As I see it, here is Al From's philosophy regarding elections:
The purpose of this memorandum is to begin to lay out what Democrats need to do to forge the kind of broad based center-left coalition of core and swing voters that we need to win in 2006 and 2008. The bottom line is this: because there are more self-identified conservatives than liberals in the electorate, if Republicans win all conservatives, Democrats need to win all of the self-identified liberals and more than seven of every 10 self-identified moderates just to break even. That is not an ideological statement, it's simple arithmetic. Simply put, Democrats cannot win unless they build a coalition of all liberals and most moderates.
from A Change to Rebuild Our Democratic Majority, If We Take It.
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=127&subid=173&contentid=253656So From's message is that the Democratic party can't get "too" liberal, or they will not attract the 7 of 10 "moderates" required to actually elect someone. From evidently believes that our job is not to present a message people will move toward, but to present a message that lets them believe exactly as they do today. A comfortable message that simply tells them what they already believe to be true.
The problem as I see it, is that without a radical change in direction this country could go completely down the toilet. Read through Latest Breaking or GD and see the laundry list of issues that - even taken one at a time - could result in disaster. And there are HUNDREDS of issues the American government is on the wrong side of today.
So - in light of all this - here is my question: In the upcoming 2006 elections, should Democrats attempt to craft a comfortable message that somewhat appeals to liberals while telling the 7/10 moderates what they want to hear?
Or, should we craft a message that appeals to liberals and inspires moderates to move from their previously beliefs?
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
