This is why it has to be "it's the economy, stupid" again

[question everything]

Most DUers see the war in Iraq as the major rallying point. Indeed, both Clinton and Lieberman were dragged through the mud here for their stand on the war.

Yet, when November 2006 rolls around, the war in Iraq will be a non-issue. Except, of course, for the families of the ones who died and maimed, both here and in Iraq as well in other countries that sent soldiers and civilians there.

This is why everyone is talking about the huge turnout of Iraqis to vote, this is why Rumsfeld is talking about starting to bring the troops home, this is why Bush all of a sudden "takes responsibility."

By next year mid-term elections the war in Iraq will be a non-issue for most voters - except for DUers here.

We need to concentrate, again, on domestic issues. We need to frame where we stand in simple words that can be understood by most voters - jobs, education, health care, cost of living, retirement. This is where we need to concentrate. Don't think that this is not what Rove is already doing.

OK, start shooting. Will be back after Jon Stewart (sorry).

[eallen]

1. Bingo!

[Warpy]

2. I've been trying to tell people this since 1999

when it looked like we were going to get another GOP-lite candidacy that wouldn't address the fact that very few of us really saw much benefit from the Clinton boom save low unemployment and a modest increase in wages during the last 2 years of his presidency.

Alas, the DLC had its way, and not only did Gore fail to address any of the economic issues plaguing some 80% of us, he also was persuaded to do the insanity of removing the universal health care plank from the party platform!

Now we've had 2 campaigns where the candidates spent their time squabbling over the yuppie vote while ignoring the party base, campaigns so lackluster and uninspired that the GOP was easily able to steal both of them through election fraud.

Doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result is one definition of insanity. The party has got to start paying attention to its own traditional base, or the party will fade into well deserved obscurity. The proof that the DLC is on exactly the wrong track is evidenced by the loss of all three branches of government. If Democrats want to be pushed farther and farther to the fringe, then they support the DLC. If not, it's time to try something new (or old) to reconnect with the party base.

[question everything]

5. Indeed. And, basically let Karl Rove dictate the agenda

while they were busy replying to him

[I_am_Spartacus]

3. I don't think it's an either/or thing.

But I do think that the war is much more of a domestic issue than people realize.

I don't think that you have to talk about war in Iraq in terms of what it's costing Americans to make it a domestic issue.

But I do think that the things that are wrong about the war -- the imperialist and fasicst elements -- are wrong for the same reasons that so many people are progressives and democrats on 'domestic' issues. If you believe the world is a better place when political, cultural and economic power is devolved to the people, then you should also believe that the war in Iraq is wrong.

So I believe you're right about your general principle -- that it's the economy, stupid.

But I think that "economy" is a very broad term that includes devolution of power and I belive that Iraq falls within that paradigm too.

[question everything]

4. As a great man once said: all politics is local

and today I would say all politics is personal. As much as many like to talk about the "shared values" and community, etc., the reality is that most voters are more focused on their personal needs. Mostly, I think, because we moved from working together in the same place for the same purpose - farms or manufacturing jobs - to being unemployed and underemployed and barely supporting ourselves in between. Large corporations that as recently as 25 years ago prided themselves in "taking care of their workers" no longer exist in the same form, or find it more expedient to consider employees as replaceable cogs.

More and more of us have to worry about our health insurance, our local schools and our ability to retire. We no longer can rely on our employers and on our civic leaders to take care of these concerns.

Many moved to the suburbs where one gets from the house to the garage to drive to work and then back, with barely knowing or talking to one's neighbors. Except on TV sitcoms, we no longer befriend our co-workers. We realize that not all of us will be in the same cubicle some six months from now.

We now belong to a "cyber community" where we can develop friendship that are independent on our physical proximity.

Thus, we retreat to our own world and for many voters, what will happen to their retirement fund is more important to how many are killed in Iraq - as long as they and their family members are not drafted.

Yes, it would be nice if all the voters would look at our leaders under a wide magnifying glass to include all the issues that are inter-related. But the reality is that most just look at what is outside their door, and we have to be able to tap into these basic concerns.

[MrBenchley]

6. Excellent point....

People vote their pocketbooks.