The Democratic Party Must Recognize That "Liberal Issues" Have Widespread Support

[JABBS]

Click here to read the entire story.

<snip>

The Democrats would do well to start framing these key issues as "mainstream" -- or put another way, they should not allow conservatives to mischaracterize these issues as "liberal." This is the time for Democrats to be "leaders," not be on the defensive, worried about Karl Rove's latest catch-phrase.

With majorities in both houses of Congress, the Democrats can quickly pass a minimum wage hike, federal funding for stem cell research, a timetable for phased redeployment of troops from Iraq, etc. How amazing would it be to have a "do something" Congress?

[waiting for hope]

1. What a lot of people

don't see is that so called "liberal" issues are sometimes more "humanitarian" issues - ideas and beliefs that if implemented, would help all Americans in the long run and globally too.

[JABBS]

2. let's just call them "mainstream issues."

If something -- like raising the minimum wage -- has 80% support, only the fringe conservatives will still call it "liberal."

[waiting for hope]

6. It's one of my dearest hopes

that the word conservative gets the same treatment as the word liberal has gotten over that past two decades or so. There was a time that being a liberal was seen as a badge of honor - not the smearing it gets now, especially the MSM using the word as a weapon.

[elocs]

9. The word "conservative" will get the a same treatment at the word "liberal"

when Democratic candidates actually run again as "liberals" and not avoid the label except when they are preaching to the choir. In our last election I do not recall many Democrats running and embracing the title "liberal". If Democratic candidates complicity accept "liberal" as a dirty word, it will remain one to many people even if they share some of the same principles.

[JABBS]

15. you could have people

say these are mainstream values, and then when the legislation is passed, start introducing the "liberal" word to show people that what they supported didn't ruin america.

for example: "The nation stood with one voice, and said that a minimum wage must be a living wage. This is not just a liberal value, this is an American value. This is a part of our American heritage, to stand up for the weakest among us. The nation stood with one voice and said that health care for our children was important. This is not just a liberal value, this is an American value. This is what people have stood up for throughout the ages, to help our children be safe and healthy."

Let the fringe conservatives rail against that.

[Xipe Totec]

3. Issues? There are no "issues"

there are only objectives, improvements, and benefits.

The only issues I have are with rabid right wing propaganda, and how to clean up the slime these left behind.

[Mythsaje]

4. Better yet...

"mainstream" and "Main Street" issues.

[Jackpine Radical]

5. Seems that the Dems could really set things up for a Presidential win

in 2008 by passing all kinds of popular legislation & sending it to Bush. All the stuff you mentioned plus single-payer, election reform, return to fairness doctrine, some kinda de-gerrymandering legislation, revising NAFTA, alternative energy research, stem cell research, whatever--and Bush would either have to let them pass, in which case we win directly, or veto them, in which case he is clearly obstructing the passage of legislation reflecting the wishes of the people, so we can campaign on a theme of "Give Us a President Who Will Help Us Make Things Better For You."

[elocs]

12. You forget the one thing that many people here want the Democrats to do.

And it is not passing popular legislation and passing it on to Bush to do with what he will. The Democrats won the midterms convincingly, but according to the polls there is not a Democratic candidate leading in the presidential race against any of the top Republicans. What Democrats do in the next 2 years will have either a negative or positive impact upon the next presidential race.
I think the American people expect the Democrats to actually address the issues upon which they ran and won.

[JABBS]

16. true

but if a bill is passed with bipartisan support, and 60-80% popular support, and bush then vetoes it, all he is doing is helping lay the groundwork for a bigger Democratic victory in 2008, with a veto-proof majority long-term and a Democratic president to boot.

[Jackpine Radical]

17. Yes, yes, yes.

[mom cat]

7. We won the election, but we will still need to fight like hell to get our

majority views enacted into law. Never let up. Make them sweat. Let them know that is they do not listen to We the People, that we will find represenatives who will!

[Perky]

8. You are right liberal issue have widespread support but

liberal solutions do not

It is the differnce between protesting and governing. We are right on the issues. but we have done an abysmal job and coming up with credible politically viable solutions.

[Zhade]

13. Care to back that up?

NT!

[porphyrian]

10. It's time to stop cowering from anything labelled "liberal" and do their fucking job.

That's what they were elected for, and we will demand no less.

[madville]

11. As long as

It's all good as long as they layoff the firearms restrictions that some Democrats love to push in Congress. What they want in CA, NY. IL, and MA is not what people want in GA, FL, AL, etc. It should be off the federal table for awhile since things have just swung back our way.

[nealmhughes]

14. Here is a little ditty from TomPaine.com today

Long a bipartisan crusade in Washington, “free trade” is now set to face some overdue opposition. And there’s no better time to start the rumble than in the lame duck session of Congress. . . .

Whether the wave of revulsion against corporation globalization will propel a lasting change in Democratic policy-making will depend largely on figures like Rangel, incoming speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Max Baucus, the Montana Democrat who is set to be chair of the Senate Finance Committee. These party chiefs may not be “free traders” like Bill Clinton, but neither are they leading fair trade activists like Brown and Sanders. Each has mixed record on trade issues; both Pelosi and Rangel voted in favor of the Vietnam trade legislation, which may yet be revived in coming months. Moreover, each of these senior Democrats has made rhetorical gestures toward bipartisanship since the election. . . .

More conservative officials at the Democratic Leadership Council hope that these overtures will morph into permanent middle-of-the-road stances. But this is not the kind of “moderation” that the rest of us should regard as a virtue. More exciting, and more laudable, would be if the Democrats come out swinging, taking down trade agreements that fail working families and clearing the way for a globalization built from the bottom up.


Slowing The Free-Trade Bulldozer
Mark Engler
November 30, 2006


hey, that is what we at PDA have been saying for a spell now! Get onboard the Progressive Train!