New Dem Daily: What Happened (i.e., Why We Lost)

[dolstein]

I note the the serial DLC bashers around here: READ this article before you flame away. Remember, Democrats are supposed to believe that thinking is a virtue.

DLC | New Dem Daily | November 4, 2004
What Happened?

. . .

We have no easy excuses for this defeat. Democrats had a smart, tough candidate at the top of the ticket, and superior candidates all across the country. We had plenty of money, the best organization of our lifetimes, extraordinary enthusiasm, and greater unity than at any time in living memory. Democrats faced a vulnerable incumbent with a bad record who deliberately abandoned the political center, and whose case for a second term was constantly undermined by the consequences of his failures as displayed on the nightly news. And his party produced a do-nothing Congress with no accomplishments worth running on. Ralph Nader was an electoral cipher. It's hard to ignore the basic problem: We didn't effectively make the case for firing the incumbents and replacing them with Democrats.

. . .

If, as the DLC has long argued, the test for Democrats is to convince voters that they will defend their country, share their values, and champion their economic interests, it's pretty clear Democrats continue to come up short on the first two tests even as they pass the third with flying colors.

As a look at the electoral map and the Congressional results shows, there is a geographical challenge closely associated with the "trust gap" challenge: We need a heartland strategy to go with a positive message that reaches the heart as well as the wallet. In presidential contests, we begin each campaign at a disadvantage because our strength is limited to the Northeast, the West Coast, and the upper Midwest, where our candidates must win nearly every winnable state. And more obviously, Democrats will be consigned to a permanent minority in the Senate, in the states, and -- because states control redistricting -- in the House as well, if we cannot find a way to become competitive in some parts of the South and the West. That's why we should not take too much solace in the narrowness of Bush's victory in the national popular and electoral vote. National politics is not just about the presidency.

All of these challenges are manageable if Democrats take them seriously and honestly. They add up to the urgent need for a party strategy and message that's strategic, not tactical; that conveys a comprehensive message, not just targeted appeals to narrow constituencies; that's national, not regional; and that's based on ideas and hope, not just on opposition and anger.

. . .

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?cp=2&kaid=131&subid=192&contentid=253002

[Avalux]

1. We need

to be ourselves. We must become who we are. I'm sorry Dennis, you had it right.