Democrats Dilemma: Progressives or Pandering?

[pstokely]

http://www.stlamerican.com/news/columnists/charles_jaco/the-democrats-dilemma-progressives-or-pandering/article_9d01805c-e690-11e8-984a-870595fa3167.html

"A St. Louis-area elected Democrat told me most of the blame for the midterm wipeout belongs to McCaskill’s right-of-center politics and trying too hard to play to the rural vote, saying, “Democrats, including people of color, are pretty angry with her, going back to her Kavanaugh and abortion comments. They may have skipped voting on her race.”

There may be something to that. The medical marijuana initiative had 52,000 more votes than were cast in the McCaskill-Hawley U.S. Senate race. The proposition to raise Missouri’s minimum wage attracted 43,000 more voters than the Senate contest. Even the wonky re-districting amendment got 7,500 more votes than were cast for U.S. Senate.

But despite all the people who opted out of voting for senator, Democrats still have to decide what to do about rural voters whose racist, religious, and/or pro-gun positions mean they’ll vote for Republicans, no matter what.

Local Democrats running in those areas may be doomed by the culture war demographics of bigotry. But statewide Democrats need to give non-racist pro-choice gun control voters a reason to turn out in huge numbers. Pandering to Republicans isn’t it."

[gratuitous]

1. It's a numbers game

How many votes will pandering to Republican and conservative voters get you when they've vowed by all they hold sacred never to vote for a Democrat? How many votes will you get by energizing progressive and liberal voters who've felt sidelined for years?

Think, think.

[marylandblue]

2. Some rural voters will be attracted by jobs, healthcare, anti-opioids etc.

You won't get the die hards, but if you keep the base plus peel off a few rural voters, you can win comfortably.

Also, common sense gun control is the new buzzword and even many Republicans agree with it.