Reply #28: "GOP manipulations and machinations" [View All]

[welshTerrier2]

a most interesting post, AK ... i have a very close friend whose last vote was cast for George McGovern in 1972 ... he's from the "it's all bullshit school" ... it's a most tragic business ... i have spent some 30 years trying to persuade him to vote ... i have failed miserably ... a vote, however constrained by corruption, electoral fraud, or minority status is nonetheless a valuable commodity that should never be "wasted" ... how we define what is wasting a vote is often the issue ...

much of what is put forth as part of the rovian neocon agenda is mostly for political purposes ... in the case of the torture bill, perhaps one of its multi-objectives was to indemnify certain republicans from future prosecution ... but i agree with your fundamental premise that, as always, sitting on top it's all politics to box the Democrats into a corner ...

and on that point, i consistenly have been feeling that the Democrats have NOT responded correctly ... and i'm not just talking about my "purist" values; i'm talking pure party politics ... IF (and this is not totally clear), those Democrats who voted with the republicans did so for purely political reasons (i.e. their votes aspired to be "pragmatic"), i believe they are hurting the party politically ... Americans, at least most Americans, have a very strong perception that the Democratic Party and most of its representatives strongly oppose bush and certainly do not condone torture ... so, when certain Democrats vote with the republicans on torture legislation, what is the political impact? and i'm specifically focusing on the best case scenario which means looking at the political reaction in those representatives' "red states" ... the reaction in bluer states to a "mixed message" is likely to be along the lines we're seeing in many DU responses ...

my belief, and this comes up over and over and over on almost every controversial issue, is that the Democrats, rather than being seen as a party that FIGHTS FOR ITS BELIEFS, is seen as a party that is AFRAID TO STAND UP FOR ITS BELIEFS and is UNWILLING TO "RISK GOING FOR IT" ... that is NOT a good political strategy in my opinion ... now, it may be true that some voters would see these red state Democrats as wimps if they voted for such touchy-feely things as fundamental human rights and the upholding of the Geneva Conventions' standards on the treatment of captured enemies in a war ... so, yes, we could lose some votes by sticking to our guns ... in fact, we might lose a few seats by doing so ... it would be foolish to not accept that as a possibility ... HOWEVER, and this is a big deal, i think it paints the party in the overall "big picture" in a very bad light ... it stinks to high heaven and it has me hearing my close friend explaining to me how "all they all care about is getting elected" ... see, this "local business" of needing to win in the red states is costing us in ALL the states ... it fails to paint the right picture of the party ... there are something like 70 million people who could have but didn't vote in the last election; voting only to "win" fails to reach out to this enormous pool of possible votes ... some of these potential voters want to see candidates with "the courage of their convictions" ... when they smell someone is not sincere and lacks integrity, they stay home ....

instead of reacting with FEAR to rove's "manipulations and machinations", the path to victory, in my opinion anyway, lies in educating the voting public every single day about what our deeply held beliefs are ... how weak are Democrats if we can't even make the case to most voters that TORTURE IS UNAMERICAN AND ITS WRONG???? if we can't make that case, exactly what case can we make????????????

i'm not sure if this was a point you were making but i also wanted to respond to the phrase you used about "raging cynicism and pessimism" ... i certainly see that as an appropriate description of those who refuse to vote ... i would not, however, apply it to those who vote third party or to people like myself who are trying to CHANGE the Democratic Party ... if i had no hope, i wouldn't spend time around here trying to explain what the hell i thought was the best thing for the country and the party ... Change Agents who have no faith that things can change are rare birds indeed ... i see those of us who are passsionate about charting a new course, either inside or outside the Democratic Party, as optimists ... we may be realistic enough to realize that change will be painfully slow, but we still believe it is possible ... our message is "keep the faith and keep fighting" ...

in the end, i see those who "put on airs" to win as the ultimate cynics and pessimists ... they believe they must be REACTIVE rather than PROACTIVE ... the path towards the light is paved by educating the voters; not by sending a cynical message of appeasement ...