We've lost our way as a party.

[davepc]

The Democratic Party shattered in 1965, and we no longer have a party of unified vision and focus, we have a motley collection of special interests. We have lacked cohesive vision and leadership, and when we run into people who give us a taste of promise, like the DLC, they fail us after modest victories. Big defeats after modest victories don't move us forward.

Civil Rights, a REPUBLICAN idea from the Civil War on was used by them to break the party at the hilt in the 60's.

Our core values which were good enough for us to dominate national politics from 1932 through the mid 1960's have been watered down by the influx of 60's and 70's movements. Good well meaning people, but radical anti-war movements didn't stop Nixon in 72. Unforgiving defense Abortion rights have given the republicans a club to beat us over the head with for 30 years. Gun control flies in the face of an amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Recently they twisted the message of the gay rights movement and attacked us with it.

Our message of economic opportunity; the battle for the little guy who got squeezed to death by the policies of Herbert Hoover, have become so diluted that they just don't resonate and capture the hearts of the onetime base of the party.

Our core value was ECONOMIC justice. In the throes of the great depression and afterwords it made sense, and was adopted far and wide. It worked, beyond anyones hopes and dreams. From that success came a natural byproduct. Social justice. They go hand in hand. Being the ones who had lead the people out of the depths of economic oppression and suppression, they were willing to follow us down the road to social enlightenment in the late 60's and 70's.

But now, economic justice doesn't resonate with the people like it used to. Republicans talk of modest tax cuts and the salt of the earth get a $200 dollar check and think they've struck Republican gold.

The barriers we set up in government with the New Deal and Great Society provide such a buffer between the people and their economic oppressors that they don't see the correlation anymore. While the oppressors have found ways to work the system to short change the little guy, we stand by and let these institutions stagnate.

The people feel oppressed economically, they don't feel like they have economic freedom, but they can't see the cause clearly. The Republicans accuse the government machinery of being the oppressing factor, not the protector from it. We lost our way. We lost our message.

Rural men and women, union folks, farmers and sharecroppers, urban poor, catholics, social justice christans....we're losing them election after election after election.

Every now and again somebody shows up who can mend the fissures, but those men are far and in between. Clinton and Carter are the exception, not the rule.

We have become so out of touch with middle America that its disheartening, and going to be fatal. We need to fix this party from the inside out or we will never again be relevant in national politics.

Take a look at who the Governor is in California and New York. We cant build battlements to keep the Republicans out, we need serious fundamental change to this party to keep it relevant, or it is going to die.

The Party of Jefferson is going to go the way of the Whigs in 1850 unless we get our house in order and right quick.

What is the answer? Federalism? A movement to reform government, to rip out parts of the New Deal and Great Society? Extreme radicalism? Another attempt to "tweak" our message? Heap more blame on the media and voter machines?

We need to find answers to those questions, we need to find a unified voice and vision, and we need to make that vision the vision of the HEART of America. A lot of people live in the cities and on the coast. They're vitally important to this nation, and an important part of our party. But they're not the heart of it, never were, not under FDR, not under Truman, not under Kennedy. We've lost the heart of our party. We need to get them back. Or we're going to splinter and die.

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. Instant runoff voting in your party is one way to find out who

your base is and what they support.

-----------------------------------------------------------
FIGHT! Take this country back one town and state at a time!
http://www.geocities.com/greenpartyvoter/electionreform.htm

[davepc]

3. I fully support it

But our urban base is strong, and our rural base is damn near dead. We need to get that rural base back. We've surrendered it to the Republicans.

[The Flaming Red Head]

47. Our urban base is gone if we go in the direction you just suggested

The farmers (rural voters) had two bumper crops two years in a row and are about suffer greatly over Republican led Bush initiatives.

It won't matter when we do get them back (and we will) if we don't investigate the corruption/fraud in this election


This is about fraud anyway, nothing else. Get it, got it, good.

[Azure]

2. davepc is one of the DUers with some insight. n/t

[Tweed]

4. Kick, I have nothing to say Davepc said it all

DUers should read this

[makhno]

5. Very well said

Economic justice is what this is all about. You'll never unify the country with divisive social issues, especially a country as diverse, and in parts conservative, as the US. Yet every voter can relate to the good that strong unions and sensible government regulation will bring into their lives, no matter their religious or social opinions.

Of course, the Democratic party is hampered by its allegiance to the same corporate interests as the ones driving its republican opponents. It's hard to make genuine progress on the class front when you have to defend such abominations as NAFTA as if they were a natural part of your party's historical platform.

Frankly, this scares me. It scares me because I don't easily see even the more progressive Democratic officials fighting against their own class interests.

[davepc]

7. Building ties with corporate interests is an ideology/pragmatism problem

I don't like it either, but what kind of shape would we be without the money?

We used to depend on the unions and the rest, those wells are running dry as the country gets de-unionized

The DLC was right to try to find a new place for cash, one that in theory at the time would suck it away from the republicans (hasn't worked that way though)

Its a tough problem.

[BeFree]

6. All we need

Is to be unified in our main quest: Equal rights across the board.

But you see dems attacking dems all the time for stupid reasons, while the pukes all stick together with their lies.

We out number the pukes 2 to 1, and if we can ever get our shit together we will make it more comfortable for those who are afraid of voting to vote for, and stand with us.

The message changes as we adapt to circumstances, so it will never be very clear. What is clear is the division amongst ourselves over petty, inconsequential personal interests which obscure our main goal: Equal rights for all.

[American Tragedy]

61. We outnumber them? You could've fooled me

[KharmaTrain]

8. This Map Says It All:

Look closely and see the city/rural split here for yourself. I'm in Illinois and if you looked at the county vote, you'd have sworn this is Kansas. If it wasn't for the Cook County machine and a three stooges local Repugnican party, we'd be Indiana :shiver:.

Our problem is misjudging both the impact of the 2000 census and the various redistricting that went on in many states and the sad reality that Repugnican legislatures throughout the Midwest & South have gerrymandered the Democrats into the urban areas and divided the districts to either pit Democrat vs. Democrat or weaken the base (by adding strong Repugnican suburbs) that led to seat losses.

It's not our heart is not in the right place, it's that we're in a bad situation and have to change tactics or continue to see this map get redder and redder.

If this is to be a national party, it has to find ways to reach into those RED areas and win local elections, have competitive Democratic organizations that can address the local concerns and start building goodwill that will start winning us the ears and then hearts and minds that are now closed to us.

Cheers and thanks for your post.

[davepc]

9. ego kick

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[catbert836]

11. So what do you suggest?

[davepc]

12. I don't know, we need to find the answers together.

The "leadership" is think tanking on it, no reason we shouldn't. All of us are in the same boat.

[GreenArrow]

13. more pertinently,

we've lost our way as a country.

[davepc]

14. And we can get it back, but not by ignoring 1/2 of it.

[GreenArrow]

17. half of it didn't vote

for anyone. How do we get that half back?

[QC]

19. How do we know that non-voters are liberals?

It's an article of faith around here that if we could just get the apathetic to turn out, we would rule forever and ever, but I have yet to see any evidence that people who don't vote are secretly liberals.

[GreenArrow]

20. we don't know that

I suspect many of them wouldn't be. But who knows.

This country is so far right at the moment, that even most of the left is right.

[NorthernSpy]

24. what we do know is that they aren't voting Republican

And this in an age when the Rovian repugs are supposed to have crafted a message perfectly in sync with the sentiments of the American voter. :eyes:


Since uncommitted voters evidently aren't inspired by the Republican message, what genius decided that they'd probably just love it if we hit 'em with a load of repub-lite?

[QC]

28. I think that's a good point.

What has always made me doubtful is that most of the people I know who don't vote say that they're just not interested in politics, think that it has nothing to do with their lives, politicians are all out for themselves, etc. They don't seem particularly ideological to me.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. I Am So Tired Of Hearing There Is A Reservoir Of Leftie Non Voters

Waiting To Be Tapped....


Several of us DUers were hollering that we would could not count on a hidden preference to save our ass in this election. That we would win with the electorate we had or not at all ergo:

http://www.igs.berkeley.edu/publications/par/July1999/HightonWolfinger.html


Their analysis of survey data show that no objectively achieved increase in turnout--including compulsory voting--would be a boon to progressive causes or Democratic candidates. Simply put, voters differ minimally from all citizens; outcomes would not change if everyone voted.

[davepc]

21. i don't believe you can.

People vote and don't vote for lots of different reasons, but thats beyond the scope of the discussion at the moment. When we can get candidates elected to national office with some consistency, instead of struggling to hold onto an ever dwindling base of power in the legislative then maybe we can tackle that one.

Even then I don't have much faith in the purposefully apathetic.

[GreenArrow]

26. like you said, it's beyond the scope of discussion

but, just to make one point anyway, I wouldn't categorize all of them as purposefully apathetic; I think there are plenty of could be voters whose problem is alienation and distrust rather than apathy.

[American Tragedy]

62. What so-called progressive refuses to vote even at a time like this?

If there is indeed this latent base out there, what the fuck are they waiting for? How bad do things need to get? What do we have to do to convince them?

I am getting sick of hearing people say that they won't go because they are intimidated by voting machines, or the weather is bad, or there aren't any perfect candidates, or we're not trying hard enough, or whatever. If they choose to imperil us all because they can't bear to take one hour or so every four years to press a button on a screen, then the apathetic can go straight to hell. There is such a thing as sin of omission.

[RedEarth]

15. Excellent post and I agree with your views....

I've enjoyed reading your posts over the last several days and look forward to more of your insight.....need to run, since I'm going to watch some football and enjoy the beautiful weather.

[Toucano]

16. Question.

"...unless we get our house in order and right quick."

What does that mean?

[davepc]

38. i meant

we need to arrange ourselves internally to become an organization that is effective at fighting the Republican party in a cohesive and substantive way.

Its not code for kick out (your special interest group) here or a plea to abandon issues wholesale.

The way we've been going has not been working, so time to try something different.

[THUNDER HANDS]

18. I wouldn't say we've lost our way, so much as

the country has lost its mind.

[NorthernSpy]

22. I propose we sell out Big Business

Let's just sell 'em right out. Those bastards are costing us elections!

Isn't it funny how their interests never really seem to be negotiable, no matter how extreme their demands?


So, anyway... who do you propose we sell out?

[rockydem]

23. The book "What's the Matter With Kansas?"

is a must read and deals with these issues.

We must frame our econmic ideas in moral terms - not just five point plans.

[Leilani]

25. This is a terrific post & tells the story well....

You're looking at the big picture, while most people are concentrating on individual interests.

Where are the big thinkers for this party?

Where are the creative people with some new ideas?

My biggest criticism of Dems is that they find problems & their only solution is to spend more money.

For example, the schools are not working. If you look at successful schools vs failing schools, it does not follow that spending more money will solve the problems. Some of the WORST schools spend the most per student.

[Awsi Dooger]

27. Excellent post, per usual

The paragraph that struck me was the $200 tax cut. So true. I can't believe how many low income/mid income friends of mine vote GOP simply because of that once a year bonanza. They are convinced Kerry or any Democrat will raise taxes wildly across the board. When I emphasized Clinton only raised the taxes of the wealthiest 1.3% in '93, or that day to day costs that have soared under Bush, like oil and health care, more than wipe out the tax cut, they dismiss it as liberal propoganda.

[DaveinMD]

29. its all about economic populism

and this populism needs to be rooted in the American values of hard work and fairness. The other aspect is that Democrats need to start running against the powers in Washington. We are out of power completely. We need to turn that into an asset.

[beevul]

30. Good points...

Heres my answer.


You are never going to reason with the right, on god, or gays.

Forget even trying.

Forget giving an inch on gay rights, or womans right to choose.



You want middle America back?


Do away with the gun issue.

Re-make the image of the party where the second amendment is concerned.

Grab up all the average joes who don't vote because it means voting against guns or voting against choice.

Grab up all the average joes who would vote Dem, except don't, because of the gun issue.

Look at all the folks talking about moving on abortion, or glbt rights.

The fact that moving on guns has not been talked about much, but moving on abortion and glbt rights has, IMO, is indicative of exactly why we don't get alot of the rural vote.

Support gun rights.

Take the issue and its voters AWAY from the opposition.

Yolk thier strengths.

Better to have them as an ally, even a lukewarm one, then an enemy.

[davepc]

33. I couldn't agree more about the futility of gun control

Holding a party position that is in direct conflict with the Constitution and explaining it away with "nuances" such as collective right versus individual right is contemptible.

Of course Gun Control was always a part of the Jim Crow Democratic Party, used as an excuse to disarm African Americans so the Klan and others could pray upon them more easily. Thats a FACT we need to own up to. The easiest and best way would be drop gun control as a policy point. We totally and completely and utterly underestimate the power this issue has on millions of voters.

Quite frankly, as a party of choice, we have decided that individuals shouldn't have a choice when it comes to guns. We have decided a BIG GOVERNMENT KNOWS BETTER, AND WE SAY "NO" policy somehow makes sense. Its not a hunting issue, its not a sportsman issue, its not a crime issue, its a personal freedom issue.

We try to pass laws that legislate otherwise law abiding people into criminals based on their possessions. We tell otherwise law abiding people that they need to register with the government, because we don't trust them. We tell otherwise law abiding people that their personal choices are bad/dumb/stupid/wasteful etc, and then wonder why they don't like us. We tell people that they should be stripped of their rights to own the tools of self defense in lieu of a government promise of protection.

Some people had the gall to tell me it "wasn't an issue" this election cycle. They should tell that to those who have "Kerry is a gun grabber" bumper stickers.

Its just part of a larger inability to understand the rural voter and figure out what issues are important to them.

[looking glass]

31. Great post

My two cents -
1. The gun issue has got to go.

2. I'll be flamed for days, but the visceral hatred for Christians by a tiny, but tolerated group of Democrats, has to go as well. At this very moment, there are a couple of threads going, which, if you substituted the words "Jew-boy", or "rag-head", for "fundie", would make harrowing reading. Yet it is winked at, here, and on the national level.

The current thread telling people to go to a church on Sunday to see what those crazy evangelicals are up to, is a great example. It is the kind of thing that turns off middle-of-the-road voters in droves.

[rndmprsn]

32. Let me make a few suggestions...

to your very heart-felt plea..as a first big step, i honestly think that we need to start funding liberal think-tanks to come up with just such solutions to your questions, this is only a first step, much much more to be done in synch and concurrently...the repubs have a good 30-40 year head start on us, to the point that now almost 80% of the talking heads and pundits on TV, who have enormous influence over public debate, come from conservative think-tanks...80%!

they are out there everyday on RW media and MS media knocking us over the head with such deviously-brlliant terms as: tax-relief, clean skies initiative, healty forests, tort-reform and frivilous lawsuits, and no child left behind...orwellian indeed, effective...you bet.

conservative think-tanks are well funded by enormous block-grants, that not only come up with policy and media frames for those policies, but they spend VAST amounts to continue to build their already impressive infrastructure...they have the future of thier own one-party system in mind and are doing everything to make this vision come true.

the few moderate and progressive foundations spend most of their rather small grants on immediate direct ways to help ppl in need...although this is noble, no doubt about it...it addresses short term needs out of necesity rather than long-term strategy and infrastructure building...the funders of these foundations have many strings attached with a single-mindedness to not duplicate efforts to make thier money more effective and so...our progressive foundations are forced into very NARROW initiatives.

they conservatives have been rewarded MANY MANY times over with their investments into their organizations...they have managed to frame the debate and control the message and language...with the greatest and most direct result is they have won the "values" game and have connected with the working-poor and suburbanites, who are OUR natural allies, in ways that convince them to vote against their OWN economic self-interest...through this and RW media, which is another conservative investment, they have replaced facts with emotion...emotions are very powerful and almost always win out in the end, it just does.

their think-tanks have also created wedge issues that divide us from OUR base and they have created strategic-intiatives, like tort-reform, whos PRIMARY reason for being is to DRY UP funding for the democratic party...trial lawyers are BIG contributers to our party, without them the party shrinks from lack of resources...the secondary results will be the loosening of environmental regulations and consumer protection laws which will INCREASE thier OWN funding by limiting the amount of money a person, who has been awarded by a jury of peers, can sue for.

we need to come up with our own wedge issues, and strategic initiatives...not just to be able to fight the repubs on equal terms like they do...but BECUASE they are OUR PRINCIPLES and VALUES.

they value STRONG DEFENSE...we value a STRONG AMERICA
they value SMALL GOVT...we value EFFECTIVE GOVT
they value FREE MARKETS...we value BROAD PROSPERITY
they value LOWER TAXES...we value a BETTER FUTURE
they value FAMILY VALUES...we value MUTUAL RESPONSIBILITY

we all know and passionately cling to our principle and values, but we have lost the communications game and haven't connected to the masses...and in a way we need to change the way we think...STOP PUTTING THE RURAL WORKING-POOR DOWN, they know we look down on them so why in the world would the ever vote for us?

we've got SO much to do and little time to do...but a first step in OUR vision is an investment in IDEAS which come from US and our OWN progressive think-tanks.

[bklyncowgirl]

34. A good thoughtful post

One problem that I see is that the Democratic party is a collection of interest groups. I do political cartooning and when I did a drawing of typical Republicans its easy. Big money and Fundamentalists.

Democrats were more difficult. In the end I came up with a black woman looking ascance at a gay man who was looking nervously at a union hardhat who was none too thrilled with the environmentalist standing next to him who was glaring at the Wall Street type next to her. It's hard to develop a coherent platform without offending someone.

NAFTA is anathema to unionists but the Wall Street types who provide so much of the party's funding are inflexibly pro free trade.

Poor but socially conservative African-American and Hispanics are part of our base but so are gay activists and pro-choice groups.

The goal is how to pull all of these threads into a convincing message that speaks to people's every day lives without losing vital parts of or consistuency.

[baltodemvet]

36. I (largely) agree

My disagreement is a "half full/half empty" quibble. I very much agree with your assessment in terms of what we need to do but I emphatically disagree that the party is on the verge of extinction.

I think the Democratic Party is on the right track and is more coherent and united than it has been in years. We need to strengthen and build on that. In my view it's not a matter of "splinter or die" but "strengthen and win"

I absolutely agree that we need to focus on reaching 'middle america'. I think we're on the right track in terms of policy and principles but we need to focus on how we relate these to 'middle americans'.

For these purposes, we should assume that we failed to effectively reach at least 25% of the folks who voted for Bush but share many of our concerns. We need to reach out to them and listen to them figure out how to connect with them.

To do this, we have to proceed on the premise that they voted for Bush because WE failed to reach them, not because they're idiots or fascists.

[In Sha Allah]

37. Do you really think you've lost your way as a party?

Nader, Greens, Independents, and non-voters have been telling you this for years.

I'm old enough to remember when the myth was that Republicans stood for Business and and had lots of dirty money, while the Democrats stood for the People and had lots of votes. Then Reagan came along and ate away at your base by pretending to be one of the common folk. From that point forward the Republicans began standing for Big Business and Joe Sixpack, while the Democrats increasingly stood for milder versions of whatever the Republicans stood for.

Your leaders (and by extension, YOU - the party members who supported them) traded cash for the moral high ground and have lost party members and elections ever since. How you turn it around is simple:

Straighten up. Fly right. If one of your bums takes a corporate contribution, toss him out and replace him with a bum who won't. Your party is corrupt from Dog Catcher right up to Governor, but you could fix it in one day flat if everybody just quit taking pay-offs. Then the Republicans either have to follow suit or lose the "moral value" voters, because it's pretty hard to be "pro-foetus" if they're being bribed to craft laws which will let power plants contaminate the little proto-darlings with toxic mercury.

Protecting the unborn from deadly mercury pollution is just about the easiest high ground there is to take. On an issue like that you'd not only mop the floor with Republicans - you'd rinse their heads out in wringers and hang them upside down in the utility closet. The only requirement is that you cannot accept money from power companies. Period. You'll lose the big money, but you'll start winning elections again.

If your party further divorces itself from reality in a fruitless attempt to gain the middle ground by proposing policies only slightly less fascistic than those proposed by delusional pseudo-cons, though, we are ALL doomed.

[demwing]

39. Where do YOU, personally, stand on these issues:

1)Reproductive choice for women
2)Civil liberties for Gays and Lesbians
3) Black Box Voting

I know you don't support gun control, but your posts concerning the above issues generally skirt around your personal views.

You've said that our stand on these issues is costing us votes in the South and the Midwest, and that we need to compromise on abortion and gay rights.

I've also noted that you've referred to BBV as being in the realm of the tin foil issue.

So, are you just pragmatic, and want the party to rethink these issues based on electability, or do you actually share thse values with Southern and Midwestern voters?

[Bridget Burke]

40. Apparently, fewer rights for women & gays.

And the whole Civil Rights thing was a mistake, as well. Just give up on all gun control & trust in black box voting.

It's very simple.

[davepc]

51. on thoes three issues...

1) should be legal for those who want it, though personally I don't like the idea. I'm one of those life begins at conception types. Other people feel differently about it, and it is hard to prove with ones of us are right and which are wrong...so I can live with legal abortion. safe, legal, and rare, I think somebody said once.

However, evidence goes to show that the better the general economic level there is, the lower the rate of abortion goes. Its a hard sell, but shouldn't be ignored. The better off people are, the less likely they are to get an abortion. So government should do what it can to provide a level playing field for people to better their economic condition.

2) The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment goes for everybody, irregardless of their sexuality. As far as government should be concerned, if two consenting adults want to enter into a contractual relationship where they give each other special rights and privileges based on an agreed upon status, then goverment should let them. If we want to call that status "marriage" then, I personally don't have a problem with it, but I can see the point of those who have an issue with it from a religious perspective. But a secular government shouldn't make any judgment one way or another.

3) don't like it, no need for it, should be eliminated. I fail to see why an electronic voting machine can not print out a paper receipt to be manually recounted in the instance of a irregularity.

[xequals]

41. I disagree. Realignment happens.

Everytime things go bad Dems can't simply jump into their time machine and go back to the New Deal era. This nostalgic, clinging to the past type of thinking has gotten Dems where they are today, straddling the line between conservative and liberal Democrats. You don't see the Republicans sitting around wishing they were still the party of Lincoln or Eisenhower.

To me, the way to go is in a more libertarian direction. Liberalism/populism/socialism/restributionism/collectivism -- whatever you want to call it -- has failed badly, resulting in a semi-fascist state where corporations have overwhelming unchecked power. A moderate left libertarian approach would work better, even though it wouldn't please the statist far left. The government would be a referee, making sure every one's rights are preserved and that corporations are playing by the rules. There would be a social saftey net, but an efficient one that creates results, accountability and upward mobility - not a permanent welfare class. It would be more of an investment in people than the bottomless pit/maze of bureacracy that it is today.

This approach would help us to frame the controversial social issues in terms of personal freedom, and put some of them back at the state level where they belong (guns, marriage, marijuana, prostitution, etc.). There would be no special privileges for anyone based on race, sex, orientation or religion. It would revise affirmative action to be based on income level only, to give poor people of all races an equal opportunity towards the American dream.

All of this would help neutralize poor white anger towards Democrats. The party would be able to strengthen itself with the metro base while appealing to rural voters in the libertarian leaning states like Montana, Wyoming, Colorado etc. The party would more easily be able to adapt a message for different constituencies.

Regardless of what Dems do, they should not attempt to go back in time or attempt a simple left/right shift. They need to come up with new ideas.. big ideas that will force realignment and a shifting of the majority. Most of the voters that will put the Dems back in power are currently in the Republican party. The rest are non voters. It could be done, but it will take big ideas that go beyond liberalism or conservatism.

[sadiesworld]

42. Populism results in unchecked corporate power?

Do tell.

[xequals]

43. Liberalism/populism or whatever you wish to call it, has failed

in most of it's implementations/goals/results and has failed to be a credible opposition to conservatism. Liberalism itself doesn't cause unchecked corporate power. It's failure does because conservatives have little to no opposition.

Admitedly, I'm no fan of social democratic policies. They may be popular in Europe and Canada, but simply don't appeal to the American electorate.

The weakness of the Democrats has resulted in a one party state, a conservative majority which has gone largely unchecked. The far right's only real remaining opposition are moderate Republicans. IMO, it's time for the Democrats to try something else.

[sadiesworld]

45. "[social democratic policies] don't appeal to the American electorate"

Malarkey. Polls consistently show that most Americans favor SS & Medicare, universal healthcare, restrictions on outsourcing, trade reform, environmental regulation, etc. The PROBLEM is that dems haven't done ENOUGH in these areas.

Republicans don't win b/c of their opposition to "social democratic polices", they win in spite of it. They ALWAYS moderate their economic positions in campaigns. * didn't win (I use the term loosely) b/c of his positions on healthcare, SS, and trade. He "won" because he appealed to fear and bigotry. It also helps to own the media.

It's one thing to have a differing view on the appeal of "social democratic" policies, it is quite another to pretend that the majority of Americans agree with you.

[davepc]

50. Americans don't want Europeans style democratic socialism

Its too much of a nanny state.

Reasonable government protection and influence is one thing.

Frankly, I wouldn't want to live under the German or French system myself.

Those systems become top heavy with the elderly and a smaller younger workforce needs to bear the burden of multiple generations.

To make up the shortfall immigration needs to be relaxed to provide an influx of needed workers, but those workers bring with them their religion and customs and culture from the parts of Africa and Asia. The new immigration gives rise to domestic militant fascism/neo Nazism to fight the "assault" on the old culture, which creates even more problems...

its not a pretty cycle.

I think people should be free to succeed or fail on their own merits, I think governments job should be to provide as much of a level playing field as possible.

[UdoKier]

52. Spoken like someone who has never liven under those systems.

Standards of living in most of Europe are higher for most citizens than here. Most Americans "don't want" it because they have a twisted perception of what it is. My experience with the national healthcare in Japan confirmed that to me. Monthly premiums are less than a fourth of what they are here, less wait time, full choice of doctors, dirt cheap prescription drugs, dirt cheap copay at the doctor's...

I found that EVERYTHING the right claims about "socialized medicine" was a LIE and in fact our system is the far inferior one.

[davepc]

53. European economic systems

are so bounded by taxation and regulation that growth is stagnate. Unemployment rates in the EU average out to around 9%. Germany and France both hovering around 10% for the better part of this decade.

Over-regulation is a major economic inhibitor.

The large expansive safety net shifts the burden of maintaining the society onto an ever shrinking native workforce (due to lower then maintains birth rates) which pushes the need for foreign immigration higher. Which like I said, leads to another whole set of problems.

Safety nets are necessary, level playing fields are necessary. Government as a referee is necessary. Those have all been reasonable and responsible positions held by the Democratic party, and ones that I share.

European systems are astronomically more intrusive and burdensome and as a whole drag down the economies and productivity and relative power of the EU member states.

Developing Eastern European economies are attempting to emulate the American system rather then the Socialist Democratic one found in Germany and France for a reason.

I haven't even discussed tax rates.

[UdoKier]

54. I guess that explains the millions of Europeans fleeing for the good life.

Oh, wait, they're not!

I have dozens of friends from Italy, Switzerland, Germany, Spain, Great Britain, The Netherlands, etc. etc. The only one who has EVER complained about any excess is my pal from the Netherlands. By and large their description of life is pretty good. And NONE of them would want to settle down here.

[davepc]

55. I never said Europe was some hellhole wasteland

But socialist democratic systems have faults.

Frankly, I like the way we do things here for the most part. Its not perfect and things need work, but a thriving capitalist system with government holding the reins to work against worker exploitation and oppression is about as good as it gets, providing the wealth and stimulation of capitalism with a healthy dose of protectionism for the people who make it all run at the bottom of the pyramid.

We need reform, not overhaul.

[slackmaster]

56. At least they have the Metric System in European countries

:argh:

[NorthernSpy]

59. I hate the metric system

Just sayin'.

[UdoKier]

57. Your description

"a thriving capitalist system with government holding the reins to work against worker exploitation and oppression is about as good as it gets, providing the wealth and stimulation of capitalism with a healthy dose of protectionism for the people who make it all run at the bottom of the pyramid."

Sounds like democratic Europe to me. The US is pretty damn unfettered, IMO, and we are drowning in both Government and household debt, whereas Europe is not.

Living good on a credit card is not prosperity. And a lot of us are buying just the necessities on a credit card.

I love this country, but everything good for about the bottom 40~50% of wage earners has been destroyed over the last 20 years or so.

[xequals]

60. That's why I'm an independent even though I vote Dem most of the time.

I don't like the Repubs social/moral authoritarianism or the Dems economic authoritarianism. People don't fear government regulation until it directly affects them. Take away what they like and they become a libertarian in a second. I don't like authoritarianism whether it comes from the right, left or center.

The government should simply be a referee to ensure a fair playing field, and to step in to protect people's rights. There should also be a basic and efficient safety net and social policies designed to move people upward - not create a welfare class. People should be able to fail or succeed on their own merits. Equal opportunity and equal rights - not enforced equality (which is inequality, because the people who do more and deserve more get the same as people who do less or nothing).

The founding fathers intended America to be a secular libertarian nation, not a socialistic (Dems) of fascistic (Repubs) one. We will return to that vision one day; it is the most natural, free and fair system. Nature always wins in the end.

[NorthernSpy]

58. LOL! you just gave a great description of...

... the status quo right here in the United States!:

Those systems become top heavy with the elderly and a smaller younger workforce needs to bear the burden of multiple generations.

To make up the shortfall immigration needs to be relaxed to provide an influx of needed workers, but those workers bring with them their religion and customs and culture from the parts of Africa and Asia. The new immigration gives rise to domestic militant fascism/neo Nazism to fight the "assault" on the old culture, which creates even more problems...

its not a pretty cycle.

LOL! And to think that we ourselves have achieved all that without at least enjoying a little social democracy first. Kinda like going directly to jail without passing Go or collecting $200.

And why is it that some people always claim that Americans won't accept a "nanny state"? Hell -- we seem to have accepted the drug war and its surveillance culture and gulags just fine, and that's a level of repression that the nanny-staters have never even dreamed of.

I find the general trend of your commentary to be most odd and disingenuous, Dave PC.

[DemCam]

44. We succeeded with our agenda some time ago...

Even if implementation isn't perfect, we have succeeded with our civil rights agenda, women's issues, but then we got complacent. We knew we could count on the Supreme Court and Congress to stop wholesale loss.

We don't know how to be a minority party and are left with only the hope that this bunch will quickly mess up.

I don't think they will...at least not soon.

Now is the time for us to talk to each other about out differences. This board has been a real downer the last few days with the hating and carping and fukuing going on.

I will never give up on the rights of any group of citizens and I will never be anti-business. We, in our security and power, became draconian about governmental envirionmental regulations that hampered business...especially small business. The demands are outrageous.

This is the conversation I would like to have...how do we embrace reasonable stances that don't harm...and at the same time reach out to people who have been brainwashed with distortions and outright lies.

Sorry I nattered on so long. Didn't intend to. There is just so very much to think about.

[sadiesworld]

48. I know your concern for rights includes...

the right of every citizen to breathe clean air. OR NOT.

[Mike L]

46. Great post. The answer is simple.

Choose candidates that agree with middle America's cultural values. Otherwise, the Democratic Party is doomed.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

49. Until we decisively figure out

if the last three elections in four years have even been on the up and up, I don't see the point in engaging in ritual foot-shooting.

Without clean elections, everything else is academic.

[hughee99]

64. I agree it's important

But unless you're expecting to find 10-20 million votes worth of fraud, the questions still need to be answered. While I can believe that fraud could have cost us Ohio, Florida and maybe one or two other states, * won many states outright. We still need to have a message for them. If the repukes are winning 30 states, we're still going to have issues in the senate, no matter who is president. We can't succeed and achieve our goals, in the long-term, without getting more Americans on board.

[Ksec]

63. Heres what I believe

Take the social issues like abortion and gay marriage OFF the platform. Those would actually do better as personal issues not associated with either party. You would have just as many GOPers fighting for those rights as you would Dems if it werent such a partisan issue. This would not hinder whatever you feel personally about these issues and IMO it would make the support even greater if it werent a partisan issue.