We need to talk directly to disaffected republicans to make a difference

[Blackhatjack]

....there are plenty of "disaffected" republicans who now find themselves in a dilemma. They do not want to vote for a Democrat, and they find no one in their own party who really represents their interests as they see them. Third partly campaigns are attractive to them. They are searching for a solution out of this mess and do not see one.

As Democrats we need to understand that these voters may be the difference in the Nov midterm elections, and we have an obligation to help them find a choice they can live with.

I do not advocate asking anyone to "not vote" and not exercise their constitutional right to vote.
However, there is a difference between advocating that these disaffected republicans not vote, and asking them to "not vote for and support the current Bush/NeoCon aligned republicans" on the slate of candidates."

Republicans cannot win without these voters. Worth repeating .... Republicans cannot win without these voters.

Democrats are going to turn out at the polls in November. If these disaffected republicans "stay home" not only do Republicans not win, Republicans will have very little to work with to "steal" the elections. There will be a gap which is too large for Republicans to close by shady vote counting/vote switching without it being blatantly obvious to everyone that the election was stolen.

So part of the campaign needs to be different than in the past. We would like to convert everyone into Democrats, but to win we need to speak directly to disaffected republicans and appeal to them not to support the party of a failed war, incompetence and corruption. For their children's sake, and everyone else's. If we succeed in this effort, Democrats win in Nov and in 2008. Guaranteed.

IF you have any doubts about this strategy, take a look at what Karl Rove and the Republicans are attempting to do in the Lieberman/Lamont race. They are attempting to appeal to disaffected Democrats to swing them the Republican side, or at the least to discourage them from voting for Democrat Lamont - which would affect all of the other races in which Democrats need every vote to win.

[Stinky The Clown]

1. I agree .... but keep in mind ..... they're still on the other side ....

I think this post said it all about courting them. Yes, courting them is a good idea. But so is *our* need to stay right where *we* are.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1857274

[Blackhatjack]

4. This analogy makes the point more clearly ....

...In a speech or debate, you try to make your point with the people most likely to be affected. It is not always an issue that affects everyone listening to you, but it may hit home with a particular group listening to you. You move on and hit another issue that appeals to another particular group listening to you different than the one you just addressed. At the end of the speech, you have addressed many different groups that together make up a substantial majority of those you need to convince to vote for you and elect you at the polls.

Now did you change your position or "move" to another location in trying to reach these different groups? The answer should be no. You did not change, but you convinced different groups with different agendas that you are the candidate who will take care of their individual concerns better than your opponent.

We do not have to "sell our souls" to reach disaffected voters. We just need to convince people we are the best choice among those available.

However, in some cases, when "voters stay at home" it can be the deciding factor in the outcome of the race.

[Atman]

2. I also just point to myself.

Many republicans have this knee-jerk "fear" of liberals, as they've been taught by Fox and Hannity and Limpballs. But I have a weekend place next to a republican, and one of my snowboard buddies is a very well-off republican. I usually tend to just bring all back to "look at me...I am as liberal as they come. Yet, you live next door to me, you ski with me, we party together. Have you ever seen me grow fangs? Have gay orgies? Smoke crack? Take a dime of public assistance? No way. And most of my friends are pretty much just like me. Some of us may dress different than you and perform different jobs, but we're all still basically just the same people with the same basic wants and needs -- security, the well-being of our families. Maybe a bit of honesty from our government. What is so "evil" and "liberal" about us that you'd choose more years of incompetence and killing and phoney terror and backrupt government just to avoid a bullshit label created by an draft-dodging pussy like Rush Limbaugh or a loud mouth fool like Hannity?"

So far it's shown signs of actually working. My neighbor swears he hates Bush now and will never vote for anyone republican involved in this administration. Great! I can't take all the credit though. Bush helped. The well-to-do guy is in phase II of denial...he just swears now that he never voted for Bush in the first place. I know he's lying, but I have to expect that. After all, he IS a republican. But it's a start just to know he's embarrassed to be attached to the GOP!

[Mist]

3. For several years now, I've mentioned one thing only to Rethugs:

"I'm just worried about the economy..." I say it with a furrowed brow, and let it the statement trail off. Most Rethugs aren't multi-millionaires, and don't like the direction the economy is going in under Bushco. Money is the unifying element for many Rethugs.