The elephant is huge and we were so hungry.

[SoCalDem]

Our diversity is both our strength and, at the same time our biggest weakness.

That elephant looked so tasty, and so easy to catch, yet we could not swallow it whole. The people who advised Kerry (Shrum:puke:..McAuliffe...Cahill, etc) seemed to think that we could do just that.

Our party has always welcomed people of ALL agendas, and by virtue of doing that, we have morphed their causes into OUR causes and beliefs. There are so many issues, because things have gotten pretty screwed up in the last 30 odd years, but for a campaign against a simpleton, who preached a few messages, over and over and over and over, we were unable to capture the necessary attention from a large enough group.

Our party always reminds me of the days when I had 3 boys under 5 years old. They ALL demanded undivided attention ALL THE TIME, and they NEVER wanted to do the same thing, eat the same food, or go the same places at the same time. Any mother can attest to this. There has to be some kind of compromise.

When we look inside our party, through the eyes of the casual voter, or worse yet, from the elephant's eyes, it's understandable why our "message" can be a hard sell.

The days of "different messages for different audiences" are G O N E . We now have the 24/7/365 media who hangs on every word, at every location. It's not deceptive to lay out the party ideas regarding stem cell research, at a laboratory in California, nor is it deceptive to deliver messages of hope to the gay community, at a visit to San Francisco. BUT....Those two messages are being relayed LIVE on every TV in the Bible Belt, and being crafted into talking points in Rove's lair in the white house basement...as the words leave our candidate's mouth.

Am I saying that "sensitive" issues must not be discussed? Not at all, but we have to begin to explore the art of language, and the art of persuasion. Do "most" gay people really think that the Democrats take them for granted, if our candidates do not address their issues continuously? Do they really think that the republican party has their best interests at heart?

Bush has been able to , with a wink-wink-nod-nod, let his constituents of all the groups their party embraces, know that THEY are a prime interest, but that the vocalization of that support,"might" push people they need, away.

When you examine the elephant, he is BIG, but he is simple too.

The messages he bellows at every opportunity:

God: ( and the hatred of people who do not believe the same brand of his God)

Tax cuts: (The more the merrier, even though they are not handed out fairly)(See also, God..as in God wants rich people to have money so they can hire poor people)

Guns: (and the fear of losing them)(See God..as in God-given right)

Moral values: (see God)

Family values: (see God)

The war: (See God)

9-11: (see God/war)

Gay "marriage": (See God/Family values/Moral values)



These were his basic campaign topics for the last THREE YEARS. There were variations, but the theme was always the same.

Our "problem" was that we had SO many issues, and advocated positions, that it was nearly impossible to dovetail them ALL into compact bundles.

We have not controlled the message megaphone, so once statements or speeches were made, the true meaning of them was completely out of our hands.

When our candidates spoke of civil rights, regarding the Patriot Act, those words were spun as "support" of the ACLU/lawyers for terrorists (See: 9-11, above)

When our candidates spoke of the Supreme Court, it was spun as Baby-killing/activist lawyers against tort reform..(See:God, above)

When our candidates spoke of the environment, it was spun as:activist lawyers out to get rich and make poor people pay more taxes(see: tax cuts)

When we complained about the horrors of the war, it was spun as almost treasonous..(See: 9-11 /the war/moral values)

We tried to address too much, and the media these days do not give adequate time to explain complicated issues. The messages of the elephant are all "FEEL" issues...our issues are REAL issues. they are tangible, not ephemeral.

The elephant looked tasty and available, but he was too full of hot air, and we never got our teeth into him..and even if we had, they were not sharp enough to pierce that tough exterior, and deflate him..

[Sapphocrat]

1. SCD, how is it that...

...you can take the most horrible, nightmarish situation, and, no matter how light / dark / optimistic / pessimistic you are at any given moment, you somehow manage to comfort me?

Which you do.

As for:

Do "most" gay people really think that the Democrats take them for granted, if our candidates do not address their issues continuously?

I can't speak for "most," but here's my answer: I don't need anyone at all to address my issues "continuously." But I don't like being taken for granted -- for votes and donations -- by any candidate who feels that "support" means nothing more than "not condemning." Make sense?

[SoCalDem]

2. Yes,my friend, it does..

I didn;t make myself clear enough.. The continuously I meant was the soundbyte coverage of ANY "red-meat" issue for the fundies..environment/stem cell/choice..take yer pick :.. Our lack of ANY real access to the media is what killed us..

If we controlled the method of voting, and were in control of most media, you can bet that FOX would have been running INDEPTH programming, and would have been interviewing computer scientists day and night.. they would have demanded (and gotten) congressional hearings (weekly) until the machines were dumped into the ocean..

[SoCalDem]

3. one kick for the morning people

:)

[chiburb]

4. SoCal, this is only the latest

In a series of wonderful "think pieces" by you. I can't thank you enough for your contributions to this board, and the insight you provide.

Nominated for the home page...

[SoCalDem]

5. thanks..

all we have is insight these days.. the "Out"sight is pretty ugly :)

I just wonder about the so-called newspeople.. They have to "know" that things are off...way off..

There is NO way in HELL that so many people would stand in line for up to ELEVEN hours to say.."the guy in offic is okay"..

The way they all just rolled over again for the lame excuses of why the exit polls "failed" again..:sigh: