Bell Curve The Law Talking Guy Raised by Republicans U.S. West
Well, he's kind of had it in for me ever since I accidentally ran over his dog. Actually, replace "accidentally" with "repeatedly," and replace "dog" with "son."

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

One of These Things Is Not Like The Others...

Hi All,

Republicans are fond of saying that to be "conservative" is to be "mainstream." They like to argue that Democrats and "liberals" (by which they mean leftists) in particular are "out of touch." But who is really out of touch? Here are some poll numbers from pollingreport.com:

When the Harris poll asked people if they thought the Bush administration generally provided accurate information or misleading information to further their own ends, 64% of all respondents said they thought the Bush administration provided misleading information. However, 68% of Republicans think the Bush administration is being accurate. This is compared to 21% of independents who think Bush is being accurate and 7% of Democrats who believe that. Who is "out of touch?"

A recent CBS poll asked people if they though Bush had similar priorities for the country as they did. 65% of respondents said that Bush had different priorities than they did. But 69% of Republicans like Bush's priorities. In contrast only 11% of Democrats and 25% of Independents agree with Bush's priorities. Who is "out of touch?"

I could go on and on. With regard to abortion, 54% of Americans consider themselves pro-choice. Another poll showed that 56% of Americans want the Supreme Court to either make abortions easier to get or keep the status quo. Yet, the Republicans are pushing an anti-choice agenda and calling it "mainstream."

Bush is a big part of this. But Republicans as a group are increasingly detached from political reality in America. Democrats need to take advantage of this. This doesn't mean advocating some sort of massive increase in the welfare state (which would be equally out of touch). It means advocating a pro-choice/status quo position on abortion and developing a plan to get out of Iraq (I like Dr. Strangelove's plan). They should probably also advocate balancing the budget and make a big stink about corruption regarding Halliburton and Cheney's energy policy meeting.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

Do the Republicans all have the same writer(s) or is there just one guy who tells them to say the exact same thing over and over again? It's truly amazing to me that the Democrats cannot keep a universal theme throughout their speeches yet the Republican elephant keeps stomping the same message to everyone. 

// posted by Siddharthawolf

Anonymous said...

They're called "Talking Points." Republicans are very coordinated about distributing these to all who are going to speak and then staying on message. They coordinate appearances on press talk shows, speeches, and so forth. Democrats have never mastered this tool.  

// posted by LTG

Dr. Strangelove said...

RxR is right. By pandering to their core special interest groups--evangelical Christians and the conservative, moneyed elite--the Republicans have surrendered much of whatever claim on to the mainstream they had. The Democrats can take advantage of this. Republicans did a good job of using gay marriage to highlight where the Democrats were somewhat outside mainstream thought.
Democrats can do the same.

Democrats can support responsible fiscal policy--balancing the budget and paying down the debt. Contrast wth Cheney, who says defecits don't matter, and with Bush, who squandered a projected $10 trillion surplus and is now digging us deeper and deeper into insolvency.

Democrats can support keeping Social Security intact. Bush's proposal to "privatize" Social Security is way out of step with the mainstream thought. We don't want to gamble our retirement plans on the stock market. In 1929, we learned the hard way what happens when you rely on the stock market for your retirement. In fact, that's why we set up the Social Security program in the first place.

Democrats can support the strengthening America against terrorism at home and abroad. We can support putting billions of dollars into the defense of our country, not into some senseless occupation. We need to move away from this "Iraq" fixation and focus on Al Qaeda. Osama bin Laden is still on the run--and as we saw in Madrid, London, and Jordan, Al Qaeda is still strong. In fact, our policies are fueling hatred of the U.S. in the Islamic world!

Democrats can support the status quo in abortion rights. We don't need "activist judges" trying to overturn established law as part of some evangelical agenda. But that's exactly what Bush and his cronies want.

Democrats can support teaching science, not intelligent design or creationism or that kind of crap. Evolution should be treated the way we treat any other scientific theory. We should be spending more money to teach our kids math and science, rather than wasting our money rewriting science textbooks because someone got offended. This is exactly the kind of "PC" stuff that got the liberals in such trouble in the 80s. Republicans are stuck advocating creationism and what LTG calls bad theology. Great! Let's crucify them with it.

Democrats can support better contracting practices. No more no-bid contracts to Halliburton. The scandals over corrupt procurement policies in the Defense Deparment should be thrown in Rumsfeld's face. Republicans want you to trust the government. Democrats should answer that what we really need to do is, "trust but verify."

Democrats can support environmental programs, saving our clean air and water, and joining with the rest of the world to fight global climate change. Republicans would have us treat industrial pollution as merely an unwanted market externality that we should try to disincentivize through voucher programs or tax credits. At best, Republicans see it as a white collar crime. Small wonder: it's the conservative moneyed elite who are the polluters. Democrats should call pollution for what it is: vandalism. These people are literally poisoning our children and dumping shit on our land. It should be treated as a felony, not an accident. The polluters should pay to clean up their mess.

It's time for Democrats to stop worrying about what the polls might say, and trying to find some centrist "position" that gets to be too confusing. Centrism is not the same as mainstream! Sometimes centrism is a white noise of dischordant voices. Like the Democratic party is sometimes. Instead, the Democrats need to take a clear position and lead. If every Democrat in Congress called for a timetable for the withdrawal of forces by the end of 2006, that would become part of the mainstream!

RxR is right. The mainstream is the Democrats' for the taking. But they need to put together a clear policy agenda on the most prominent issues that hurt them last time: Iraq and gay marriage. When it comes to Iraq, bring our troops home; and when it comes to gay marriage, let the red states ban it and the blue states approve it as they will. And now with that out of the way, we can start talking about health care...

Anonymous said...

Dr. S -- why don't you make that a post and put it on the main page?

 

// posted by Bell Curve

Anonymous said...

Dr. S. - What a bunch of dribbling, emotional, whining! When trying to make a point, why don't you use some facts, FACTS, to back up your position. You have wonderful feelings, but no FACTS to support your whining. We're all scratching our heads wondering why we lost the election? It's because most democrats try to appeal to everyones FEELINGS. Useless. Let's start using real FACTS.  

// posted by Bluetailfly

Dr. Strangelove said...

Bluetailfly is right, of course: my post was mostly an appeal to emotion with very little factual support. I did not mean to claim otherwise. But it felt so good! :-)

Ssome of the aspects of that post have been discussed elsewhere on this blog quantitatively: the budget crisis, global warming, and Iraq come to mind. Before I take Bell Curve's suggestion and elevate this comment to a primary thread, I will try to buffer it with more factual material.

But it is just wrong to say Democrats appeal to feelings while Republicans appeal to facts. I'm afraid that statement, too, is just dribbling emotional nonsense.

Anonymous said...

I couldn't disagree more with Bluetailfly. Democrats lost the 2004 adn 2000 elections because they focused on facts and neglected the emotional appeal needed in a modern democracy to connect voters to ideas and candidates. Reagan sold "Morning in America" and it worked. Democrats have all the facts on their side, and it matters so little if they sit mute and dumbfounded while the response is flag-waving, piety, and invocation of the mighty war dead and 9/11. 

// posted by LTG

Anonymous said...

Mondale's rhetorical question of Reagan was "Where's the beef?" Mondale was the guy with clear details and specific policies. But Reagan had "vision."  

// posted by Raised By Republicans

Anonymous said...

We have too many dichotomies within the Democratic Party. Subtley. Subconsciously. We all pick up these contradictions. In the election, Democratic contradictions were more blatant. Kerry presented himself as a war hero but it was clear his service was for the end goal of becoming a war protestor and advancing his own cause. He votes for the Iraq war, then votes against it. Which of our Democratic leaders actually have true convictions? The only ones I see are Lieberman, Feingold & Dean.  

// posted by Bluetailfly

Anonymous said...

I think Kerry get's a bad rap. I think he's got firm convinctions. He's just not very good at communicating them. I can see a constant thread in his voting and his life behavior the problem is the average person is too lazy to think about it past the sound bites.

The GOP is very good about hitting the talking points. The pound away on their "message" regardless of what connection it may or may not have to reality. And that is effective. 

// posted by Raised By Republicans

Anonymous said...

Kerry get's a bad rap because idiot democrats in Massachusetts keep electing this guy and nationally idiot democrats still promote him. Look what he said yesterday on Face The Nation about our military.

"...there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the -- of -- of -- of -- historical customs, religious customs, whether you like it or not. Iraqis should be doing that."

What an embecile? And this was our Democratic nominee for president. No wonder 80% of the military votes Republican.

 

// posted by Bluetailfly