AlanCranston
(166 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-02-11 10:35 AM
Original message |
should the democrats try to... |
|
out christian and out good ole boy the republicans? By that it means we should run candidates in elections that sort of resemble the Marlboro Man. We should take their signature issues and use it to attack them. We should attack then on being soft on crime and soft on defense. If I remember right, George W. Bush ran for congress in 1978 in a district that Gerald Ford had won. His opponent painted him as a carpetbagger who was out of touch with the christian values of West Texas. He ended up winning by seven points in what was a fairly good GOP year.
But before the criticism begins, let me say that I am not trying to say that we should run conservatives. All I am trying to say is that when running for office we should try to co-opt the republicans issues and use it against them. Our candidates can be as liberal as they want once they get elected.
|
OHdem10
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-02-11 10:44 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Bill Clinton is a Conservative Democrat. Jimmy Carter is a |
|
Conservative Democrat. We cannot run Liberal Democrats.
I think I get where you are cming from, but may I suggest that we have Candidates who are willing and ready to go on offense. First we must have a set of beliefs for w we are ready to fight to death for which, we are ready to fight to the death.
We are in age of authenticity. This means you believe in something, that something will improve the country and you never appear hesitant to say what you mena and mean what you say.
|
northoftheborder
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-02-11 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Disagree with running conservative Democrats who are secretly liberal. |
|
Do we even have any of those? They are at heart conservative. (including Obama) I think the voters are ready for some hard truths told in a way they can understand. Effective communication of issues which they can identify with. They don't have to be called "liberal" or "progressive". Enough with the Con-crats.
|
Shagbark Hickory
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-02-11 10:59 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Yeah. If we have to. The Evangelicals used to be on our side. |
AndyTiedye
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-02-11 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. You'd Have to Let Them Have their Way with Abortion and Gays |
|
and even then you wouldn't get them back, you'd just piss off what is left of our base.
|
Shagbark Hickory
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-02-11 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. Well they dangle lots of cheese in front of us that they never give. IE marriage equality, universal |
AndyTiedye
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-02-11 11:40 AM
Response to Original message |
4. That Trick Never Works |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 04th 2024, 02:31 PM
Response to Original message |