(no subject)
I've figured out what the Dems need to do to win in 2008. Sadly, I doubt any of this will happen, but if they were to do it, we'd not only take the White House, but most likely also a large chunk of Capitol Hill as well.
First of all, party leadership needs to compile a list of all Democratic senators, representitives and governors right now. As soon as that's done, they need to go through and find the person on that list that best meets the following requirements:
-Consistently opposed Bush's key policies, especially the war in Iraq, either by voting against them if a legislator or publicly speaking out against them if a governor.
-Consistently liberal. The Democrats' insistence on trying to move right to appeal to swing voters hurts them more than anything else.
-Popular with the mainstream. One thing that people don't seem to realise is that even in highly conservative areas, progressive candidates can still enjoy tremendous popularity.
-Have specific, substantive issues and be able to defend them. The Republicans beat us because they present issues and we just oppose them. Most of their issues, however, are vacuous and disingenuous, so if we present actual issues and can back them up, we'll win on that count.
-Have a squeaky clean record. No possibility of campaign finance scandals, no ties to special interest groups, no history of inconsistencies. This also means that they must have a fairly established record to begin with, which sadly disqualifies Barack Obama.
Once the Democrat who best fits this profile is selected, the party needs to get behind him or her right now and start campaigning for 2008. The candidate must not indulge in any negative campaigning. The Bush administration will take care of that for them. If they present themselves as a viable candidate in their own right and not an 'anybody but Bush,' then Bush's low approval ratings will help them immensely against whoever the Republicans run. Additionally, as part of avoiding negative campaigning, they must avoid ties to groups that will run negative ads on their behalf, such as MoveOn.org. While such ads may be helpful, the candidate must make sure it is publically known that they are distancing themselves from any personal attacks. Since the elections are three years away, they should use the time they have to build up huge grassroots organizations (a la Dean). If they can fund their entire campaign without any special interest money, it will go a long way towards establishing credibility and making their opponent look bad without negative campaigning.
If this is done right, especially if it is done before the media decides to go back to being a Republican propaganda outlet, it will keep Bush's approval rating down by demonstrating that there are viable alternatives to his adminstration. By keeping his approval rating down, we greatly increase the chances of getting a true progressive elected. By the same token, this would also likely influence the legislative elections a great deal and put both the executive and legislative branches back in our hands, which would go a long way towards minimizing the damage caused by a far-right Supreme Court.
As I said, this is fantasy, it will never happen, but it's encouraging to think that at least there are winning strategies out there we can use. The Republicans aren't invincible, after all.
First of all, party leadership needs to compile a list of all Democratic senators, representitives and governors right now. As soon as that's done, they need to go through and find the person on that list that best meets the following requirements:
-Consistently opposed Bush's key policies, especially the war in Iraq, either by voting against them if a legislator or publicly speaking out against them if a governor.
-Consistently liberal. The Democrats' insistence on trying to move right to appeal to swing voters hurts them more than anything else.
-Popular with the mainstream. One thing that people don't seem to realise is that even in highly conservative areas, progressive candidates can still enjoy tremendous popularity.
-Have specific, substantive issues and be able to defend them. The Republicans beat us because they present issues and we just oppose them. Most of their issues, however, are vacuous and disingenuous, so if we present actual issues and can back them up, we'll win on that count.
-Have a squeaky clean record. No possibility of campaign finance scandals, no ties to special interest groups, no history of inconsistencies. This also means that they must have a fairly established record to begin with, which sadly disqualifies Barack Obama.
Once the Democrat who best fits this profile is selected, the party needs to get behind him or her right now and start campaigning for 2008. The candidate must not indulge in any negative campaigning. The Bush administration will take care of that for them. If they present themselves as a viable candidate in their own right and not an 'anybody but Bush,' then Bush's low approval ratings will help them immensely against whoever the Republicans run. Additionally, as part of avoiding negative campaigning, they must avoid ties to groups that will run negative ads on their behalf, such as MoveOn.org. While such ads may be helpful, the candidate must make sure it is publically known that they are distancing themselves from any personal attacks. Since the elections are three years away, they should use the time they have to build up huge grassroots organizations (a la Dean). If they can fund their entire campaign without any special interest money, it will go a long way towards establishing credibility and making their opponent look bad without negative campaigning.
If this is done right, especially if it is done before the media decides to go back to being a Republican propaganda outlet, it will keep Bush's approval rating down by demonstrating that there are viable alternatives to his adminstration. By keeping his approval rating down, we greatly increase the chances of getting a true progressive elected. By the same token, this would also likely influence the legislative elections a great deal and put both the executive and legislative branches back in our hands, which would go a long way towards minimizing the damage caused by a far-right Supreme Court.
As I said, this is fantasy, it will never happen, but it's encouraging to think that at least there are winning strategies out there we can use. The Republicans aren't invincible, after all.