don't allow their partner any rights to the things they work toward together....they are just left out with nothing....sometimes not even the house unless both of their names were on the purchase agreement. This makes the marriage issue pretty important to a couple who have been together many years.

We need to allow them to claim their partner on health insurance and property after death just like everyone else...even unmarried straight people who have lived together for many years have the right to claim property gathered together after the death of one of them....gays don't and they need to

Change the words relative or spouse to partner or just "chosen recipient".

phenomenon. The brand name "Democrats" is a killer in the political marketplace of the Red States. No one would believe such a candidate. He or she would be slandered as a "closet liberal" and the like. Even Lieberman, as retrograde and reactionary as he is, would easily be tarred as a 'pinko' here, as indeed he was when he was Gore's running mate. And he's not "center-right"; he is now a "wing nut."

Even though my political beliefs, which have evolved from unflexible libertarianism to where they are now, are much more in tune with the Democratic Party, I do not see the Democratic candidates ever winning any significant elections where I live (Texas)--ever. Every statewide elected office is held by the GOP. It's been that way for around a decade, maybe even longer.

I really don't see these "warring cultures" ever able to coexist peacefully in this country.

As for the deficit, it is now so out of control and the economy on such a knife's edge and precipice, that to reduce government spending right now would trigger the depression they've artificially delayed since 2001 with the insanely low interest rates.

I would just as soon let it all hit the fan and be done with it, but the powers that be want to engineer a "soft landing" and so the deficits will continue. It will be interesting to see if people around here still have time to "war culturally" when they are having trouble keeping body and soul together and a roof over their head.

As for gun control, yes, it is a total political loser in the Red States and no candidate of either party ever does anything but go on "photo op" hunting trips to prove they've got balls (even Ann Richards did this while campaigning for governor here).

And it's been killing us. Why vote for artificial Repukes, when you can have the real thing? We don't offer any REAL alternatives.

Our position on abortion has always been to make it rare and uncommon, by providing reality-based sex education and access to contraception. We don't encourage people to have abortions, but realize it's a personal, private, decision.

We have no problem with guns, used to hunt or for protecting your family, but I personally see no reason for anyone to own an Uzi or AK 47.

When we got quiet when Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and George II, turned the keys to the country and the treasury over to Big Business, allowing mega mergers and monopolies again, we were fucked. Allowing industries to voluntarily regulate, means they will volunteer to do absolutely nothing, but gorge themselves on profits. Look at the drug industry. Instead of importing Canadian drugs, why not import Canadian drug policy?

There's a lot of Democrats who need to be run out of office, on a rail for selling "We the People" out. And a good place to start is everyone who voted for that bankruptcy bill.

End of rant.

for decades. They've lost all three branches of government doing just what you suggest.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

If you want to restrict abortion, vote pubbie. If you want every child, felon and lunatic to be able to buy a gun free of interference, vote pubbie.

Everybody else has, no matter how far to the right the DLC has dragged the party.

For at least 2 decades Democratic candidates have been afraid to stand up for what they believe in...and have lost. Especially on economic (tax) issues, Dems could not articulate the message that a reasonable level of taxation is the price we all pay for living in an advanced, civilized society.

Meanwhile, the religious right was taking over the Republican party, making Democrats even less willing to stand up for what they believe in on social issues.

The Republicans will always be for lower taxes (even to point of destroying the fabric of our society) and for more conservative social values (even to the point of destroying the principle of the separation of church and state).

The Dems should stand for what they believe, not merely a little less of what the Repubs believe (which is wrong to begin with).

they have been stolen. We should definitely NOT move right, or to the 'center' as some people call it.

At this point, winning is tantamount.

We are dealing with predators who clearly have a totalitarian streak and don't really give a damn about principles or integrity or honesty or any of those noble things.

I like how you take the wedge issues and reframe them without really giving up anything.

I believe we must be better "marketeers" and more aggressive at "targeting" than our ruthless opponents.

We must also agree that, once we destroy our opponents, we will work together to pull back the pendulum and get back on a progressive track.

We don't change any damn thing. We simply define ourselves instead of letting te Republicans define us. We are the "pro-life" Party. We support the 2nd Amendment. And when it comes to economic issues, we are the fiscal "conservatives".

Yes, we are dealing with totalitarian predators. How dare they call themselves "strong on defense"? Just because they spend more money? Or because they fall asleep at the wheel and let terrorists attack our nation? How dare they call themselves fiscal conservatives? We are the fiscal conservatives. How dare they campaign as the champions of "freedom" as they seek to deny freedom in oru own country. The point I am making is that we should define ourselves - and then govern the way we feel. Two can play their game.

From the far right ditch the DLC is driving it into?

yes.

will never vote Democrat for economic reasons. They are greedy and they know that Democrats will tax them when in power, even if those taxes prevent worse losses for them in the long term.

Now, the positions that you have propsed are winners, imho. They bring folks together on issues that Repugs have been using as a wedge.

Look at the facts. Look at the deficits. Look at the debt. Who can say with a straight face that they are the Party of fiscal discipline? They are radical reactionaries. Not Republicans. Not conservatives. And not very pro-American.

I would agree with many of the posts that labeled the Democratic party as "center right." Being first on the list of Super Powers also means a tendency to ignore our revolutionary roots and instead embrace the "status quo." After all, when one is on top, one wants to stay there even if it means stepping hard on those who would challenge that position or call for changes in the system. Getting people who want to stay where they are to consider change is a direct threat to their mind-set. After all, what if something about the change went wrong?

Because, this country is in a state of entropy that puts no energy into the renewal of its vision.

The republicans rely on retrograde policies; if it worked in the 1950s or the 1850s, then suggesting the same for 2005 or 2050 is a non-threatening position. There are however, non-threatening positions that honor our nation's past and could be a reasonable and futuristic rejoinder to the republican's backward thinking.

Put people above party politics.

Make the "common good" more important than one person's political aspirations, or the gleanings from the next fundraiser. Propose a honorable, accountable, and transparent government. Revisit and restore the Constitution to the glory of all of its checks and balances. Reaffirm a commitment to rights that were so dearly won and must be protected from those in and out of the government who would subvert them. (yes, this applies to gun ownership but it also applie to privacy in our bedrooms.) Propose a leadership role for the US in establishing and encouraging interlocking world counsels to address rogue states, without bombs, and rogue multinational corporations who currently are operating without public governance. Call for the diminishing of special-interest influence and its negative effect in forming public policy. Redefine security in broader terms that include both the economic (health, education and job security) and the environmental strength of this nation. And finally, something that came to my attention last night, promote the concept of an "holistic" economic approach to the choices we must make in the future.

The DLC does deserve credit for moving however slightly, the country's perception of the Democrats when it comes to economic issues. Their failure lies in the inability to use their newly found mastery of the economy to formulate a policy and to create a vision with workable programs for the future. They stood for living within our means, true, but that is where it ended. Now all of that hoarded cash that could have put forth positive change has been given away to bush pioneers. That is their failure and it is a hard legacy.


There is much more to ponder about this business of standing for something and it presents a wonderful opportunity to dream and plan. The greatest obstacle to this approach is an entrenched Democratic party that does not want to change, they want to tinker at the edges and pretend to change so that they may maintain their status quo stardom. They want to pull the Madison Avenue wool over the voters eyes, just as much as the republicans. Oh yes, there are a few voices who would champion the energy needed to save this country from itself, but those voices are rarely heard among the shrill rantings of the supposed right and the left.

Forget the right and left and the center. If we want to win, then we must become associated with the brand that looks to the future and speaks in terms of what is best for all of us. The republicans have determined what the Democrats' branding shall be, because the Democrats stand for so little. FDR stood for radical change and was prepared to assume a leadership role in presenting that change to the American people. Where's the leadership?

^^^^^^^^^

Note: we can't even get this small forum to think beyond labels and useless past imagined slights. But if the party cannot rise above its current state of corporations before people, then we are engaged in a race to the bottom, or as Mr. Z often says: just surfing on the entropy.