Are we on the verge of a dramatic shift in political allegiance?

[DeepModem Mom]

NYT: Voters’ Allegiances, Ripe for the Picking
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
Published: October 15, 2006

....polls showing Democrats poised for big gains this fall in both chambers of Congress are reigniting the debate: Can Democrats crack apart the Reagan coalition of white blue-collar workers, evangelical Protestants, Southerners and chambers of commerce? Or will shifts in population toward the outer suburbs, the South and the West combine with the Democrats’ secular, liberal Northeastern image to keep the party a minority in national elections for years to come?

At the heart of the debate is the war in Iraq, which pollsters on both sides agree is the biggest factor propelling Democratic hopes for the fall.

To many analysts, the backlash against the war is an inevitable and transient reaction that could fade when the Republicans pick a new standard-bearer in 2008. John Mark Hansen, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, said every conflict since the Mexican-American War has hurt the president’s popularity and cost his party in midterm elections....Democrats, though, argue that Iraq may be singular. No other fight has been so closely associated with one party or its leader. None has been justified with arguments that crumbled as quickly as the suspicions of weapons of mass destruction or an Iraq-Qaeda tie. And the war’s end, for now, remains far out of sight.

“Iraq has the potential to be to the Republican Party on national security what the Depression was to the Republican Party on economics,” said Representative Rahm Emanuel, the Illinois Democrat who is chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

The Democrats’ hope is that the war changes the reputations of the two parties in a way that may ultimately lead to remaking their constituencies as well, just as Roosevelt’s New Deal formed a lasting bond with union members and urban immigrants. President Johnson’s Great Society programs, on the other hand, eventually delivered the South to the Republicans by linking the Democrats to civil rights and liberalism — a gradual shift that reached a sudden tipping point with Mr. Reagan’s election. By tarnishing the Republican image of greater competence in foreign affairs, Democrats say, the war could open new inroads for their party among the white working-class voters who have voted Republican since the Reagan days....

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/15/weekinreview/15kirk.html?ref=weekinreview

[PSPS]

1. "the Democrats’ secular, liberal Northeastern image"

Gee, no bias whatsoever in this piece!

[DeepModem Mom]

2. Why pick out one line, when the point of a story is...

that the Democrats may be on the verge of an FDR kind of national political realignment?

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. Right. And We Are! n/t

[aquart]

5. Without actually offering any programs.

I mean, we're assuming a lot right now.

My feeling is that victory won't mean we let up the pressure for more than ten minutes. Many Dems are quite comfortable with a party that moved way too far right to suit me. I want to see rollbacks of heinous Republican legislation, I want the Patriot Act cancelled, so much to undo and THEN I want to see positive legislation on a national health single payer plan. Incentives to combat global warming and ready us for the future climate. Incentives to create business and jobs IN America.

I know we can't make plans until we see what we wind up with.

But that first hundred days better be busy.

[DeepModem Mom]

6. Good point. Way down in the article, it's pointed out that FDR...

had the New Deal outlined, and we don't have, or haven't been able to communicate, a similar specific program.

[aquart]

19. We're basically voting on faith.

Oh, crap. The Democrats are a faith-based initiative.


Well, we've been likened to battered wives. I have to say I've known some battered women who've broken free, and they are leading rather wonderful lives now. So, maybe we simply need a period of recovery. Right now, we're still afraid Karl Rove is about to beat us up again.

[NMDemDist2]

20. check it out...

http://www.democraticleader.house.gov/pdf/thebook.pdf

[DeepModem Mom]

25. You're right -- I should have just said we haven't been able to...

communicate our program. And that's the fault of MSM, either from bias, or that they don't think policy is of interest to news consumers.

[NMDemDist2]

27. true dat, mom! :hi: n/t

[bonzotex]

30. Not all their fault (the MSM)

It's part progressives fault, both rank and file and our politicians.

We don't organize and push our agenda year around like the fundie churches do.

Unions are not nearly as prevalent and blue collar workers aren't getting any populist message from any other authority figures.

Even in conversation and social scenes I think we liberals tend to back away from confrontation with a go-along-get-along, agree-to-disagree mentality.

We don't hold our political leaders accountable when they don't live up to our ideals.

Some of this is changing. This latest political season is amazing, but if the MSM suddenly grew new spots and reported substantive news, hard hitting investigative reports and even liberal slanted editorials, we still wouldn't get out a coherent Democratic message unless the Party at the highest levels decides to do so.

[DeepModem Mom]

31. Very good points, bonzotex. nt

[Jade Fox]

4. Once again....

the issue here is the myth that at some point this country took a dramatic turn to the Right. Yes, people were disgusted by Clinton's inability to keep his pants zipped (inflamed mightily by the GOP and the press), and yes many Americans had a knee-jerk fear response to 9/11. But at no point did the majority of Americans decide they wanted to return to some mythical 19th century and have Attila the Hun running our government. This myth has been widely reported by the media and beaten to death by TV pundits. It has also been widely promoted by the GOP, in no small part as an offshoot of their unholy alliance with the Christian Right. People who should know better now except this myth as reality.

Most people in this country want to move forward. They want sane progress and real solutions to our problems. Except for the minority who have always been inclined in that direction, they do not want fear-based moralism and anger-based warmongerin

[BootinUp]

8. dramatic turn to the right?

Where was that in the article. I read through it quickly maybe I missed it. They did describe a gradual realignment that came to fruition in 1980.

[Jade Fox]

14. I was not responding to the article....

per se, and was referring specifically to the Bush years.

This is a topic that gets me steamed and in (not always logical) ranting mode.

[BootinUp]

16. understandable...

I frequently get steamed as a result of our situation too.


There are some big differences in political opinions out there as a result of the divisive rhetoric we have been subjected to.

[demwing]

10. "Dramatic" turn?

Perhaps not a dramatic turn, but it's documented history that Reagan took a slice out of the New Deal Democratic pie, creating a right-leaning voting block that brought us to George W.

And of course, the Contract with America realigned the US Congress, sending America further to the right.

Call it dramatic or not, but don't call it a myth. America has clearly moved to the right, whether that has left the country to the right of center, or just to the right of the left.

[janx]

7. This article is a must read for anyone unfamiliar with what

happened with Reagan and beyond. And yes, a realignment is in the making, if the polls are any indication.

[welshTerrier2]

9. wish i could agree ...

i would love to jump on the bandwagon and agree that the Democratic Party has been building itself a sustainable mandate to govern ... i just can't see any credible arguments to make the case, however ...

one might cite some polls that show Democrats are now more credible on national security or the WOT or foreign policy ... to look at the mess bush has made, it's not surprising ... but what's underlying this new-found confidence in Democrats? is it their rational approach to dealing with these problems? of course not!!!!! don't be deceived into believing such nonsense ... sadly, such a view is absurd!!

do i argue that positions taken by many Democrats on these important issues is not worthy of support? NO, that's NOT what i'm saying ... what i do argue is that if you asked 100 people on the street to explain a single thing about the positions that Democrats hold, i'd be surprised if you could get even a single coherent response ... these are not the things that sustainable mandates to govern are made of ...

Americans have finally awakened to the insanities that bush has created ... they've come to see that the republican Congress has been a rubberstamp rather than a co-equal branch of government serving as a check and balance on the Executive branch ... there's nothing at all wrong with voters voting for Democrats as an anti-bush response ... just don't make the mistake of believing the current wave of Democratic support is a long-term realignment ... such a realignment is entirely possible if Democrats were to put forth a tangible and clear platform and set of values ...

i believe most Americans correctly see the current Democratic posture as primarily a set of political tactics and not a statement of how they would govern ... don't bother pointing me to the DNC's website ... i've read the agenda there; i consider it totally vague ... i also think very few voters have read it or are familiar with its essence ...

we may well see a tidal wave of Democratic support this year ... when the mighty republican fascade comes crashing down, Democrats might very well find themselves winning landslide victories this November ... but the party has chosen vagueness as its political strategy ... they've concluded that specifics do nothing more than give republican political hacks a clearer target to aim at ... fine ... if it wins, that's great ... but a realignment based on campaign tactics will never happen ... at some point, we have to offer tangible solutions to the real problems the country is facing ... your mileage may vary; i just don't think the Democratic Party has done that yet ... until they do, no sustainable mandate to govern is possible ...

[BootinUp]

11. The article is really just posing the question

They say that these re-alignments are never clear until looking back. I think if you ask people why they are considering switching the answer is going to be:

Bush's unilateral non-diplomatic, partisan approach to foreign policy, and probably losing the WOT (less safe), and his mismanagement of the economy and federal budget and corruption in the Republican congress.

Its difficult to get much of a positive populist message out there right now.

[bonzotex]

18. I think you give Bush voters too much credit

You said,
I think if you ask people why they are considering switching the answer is going to be:

"Bush's unilateral non-diplomatic, partisan approach to foreign policy, and probably losing the WOT (less safe), and his mismanagement of the economy and federal budget and corruption in the Republican congress."

While I agree those are good reasons to vote against the republikers path, I doubt a Bush voter would put it that way.
I think more likely:

Bush seems kinda dumb now... i don't think i wanna have a beer with him anymore, like i ever did! but he says he doesn't drink anyway, but he still sounds like that asshole guy Earl at Moes' Bar who's always drunk and yelling at the TV so whatever and .... and all this debt n' my taxes don't seem lower, and dead murricans, Osammy Bin Muslim is still out there and my cousin's brother-in-law came back from I-Rack with no legs and he said it was all bullshit plus meskins still takin our jobs and some of the republics are fags and not real christians, maybe i'll vote for the other guys, the demo-whatevers and see what happens plus my wife keeps going on about something or other that pissed her off so she wants to vote Democrat...and i'll never hear the end of it, so why not?

Ok, a little hyperbole but not much. In forums like this we tend to think voters are better informed than they are. I'm much more convinced people vote based on gut-level emotion much more than reasoned weighing of issues.

You are right it's hard to push a populist agenda right now, but the Democrats as a Party haven't even tried. Winning elections is about attacking from a lot of different angles and catching a break here and there. We are in a great spot but governing after the win is a whole other ballgame.

[BootinUp]

21. Point taken

but more than likely it is somewhere between our two examples, as the non-thinking crowd are not the ones considering switching their votes.

[bonzotex]

29. all snark aside...

I agree to an extent. There is a certain minority that are intellectually and emotionally unable to vote for anyone but a repub. The "non-thinkers" as you say. In my world at least, the people I actually meet and talk to, those non-thinking repub stalwarts are white middle class guys with some college or a degree, usually (but not always) evangelicals to boot. Those are the true believers, no amount of evidence, patient logic or clever argument will sway them.

Still, there are a lot of voters and potential voters out there that can think, but we don't reach.

In my work I get to talk with a lot of blue collar workers. They are not sophisticated thinkers, but not as stupid as I earlier implied. They are non-union, no college, skilled and semi-skilled, rather low but not minimum wage guys. Most are rather apolitical. They are the mysterious "swing voters" we read and write about so much. There are a few that follow politics, but most don't. Lots of them were Bush voters, lots of them have changed their minds only because Bush has been such an obvious failure.

If they read papers it's the sports section. If they watch news it's short sound bites and often on Fox. Very few have any idea that Fox news has a right wing bias. If they listen to talk radio, it's the predictable list of RW hate talk. They listen to their friends, family and people they respect, like ministers and priests. So these guys aren't stupid, they just don't get very much information unfiltered. In some cases they have told me I am the only person they have ever spoken to that said they were a liberal. They don't really know what liberal means except that Rush, Sean, Bill, Medved etc have said liberals are to blame for pretty much everything bad that has happened, ever.

Despite all that, they are swinging the Dems way this election. I just wish they were swinging this way because they heard some compelling message from the left rather than turning way from the obvious smoking wreckage on the right. I still ponder how we, The Democratic Party, will reach these people in the future and hold onto gains made due to Repuke failure.

[Doctor_J]

12. Most of that is the corporate/GOP media machine

Wes Clark has outlined specific, rational plans for Iraq and the WoT. John Edwards' plan for bottom-up economic recovery is intriguing. And personally I don't think "Bush and Rove are evil, lying cowards" and "The GOP are corrupt and malignant" is such a bad campaign platform anyway.

But with the GOP media organ lying, prevaricating, and protecting Smirk 24/7, no Dem message will ever get out.

[Tom Rinaldo]

13. "Ripe for Picking" is consistent with what you state

A realignment has not yet occurred, but the potential for it is just now emerging. It is emerging because, among a number of other also important factors, the American publics confidence in Republicans ability to be "the Daddy Party" when the world gets scary (to use that well worn cliche but quick short cut way of putting it) has been severely shaken. That creates a crack in the armor Republicans have repeatedly used to keep Democrats at bay. The Democrats now have a better opportunity to receive a much fairer hearing from the American public regarding our positions on preciously Republican strong hold issues involving national security than has been the case since perhaps the days of JFK. You accurately point out that we have not yet used that opportunity in a cohesive and compelling way. That realignment is by no means a done deal, in no small part as a result of that.

[welshTerrier2]

17. "a better opportunity to receive a much fairer hearing"

what's not at all clear to me is what Democrats will do with their "opportunity" ... i have made no effort to hide my displeasure with the party's "tactics before values" crowd ... i'm glad we're doing as well as we are; i would be much, much happier if i thought we were winning based on our values ... i do not believe that is the case ...

but good ... it's great to win and it will be a truly joyous day in wt2ville when the evil ones lose both the House and the Senate ...

the question remains, though, then what? picture the calendar pages torn away until we find ourselves into next March and April and May ... the great news? bush will be forced to negotiate with Democrats unlike the rubberstamp nonsense we've seen since he took office ... but what will be the Democrats' script? will we see our legislators truly pushing our agenda or will we still see a timid party controlled by political hacks? which will it be?

it's hard for me to imagine how, if you accept the premise that the party is currently being controlled by a political agenda rather than a "values agenda", that anything will change after the election ... color me very skeptical ... what would cause the party to change? will we not continue to hear the tired old arguments that we're approaching the '08 elections and that this "vague platform" worked for us in '06? will most of our candidates be muzzled into a "don't rock the boat" meme?

i am in full agreement with what you wrote, Tom ... Democrats, indeed, will have a much better opportunity to be heard ... we will not only have a greater forum to get out our message but we will hold real power to back up our words with actions ... still, i think the "chase the vote" hacks will control the party's agenda ... we all want to win; some of us believe we can win and sustain our victories by clearly articulating our vision and our values ... we want to be "change agents" for America's future ... if our voices are ignored, as they have been, and the campaign mechanics are able to maintain their stranglehold, the opportunity we both see will never be realized ...

[Tom Rinaldo]

22. I don't disagree with you at all

Right now I almost feel like I am in a video game world where my life is on the line every moment. Have to deal with the threat that popped out in front of me this instant or I can't make it to the next door to deal with what's in the next room.

At least that's what it sort of feels like 3 weeks before a critical mid term election: "Now is the time for all good non neo-cons to come to the aid of the Democratic Party". Four weeks from now, even if we do win big on Election Day, it won't mean we will have won "the game". At most it means that we get to graduate up one step to the next level of difficulty, where the struggle continues. But surviving to fight another day does have a certain appeal to it compared to the alternative of unchecked Republican power continuing.

Right now I help the Democratic Party we have against the Republican Party we must defeat. Next I focus on the Democratic Party we have and try to make it the Democratic Party we need. Based on what happens then... Doors upon doors. We really got ourselves into a mess this time.

But in an odd perverted way, it is sort of relaxing to simply put aside for now all of the complex issues of relativity and comparative grays that must be sorted through and decided upon, some to be embraced, some to be rejected. For now I am just rooting on the Democrats in the upcoming Congressional Elections. Virtually any and all Democrats in the upcoming Congressional Elections. For now I'll take Reid and Pelosi over whoever the Republicans have to offer, and someone like John Conyers chairing Judiciary with the full power of majority control behind him to launch investigations.

[welshTerrier2]

24. this is my "painful" statement to the left this year

source: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/welshTerrier2/99
while i hate to send the wrong message to Democrats, and i fear if they do well in November they'll believe they're on the right track, the neocons are just too dangerous ... never before have the fundamentals values of American society been so threatened ... my two cents, for what it's worth, make 2008 the intra-party battle, not 2006 ... i'm voting a straight ticket this year ...

this was a very, very difficult position for me to take ... i said after my ABB support of the ticket in '04 that things had to change or i was gone ... and frankly, i feel like i've totally caved in based my '06 position ... bush is just too dangerous ... this is not an "oh those stupid Democrats" kind of year ... we just cannot afford any more neo-conning ... period ...

and so, with egg on my face and a genuine apology to those to my left who will vote Green or Socialist or otherwise, i restate my promise for AFTER '06: never again ... either the Democratic Party starts addressing the issues in a real way or i'll be voting for candidates who do ... i've heard all the promises about Conyers and Waxman and blah, blah, blah ... put up or shut up!!!!! as i said above, i do not believe control of the party will be taken from the political hacks ... many so called DU moderates have sworn over and over and over that "once Dems have real power, things will change" ... as long as we hear the "we can't take chances with '08 around the corner", nothing will change ... no, it won't be as bad as with republican control; that's not the point ... but we will not see "We The People" topping the national agenda; that spot will remain reserved for those who fund the campaigns and fund the lobbyists ... pardon my skepticism ...

so, i hear your message about enjoying these interim days of riding to victory ... as i said, it will truly be a joyous day and i will gladly join in the celebrations ... the day after that, however, we are damned well going to get this intra-party mess straightened out or there will be bloody hell to pay ... and job one for me is going to be a rapid end to the war ... i do not accept any of the drivel that passes for policy ... i won't belabor that point here ...

[Totally Committed]

28. I was thinking more post-'06....

If we are just spinning our wheels, and nothing we do, no matter how hard we work at changing it, it's time to go on to Plan C.

But, time will tell, I guess.

TC

[Totally Committed]

15. All I can say is this (with the caveat that it's my own opinion, only...)

If these voters coming into the Party bring this Party any firther to the Right than it already is, you may end up seeing people like me -- who will not be able to deal with that -- take a hike and leave. On balance, all that'll be left when that happens is an even MORE conservative Democratic Party... about the same size as it was before, because a bunch of us Lefties will have gone.

I think it'll be an "on balance" thing. If this happens, a Liberal, LEft-Wing Third Party is more and more likely, I think.

TC

[Tom Rinaldo]

23. If we gain more people of intrinsic honor, like Eric Massa

...who get their eyes opened to what truly is happening to America, I think we can get through it in one larger piece. Sometimes when people break free from their long term knee jerk political moorings, where they more or less existed in passive unconscious "brand loyalty", and finally start to really look at and THINK about what is happening in the world around them, as they take in new information from sources that they never before considered, positive changes CAN happen. There are lots of examples of this to point to in politics, someone like Arianna Huffington also comes to mind, and a lot of our current DU poster too who are former Republicans.

No quarantees, that's for sure, but when someone with the personal integrity of a Pat Leary shifted away from the Republicans and started fighting for the most part on our side, it felt like a net gain. Time will tell TC, that and all of our collective efforts.

[many a good man]

26. Phony macho posturing makes bad defense policy

Face it. Ever since Democrats "lost China" half a century ago Republicans have been beating us over the head as "soft" on defense. It picked up steam after Vietnam and it became ingrained in the 80s due to relentless corporate propaganda.

If there's one Democrat that's anti-war, we all get broad-brushed as appeasers. Criticize the bloated Pentagon budget and we are imperiling the nation. Its so ingrained now that they don't even have to work it any more.

The Iraq fiasco may be just the thing to finally turn this around. Mindless Republican chest-thumping for military aggression endangers our national security. The people are finally beginning to get it.

More than anything else this sea change can lead to electoral re-alignment.

In the 80s we were hammered by welfare, affirmative action, and abortion. Clinton took the "welfare queens" off the American radar and the other social wedge issues now seem less important to the average voter because our ship is clearly sinking. People are clamoring for competence, for good government, for righting the ship of state.

The cronyism, corruption, and incompetence of the GOP are too blatant to ignore. Americans hate losers and we have a chance to take the majority of the white male vote for the first time since 1964. After that the demographic shift taking place in the country favors Democrats. To build on this momentum we have to come down squarely on the side of the people. If we can do that we will do something even more important than create a Democratic majority - we will have shifted the center of American politics to the left for the next generation or two.

Bursting the myth of Republican superiority on national defense issues is the necessary first step.