Jim Hodges on "fixing" the Democratic Party

[Julien Sorel]

Stop responding to Republicans on their terms. Republicans use talk radio, FOX News, religious broadcasting and a solid grassroots network to shape the national debate. In the middle of a war, they managed to focus attention on gay marriage. It may be in Democrats' genetic makeup to intellectually engage and thoughtfully debate policy whenever possible, but debating Republicans' issues using their language will never advance our issues. Neither will adopting their agenda.

...

We need to talk about our agenda from a moral perspective as well. Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy advanced their agendas with inspiring language rich in biblical references. We must do that again for causes as great as equitable school funding and affordable prescription drugs.

...

Look to our successes in the states for guidance. In North Carolina, Gov. Mike Easley won re-election the same day President Bush was winning big on the same ballot. Easley's brand is that of a tough former prosecutor and former attorney general who responsibly balanced budgets while shooting straight with the people in a language that everyday folks understand. He is adept at engaging Republicans on his terms -- something the more intellectual wing of our party doesn't seem to get. Easley is far more Dollywood than Hollywood, and so is America.

Gov. Mark Warner of Virginia won in a red state in 2001. So did governors Bill Richardson of New Mexico, Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas and Janet Napolitano of Arizona in 2002 and Kathleen Blanco of Louisiana in 2003. It can be done nationally with new people and better ways of communicating our positions with the voters.

As a Democrat living in a medium-sized city in the middle of red state country, I can tell you that we're hungry for new faces and new ideas from the national Democratic Party leadership. Cosmetic changes won't do. We must make dramatic changes in key leadership positions, language and focus if we are to again enjoy electoral success.

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/opinion/10287402.htm?1c

[Shopaholic]

1. Good column but fair warning-he was a terrible governor when

he was Governor of South Carolina. At least I thought he was, anyway. I do not see this man running the Democratic party!

[Career Prole]

2. If winning elections means giving up on my ideals

they can have the elections, and I'll fight from outside.
I'm not selling out.
If the Democratic Party gives up on our ideals to win elections, I'll fight them too.
I'm not going to be herded complacently into some off-flavor which "experts" feel will make us more palatable to repukes.
If they don't like me or what I believe, fine...I ain't too crazy about them lately, either.

[Julien Sorel]

7. I didn't see anyone talk about selling out ideals.

Where did you see that?

[Career Prole]

17. Am I misinterpreting this, perhaps?

"Cosmetic changes won't do. We must make dramatic changes in key leadership positions, language and focus if we are to again enjoy electoral success."

[Julien Sorel]

19. I believe so.

It may be in Democrats' genetic makeup to intellectually engage and thoughtfully debate policy whenever possible, but debating Republicans' issues using their language will never advance our issues. Neither will adopting their agenda.

[Career Prole]

20. I'm grateful for that. Thanks. :-) n/t

[Perky]

13. If we don't give up our "ideals" we will lose...everytime

Just what ideals are we talking about? Espoused by who?

Our ideals are so muddled they are rotting under the weight of their own inconsitency.

You r suggesting...I think....that 1960s liberalism has a place in a 21st century dialog.
We use to win the South in the 60s with conservative Democrats..Well they did not change...they heard something that appealed to them more.

We allowed on a national basis the Republicans to take the sensible center away from us...You expect to get it back by moving to the left are staying on the same course we have for 40 years...

that is an embarassment... I am a progressive...but by God, repeating the same failed behavior over and over again is the definition of insanity.

[Career Prole]

18. As a matter of fact...perky...yes, I am suggesting exactly that.

"you r suggesting...that 1960s liberalism has a place in a 21st century dialog."

I believe if you read my post a bit more carefully you'll see that I didn't say the party must stay the same.
I said quite clearly that if the party makes any more of a shift to the right than they already have I'll leave the party.
If all that matters is winning elections why bother making the Democratic Party more closely resemble the Republican Party?
Why not just become a friggin' repuke so you can skip down the street chanting "Wee-ee--ee wo-on!"
If the Southern Democrats decided liberalism wasn't as attractive as marching off to war against the heathen and the gays then I say screw 'em...good riddance.
Likewise if the Democratic Party decides to court them by giving up ground we've fought for for forty years I say good riddance to them too. It's that simple.

[Padraig18]

3. Here come the outcries from the usual suspects...

*hoofbeats*

[okieinpain]

4. he left off brad henry of oklahoma. I don't think brad is ready for

prime time, but the guy knocked off steve largent. if largent had won, people would be talking about him running in 08 for president. largent was the repug pretty boy, and they pretty much had him as a governor before the election.

we need somebody like brad but with a little more umph.

[Julien Sorel]

9. Henry's wife is pretty cute.

He, however, looks kind of like a young Karl Rove, and that ain't a compliment. I really don't see him as a national ticket kind of guy, but I like seeing a D as Oklahoma governor, especially since he knocked off Largent to get there.

[unblock]

5. it's the banana republican party that needs fixing

it's been taken over by radicals so far to the right of the country that now the true home of conservatives is the democratic party.

there is nothing the banana republicans have to offer but corruption, elevated to philosophy. their mission is to pass laws that confer financial benefits narrowly to the people who pay for their propoganda and their continued power. meanwhile they offer the rest of the people, including their own loyal rank and file, nothing but meaningless platitudes, false religion, false patriotism, and unfunded mandates.

they abuse the legal process to achieve political goals that they cannot achieve through honest debate, they abuse whatever station in which they have loyalists to implement the whim of the party, no matter what the legalities or ethics of the situation may be.

one day the republican party will come to realize that their once-respected party has been taken over by some of the very enemies they used to fight, and would have fought tooth and nail, if only they had presented themselves more honestly.

[Toucano]

6. Thank you!

Not sure if I'm a "usual suspect" or not, but here I am. :hi:

[Guaranteed]

8. Well, shit, why didn't you say so?

Has anyone told them this?

Think they'll go for it?

[Nordic]

10. He's right. We have to purge the party completely

or start a new one altogether.

There is no "leadership" in the Democratic party.

And yes, the Democratic Party took all the republican's bait, bigtime. It was disgusting to watch.

[PoiBoy]

11. Please read this article...

It was referred to in this thread here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x2099363

the actual article is here:
http://mathewgross.com/blog/archives/001041.html

<snip>
Watch Dan Rather apologize for not getting his facts straight, humiliated before the eyes of America, voluntarily undermining his credibility and career of over thirty years. Observe Donna Brazille squirm as she is ridiculed by Bay Buchanan, and pronounced irrelevant and nearly non-existent. Listen as Donna and Nancy Pelosi and Senator Charles Schumer take to the airwaves saying that they have to go back to the drawing board and learn from their mistakes and try to be better, more likable, more appealing, have a stronger message, speak to morality. Watch them awkwardly quote the bible, trying to speak the new language of America. Surf the blogs, and read the comments of dismayed, discombobulated, confused individuals trying to figure out what they did wrong. Hear the cacophony of voices, crying out, "Why did they beat me?"

And then ask anyone who has ever worked in a domestic violence shelter if they have heard this before.

They will tell you, every single day.
<end>

the similarities between the response of our Democratic representatives and the victims of domestic abuse are amazing, IMO... I had never really looked at it from this angle before...

<snip>
Any battered woman in America, any oppressed person around the globe who has defied her oppressor will tell you this: There is nothing wrong with you. You are in good company. You are safe. You are not alone. You are strong. You must change only one thing: stop responding to the abuser. Don’t let him dictate the terms or frame the debate (he’ll win, not because he’s right, but because force works). Sure, we can build a better grassroots campaign, cultivate and raise up better leaders, reform the election system to make it failproof, stick to our message, learn from the strategy of the other side. But we absolutely must dispense with the notion that we are weak, godless, cowardly, disorganized, crazy, too liberal, naive, amoral, "loose", irrelevant, outmoded, stupid and soon to be extinct. We have the mandate of the world to back us, and the legacy of oppressed people throughout history.

Even if you do everything right, they’ll hit you anyway. Look at the poor souls who voted for this nonsense. They are working for six dollars an hour if they are working at all, their children are dying overseas and suffering from lack of health care and a depleted environment and a shoddy education. And they don’t even know they are being hit.
<end>

I think the author has illustrated an important first step towards "fixing" the Democratic party, please read the whole article, he makes a lot of good points... I wonder what you all think about this?

[Julien Sorel]

15. I read it. It's hyper-emotional crap.

The worst kind of pop psychology. I believe I posted in that thread with suitably disparaging remarks already, but I suppose "battered wife syndrome" is the "pink tu tu Democrat" code du jour, and there's just no stopping it, is there.

As an aside, have you ever thought about the sexist implications of some of the insults thrown at Democrats here? "Battered wife syndrome." "Pink tu tu Democrat." "George Bush's bitch." Kind of funny, when the self-styled "progressives" use the effeminate as a pejorative.

[Cheswick2.0]

12. Sounds like a job for Howard Dean

<<<<<who responsibly balanced budgets while shooting straight with the people in a language that everyday folks understand. He is adept at engaging Republicans on his terms -- something the more intellectual wing of our party doesn't seem to get.>>>>

[Julien Sorel]

14. So does everything.

We need to talk about our agenda from a moral perspective as well. Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy advanced their agendas with inspiring language rich in biblical references. We must do that again for causes as great as equitable school funding and affordable prescription drugs.

"I don't want to listen to the fundamentalist preachers anymore!" -- Howard Dean

[Shopaholic]

16. And from what I read in my local paper--Hodges is in the running

to become the new DNC chair-along with the cast of thousands already mentioned here. Not good news in my opinion. . . he was a half-assed governor at best.