Are you willing to admit the Democratic Party is now the minority Party?

[kentuck]

Or do you believe the 3 1/2 million votes advantage Bush got in last election was a fraud or a fluke? If you are a national Party with a disadvantage of 3 1/2 million votes, what do you do to counter? Do you go after the same voters that voted with the Repubs in the last election or do you go after new voters? What would be your strategy?

[annabanana]

1. My strategy would be to nationalize and regulate

the voting methods. That should take care of the problem.

[tjdee]

2. That's a tricky question because there are so many nonvoting people.

Conservatives are the minority in this country.

It's just that 1)Half the country isn't even voting, 2)conservatives always vote, not just in presidential years, and 3)various modes of cheating/fraud has given conservatives the advantage.

I absolutely believe the ideals of the Democratic party are the ideals of the majority of Americans.

The trick is to get that to manifest itself in political victories.
The biggest thing is to get those who aren't voting.

[American Tragedy]

11. If the non-voters couldn't be bothered to take an hour off work to go vote

at least one Tuesday every four years or so, what the hell is going to motivate them? In this last election in particular, the stakes are so high. What the fuck are they waiting for?

I just have little sympathy for the apathetic. My grandmother barely had any formal education and was busy raising eight children, yet she read two newspapers every day, researched the issues, and voted in every single election.

[tjdee]

38. Well, that's the job for the Democratic party, isn't it?

Finding reasons people aren't voting, and then convincing them that voting is in their best interest (and of course, voting Democratic).

I don't know what will get them off their ass, but I'm not being paid 100K or whatever these people for their "experience" and their "ability" are getting paid to do their jobs.

[forgethell]

14. I think that you

are making assumption that are NOT in evidence.

1. Democrats have been known to cheat, why should the Republicans suddenly get so good at it that no hard evidence has yet been produced, yet the Democrats suddenly give it up?

2. Without polling every legal voter, how do you know that conservatives are in a minority? Assuming that this is NOT true, what would convince you? (Is your hypothesis disprovable??)


3. Anecdotal, of course, but I know plenty of conservatives that don't vote in every election. Some that don't vote in presidential elections. One that didn't vote this year.

I'm not saying that you are wrong. I'm just saying that there are other explanations for why we lost other that massive Republican cheating. They should be examined with an open mind, because if we do not determine the cause of our defeat (and it was a defeat, Bush will be the President for the next 4 years, regardless of how he got there), then we are doomed to repeat our mistakes in the next election and be defeated, or out-cheated, again.

Who was it that said stupidity was doing something same thing over again and expecting a different result??

[Warpy]

3. I admitted that ten years ago

thanks to the efforts of the DLC to drag the party so far to the right that it bears more resemblance to the GOP than it does to the party I grew up with.

Folks, moving to the right has been a losing strategy. All you DLC types who think you're centrists had better wake up and realize the error of your ways, or you're going to have to get used to being such a minority party as to be irrelevant.

Oh, and by the way, we'll never know for sure about Bush's "mandate." The fraud was widespread and massive. We'll never know if he managed to squeak by with a tiny fraction of 1% or if he lost by the same.

[stray cat]

4. We need to do a better job of presenting our message.

I don't think Americans had a big problem with John Kerry's message although I prefer the populace appeal of Edwards. I think our problem is with countering the republicans great ability to drown out and demonize the democratic message and to manipulate the media with their talking points of the day. Democrats are better at governing in general but the republicans are great at dominating campaign issues or demonizing candidates.

[Razorback_Democrat]

5. Several issues

1. I do believe that vote fraud has occurred in many places and our voting system needs a real fix

2. Because of this I don't believe that 3.5 million people favor Bush, but even if that is the case, I don't believe that that same margin are all Republicans either. Many are independent, or voted for Bush out of some loyalty to him post 9/11, or the old, don't change horses midstream thing.

3. I think you have to go after new voters and appeal to the middle.

going left will not work, we need to move to middle on fiscal and defense issues and stay more left on social issues.

[latteromden]

7. RE: the middle ground on fiscal issues

We DO stand for the middle on economic and fiscal issues. The Republicans have become the party of deficits and ridiculous spending.

Check this out: http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm - we already ARE the fiscally responsible ones (and looking at that, it seems like not even good economic policy will ever reverse what Reagan and the Bushes did... how depressing!).

[stray cat]

8. We need to present ourselves as the responsible party -

including fiscally. I don't know if it requires any movement on the part of the democrats but they have to present themselves that way to the American voters (many of whom don't want to think very hard).

[Razorback_Democrat]

25. Good points n/t

[bvar22]

18. Going to"the Middle" has worked so well...

...for the Democrats. Why change a winning strategy?

/sarcasm

[Razorback_Democrat]

26. When did we go to the middle?

[bvar22]

30. where have you been since 1992?

*

[City Lights]

6. Not yet.

I still believe _chimpy's totals were padded. The last election stinks as much as the GA 2002, and the presidential of 2000. I believe we will continue to lose until the Democratic party wakes up to the fraud. They seem too :scared: to do much about it.

If the pukes lost this way just once, the problems would already be solved, and whatever Dem won through hacking would be unable to govern. They would not shut up about it. We, OTOH, roll over, move further to the right, and ask for more. :eyes:

[anti-fundie]

21. Remember that episode on Oz?

When they prison raper went ahead and knocked out the teeth of the rapee so that no biting would occur and disrupt their time together? That's exactly what the repubs want to do to us now. Sure it hurt the first time, but do we want there to be more?

[latteromden]

9. That depends on what the meaning of "minority" is (I'm serious!).

If you mean simple numbers, I don't think that the Democrats ARE in the minority. Democratic ideals are American ideals, and the people realize it - but with half the country refusing to go and vote, we have a problem on our hands. Conversely, if you mean minority in the sense that the minority party is the one without the political power, we definitely are, and chances are that even if we had a Democratic president and hell, even a Democratic Senate or House, we'd STILL be in the minority, because the right-wingers wouldn't let us get a thing done.

[ChairOne]

10. Of course we are - have been for damn near a decade....

Our rural brethren don't care one whit that they're getting fleeced - just gay-bashing, white heritage, dead camel-jockeys, and god everywhere... It really *is* all about values folks...

Now that they're organized, they're finally getting us back for the 60s... and for Reconstruction...

My guess is that we're gonna have to wait em out. We won't get anywhere until enough of them wise up to their evil. In all likelihood some egregious things are gonna have to happen in hickland before any of them will be willing to break ranks and join us.

What we *don't* need to do is compromise our liberal values in an attempt to win election. If you wanna do that, just become a republican and be done with it.

They used to criticize Democrats, saying that we'd rather be right than win the election. I suggest we stop thinking of that as a criticism, and start thinking of that as our singular virtue. Keep Churchill's Thesis in mind: Americans can be counted on to do what's right - after they've exhausted every other option. We'll be here after they have.

[American Tragedy]

13. Until then, at least we will be on the righteous side of history.

[ChairOne]

15. bam /eom

[Cleita]

12. Well, it will be when most of us leave for the Green Party.

Since the Democratic Party has failed us in leadership, failed us in keeping the DLC infiltrators out and failed us in so many ways, most of us are looking for a new party and new leadership that are closer to our political ideals. I for one don't find this Democratic Party to be the same one that I joined back in 1961 when I first registered to vote as a twenty-one year old.

[ChairOne]

16. bye.

How do you make the wavy-wavy emoticon?

[IStriker]

39. I agree with your analysis...

Maybe it's just because I was "born" a Democrat that I've stayed registered that way since '64 when I turned 21, but I can tell you if the Clintons remain in control of my party, I'm going to find a new one before the next election.

[UdoKier]

17. Who knows. Such Things change.

The democratic party is ineffectual and fairly corrupt. The GOP is aggressive, malevolent and completely corrupt.

Apparently, the voters respect strength and evil more than weakness and less evil. Go figure.

[MessiahRp]

20. What Strength?

How is Bush strong in anyway? He can't fight terrorists so he takes on a defenseless country who wasn't going to attack us anyway. He is ignorant (not strong) and refuses to admit mistakes. He probably LIHOP with 9/11. He can't even fight off a pretzel without making it a close fight to the death.

How is this guy strong at all?

Rp

[UdoKier]

23. It's not Bush that's strong, it's his party.

It's political power. They fight to the death, we ALWAYS run with our tailes tucked between out legs, or kiss dumbya's ring sycophantically.

Did your democratic congressperson or senator vote against Dumbya's Iraq War Resolution?

Mine, Nancy Pelosi voted against it.

Sadly, our Senator Feinstein did not.

We needed to stand united against an obviously obviously corrupt and dishonest war, but nobody stood firm, even Hillary "Goldwater Girl" Clinton voted for it against the vocal opposition of 80% of her constituency. And yet they will probably return her to office, even though she deserves the boot for that alone.

[MessiahRp]

32. Congressionally...

We have a Republican Rep for the House, so Petri was all for it. Senate-wise I *think* Russ Feingold voted against it. Not sure how Herb Kohl voted but I think it was for it.

Rp

[UdoKier]

33. I'm pretty sure Feingold voted no.

A real rarity in the Senate. Feingold is one of very few real democrats left.

[American Tragedy]

40. Feingold voted against it

You're very lucky to have him. He's my favorite living Senator. I kind of wish he would run for president.

[MessiahRp]

41. There's been a lot of talk of that here

After the Kerry loss a lot of Wisconsinites started the Feingold in '08 murmurs...

Rp

[American Tragedy]

19. In presidential elections, it's clear the electoral college hurts us

in its current distribution of voters and electoral votes. If we could only strategically shift our numbers, it would be impossible for them to defeat us. Anybody up for a liberal mass exodus?

[jarab]

22. Simple solution ....

Just divide the minority into four or five components; call 'em DLC, liberals, Deanies, etc. We all know the sum of the parts is greater than the whole.
The greater the divisor, the higher the quotient. New Democratic math.


...O...

[kentuck]

28. Interesting....

Why should the "parts" fight amongst ourselves? Form coalitions with the strongest "part", according to the votes received. Follow the rules of democracy. Majority rules. Negotiate after the victory rather than before the battle. What does it matter if we are a "DLCer" or a "liberal" if we do not win?

[Cleita]

29. If the DNC did this I might hang around. n/t

[jarab]

31. It seems to be the "nature" of the Democratic

animal to fight whenever possible - even when the battle is in its final throes.
OK. Which "part" was the cog in the latest election? We couldn't even agree on that. Sure, if Democrats would coalesce around their "majority" part, that would be a beginning.
Something else to fight about. See, told ya we like to fight (too much).
The animals we are, we eat our own. I'd prefer to be the predator, for a change.
...O...

[kentuck]

34. It shouldn't be a point until you win the election....

that would be the time to battle over whose agenda to put up front. The goal should be to form a coalition of all the "parts" to defeat the Repubs. If we do not succeed, we should all accept the blame equally, rather than say "it's Michael Moore's fault" or "it's Al From's fault" or whomever. It's irrelevant if we don't win. The battle for Party supremacy should be after we win not after we lose.

[jarab]

35. All fine and good ....

"....The battle for Party supremacy should be after we win not after we lose."

The operative word being "should". Naturally I was being sarcastic with the "sum of the parts".
I suppose when a party has as many viable parts (factions) as does ours, it does present a problem to bring the necessary components together. Again , the operative word is "necesary".
To your OP, I am resigned that we are a minority party. But, it's not like we're scraping around for a Nader-like 2 percent. I like to think we're THE minority party of several in competition.
Maybe we should have lost a 70-30 campaign. Perhaps then we would have seen the need to come together. These close elections seem to divide us moreso than a McGovern-like debacle.
...O...

[indigobusiness]

24. Hardly. More like the victimized Party.

Now that BushCo has turned the country I love into a Banana Repepublic, I put more stock in exit-polls than vote-count.

[sonicx]

27. No, Gore won the PV in 2000. so what changed this time? terra

how to counter it? who knows.

[Bandit]

36. Do you honestly believe it matters?

The powerful will continue to rule just as they always have. Don't let yourself fall for the propaganda that you truly have a voice in what goes on in the world. IMHO they have won. I will now only care about what goes on in my own backyard and the hell with the rest of the world or even America. America does not care so why should I?

[kentuck]

37. We have to care about our neighbors....

We have to...