The Trouble With Dems

Jeffrey Goldberg's account of the Democratic Party's confusion since the last Presidential election touches on a crucial reason for John Kerry's defeat ("The Unbranding," March 21st). Democrats consistenly focussed on explanations of policy, while Bush and his followers conveyed their sense of moral superiority and their toughness, which appealed to voters' emotions. Kerry didn't appear as angry, as self-confident, and as connected to his feelings as Bush did, and, speaking to Goldberg, he now seems to recognize this: "I presented stronger arguments, but there was a visceral unwillingness to change." The rest of the Democratic Party needs to wake up to the fact that they will continue to lose elections until they learn how to appeal to voters' gut feelings.

David C. Balderston
New York City

[Link added -- Ed]

Of course I heartily agree with Mr. Balderston's assesment, since it's one that I've made here before, both in specific and extended form (see, for instance, here, here and here), but I'd also point out (once again) that the Kerry loss to Bush, although heartbreaking and entirely unfortunate for the country and the world, was a slim one, with less than 3 percentage points separating then at the end. That's a win, but it's hardly a resounding one, and Democrats can get carried away in trying to learn the supposed lesson or lessons of the election, since we don't need to shift 10 or 15 or 20 percent of the voters, or even 5 percent of them, we only have to shift about 1.4 percent to win, a task that probably doesn't require any dramatic changes in the party's approach to winning elections.

In fact, it's quite possible that thatg goal can be accomplished by waging a campaign that's at least as concerned with projection of image and emotional concern as it is with presenting the broad thrusts and details of policy.

So, a candidate better able to appeal to voters' emotions would indeed be a good idea, but today's fracas (between Amy Sullivan, Noam Schreiber, Matthew Yglesias, Atrios and others [these are links to selected posts, look over the blogs for more comments]) on whether Dems need to start hitting hard on cultural issues seems to me to be a case of going too far, much farther than is necessary -- especially considering the rank-and-file supporters such a sea-change will alienate and drive away.

As is often the case, Digby says it well:

In order to gain a political majority in this country we need 51%. We have 49%. This question of where we are going to get that majority could be answered in any number of ways or any combination of ways. But, you have to settle on some sort of strategy and mine comes down on the second option. It reflects my personal values and I think it presents a stark, clear choice between the two parties now that the Republicans are being shackled by their image as the party of the religious right extremists. I think it's good policy and good politics both to embrace a "mind your own business" message in light of how far out the Republicans have become. Now is not the time, in my opinion, to blur the lines. It's time to draw them clearly. All those people who watched FOXnews in disgust during the Schiavo matter are open to the argument that the Republicans are trying to impose radical religious values on the country.

But, others disagree and think that social conservatism is where the votes are and that's where we should concentrate our efforts. I have serious doubts that attacking popular culture will be seen as anything more than pandering...

[...]

[B]y feeding into the myth that the biggest problem facing America is a decline in "values" --- a decline which is promulgated by liberal elites (who, yes work for corporate masters) --- we play into the the right wing's game plan. They have created a myth that liberal values are the prime cause of people's discontent instead of the very real pressures that people feel in the squeeze between work, family, consumerism, freedom and responsibility. Some of these things the government can help with, some of them they can't. But the problem with the current formulation is that the Right has convinced everyone that the government should interfere in the ways in which it is most clumsy and ill equipped and abdicate it's responsibility to do the things it can actually do pretty well.

Here's the thing. Everytime we expolicitly play into this "oh the country's values are going to hell in a handbasket" game, we are playing on GOP turf. I think Amy Sullivan is correct to say that we can use this issue as a way into the hearts and minds of overworked and worried parents. But not by joining with Joementum and condemning Hollywood or, as Amy Sullivan said, pulling a Sistah Soljah on Susan Sarandon. ...

The way you worm your way into this topic is by responding to people's concerns about popular culture with an empathetic, "well we live in a free country and apparently a lot of people like that stuff or it wouldn't be on. However, I think we should definitely try to find some ways for you to be able to spend more time with your kids so you can have at least as much influence as the television does."

What you don't do is allow their framing of the argument to stick. It only reinforces their message that liberalism is the cause of all evil. We just have to stop doing that. Whenever we find ourselves speaking in terms that could come out of a Republican's mouth we should ask ourselves if it's really common ground or just internalizing their criticisms of us. 90% of the time it's the latter.

And later:

The thing is that rarely have I seen in my lifetime a situation in which the Republicans have been so soundly criticized by even their own constituency for being too intrusive and imposing their own values on others as we saw in the Schiavo case. It would seem a natural that Democrats would, out of pragmatism if not principle, see this as a way to drive a wedge into the Republican coalition by capitalizing on public opinion and characterizing the Republicans as being in the grip of a mad faction that wants to impose its religious values on everyone.

Apparently not. Instead we are going to drive a wedge into our own, against the will of the majority of both Democrats and Republicans. It's an unusual strategy to say the least. Now is our chance to expose their extremism and it looks like we may just punt. How depressing...