From the Palm Beach Post:
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/content/opinion/epaper/2006/06/11/a1e_watson_commentary_0611.htmlGiving the Democrats a 1-2-3-4 punchBy Robert P. Watson
Every so often - 1828, 1860, 1932, 1948, 1980, 1994 - there are elections when the stakes are high and the outcome is a turning point in American history. With the country now at a crossroads, 2006 and 2008 might prove to be such critical elections, and there might be no turning back from the choices we make.
America faces record budget and trade deficits, a record - and growing - national debt, and an insecure homeland. Meanwhile, the cost of a college education, basic health care and gasoline skyrockets, and "good government" has been replaced by an inability to provide our troops with adequate armor, vaccinate our children or respond to a hurricane. We find ourselves more divided at home than any time since the Civil War and more despised around the world than at any time in U.S. history.
(snip)
...Democrats must give the voters something to vote for, not simply someone to vote against.
On that note, I propose four basic strategies for Democrats to win in 2006 and 2008.
1) Lead the agenda.For most of the 20th century, the Democrats controlled the agenda. Democrats successfully prosecuted two world wars, brought us out of the Great Depression and gave the country women's suffrage, Social Security, the GI Bill, civil rights, Medicare, Head Start and public financing for scientific research and the arts. Republicans opposed nearly every one of these vital initiatives, which contributed to their long tenure as the minority party.
Yet since 1995, when Republicans gained control of the House, the positions have switched. Simply saying "no" to the Republican-led agenda of tax cuts for the rich, corporate giveaways, lax environmental standards and war in Iraq is, at best, nothing more than an "anti" agenda and, at worst, a formula for failure. Democrats must offer the country a choice by differentiating their platform from the Republicans and offering positive solutions to public problems.
2) "It's not the economy, stupid!"In 1992, responding to the first President Bush's inability to understand his unpopularity and the concerns of average Americans, the Clinton campaign responded with the slogan "It's the economy, stupid!" Although clever, this premise could not be further from the truth.
If it really was about the economy, Democrats would be in power. The 1990s were a period of unprecedented growth, while George W. Bush became the first president since Herbert Hoover to have a net loss of jobs (1.7 million) during his first term.
Democrats continue to mistakenly believe that people are rational voters who vote with their pocketbooks in mind. Republicans have figured out that people actually vote with their hearts, not their heads. Elections often are won by linking your message and your messenger to deeply held beliefs and making connections with people on a personal and emotional level. Does this sound like Al Gore, John Kerry, or the Democrats? Not anymore.
3) Reframe the issues.So, how do Democrats connect with voters? I believe that Democrats have better solutions to problems, yet are losing the public relations battle.
Most Americans support restrictions on assault weapons, know that families can't live on minimum wage, favor clean air and clean water and believe that America is always strongest when leading our allies, not bullying them. So Democratic policies don't need to be changed; instead, the way they are presented to the country does need to be changed.
For example, the Republican Party, like a good courtroom attorney, frames debates in such a way that to oppose the war is to oppose our troops. To criticize or question Bush is to be unpatriotic. Democrats need to lead on national security and the fight against terrorism by reminding the country that being patriotic means providing our soldiers with protective armor, a livable wage, fair death benefits, and the truth about the war.
To make complex issues such as the record budget deficit and ballooning national debt resonate with the public, Democrats must reframe them by using simple, straightforward terms such as "baby tax" or "birth tax." That is what the deficit and debt are: President Bush is taxing our children and the unborn by passing along an insurmountable debt while claiming to be pro-family.
Republicans have given themselves an advantage by framing the abortion debate as pro-choice versus pro-life. Why? By favoring choice, Democrats play into Republicans' hands because "life" always trumps "choice." But because it is not a "choice" - a choice is whether one orders vanilla or chocolate ice cream - but rather a woman's right, a personal freedom and an important public health issue, Democrats must reframe the debate.
How? One cannot claim a "culture of life" yet rabidly favor the death penalty and cut pre-natal care. One cannot claim to love a child in the womb but let the baby fend for herself after birth by gutting child vaccinations, early childhood nutrition, and school lunches. Republicans are pro-birth, not pro-life.
4) It's about the messenger, not just the message.People view politics in a personal way and want to make connections with their elected officials. After all, what explains the popularity of a Reagan or a Kennedy? Personality always trumps policy. Democrats need to make the election about both the message and the messengers, nominating candidates who can connect with the public and inspire us by their example.
As long as Republicans continue to run the country into the ground, Democrats have a chance. But they will have a chance only if they rethink their strategy, become proactive, and take off the gloves to hold the Republicans accountable for the colossal mess they have made. Only then can Democratic candidates win. More important, maybe, just maybe, the country will win.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
