The Kill Your Own Base Strategy

[radio4progressives]

The Kill Your Own Base Strategy
by Chris Bowers, Wed Feb 22, 2006 at 03:02:39 PM EST


I have engaged in a decent amount of berating lately toward members of the progressive activist base who, in response to poor Democratic candidates, have indicated that they will do little or nothing to support the Democratic cause in 2006. I stand by those comments, because I feel the progressive response to any given political situation can never be to do nothing. I think this is especially the case when progressives are so desperately in need of strong, extra-party (outside of the party, not a third party) organizing to make sure that in the future we will have more power so as to, among other things, prevent the selection of poor Democratic candidates. However, in the interests of equal opportunity berating, I also want to make it clear that the Democratic Party has been doing a terrible job of firing up its base in recent elections, and it has cost them dearly at the ballot box. Just look at this remarkable data from Gallup (emphasis mine):


"While a seven-point margin would give Democrats majority control of the U.S. House of Representatives if all registered voters actually participated in the 2006 election, it is likely many voters will not do so. Typically, this early in the election year Gallup does not ask the "likely voter" questions that are designed to identify the subset of registered voters (RV) who are most likely to vote. Still, our experience over the past two mid-term elections, in 1998 and 2002, suggests that the RV numbers tend to overstate the Democratic margin by about ten and a half percentage points."


cont..
http://mydd.com/story/2006/2/22/15239/0976

[eallen]

1. What is the Democratic base?

The GOP has acquired a base. It is the religious right. They are united ideologically, they are politically active, they reliably turn out and vote, and they represent about a quarter of the electorate. Is there a corresponding group for the Democratic Party? I don't think so. This talk of a base assumes a symmetry between the two parties that I don't believe is real.

It's not morally wrong that we don't have a base. In fact, I'd be very leary of the party if it did have a base in the sense of the GOP, Al Qaeda, or some of the older communist movements. That kind of ideological movement looks to True Believers, not rational citizens.

But this asymmetry does mean we need to stop thinking of ourselves as a reflection of them. We're not the anti-GOP. That's how Ann Coulter thinks of us, of course. But that doesn't ring true to me.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

2. Not only that, but the Christian GOP right has a weekly meeting

It's practically mandatory, and it takes place throughout the U.S. It's called Sunday church services. There, they are a captive (though willing) audience to hear the wonderfulness of the GOP, and the horrors of the Democrats, and have those ideas reinforced every week of the year. Do Democrats have that? No.

[radio4progressives]

4. there are Liberal Evangelicals.. that actually go to church

I'm not one of them. But i understand your point. I don't know where you live, but on Sunday mornings where I live, the freeway is almost as congested as it is during the commute times, and oddly the shopping malls and the big box stores, like Costco, Home Depot and the like are packed.

so, i don't buy into the notion that the "population" is 80% church going christian etc.. my eyes tell me something completely different.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

5. With like 98% of Christian churches being GOP PACS...

And the topics they discuss being right wing extremist.... Are these liberal evangelicals you're referring to, hiding in the back of the churches or what?

[Sarah Ibarruri]

6. With like 98% of Christian churches being GOP PACS...

And the topics they discuss being right wing extremist.... Are these liberal evangelicals you're referring to, hiding in the back of the churches or what?

[radio4progressives]

9. Liberal evangelicals are not going to the same churches -

apart from the Unitarians there's a number of other Baptists organizations that are very Liberal, mostly African American and others that are liberal.

I'm not the one to ask about specific stats because I don't never go to church and I never listen to preachers of any persuasion.

[eallen]

11. It's not anywhere close to 98%. Many mainstream churches are liberal.

[eallen]

10. I think it is more like a quarter. But that is enough.

A quarter of the electorate that drinks the same koolaid and that regularly turn out to the ballot box is a huge force. Because they turn out, they might represent a third of those who actually vote. That means their machine need attract only a small fraction of "everyone else" to win elections. It is in the interest of the rest of us to defeat them. But we are unlikely to do it by becoming like them.

[radio4progressives]

3. Not sure I follow your logic all the way through...

it sort of seems to wander a bit off course, but maybe that's my mis-reading.

If you're sincerely asking a question, ("who is the base") or simply trying to make your own point, (no such thing as a progressive base) in what can be seen as a rather snide manner, unless again i'm misreading your response, and if i am, allow me to apologize in advance for my mistake.

surely, you are not dismissing the vibrant existance of a very politically active, very organized progressive segment of the population who regularly registered and voted Democratic at least since FDR?

The question the OP brings up, how many are still with the party in proportion to those who have left the party in recent years.

And mind you, the statistics is pre-Alito filibuster fiasco, which i expect a huge adjustment in the stats will need to be revised.

[Odin2005]

7. The problem is that the 60's radicalism aleinated the old New Deal base.

There is a reason for the '68 disaster. The Republicans succesfully panted the Dems as dangerous radicals, and the term "Liberal" was a bad word ever since. We have been looking for a fully secure base and still havent found one to win elections consistantly. the problem is that two good possible demographics we can expand our base with, left-wing libertarians and socially conservative left-wingers are persona non-grata for the purists who sea the left-wing libertarians as "DLC hacks" and scare away the socially conservative left-wingers by not comprimising on social issues.

[radio4progressives]

8. the actual history is a whole lot more complicated than this theme

and it would best serve all of us (as a nation, left right and center) if we set aside the spoon fed hand wringing analysis that is quoted almost verbatum - when there's so much more, so much more to this story.

Again, the OP refers to a base that is active, passionate and organized. They are who make up all of the so called Liberal 527's and the laundry list of what is identified as "liberal" or left leaning non prifits of in it's totality comprise millions of members - we are the base. and we are active. and we vote. and we organize around elections.

And we have been evident and visiable vis a vis faxes, emails, telephone calls on just about every fricking issue that has come to the floor in congress - and we've visiable in the streets as well as townhall meetings across the country.

I'd love to chat about history, but that would require a voluminous tombe to straighten out quite a number of omitted facts in a lot of the analysis. the point of the OP is that this base has been abandoned, and have been abandoning the party for the past few elections. 2006 is likely to be worse considering what we've had to do to get our own party to do what they should on their own in Congress. and still, too often they ignored us. that's the point in this time, in this era.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

12. It's not clear what you mean. nt