You know, if Kerry could actually do all that stuff you people say he could, he might have won.
OK, this one I agree with.
And some consistency. Sometimes you have to drop an issue because you realize (a) you’re alienating the very people you ought to be able to win over, and (b) it wasn’t really one of your core issues anyway. (I’m thinking gun control here, which doesn’t really fit in with the Dems as the party of the people v. the moneyed interests, or as the party of defending civil liberties either.)
But the vast majority of the time, we ought to be able to stick with an issue until we accomplish it, or until it loses its relevance, one or the other. Before Kerry brought up a minimum wage increase in the debates, when was the last time Dem advocacy of a minimum wage hike made the news? 2000, that’s when. And for the Dems, this is a core issue. But as long as we can’t be counted to fight for even our core issues, nobody knows what we can be counted on to fight for.
This is one of the features of the GOP over the past quarter-century that we definitely need to learn from. When they lost a battle on one of their main issues, they came back and re-fought it the next year, and the next, and the next. As a result, everyone paying any attention knows what they’re for and what they’re against, whether you like it or not.
On gay marriage, it’s clear that they’re going to try to use this to pull us down anyway - and that it worked well for them this year. So we might as well abandon the civil-unions wimp-out, because it’s not gonna save us politically anyway. Let’s take a stand for gay marriage, (a) because we’re for it, (b) because gays are people too; (c) because we are the party of civil rights and civil liberties, so let’s be what we are; and (d) because we’re on the right side of history with this one. So I agree with Manny on this issue in particular as well as the general principle of spinehood: those Dems who can afford it, ought to say, “Why shouldn’t gays get married? What skin is that offa my back?”
When you can’t run away from something, it’s time to turn, stand, and fight.
And what the Dems, as an opposition party, should definitely have had the spine to do, was ask better questions before being buffaloed into everything from the Iraq war to the Patriot Act. “What’s the plan for securing the WMDs?” “How do we expect Sunnis, Shi’ites, and Kurds to cooperate, once we leave?” “What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen Chalabi?” “Can we at least have time to have our staffs read this thing before we vote on it?”
The contempt you demonstrate for those who have the audacity to disagree with you exposes one of the glaring weaknesses of the left. You will not win converts to your way of thinking with affected intellectual elitism.
I’m not a legacy admission to Yale, I had to drop out of college to work because my parents couldn’t afford the tuition. I just don’t want all the federal revenue from the blue states flowing to the red states while they whine about how awful taxes are. It’s not like I’m trying to deny NASCAR fans the right to marry.
You know, I wonder. Does it ever happen that Barry Bonds encounters a hanging curveball that some hapless pitcher has thrown which is just so perfect that he decides not to swing at it? That it’s too easy to the point where it’s not even fair and that this time he wants to try to put a hard slider into the Bay?
Nobody here, rightie or leftie, has mentioned the most obvious strategy:
Wait.
Sit back. Have a beer. Watch the GOP collapse.
You see, they have absolute power. And that means they have absolute responsibility, whether they admit it or not. And absolute arrogance, whether they realize it or not.
It’s up to them to do something about the Iraq war.
And the upcoming debt meltdown. (As RTFirefly points out, China is slowly wrapping her fingers around our short-and-curlies.)
And protect us from terrorists. And improve education. And improve the status of our health care system.
Way back when, there was a time when the Democrats had it all. The White House, Congress, public sentiment. The party got fat and lazy and tossed on its butt in 1980. The original coalition frayed, splintered, lost its voice.
And sooner or later, that’s exactly what will happen to the GOP. Do you think it’s a monolithic voice? No, it too is a coalition of interests, one which can quickly unravel.
Look at the above issues. In Iraq, the neocons want to build a new democracy. But the isolationists wonder why the hell that task has to fall on American soldiers and taxpayers.
Or the debt problem. It’s pretty obvious that the Republicans are no better than the Democrats when it comes to controlling spending, when one party has a lock on Congress and the presidency. This one will bite the GOP in the ass, because they’ve posited themselves as the party of small government. What will happen to the national security wing of the party when China stops financing our debt? We could have utter economic chaos.
Or education. Pretty neat trick, passing NCLB without bothering to pay for it. This wasn’t so much about appeasing a wing of the GOP as it was co-opting a Democrat strength. They’ll take their eyes off the ball eventually, and the voters will notice.
Or terrorism. Al Qaeda will strike again, it’s a matter of time. But the GOP said “We can protect you!”, the voters will say. And the libertarian wing will look at the erosion of civil rights and wonder what is going on here?
Politics is a pendulum, and at some point in the future the American right will look at its current leaders and cringe in embarrassment, the “National Review” equivalent of seeing Jane Fonda on a Viet Cong anti-aircraft gun.
I was going to say what Manhattan basically said. Except, when I said it it was going to be even smarter and better, and funny, too.
Oh yeah, and when I said it there were going to be lots of typos, and paragraphs of one sentence.
I feel pre-plagiarized.
Flee, like a rat off a sinking ship. I have a trip to Norway this month, I might just stay.
Meh, they don’t want me here anyway. I’m on gov’t medicare and all. At least that’s NORMAL in most other first world countries.
Oh for chrissakes, listen to you people. Boohoohoo, we lost an election.
The left has stood up to bullets, firehoses, and auto de fes, and you can’t stand losing 51-48? We are the point of the spear for human civilization. We are ALWAYS getting our asses kicked. But in the end, we always drag the rest of the species along behind us, kicking and screaming all the way. Being the whipping boys for the species is the price for benig the cutting edge.
The right has held Congress for a decade. They came in screaming about snatching away children from poor families. They talked about ending public education. They were going to roll back reproductive freedom. And now where are they? The national Pubbie leadership wouldn’t dare to decry homosexuality in public. When their talking heads advocate the execution of abortion providers or say homosexuals shouldn’t be allowed in schools, they disown them.
Yes, they think those things behind closed doors, but they know where the public stands. They can only survive by inching along behind us, staying just far enough to the right that they don’t fall behind. The center is a moving target, and it moves with us. Give it a few centuries, and the attitudes that won this election will be lumped in with all the other failed dogmas of the past.
Scylla: Ditto.
Is there a way we could send Manny’s post out to every liberal in America?
Which puts you in the position of rooting for bad things for America. If the economy goes well, it’s bad news. If democracy takes hold in Iraq, you’ll be upset.
You’re hoping that things go badly for the nation, so you can give the voters an I-told-you-so.
This is known as being strategically outmanuevered.
Upset? Hell, Furt I won’t be upset, I’ll be too busy being astonished, amazed and flabbergasted! Nothing could make me happier than for us to get out of this shitstorm!
This is going to happen? You think? The evidence on the ground being what, other than corpses?
But why just sit on our collective behinds when there’s so much we can be doing in the meantime? So much, I might add, that doesn’t conflict with the goal of holding the GOP accountable for everything it is now (and will be) accountable for.
While I disagree (rather strongly) with furt that waiting is the same as “hoping that things go badly for the nation”, I do agree that waiting for the other team to make a mistake is not by itself good strategy.
(Hey, 1000th post!)
Um, yeah, because understanding that they really are martyrs will in no way help us combat them. No, let’s all demonize them, because that always works. Worked in Salem MA, didn’t it… no witches there. Worked in Vietnam with the gooks, definitely kept the Negro down, and…
Wait, what fantasy world are we living in, again? Terrorism isn’t new, and neither is martyrdom for ridiculous religious causes. Renaming them “terrorists” isn’t going to win the battle, mannyvision. The sooner we see they are real human beings driven to do extraordinarily dumb things, the sooner we might actually get through this.
Did Rome keep the Christians down by demonizing them…? Did they lose a lot of ground to the “barbarians” around them by demonizing them? Did we keep the Negro down by demonizing blacks? No, really, show me where in history demonizing the opponent has been the component of victory, rather than understanding your enemy and applying sound strategies.
We toppled Saddam because he kept the people from being free, some say. Now we should topple justices because… they let people be free? While the topic of judicial activism still comes up in GD, I see the rationale of disliking it. I may yet be swayed. But, um, if I can’t call someone who thinks they’re a martyr a ‘martyr’, then please don’t call someone promoting freedom right here in the US a ‘dictator.’ Deal? Or should we stick to our sides from which no progress shall ever be made?
Fat chance. Court decisions have been binding for a long time, and will be for a long time to come, else why have a court system at all? If all it took to understand law was downloading a copy of the US Constitution and reading it out loud, lawyers would be out of business. Fact is, court decisions affect how we view laws all the time. You don’t like substantive due process? That’s one thing. Pretending that substantive due process is the only way courts help determine the shape of laws is another entirely.
Demonizing the other side? Why, I’ve never heard of such nonsense. Of course, gays trying to get rights has never happened at all. People really were just waiting for the right judge. No marches, no discussions… nope, just a bunch of lazy liberals.
Unable… to… reconcile… broad absolutist brushes… with… relativism… [explodes]
I have no problem with this at all. Of course, balanced budgets don’t really seem to impress 59 million Americans, so it is hard to say for sure how much this word will mean outside of present company. Didn’t phase Reagan supporters, and didn’t phase Bush supporters.
sorry, manhattan, for messing up the name.
I said as much here
Oh, horseshit. Here’s your problem: I do not think the next few years will go well under the GOP. If I did, I’d be a REPUBLICAN. Are all of you righties so obtuse that you accuse us leftists of not seeing the other guy’s viewpoint, while you choose not to see the other guy’s viewpoint? Couldn’t you at least do that with a sense of irony?
Orbifold: Yes, I agree that we need to take this time to regroup. The point is that circumstances ALWAYS change. And we should prepare to fight the battle of 2006, and start doing it toot suite.
Worked for prohibition didn’t it? I say that as someone who still doesn’t get why politicians don’t see the connection of drug prohibition on the crime rate. What is clear though, is if the Republicans are responsible for everything that happens the next 4 years, the Democrat message will be easily heard, and more importantly contrasted against the Republicans record. I’m not saying the Dems should do nothing. Every peice of legislation should get vigorous debate along with a tour of the talk show circuit explaining our position. Then start marketing in 2005.
And let me be clear here: we call them “terrorists” because they are terrorists. There’s little doubt of this. But they are dying for a cause they think is right, which is, of course, martyrdom. I don’t have to support their cause to realize this.
LJ brainfreeze? 
Why is it that conservatives think Hillary is such an important figure? She was the First Lady for a while and now she’s a senator. Wow. I don’t know anyone who considers her a rock star or a party leader.
So, everyone who visits the largest political blog on the internet is anti-American?
Oh? IIRC, it was on the ballot, and it was not a win for liberalism. The issue was not whether or not to allow judges to force people into gay marriages; it wasn’t even whether or not to allow gay marriages at all. It was whether or not to ban them.
Do you really think this will be successful without a similar loss of hate on the right? Folks like Coulter, Limbaugh, and Hannity aren’t just going to stop calling us traitors.
Doesn’t seem like conservatives need those measurement regimes. Why would we?