Many on this forum have said that the Democratic party needs to move to the right. Here I outline several problems with this argument.
1. Liberals already realize that very liberal candidates generally can't win. That's why they support more moderate candidates like Howard Dean, Russ Feingold, and Paul Hackett. Of course some people confused "outspoken" with "liberal". Someone like Cindy Sheehan would probably not be a good candidate.
To say that Cindy Sheehan would probably not be a good candidate is an
understatement . Dean, Feingold and Hackett are, arguably, moderate . However, Dean can be his own worst enemy in that he allows those on the Right to demonise him. I'd gladly support Feingold or Hackett
Zell was a good governor, who seemed to lose his way in the Senate. He's too conservative for my tastes. Could I ever support him after he blowed sunshine where the sun don't shine (i.e. up Bush's backside)? Yes, if he was ever running against the likes of Saxby Chambliss
The task facing the Democrats in 2008 is to select a "ticket", who can consolidate the liberal base as well as reaching out to sufficient enough moderates and moderate conservatives to coast them to victory. As things stand, an ideologically polarising election (i.e. liberal Democrat vs conservative Republican) favours the GOP. As to if as the Democrats move right and the GOP further right, I don't know but I would think there is a point at which the GOP would be too rightwing for most Americans to stomach. If polls are to be believed, the US does
not have a conservative majority. Democrats need to use that to their advantage
Well, if they do that they reap what they sow
. Continued GOP dominance in the White House and on Capitol Hill. I don't suffer self-defeatism
I have, and will, continue to criticise the left of the Democratic Party. I'm a populist, I hold moderate economically left-of-center ideals and I'm mildly center-right, as a whole (but by no means exclusively), on social issues. I don't think any one could ever accuse me of being Republican-lite. I'm every bit a strongly Democratic partisan. I'm also a 'Defense Democrat' in the 'Scoop' Jackson tradition
Yes, I support the Iraq War and I'd so again. Bush, however, has made a cackhanded job of it - it was to be expected
- and it's good to see defense Democrats, like Evan Bayh, criticising him up on it. It's a shame Lieberman isn't. Personally, I'd like the Democratic Party outhawk the GOP and return to its once proud past. By fecklelssly abandoning, a 'Trumanite' defense policy Democrats allowed an inferior-calibre of GOP presidents to realise the great man's vision
That it does especially when it comes to a wide range of domestic issues (such as the economy, education and healthcare) and it should be using these to its electoral advantage. However, I seriously doubt that 65% support Roe vs Wade. I'd guess a majority support abortion with restrictions. As for the media, those on the Right would claim that the media is by-and-large hostile to Bush! The biggest policy challenge facing the Democrats is to convince the electorate that they are credible on the GOP's trump issues - defense and national security. Furthermore, they somehow need to counter the increasing saliency of hot-botton social issues, which Karl Rove has exploited to great effect
The Democrats need to come up with their own legislative agenda and sell those ideas to the American electorate. On some issues, bi-partisanship can be a good thing (for a start, any Democratic Senator or Representative is dependent on it to further their own pet, and often admirable, pieces of legislation); I agree, however, that Democrats (as the opposition party)should provide a balance to ensure that the execesses of the Bush agenda is thwarted wherever possible. That said, the Democrats shouldn't be obstructionist just for the sake of it and must come up with better alternatives to what Bush and the GOP are proposing
You've made some good points Jfern
, but you and I are never going to agree 100% down the line. A move to the 'center' could, if applied successfully, render the Republicans the minority but the Democrats must address their weaknesses (perceived or real) in order for that to happen. If they don't, then they can look forward to enjoying minority status on the Beltway for the foreseable future - and, if that happens, the Democratic Party will acheive very little, if anything at all, at the federal level
Dave
