Dems split over use of ‘party of no’

[babylonsister]

Dems split over use of ‘party of no’
By Ian Swanson - 12/08/09 06:00 AM ET


Democrats are debating the tactic of labeling Republicans the “party of no.”

Senior strategists in the party argue the label at best has outlived its usefulness, and at worst will do nothing to win new Democratic votes in the 2010 elections.

“The Democrats are making an enormous mistake when they say the Republicans are the party of no,” said Paul Begala, the veteran Democratic strategist who worked in President Bill Clinton’s White House.

Democrats began describing the GOP as the party of no after every House Republican voted against the $787 billion economic stimulus bill in February.

The label has stuck in press releases, e-mails and public comments from Democrats in subsequent months as Republicans voted en masse in committee or floor votes against healthcare legislation in the House and Senate backed by President Barack Obama.

The risk to the message is that polls show a public split down the middle on the stimulus and healthcare reform. It is unclear whether voters will punish or praise Republicans for saying no to Democratic efforts on those issues.

In addition, as voters turn their attention to the 2010 midterm election, they are increasingly looking to the choice they must make at the ballot box. That calls for a political message steeped in what Democrats and Republicans say they would do if they controlled Congress.

Strategists such as Begala argue the “party of no” message misses the point that Republicans do have an agenda and governing philosophy.

“I’ve hated this message of ‘party of no,’” said Begala. He says Republicans are the party of “colossal deficits and tax cuts for the wealthy,” not the party of no.

more...

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/71077-dems-split-over-use-of-party-of-no

[Mass]

1. I agree. They need to stop with this and start explaining why conservatism as an ideology is bad.

When your opponent is pushing the ideology that was followed by Coolidge and Hoover, it should not be hard to make your case.

The GOP does not want healthcare reform because they believe that healthcare is not a right but a commodity. How many times do people like Session need to say that before the Democrats start calling them on their callousness.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

3. Good Point

The GOP was REWARDED for being the "Party of no" back in 1994 b/c people had issues with Clinton's agenda. I don't think Obama's agenda is quite as unpopular- or at least people are more receptive to him and/or his agenda- but it would probably be more productive to discredit conservatism like they were able to successfully discredit liberalism.

[phasma ex machina]

2. A department store chain from my past hated splashy "sales" as much as Begala hates negative

political messages. Sadly, a big segment of population demands both sales and negative political messages.

[derby378]

4. I think the Democrats are turning into the "Party of No"

No public option, no prosecution for torture and war crimes, no meaningful control over predatory bankers and creditors, no action on DADT.

I'm getting a little frustrated.

[ConnorMarc]

6. Good Point

But Begala is right, its passed its usefulness.

Now tell the people WHAT the GOP stands for.

[Orsino]

5. Well, yeah. Some Dems are determined to be "no" as well. n/t

[msongs]

7. exactly. DADT comes to mind nt