Democratic Party moves sights from poor to middle class

[Rose Siding]

WASHINGTON (AFP) - John Kerry (news - web sites)'s strong courtship of the US middle class marks a new step in the evolution of the Democratic Party, which has moved to broaden its appeal from its generations-old base of the poor and working classes.

For months the presidential candidate has been pitching the middle class as "the moral and economic backbone of this nation," contrasting sharply with the party's image of yesteryear as champion of the underdog.

As the Massachusetts senator prepares to formally accept the nomination at the Democratic convention in Boston next week, some analysts see his candidacy as a further twist in the party's constantly evolving ideology.

"It's very amazing to me that I see them now saying 'We're worried about the middle class,'" said John Jay Douglass, a professor at the University of Houston. "It's as if the poor had disappeared."
...
African-American and Latino leaders have been warning the Democrats not to take them for granted, but political experts say that in the final analysis they'll have no choice but to cast their ballots for Kerry.

"George W. Bush isn't going to get very many black votes, and he knows it and Kerry knows it, and therefore they (the Democrats) are going to spend their time and their money elsewhere," said Stephen Hess of the Brookings Institution think tank.

"Black politicians may be upset by this, but they understand the facts of political life," he said.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/afp/20040721/pl_afp/us_vote_democrats_party

[Fovea]

1. The Democratic party

is priming itself for massive failure in 2008.

The real base is still progressive and pro labor.
Walk away from your base, and face the Greens as a real spoiler in 2008.

[sangh0]

6. Progressives are not the Dems base and never was

it's always been the middle class. Progressives who think they are the Dems base are merely engaging in self-indulgent and self-entitled flattery

Walk away from your base, and face the Greens as a real spoiler in 2008.

Silly Naderism. Nadir didn't play spoiler in 2000, but if the Dems aren't careful, Nadir will play spoiler AGAIN! Your extortion won't work and it never has.

[Fovea]

10. Three words

Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Three more words

Lyndon Baines Johnson

Two more words

Adali Stevenson

And equating the Greens with Nader is a past tense phenominon.

Watch the country move increasingly leftward, as the lag between the tremendous insult done by the Pugs works its evil magic on the former middle class, and labor becomes a wish, not a condition.

Welcome to America in the 21st C., a newly prismatic nation with far more in common with the rest of the third world than it does with the civilized one. Our long national bender is over.

BTW, Progressive is not a matter of economic class, it is a view of the nature of the human condition and the value and uses of society..

[freetobegay]

11. 3 more letters G.O.P.

Thats who Nader is seeking help from. Any questions?

[sangh0]

18. Pretty stupid argument

For one thing, the "progressive" policies FDR pushed for were made to prevent the Socialists from gaining power, which at the time was a very real concern.

For another, LBJ was NEVER a progressive, unless you think it's progressive to spend years making sure a civil rights bill never got past the Senate.

And as far as AS, he lost IIRC. That doesn't help your argument that Dems win when progressives lead the party.


And equating the Greens with Nader is a past tense phenominon.

I guess you didn't notice, but in the post I was responding, the poster tried the Nadir-extortion ploy. ANother thing you may not have noticed is that in 2000, Nadir was the Green Party's candidate

[K-W]

21. There are two wrong views on the democrats.

To view them as useless because they are totally owned by the elite is wrong, but so is viewing them as though they can ever be the voice of progressivism.

Liberalism is a deal between the marginilized poor and the government that the elites will share a little bit of power and a little bit of money in exchange for the marginalized poor not picking up shotguns and taking over government buildings.

Liberalism is failing because there are less marginalized poor, and the marginalized poor is demotivated and under various governmental controls.

The elites no longer feel that it is neccessary to give concessesions to the poor, they dont think the poor can do anything to stop them.

[CWebster]

24. Yes, that is why they branded them as

"bleeding heart liberals"

If politics is about power--the motivation for that power may be for an honorable goal.

[sangh0]

49. Thank you, K-W

That was a very perceptive analysis. I agree with most of it.

[GreenArrow]

19. "Progressive is not a matter of economic class, it is a view ...

of the nature of the human condition and the value and uses of society.. "

Extremely important distinction.

[sangh0]

20. And it's a view most Dems do not share

.

[CWebster]

22. So, what views do most Dems share that would be in conflict

with Progressive views?

On environmental issues? Racial issues? Gender rights? Economic justice? media regulation? Corporate domination and corruption?

Are you saying that most Democrats would be more in agreement with the Republican view?

[GreenArrow]

29. which does not

make the view incorrect.

[sangh0]

51. True, it just makes it impossible

for progressives to be considered the "base" of the Democratic Party, which was my one and only point in making that assertion

[TeacherCreature]

35. Liberals have always been the dem base

The centrist vote swings to the republicans. It is just in the last few years that the liberals have been driven out by the forces who want another corporate friendly party, only one they can exploit this time.


And before you make any statements about Nader, I am not and have never supported anyone but Democrats.

[Kahuna]

45. Right you are.

nt

[Kanary]

23. You hit the target...... "priming itself for massive failure"

And well-deserved it is.

I've been bashed royally for saying that the base is moving away. I've been trashed for pointing out that traditional DEM strongholds are giving warning. Here it is in black and white, yet it will still be bashed. WE've fallen down the rabbit hole when strong views of the future are greeted with derision.

I've cited newspaper articles voicing the same from Independents.

I've told party stalwarts all their protests that they're including poverty issues are just those that appeal to the middle class, and been dismissed.

I guess learning the hard way is all that's left.

Oh wellllllllllll.........

It certainly isn't important that people in our OWN COUNTRY are suffering.

A Pox, and all that......

Kanary

[Jose Diablo]

39. All thats needed is some frilly trump to say,

"Let them eat cake".

There's gonna be blood. But few see it. As you said,

Oh wellll....

[mstrsplinter326]

2. Two words: WRONG DIRECTION n/t

[CWebster]

3. Classic New Democrat

Nothing new about it.

And what so many progressives find so unappealing.
Where would they be without ABB?

[sadiesworld]

4. Kerry:

"The 'haves' and 'have nots' have been replaced with a new divide pitting the 'wealthiest Americans' against everybody else."

He has a point, IMO.

[Kahuna]

5. The poor don't vote. They need to. If they would vote, they

would have a prominant position in the party platform. That's how it works.

[tigereye]

9. or at times, they appear to vote

not in their best economic and social interests.

[JI7]

15. this is true with many religious right white voters

they vote based on things like Bush believes in God and is a family man and some other shit that isn't all that true.

[tigereye]

46. that is what I was thinking as well

:)

[Kahuna]

26. Right!

:hi:

[Fovea]

16. The same corrupt inadequate voting laws and systems

that make it difficult for the poor to vote, also helped put * in office.

[Kanary]

25. How convenient to place blame

Chase away the various groups and ignore them (expecting them, of course, to keep begging on bended knee for scraps of attention), then blame them because they gave up a hopeless cause.

You've had NOTHING but harsh words for me and other poor folk, and I expect nothing different this time.

I find your lack of compassion to be VERY UNDEMOCRATIC.

The poor used to be part of the party in great numbers, with a voice that was heard.

So did blacks, Hispanics, and other disenfranchised groups. But, keep blaming........ that'll sure solve the problem.

:crazy:

Here's where you vent your spleen.....

Kanary

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kanary]

31. And you don't preach to me your anger at poor folk

I happen to be one of those who will be cut, and die on the streets. You've made it quite clear that matters not to you, so I don't happen to have much hope of finding any heart there.

I'm older than you, as if that matters, and am suffering the consequences of being poor and ignored by the party. IN other words, I"M IVING IT. Not that my suffering, or the suffering of anyone who is poor matters to the great muddle class anymore.

Actually, I liked the message....... it says very clearly that the Dem party is shooting itself in the foot by turning it's back on it's traditional base.

Not to mention losing it's very soul.

Once the soul is gone, physical death isn't far behind......

Kanary

[Kahuna]

33. What anger?!?! What are you talking about? Don't project your

little attitude on me. I stated what I did, matter of factly and without anger. You seem to thrive on anger. You're the one who pitched a hissy fit. Give me a break. You think you're the only one having a hard time? I can assure you that you are not. I'm a woman who has had to deal with hard times all of my life. I don't bitch. I don't cry. I don't ask what anybody is going to do for me. I delve into my owninner strengthq and resources and pull myself up. Sometimes by sheer will. Most of the times it means I have to reinvent myself. Try it.

[Kanary]

36. Yeah, your anger. Check out a mirror.

[sangh0]

53. I have also been accused of harboring anger to the poor

for disagreeing with a certain poster

[Kahuna]

67. It's ridiculous. Just because you say the poor don't vote,...

that equates you disdain for the poor. Now I've heard it all! :eyes:

[Classical_Liberal]

48. What baloney

They voted in 2000 and got their votes purge, and not one fucking white democrat came to their defense when they complained.

[TeacherCreature]

38. The poor do vote

what morAn told you they don't?

[Classical_Liberal]

47. The poor vote. I am poor and i vote

What I don't have is a million dollars. Then the two parties would listen to me.

[Jose Diablo]

50. Just who would they vote for?

Thats exactly the point, who represents the interests of the poor?

With the DLC just how much platform do they get?

In the race to the right for last 25 years, who has represented to poor?

[Forkboy]

64. Complete and utter shash

Cripes...what a Party :puke:

[Kanary]

69. Thanks Forkboy

puke is indeed about the size of it.

Too bad the resulting deaths won't matter.

Kanary

[goodhue]

7. nothing new here

this move happened about 14 years ago

[Kanary]

28. Yup......... and that's why the party has lost some strength....

But, it's obvious from the continued dissing of poor folk here, nothing is about to change anytime soon.

There are a few on DU who still have some heart left.

The rest have become interested only in what affects them personally.

The heart of the party has died.

Kanary

[Kahuna]

30. Yeah right! And voting for Nader is putting the poor people first?

That's a good one. :eyes:

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[goodhue]

41. this is unfounded and violates rules

Stop attacking good democrats.
Do you want to run folks out of the party towards Nader?

[Kahuna]

43. Follow the thread and see who attacked whom first... See post #5.

I don't play that. If a person attacks me like this person did, I'm duty bound to respond. Nobody puts words in my mouth but me.

[Kanary]

58. Thank you, goodhue

In a way, I'm kinda sad the post is gone....... it serves to show just what the attitude and level of hatefulness has become.

No danger I'm "running towards Nader"........ but certainly many of us are rethinking any support of the DEms in Nov. It's kinda difficult to support those who either ignore you or vilify you. I hear a lot of anguish about this very issue from those I've been working on campaigns with. The party is, indeed, in trouble.

Thanks again......

:hi:

Kanary

[goodhue]

40. who said anything about voting for Nader?

Sadly, neither the DNC nor the RNC put poor people first. But it does not follow that one should vote for Nader. Most poor people will simply stay home.

[sangh0]

57. who said anything about voting for Nader?

Post #1. I guess you missed it

[goodhue]

59. Post #1 says nothing about voting for Nader

Contrary to your assertion post #1 says nothing about voting for Nader. It says:

The Democratic party is priming itself for massive failure in 2008.
The real base is still progressive and pro labor.
Walk away from your base, and face the Greens as a real spoiler in 2008.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2034694#2034724

Greens in 2008 is not a reference to Nader. Nader is not running as a green this year, 2004. And is not likely to run as green again.

Nader was not mentioned at all in this thread until post #6, which I did in fact miss because I had had that poster on my ignore list.

[sangh0]

60. Post #1 talks about people voting for Nadir

instead of voting for the Dems. What did you think the poster meant when they spoke of Nader being a spoiler?

[goodhue]

61. Post #1 does not mention Nader.

Post #1 mentions Greens as spoiler in 2008.
Post #6 spoke of Nader as spoiler, not post #1.

[sangh0]

62. So what?

Excuse me if I don't see the importance of your obsession

[goodhue]

63. Merely responding to post #57.

Post #57 suggests I missed that post #1 said something about voting for Nader. But in fact Nader was introduced to this thread in post #6. Some folks are indeed obsessed with Nader but I'm certainly not one of them.

[sangh0]

68. Ahh, gotcha

I followed the thread back up, and now I see it. Sorry bout that

[BurtWorm]

8. Who is John Jay Douglass and why is he such an expert on the Dem Party?

Google him and he turns up in another yahoo.com story, this one about Edwards:

Wide belief that Kerry was going to pick Edwards as his running mate contributed to the limited bounce the presidential candidate enjoyed in the polls, said John Jay Douglass, a law professor at the University of Houston, Texas.

"There was not much of a surprise," Douglass said. "This did not bring a new face into the picture."

Kerry's choice of Edwards, a good looking and charismatic 51-year-old senator, was described as an attempt to inject new energy to his lackluster campaign. Some pundits also viewed it as a bid to attract southern voters, who have traditionally voted for Republican candidates.

So far, however, the North Carolina politician has not even helped Kerry overtake Bush in Edwards' home state.

Tuesday's CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, conducted July 8-11, gave Bush a 54 to 39 percent lead in North Carolina. Bush easily won the state in the 2000 election.

Douglass said there were even "some questions whether (Edwards) could have been reelected in North Carolina had he run again" for a second six-year senate term.

Just asking.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. The Blair Democrats in action.

Is it still called pandering? More tax breaks for the middle class so they can buy SUV's. More deals with the corporations to make them more "compassionate"? More "sensible" enviromentalism? Less gun control? More flagwaving? More cuddling up to the HMO's? More calls for a "stronger defense" to protect the corporations?

Welcome to the Bland New World of the "not quite as republican as the republicans."

[Kanary]

66. And that Bland New World is working so well, right?

But, I guess we're not supposed to actually *see* that......

Pay no attention to the creature behind the curtain.....

Kanary

[JI7]

13. the middle class aren't working people or minorities ?

this is a bunch of crap. when he gives his policies they are geared towards the working people and the poor. most people do see themselves as middle class even though they may really be considered poor based on official standards.

also, the poor include many whites and not just african americans and latinos. and many african americans and latinos care about issues concerning the middle class. they don't always want to be spoken as if they are all poor . it's about small businesses, health care, etc.

[Kahuna]

32. The truth of the matter is, the Dems have moved away from..

pandering exclusively to poor and disadvantaged minorities and have widened their platform towards the working poor. I think that's a good thing.

[sangh0]

54. You might want to read this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2035085

Dems may be moving away, but Kerry is not

[GreenPartyVoter]

14. This is RW propaganda

It's all about keeping the working poor and the middle class at each other's throats, while the rich and super rich stay out of sight, happy as clams.

We need to work together and get a government together that will shift more of the load of responsibility on to the rich, where it belongs.

[K-W]

17. Follow the money people

The poor and working class started voting based on television commercials. The republicans went to thier corporate supporters and said 'give us money and we will create a corporate paradise' they got alot of money, they started beating democrats badly because of publicity. Democrats went to thier backbone, liberal groups had been in a financial free fall as activism lost its momentum in the population. Democrats said 'crap we need more money or the republicans will just spend us completely out of power'. So they went to the margins of the corporate world, but that couldnt counter the republicans, so they focused on the only other source of wealth in the society. The middle class. So they they sucked up to corporations and focused thier rhetoric on the middle class. The poor number greatly, but they have no money to fund commercials and they are very sensitive to marketing. Thus getting money meant giving in to corporations against the poor, and there seems to be no way to capture the poor without money. And, contrary to what people seem to think here, this strategy had success, capping with the election for two terms of Bill Clinton. The New Democrat spoke to the middle class, went conserrvative on economics to keep corporations happy, and lowered the bar of the previous magnets of the parties attention, enviromental groups, minority and womens groups, untions, etc.

They didnt know that they were just feeding into a trend towards facism on the conservative side of the aile, who really plans for that in thier day to day life? Politics still hasnt caught itself by surprise, but its happening a little bit. So now the Democratic party is just trying to find a place to stand as the conservative movement tears through the social fabric. It is still on the Clinton model until somebody proves there is a safer place to stand.

It is a difficult situation, people on this forum dont properly take into account the political conditions that caused the democratic shift. The popular belief here is that the democrats just turned evil and stupid one day and all this movement right was just a stupid strategy taken out of thin air. What looks to us like a drunken stagger right was a series of decisions and thier repercussions. Througout that process the people in the party made the decisions they thought were best, they cannot be held accountable for the chaos of the system and the final shape of that path. We just need to do what we can to steer that path where we think it should go.

We need to use grassroots methods to increase the power of liberal and progressiv groups. We need to get democrats elected and show the democrats that liberals can win them elections. Show them that the working class, enviromentalists, unions, new liberal groupings are capable of battling and defeating corporate money and the democrats will come running left so fast it will make your head spin.

[Classical_Liberal]

56. Howard Dean pretty much debunked this idea that the only

money to be had was in corporate America. Guess what, the DLC and their corporate media friends went on jihad against him.

[Classical_Liberal]

42. We need to develop other choices that is for sure

Every four years the democrats extort our votes. We need something different with or without the party. They are going to take us for granted till we find a way to harm them politically. Anyway the socalled middle class focus is a lie. They care about their cororate donors. I was middle class, and I am not anymore, so I am nothing to them.

[Crachet2004]

44. ABB is fine with me-this time. If we win this fall, and especially if...

we take back both Houses of Congress, there had better be some advances for minorities, labor, women, etc...you know, our BASE!

With the neocons in charge of the GOP, with their warmongering, internationalist, budget-busting, holier-than-thou arrogance and the Democratic Party ignoring their own base, there is a huge potential for the birth of another major party; maybe even a majority party.

If the Greens would take a hard look at their own platform, and subtract some of the soylent green, they might have a shot at filling the role. But as currently constituted, I believe they are no more than a gimmick designed to siphon the best and the brightest from the left, that they may labor their asses off for the rest of their lives, in obscurity and absolute futility, with no chance of ever becoming a dominant force. Go read their platform, if you don't believe me.

Howard Dean has a much better idea. He, like me, is ABB. But there will be other elections, on down the line. He is fiscally conservative, combined with a hands off attitude to the constitution. He is anti-corporatist and outsourcing, green-leaning on pollution, antiwar and anti-dependence on foreign oil. He says the right things about health care, education, and so on.

If Dean were our candidate right now, he would be twenty points ahead, running on an antiwar platform.

Look. The Dean campaign pioneered the netroots and John Kerry later raised over three million dollars IN ONE DAY, from small contributions. Kos and others are showing the way as well, raising money and volunteers nationally, for local elections. And if we have to, that is what we need to do...take over small towns and rural counties, school boards, state legislatures, etc...

In short, I think there is a lot of potential for the Democratic Party to become a true majority again, if it will stop ignoring its own base; and failing that, an enormous potential for a new Party to be born. One that is neither far left or right, neither fish nor foul, but rather reflects what THE PEOPLE in this country want.

[GreenPartyVoter]

52. I happen to like the Green platform. Just because it doesn't tickle your

fancy doesn't mean it isn't valuable, "soylent green" and all. ;)

I look forward to the day when we have some serious election reform in this country, and I sincerely hope that John Kerry will be the man to get the ball rolling in that direction. Then it won't matter if the Greens "siphon" off X % of dems. If the number of left-leaning "other" voters and dem-voting moderates outnumber the conservatives, preferential voting should reflect that and our government will then experience a huge influx of progressives and sensible moderates.

[Crachet2004]

65. The Greens are meant to appeal to the few, well-meaning people...

on the left, who also actually have enough getupandgo, to do so. But they have zero potential to ever become a mass Party, in the US. Too much communalism, not enough individualism-based on the rather unappealing politics of scarcity.

I know the plan of some on the far left, is to help things get so bad that people 'have' to turn to the left, but I would submit that in THIS country, if things really get THAT bad, people will turn first to a man on a white horse.

Greens can never have any appeal to the broad center...more like they will be the goat, if things go bellyup, in a big way...someone for the mobs to demonize, and hate.

What Dean is saying, however, has appeal for the disgruntled in BOTH parties, as well as those already disenfranchised-and that would surely be a majority. It may be the only way to effectively burn bridges to politics as usual in peoples minds, is to start over, completely fresh, with a whole new Party. It might even work faster than trying to reclaim the Democratic Party. Many of us are beginning to wonder if it CAN be reclaimed.

Again, I am ABB-but this is the last time I am going to feel manouevered into 'having' to vote for anyone. And I know a lot of Greens have already legitimately come to that point. But I would rather be a part of something I feel actually has potential for mass appeal-and that is not the Greens, not in this country.

[ContinentalOp]

55. What a load of bullshit.

"John Kerry (news - web sites)'s strong courtship of the US middle class marks a new step in the evolution of the Democratic Party, which has moved to broaden its appeal from its generations-old base of the poor and working classes."

It was the Democratic party that CREATED the middle class. Democrats have always been for the middle class and for bringing up the poor so that they too can be middle class. This article is pure RW propaganda that tries to give the impression that republicans are supposed to be for the middle class when in reality they only look out for that top .1%.

This is all semantics anyway. Republicans are experts at fleecing middle class people who think they're upper class and want to be members of the millionaire elite. Who is middle class, who is poor? According to this article poor=minority and middle class = white republican. What a great way to divide and conquer.