“An issue”? Screw that. We’re talking about multiple issues, clearly defined and marketed. Read the first page again and you’ll see them.
The funny thing here is that Hastert was specifically chosen because he was more moderate than his immediate predecessors. Lord knows, I can’t think of anything particularly “evil” that can be pinned specifically on him (unlike, say, Newt Gingrich, who was clearly responsible for pretty much everything when he was active).
I guess all Republicans were “summoned from a hole”, eh? Maybe someone needs to visit Stoid’s “partisan” thread.
Chaim Mattis Keller
Like I said, we just need to re-frame the issues that are already on the table. For example, we need to do a better job of explaining why the tax cuts proposed by Republicans are bad medicine for middle-class Americans.
Instead, in the past election cycle, we allowed Republicans to distract voters with the war and to frame the tax cut question as a simplistic “Were in favor of tax cuts and the Democrats are against them.” Democrats responded limply with the equally simplistic “The tax cuts favor the rich,” when they would have done better to explain how the proposed tax cuts will hurt the middle class.
(Frankly, we could use some mad-dog talk radio hosts to challenge the seeming Republican monopoly in that area. I can’t tell you how many people I know who derive their political views entirely from listening to talk radio. We can deride Rush Limbaugh all we want, but we’d do better to find an antidote to him.)
My recollection of news stories at the time was that DeLay knew he was “radioactive” after pushing the impeachment vote, and pushed Hastert instead as a front man. I am not convinced that Hastert even now has the actual power in the House.
Just curious, for all those folks deploring the lack of a coherent Democratic message: Do you think the Republican one is all that more coherent? Or were these election results based more on personalities and transient political atmospheric conditions?
Yes, I do think the Republican message was far more coherent, and much better marketed. Homeland Security and War With Iraq were easy sells, and they were not effectively countered with anything on the Democratic side.
Chaim, regarding Dennis Hastert crawling back to whatever hole he came from, I meant primarily that he was a nobody on the national scene before being magically elevated to Speaker. The guy is still basically invisible, as far as I can tell.
There’s also a good article regarding this discussion in this week’s Time.
minty, sorry I misinterporeted what you meant about Hastert.
Chaim Mattis Keller
Not at all, Chaim.
Let us not forget that Republican’s won their marginal victory by running as DEMOCRATS on domestic issues: They claimed to be for a prescription drug benefit, and against privatization of Social Security.
The dem’s don’t have to change their positions so much as somehow show the public that the Republican’s aren’t really sincere about the domestic positions that they took to get elected.
Which will be difficult, because the mass media are either wholely owned subsidiaries of the republican party (Talk radio), or so concerned with ‘balance’ that they quote politicians without providing the background information that would show when a politician is probably lying.
The dem’s simply can’t continue to rely on the the media to fairly represent their positions, they don’t, and so far that’s cost the dems the presidency in 2000 and control of congress in 2002.
The Republican’s control of the 4th estate is the problem for the Dems. Fix that, and the other problems go away because the Republicans actual domestic agenda is deeply unpopular, but they manages to run away from it come election time and the press don’t call ever call bullshit, or quote the Dem’s when they call bullshit.
I don’t know about the whole 4th estate, but the Reublicans have definitely cornered the talk radio market. Democrats are badly in need of voices there. And I don’t mean a whiney, NPR-style voices, either. I mean voices that will go to war with the Rush Limbaughs of the worrld on middle class issues. (Middle class issues. Can’t emphasize that enough.)
One other thing (and at the risk of sounding really sexist): the Democrats need an infusion of testosterone. Why do Republicans routinely draw the majority of male votes while Democrats draw the majority of female votes? The Republican party has subtly (or not-so-subtly) positioned itself as the macho party. (This may be especially true in the South, but I get the feeling its a national phenomenon.) I think a strong regular-guy, male Democratic voice on radio would help immensely.
Am I wrong to think this?
What about that Texas guy, what’s his name? Hightower?
my point exactly. The point man for the Republican disinformation machine doesn’t even need to use his last name anymore. It’s nice to have Carville out there too, but he’s just one voice in a sea of repulican spin.
Even the mainstream media is a problem, because the vast majority of it is owned by a few large corporations. You won’t see too many reporters <b>effectively</b> opposing the interests of their owners. Though they are encouraged to do so ineffectively because that helps perpetuate the ‘liberal media’ nonsense.
Witness the trashing of Al Gore’s character by the media at all levels during the 2000 campaign. The man is practially a boy scout in real life but he got slandered by just about everyone. See back issues of the Daily Howler for details.
There’s no doubt that the mainstream press’s collusion with the Republican spin campaign cost Gore enough votes to make the Bush election theft possible.
So, how about this idea for the Dems from Robert Reich: Get rid of the repeal of the estate tax and replace it with a 2-year tax holiday on the payroll tax!
Nah, I hate one-time tax cuts even more than I hate the estate tax repeal. Taxes should be based on policy, not marketing.
Except then the purpose of the tax rebate is to stimulate a sagging economy. In which case it should be only temporary.
Name a tax increase supported by Democrats that was temporary.
Regards,
Shodan
Sorry, I misread ‘cut’ for ‘rebate’. My bad.
Let me just get this straight Tejota, you’re saying that not only is there no liberal media bias, but that it’s in fact a conservative bias?
We’ve had this debate countless times here on the SDMB. Here are some links to sources that discuss aspects in which the media seems to be biased in the conservative direction, particularly on economic issues (as opposed to social issues like abortion and the like…where the bias in most educated circles, including here on the SDMB, tends to be in the liberal/libertarian direction):