Do Democrats relish the underdog role too much?

[Perky]

The question is far from rhetorical.

I am not convinced we want power as much as we want to make sure the other guys do not have it or that we can call them on thier abuses. And apart from the political differences, what distinguishes us from the GOP is that they want power and we want to protest their power more than we want power ourselves.

It would seem at some levels we want to prohibit them from tampering and supression techniques so that the playing field is level and fair. We tend to believe that with a republican form of government,free and fair elections and logical district borders that red states would turn more purple and light-blue states would go deep blue? We tend to believe that with clearer unmuddled political divisions between the parties that the middle would naturally gravitate towards the left rather than the right? We tend to believe that in a fair fight and with a level playing field we can create create permament Democratic majority in either House. Is that naive?

I wonder if such a position puts too much faith in the american people to make the right political choices and that our candidates will have the ability to move people to our side. The rub is that that historically has not been the case over the last 60 years as evidenced that there has only been one Democratic landslide and four Republican blow-outs.

I have a sense that there is a deeper underlying rub for democrats.

The republican coalition synthesises libertarians, social conservatives and pro-military with the enterprising and investing class. The brilliance of their coalition is that the adherants of those five groups are so adamant in their belief of their beliefs, that they are willing to overlook the lunacy of the other four groups so long as they get what they want. The philophical underpinning of the republican coalition is largely self-interest or very narrowly defined cummunity interest.

All Republicans want to to do is wield power and they will tend to bend or break the rules to get there. That is their default plan...ALL THE TIME and ANY WAY THEY CAN. They win by gerrymandering, politicizing the judiciary and the Justice department, cheating, and by very effectively scaring the middle class about what would happen if we wielded power,ecause all the Demorcat party cares about is redistibuting your wealth and taking away your choices. Whether correct or not it sells well

Democrats on the other hand, define our political idealogy solely as the party of community interest. In fact, we have a tendency to pooh-pooh the development of coalitions built on self-interest. I see a lot of criticism on here about candidates that pander to the middle, about the DLC being a bunch of DINOs and a genuine belief that if the party moves to the left and stands on liberal principle that the vapid middle will be drawn our way more often than not. We appeal to community interest and helping the underprivielged rather than appealing to self interest. As a consequence. Our default position is not attaining and wielding power....it is checking the power of others and criticizing the way they wield it rather than wielding it ourselves.

We tend, to demand broad philosophical hegemony first and foremost. We tend to value philosophy over power. And as its core that philosophy is about protecting the weak and the underdog aganst the unbridled power of the "elites". Liberalism focuses on the interest of others far more than self-interest in the way we make the case for votes. And yet as such, we are more comfortable in assuming in playing the political underdog in fighting the "machine"


My question is this: Is the nature of liberal politics about the underdog and community interest as oppossed to appealing to self-interest? And as such does that handicap us politically?

What are issues of self-interest that would make people want to vote for us as opposed to a competing self interest that the GOP offers? Is it necessary to appeal to self interest in order to win?

[The Wielding Truth]

1. I loved the respect and progress during Clinton administration.

[enki23]

2. i'd say it's been the conservatives who have perennially played at being underdogs

it's how they get away with taking absolutely no responsibility for the consequences of their actions. sure, they do anything they can to get and wield power when they can. but when they succeed, and fuck everything up, they find it convenient to pretend they (ie. "real conservatives") never really had any influence after all.

[Phredicles]

3. I have gotten the impression that some Democratic politicians LIKE

being in the minority: After all, there's no real responsibility or pressure. All you have to do is keep offering your (extremely tepid) opposition and go on trolling donors for campaign contributions.

[GOPEC]

4. Do Democrats relish the underdog role too much?

Yes. After all, this site is DemocraticUnderground.com, not DemocraticMajority.com or DemocraticHegemony.com...oooh, I'm going to register that.

[Perky]

5. kick

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

6. Yeah, Cause Like, That Makes So Much Sense And Stuff.