Depressing '04 discussions over the holidays....

[vi5]

Particularly with my father, brother, and father-in-law. To sum each of them up:
Father: independent swing voter who likes to talk conservative but almost always ends up voting for democrats and who is definitely slightly more left than right leaning.
Father-in-law: independent swing voter who tends to lean right economically and foreign policy wise but not socially. Tends to vote republican but is not a die-hard.
Brother: independent and relatively apolitical but usually votes dem but doesn't always bother to vote.

Each and every one of them isn't a fan of bush*. Father-in-law voted for him, while my brother and father voted for gore.

Talking politics with them over the weekend was depressing. Even though they don't like bush*, I tried to feel them out on the presumptive democratic nominee over bush. My father in law said he wouldn't vote for him and my father said the same while my brother just said he'd likely stay home. Each of them felt that the dems were going to go into full on attack attack attack mode and that was going to turn them off the way it turned them off of republicans who in the mid 90's let their hatred of clinton dictate their moves rather than what was best for the country. Their common complaint was that they didn't want to hear endlessly about what bush was doing wrong. They could figure that out themselves. They wanted to hear about what the democrats would do RIGHT.

It depressed me because these are the exact people we need. And while my father-in-law was never a check in our column, my father and brother were ours to lose. I plan on doing everything I can to sell our nominee to them, but if it's going to be this much an uphill battle especially for two people who are usually sympathetic to our side then I feel we are in for a world of hurt.

[Atman]

1. aarrrrggghhh!

Their common complaint was that they didn't want to hear endlessly about what bush was doing wrong. They could figure that out themselves. They wanted to hear about what the democrats would do RIGHT.

Dear god, does this line of non-reasoning toast my cookies! So, your family members are basically saying, "I know things are bad and I choose not to do a damn thing about it." They should be ashamed of themselves, no matter they're affiliation.

[vi5]

4. That's not what they said at all....

Did you even read the one sentence "They can figure this out themselves." They have their own laundry list of what bush has done wrong. Their problem was that they feel like their intelligence is being insulted when the only thing they hear in speeches is what bush is doing wrong, as though they are gullible buffoons who can't figure it out themselves.

Their point was "O.K. we're starting from the same place. We think the current situation is bad. Don't keep telling me it's bad. I know it's bad. Tell me what you will do about it."

I'm not saying I agree with them, but it's also not a head in the sand approach as you make it out to be.

[HFishbine]

5. The truth is, in reality

they probably don't know half of what Bush has done wrong (do we?).

[vi5]

6. But again, that's the thing....

The things they do know are enough to make them not like bush*. They are not debating the failures. Their point is that if I'm already disillusioned with the other guy, don't give me MORE reasons to be disillusioned with him, give me more reasons to be enamored of YOU.

[Atman]

8. Well, yeah, it is...

Yes, I read the one sentence. I read the whole post. What's with the attitude?

The have a "laundry list" of what Bush is doing wrong. They've figured it out for themselves. But they would rather play childish games than take a stand and DO SOMETHING about this laundry list. I read every line.

This "just tell me what you're going to do about it" line is just a typical republican cog-dis denial. EVERY CANDIDATE has said and continues to say "what they're going to do about it."

Your family, OTOH, apparently chooses to do nothing when presented the opportunity to remove the man who has provided them with a laundry list of reasons to do so, but will not listen to any of the people providing them with the means to remove him.

ON EDIT: Perhaps the lines about them choosing to stay home rather than vote is what cheesed me off the most. That is the basis of my entire response. If they know there is a problem but choose to ignore it because a dem makes them feel yucky about the problem...that is inexcusable, in my book.

[vi5]

10. Look, here's the thing.....

My father in law will still probably vote for bush again, and my father and brother will still end up voting for the democratic nominee.

My point and their point is that simply attacking bush isn't going to win us the election and get us the middle of the road swing voters. People want to hear some form of positivity and some kind of vision for the future beyond "Well, I'll be better than that other guy who sucks."

If it's this tough a sell to 3 guys who are well read, informed, and willing to be convinced then that's where our problem lies. And the fact that you are so willing to chalk it up to them being ignorant or unwilling to act or do something is also another example of our problem. Lecturing people and telling them what they are currently doing is wrong or stupid is not going to win anyone over either.

So if you think that's the best way to go about things then by all means do so. Call people hardheaded, or apathetic, or tell them about how they are to blame because they are unwilling to act or call them uninformed because they didn't read some article in the Guardian or the Nation or some such thing. If you honestly think that's the best approach then good luck to you. I know these people and that's not going to do anyone any good.

[HFishbine]

11. A gentle observation

I'm not going to question your knowledge of your family (I too had an eye-opening political discussion with my dad over the holidays and was surprised to learn he's leaning towards Edwards.)

But, I think you're missing a crucial point -- if not the single most important point of all. The general tone of your post shakes a fist at circumstances. Yet, you, excuse me, this fits, have the power to do something in this case. You have three disenchanted voters before you and they tell you they are not getting a positive message from whatever their usual media sources may be. Subvert that! Take control! Anybody who spends a little time on DU can make a positive case for any of the candidates. Print out some web pages, clip some news articles, video tape some speeches or debates and INFORM your family about the positive aspects of the democratic candidates. Don't capitulate to the way things are, change them!

[vi5]

14. And I plan on it.....Don't get me wrong.....

I plan on doing that 100%.

My frustration and the venting of my post was due to that I'm worried that if I have to work this hard at people who should automatically be in our column to begin with, then that is energy I'll have to spend away from people who should need MORE winning over.

I don't think we can take chances with anyone. So even though my father and brother are more than likely going to vote for the democratic nominee, do I take that chance? Do I not try to sell them on him based on that assumption?

That's why I was depressed after this weekend. I thought going into '04 that I wouldn't have to spend my time convincing these people who should automatically be in our column and that I would be able to spend my time concentrating on people who would take more work winning over.

[HFishbine]

19. Good for you!

That's good news, no matter who you support. Look at the bright side, your family will be good practice. The materials you assmeble and the persuasive arguments your formulate for them can be passed on to other people as well. Good luck to you.

[qwlauren35]

33. What are their sources?

That might be useful for you and all of us.

I don't perceive my candidate as having no plan and saying nothing but anti-Bush rhetoric, but many do perceive him that way. I can only surmise that it's a combination of which things about the candidate they observed AND how they took in the information.

I have no doubt at all that the media is more interested in presenting short anti-Bush sound bites than long policy speeches. So, I tend to assume that this is what the average American hears unless s/he goes digging for information.

Yes, this creates a problem, yes, if it can turn off people like your relatives, we're going to need a massive strategy to cope with it.

Please be part of the strategy. Find out how they got their information and whether this is part of how their feelings were shaped. Every single Democratic candidate has a positive, powerful message buried under the sound bites. What you have just written speaks volumes to the work that we Dems must do to get the message out past what the media parades.

[Atman]

12. That is not what I'M saying...

"ell them about how they are to blame because they are unwilling to act or call them uninformed because they didn't read some article in the Guardian or the Nation or some such thing."


That is NOT what I am saying. Unfortunately, it is what they and you are hearing, and it plays into, and/or is a result of a media that will not allow the message to be heard. Dean isn't just standing up there saying "Bush Sucks." He has a platform, and a plan. As far as I can tell, each of the candidates do. It doesn't take a gander at the Gaurdian to find out what the candidate's platforms are. Each candidates presents one, the media focuses in on a misplaced comma and it is headline news that the dems are "bashing" again, without any substantive reporting about WHAT is actually being said. Unfortunately, it really may be up to your family to do more research. And maybe it is up to you to help explain WHY they need to do more research.

I am sorry, from reading your posts, I don't buy the line that they are well-read on the issues. They simply cannot be well read on the issues and still be supporting Bush. They may read their daily from cover to cover, but that is tantamount to reading a Karl Rove news feed.

At some point, the electorate does bear responsibility to do their own fact-checking, and not rely on multi-millionaire back-pocket "journalists" like George Will or Bob Novak, or even Peter Jennings, to tell them their leader is being bashed by a guy with no platform.

[vi5]

16. Again, my apologies but....

You tell me that them not reading articles from harder to find and more obscure publications is not what you are saying.

But then you criticize them for not getting information from anywhere but the Rove controlled media. So which is it?

Honestly, I think I know how well read and informed these people are a little better than you do. And honestly, if your answer to how to sell people who are on the fence is to insult and belittle them, then good luck to you.

And I didn't in any of my posts say that they were going to support Bush. But not supporting Bush isn't enough. We need them to actively and enthusiastically support our democratic candidate. Plain and simple. And the intent of my intitial post was simply to express my frustration that if I have to waste time and energy convincing people who should already be in our column, then it is going to take time and energy away from convincing people who really will be tough sells.

[no name no slogan]

30. People would rather vote FOR somebody than AGAINST somebody

I know exactly of what you speak. I had a very similar argument with my in-laws over much of the same things. Many of them are former diehard ex-Democrats and farmer-union organizers, and they feel much the same way.

While it's a good thing to be against Bush, most of our other candidates are not articulating what makes them DIFFERENT from Bush, and why we should vote FOR them.

We need candidates with programs that people will VOTE FOR, not just candidates who will get votes by default because they are "not Bush". If we want to win, we need strong "FOR" supporters, not just the lukewarm "AGAINST" voters who would as soon vote for a washcloth as anybody else.

This is the reason why Gore lost in 2000-- his votes were not "for" him so much as they were "against" Dubya. It's also the reason why 3rd party candidates did relatively well, too, in 2000 and 1996 and 1992.

Our candidates have stopped being "for" things, and are merely content to be "against" what the Repubs do. We've been doing this for a dozen years now, and it's been disastrous to us as a party on the nationwide level.

I just hope we learn the lesson in time for next fall. Otherwise,...

[Capn Sunshine]

34. It's the river in Egypt approach to politics

de Nile. :)

[SlavesandBulldozers]

2. at least

they aren't voting for Bush. WHich is somewhat of a good thing, no?

[whatelseisnew]

3. If you cannot wake them up to the sham that is our media...

They will only hear about Dems Attacking

The 'Free Press' will be freely construing Dems as having no positive message

[bearfartinthewoods]

7. same here...my brother in law announced he's probably voting for bush

and he said it in MY HOUSE and after we just had a very good steak dinner. his reasons are the economy and the war. this was waaaay out of the blue. i knew he had problems with dean's tax policy but to here him say he'd vote for bush was a shocker.

BTW>>>>to everyone who helped with the links to evidence that Gore won the recount, thanks. i've lost the thread and the arguement but i really appreciate the help.

[Cheswick2.0]

25. I am shocked!

I am shocked to hear that someone you know is going to vote for bush because they don't like Dean.

[Capn Sunshine]

35. !Gasp!!

IN YOUR OWN HOUSE?
Did you have to get him drunk first so you could quote him here honestly?

Taxes lol

[BeatleBoot]

9. Don't worry...Bush bashing is all that they are hearing now because

Its right before the Dem primaries.

I think they'll change their tune once we provide a clear alternative to AWOL*.

IF (and its a big IF), we provide a clear alternative after the primaries.

Democrats will not win by just bashing Bush. That's a losing strategy.

They need to provide ideas. I hope we do that.

[NewGuy]

15. You are correct!

Also, since Dean has opened up a clear lead, they are beginning to focus more on him and to bring up some of his ideas and his past practices in Vermont. This will help define both him and his opponents.

I am not sure how that will shake down as Dean has had some similarities to the current administration. i.e. sealing his records while asking for others to release theirs, holding energy meetings with energy moguls, and giving tax incentives to big business.

[ourwinter]

13. Welcome to America

My observations of the holiday were the same:

"I know Bush sucks. Why is Dean so angry? Where the hell is Clark?"
Mother 54 years old, independent, math teacher

My sister, sister's husband, step-father - all looked at me as if I was on mars when I talked politics.

Most people work, and work hard and have little time
for news, things like DU, Op/Ed pages.... We live in a different world, all you can do is try as you may to inform, and advocate. Their votes, every vote - matters. But food for thought, if the Democratic candidates aren't getting their message across we won't go anywhere fast...

[spooky3]

17. These are the types of voters Edwards has been trying to reach.

Looks as though he'll have to work harder.

[JNelson6563]

18. sales 101

One must demostrate the difference between Product X and Product Y.

The trick obviously is to not give the competition more "face time" than yourself. I think that is where some candidates have tripped up a bit. Sure, take a shot at the competition but when one must be interupted in an interview to be reminded to talk about one's own positons, this tells me there is too much focus on the competition.

It must be done quickly and cleanly.

Here's what's wrong with Product X: One or two sentences.

Here's what's right with Product X: Lots more sentences.

I like to think adults can deal with that much contrasting of choices.

Julie

[davsand]

20. Voters are OVER the lack of vision.

"Their common complaint was that they didn't want to hear endlessly about what bush was doing wrong. They could figure that out themselves. They wanted to hear about what the democrats would do RIGHT."

You summed it up RIGHT there. Voters are sick unto death of the mud slinging, carping and bitching that passes for politics today. We have voter turnout under 50% and there is a reason for that.

Clinton won his first term because he painted a vision of what he wanted to do (Think about it as the old "Whatta you gonna do for me" conversations) rather than how screwed up he thought it all was. Clinton offered a vision for a constructive change. He won with it.

In the primary, we are eating it up with the daily headlines from the Dem candidates that say everything from "Bush is the worst President in the last five" all the way to discussions of the "angry" candidate as the front runner. That is what it takes to win in a primary against an incumbent--especially one like shrub who was a marginal one the first time around. That is not what it will take to win a General.

The swing voters are not motivated by anger or vitriol, they are motivated by self interest. Keeping their kids out of war, keeping their job, affording health insurance and medical care--THOSE are the issues that people care about. That vision is what will win this election.

Laura

[HFishbine]

21. Indeed. And frankly,

any of the dem candidates are capable of delivering such a positive message. By mere positions alone, they have the advantage over Bush.

[davsand]

22. Exactly! Dems do have an advantage there!

We just need to use it. Bush has done a "remarkable" job of keeping the nation in fear and that can (and should!) be used to the Dem advantage in this election.

I want to hear the following kinds of statements from the Dem we nominate:

I can make you feel better about your job security by doing this________.

I can do _____ to keep your loved ones out of a body bag.

I will do _______ to keep you safe from outside threats.

I will do _______ to make sure you can see a Doc when you need to.

I plan to do ______ to make sure your kids get an education that will allow them to excel...

THOSE are the mantras of a wining Dem, IMO. Those are the statements that will spur voters to go out and vote.

Laura

[waylon]

23. you make a very good point vi5

Its not hard to predict how swing voters will vote when they are dissolusioned by the constant "i hate bush" rantings. If they cant be inspired to do more than, hopefully, vote D in 04, the party will lose critical support.

If you have to work at convincing them (your swing voting family), chances are they wont be all that motivated to work at convincing others. The candidate's message has to change and its hard to blame it on the media or expect the media to turn things around. Its time to end the "i hate bush" rhetoric from our candidates altogether. Perhaps, "i love america" would be a better strategy.

If they are given the ammunition, the media will always choose the ugly side of a candidate's message. Its up to the candidates to tell the media what to report and they need to start now. The media doesnt have control over a candidates message, the candidates do.

[Tom Rinaldo]

24. I hear the same things too often for comfort

Frequently I can get Republican leaning associates to seriously consider Clark, but not Dean. Hopefully that will change if Dean gets the nomination, or hopefully Clark will.

[Cheswick2.0]

26. gee I have the opposite problem

Lots of republicans I know will vote for Dean but don't really see a difference between Bush and Clark. :shrug:

[Tom Rinaldo]

29. Hard to seperate the message from the messenger

I suppose we are most persuasive on behalf of those we most believe in. If Dean gets the nod, I'm willing to take lessons from you lol.

[rucky]

27. There's PLENTY of Positive Messages Out There:

They just don't get covered in the media...

www.clark04.com
www.deanforamerica.com
www.johnedwards2004.com
www.johnkerry.com
www.gephardt2004.com
etc...

even www.joein2004.com - chooses to keep a prevailing positive tone to the website.

All the data is there for anybody to research what's important to them. When the primary comes around, all a voter has to do is spend about an hour total looking at these websites & they'll see what each candidate stands for.

If they're waiting to be spoon-fed by the media, then they will have no reason to go to the polls.

[Atman]

28. Amen. That's all I was trying to get across.

If they're waiting to be spoon-fed by the media, then they will have no reason to go to the polls.

[cosmicdot]

31. who is the "presumptive democratic nominee"?

http://www.kucinich.us
offers much info which isn't found in daily newspapers, local news, nor the cable/network GOP propaganda channels -- and, what Democrats would do right ...

I don't see this as a problem on the part of our candidates.

Personally, I want to hear more of what * is doing wrong ... too much covering up by the media fogs the mirrors going on.

Show them how to seek out information on specific Democratic nominees.

[eileen_d]

32. You & your relatives are echoing a lot of my personal frustration

I'll leave it at that because you said it best. :hi: