Can we talk about issues instead of people for a minute ..... ?

[Stinky The Clown]

(By 'people', I mean candidates.)

What do you think will be the defining issues in the 08 cycle?

These aren't necessarily the *real* issues. They are the manufactured issues or a sleeper issue that suddenly catches fire. Let's see what kind of political analysts we are. Let's see how clear our crystal balls are.

On what issue or issues might the 08 cycle turn?

[niyad]

1. the war with china, perhaps?

[Stinky The Clown]

9. Hahahaha

Consider that a very nervous laugh.

I don't think that's an impossibility, but I do see it as unlikely. Were it to happen, it would, indeed, define the 08 cycle ..... and everything beyond that. Everything.

[lonehalf]

2. I really don't know but...

...if the public continues to think that liberals are 1. Soft on crime 2. Weak on national defense...
You know, the same old stuff.

We must continue to inform the electorate where we stand not just keep denying the Repubs propaganda

[Adelante]

3. Same as 2004

Foreign policy and national security.

[Totally Committed]

4. Well, the tried-and-true formula seems to be something

the media is content to allow to be advanced:

**** Anti-War = Anti-Troops = Anti-America = Anti-God

**** Pro-Choice = Pro-Abortion = Anti-Baby = Anti-God

**** Pro-Human Rights = Pro-Terrorist = Anti-Torture = Anti-American = Anti-God

**** Pro-Gay Marriage = Anti-Family Values = Anti-Chritianity = "Godless" = Anti-God

**** Anti-Tax Cuts for the Rich = Anti-Business = Anti-Employment = Pro-Big Government = Anti-God

Then they'll add a big dose of Immigration, Sex Education of our kids v. Abstinence, Prayer in the schools, and intolerance of all alternate lifestyles. The cherry on the cake will be TERROR TERROR TERROR TERROR 24/7.

Unless we get a titan of a candidate who will stand up LOUD AND PROUD against this, the cards appear stacked against us UNLESS the media comes around -- which appears very unlikely.

TC

[Stinky The Clown]

10. Of all of those, one jumps out at me as a sleeper that is only now .....

... starting to show up on some people's radar.

Taxes.

Look around right now at all the hand wringing over the 'death tax'. The Repubs were brilliant to make their tax cuts expire after Il Dunce leaves office. There will be very heated debate over this all through the 08 campaigns. And it *will* be framed as class warfare. And it will be waged with slogans - very personal, very universal, very visceral, very illogical slogans and framing.

Our strategy *right now* should be to define the warring classes. If we include people with a (yes, paltry) few million in net worth as our enemies we lose ...... big time. If, on the other hand, we include those people (and by extention, those who can somehow see themslves as someday being there) we win. We need to draw the line at the bottom of the top 1%(ish) of people.

[ismnotwasm]

5. War

It has to be the defining issue, the one that will supersede all others. It's a complete mess over there, not just in lives, bombed out cities and insurgency but the inability at this point in history of the Iraqi government to, well govern. And of course, the cost. I was reading in an older issue of The Economist (sorry, I don't have a link, I think it was October 2005) about disgust not over the actual war, but the handling of it. Not exactly liberal fare, but an interesting point of view. The article mentioned a new book written by a man who completely supported removing Hussein by any force necessary. This man was overjoyed evidently that the US decided to take these steps. He has since become absolutely appalled at the inept handling of the Iraq. He's furious. He thought, I guess that the bush administration would pay attention to history.
(I'll look around for the book's title and author and the article, if anybody knows, I'd appreciate it)

[Stinky The Clown]

13. I actually think the 'War' debate is over .........

...... support for the War in Iraq® is never going to come back. Ever. The debate will be over startegy and policy and impact, as your article points out. Where we saw the need for a candidate with some sort of military bona fides, the new candidate will need bona fides as an international statesman.

Similarly, as the War on Terror® starts to look more and more like the criminal activity it really is (frame it more along the lines of the Bloods and the Crypts) a crime fighter will have sufficient bona fides.

[ismnotwasm]

21. Ah

Perhaps you're right. I always think of who is going to get political mileage out of what. Beating the dead horse of the rights and wrongs of a war that everyone knows is a disaster might not do any good.
But pointing out ineptitude might/should. The money spent on the war is a great issue, however.
So what issues affect everyone?
The national debt, which is A Bad Thing in your average American's eyes, is manipulated by certain economists as actually being a good thing (it's better to owe money than be owned money or it doesn't really mean anything)which could tie into
Health care for the elderly. If it's true that the social programs of the New Deal are being deliberately spent out of existence, it's good to note that many of the "Sandwich" generation, are pissed, when actually confronted with the benefits their aging parents don't have. Health care in general is an issue that affects everyone.

Education. Including the ridicules "No child left behind act" It's causing havoc everywhere, and teachers are pissed. Of course teachers can't even get decent pay, but hopefully they'll have a strong voice. Budget cuts for higher education. Most of us are not rich of course, and many of us are not even middle class. Higher education is expensive.

VA benefits. We have soldiers returning from war, who will face the same bullshit the Vietnam era vets faced as far a benefits go. My daughter is a decorated combat veteran,--an uninjured one and her health care benefits from the VA stop 6 months after leaving the army. So, what if she developed any "syndromes" common in returning soldiers? She has a bit of PTSD, but she deals very well. Not all soldiers will. The money for Vets isn't there. This is more of an emotional issue, but if we're going to "support our troops" then we should support them dammit.

The very real issues, but potential political red herrings such as immigration, abortion, gay marriage, separation of church and state-- which the right wishes to distract us with, will be issues, and they should be, but how do we address them without one of them becoming THE issue? Personally, I put much of my energy into reproductive rights. I know it's a battle that is being fought state by state, and it will stay in the spotlight whether we want it to or not.

[BillZBubb]

6. Taxes/Spending Cuts & Energy & Economic Recovery

The reality of the massive Repug generated debt will force any sane candidate to discuss how we can get the country back from bankruptcy. The Repugs will claim they won't raise taxes and in fact will fight to make some cuts "permanent". They will repeat the lie that their tax cuts are the only way to get the economy going again.

They will vow to cut all the "wasteful" spending without any meaningful specifics. They will proclaim at every opportunity that the Democrats will raise taxes. In other words, the Repugs will repeat their successful propaganda campaign one more time.

The Repugs will claim that only they have a real plan to reduce energy cost: "Incentives" for Big Oil and Drill, drill, drill...

Barring another major terrorist attack or war, the poor economy will be on everyone's mind.

[Bobbieo]

7. I feel the environment and global warming will be a major factor.

Already the first summer storm of the hurricane major season is forming and the subsequent ones will have an affect on the nation and the economy - tornados, flooding, catastrophic damage to the southeast.

[tives12]

8. I agree

The issues in '08 may be decided by both nature and our foreign involvement in the next couple years.

[Bobbieo]

11. New York City in 2059

I am reading J.D. Robbs crime novels set in NYC in 2059. My God, if the current rate of the global warming continues - Florida will be submerged and half of NYC will be under water. I believe it, too.

[BillZBubb]

14. I don't and here's why...

The Repugs have continued to successfully finesse the issue. They paint the Democrats as "extremists" and promise to take "sound" measures to help the situation. They'll repeat over and over the the Democratic solutions will kill the economy and the media will support them. And of course they'll lie like Bush did in 2000. The media will help them paint people like Gore as loony, sky-is-falling fanatics.

I think Gore on Leno said that a majority of Bush voters in 2000 believed Bush SUPPORTED the Kyoto agreement. I just don't see how the Democrats can make the environment a decisive issue. The Repugs are too good at muddying the waters.

[Stinky The Clown]

17. I agree completely

It will take quite a number of years and lots more science and lots more Katrina-like disatsers to make this issue sink in on Main Street.

[Stinky The Clown]

16. We have a winner!

I completely agree with you. The debate will be not so much on 'the economy stupid' as it will be on economic fairness. And *that* is such a squishy issue that it will all come down to framing and slogans and visceral images. It will, in fact and indeed, be class warfare.

Our task is to define not the war, but the warring factions. We need to separate the Republicans from that part of their base who is there because they think they're rich or think they *can* be rich someday. And these people are *not* the rich. They're ordinary people who have managed to accumulate a bit more than average. We need to convince them that we're not unrepentent Marxists who wanty nothing more than to separate them from their accumulated 'wealth'. We need to disabuse them of the illusion that we're anti-wealth. We need to demonstarte to them that we have *their* best interests at heart.

In my mind, the best way to do this is with the 'death tax'. We need to develop a sensible plan that preserves, pretty much untouched, the personal 'fortunes' of people with a measley few million in net worth (most ot from obscenely inflated values for crappy little houses and a few bucks in a pension plan or an IRA and a couple of tens of thousands inherited from the sale of dear old dead Dad's even crappier house. We need to appear not just 'tolerant' of these people, we need to appear to *be* these people.

Cuz ya know what? We are.

[WA98296]

12. No issues. Any "issues" will be silenced by the NSA immediately by '08...

Of course by then, you won't be able to come here and do a search to find out what we all said, and that I WAS RIGHT.
Blogging on the net will be dead.
A few of us will have managed an escape to Canada or Costa Rica.
The rest will be trapped here, voiceless.
The rest to too awful to tell you, but it is the price we will pay for taking our freedom for granted when things were good.

[Warpy]

15. If the Dems ever catch a clue, WAGES

It's the perfect wedge issue, one that will blow the coalition of the rich and the stupidly greedy apart at the seams.

The only answer the pubbies have is the tired old lie about disappearing jobs. Well, those jobs are disappearing now with wages at rock bottom and the minimum less than it takes for one single adult to survive on.

The Democrats have never gone wrong with economic justice issues. Abandoning them has led to the loss of all 3 branches of government to a party that at least promised tax cuts.

If they stubbornly cling to the platitudes at the DLC site, then they deserve to stay out of power.

[Stinky The Clown]

18. This issue - wages - is a perfect tie-in to the 'debate' over taxes and

wealth.

I'm just making this up, but consider:

Candidate Smiley: "I want to eliminate all taxes on the bottom of the income scale. Everyone below a $50,000 income for a family of four will pay no taxes whatsoever. I want to elminate entirely the 'death tax' on estates below $5M. I want to raise taxes to 80% on the top 1% of estates. I will raise the minimum wage to a liveable wage level for every American who holds a job. I will make any job that ties to a federal contract pay a prevailing wage. I will change federal purchasing guidelines to make the choice one of of best value and not low cost. Good work, done competently, for a fair wage is almost always the better *real* value. Our federal purchasing competitions will now be based on a value for labor rather than value for 'cheap'. These wages will be paid from the tax income gained by taxing heavily the billions and billions of dollars held by just the top 1% of the people. The trickle down theory has clearly been shown to be a gift only to the obscenely wealthy .......... etc."

[Warpy]

19. Too wordy

I'm here to tell you that a day's work, whatever it is, should give a person a day's pay. That means enough to live in safe housing, eat decent food, go to the doctor whenever he's sick, and maybe be able to save a little for a rainy day. Conservatives have allowed our minimum wage to become so stingy that it won't do any one of those things for a single person, let alone all of them.

Hard work should be rewarded. The government needs to make sure it is.

[Stinky The Clown]

20. I'm workin' on the words ........

I've always liked 'minimum standard of living' more than 'minimum wage'.

I could like a concept of 'maximum level of wealth', but need a MUCH better way to say it.

[blondeatlast]

22. Can we talk about issues instead of people A LOT MORE THAN A MINUTE?

Please?

Nevertheless, the manufactured issues the DNC better start prepping for are the estate tax (as someone mentioned above--let's talk economic fairness), privacy, and the national debt.

[blm]

32. Heh...apparently people don't WANT to.

.

[Stinky The Clown]

34. Ain't dat da truff ......

The dichotomy of the internets ......

"Nothing more important that issues"

Post about issues ......

Na-fukkin-da

[welshTerrier2]

23. issues: should be's and will be's

some of the should be's:
1. big money corruption of our government
2. imperial foreign policy
3. excessive power in the executive branch
4. global warming
5. addressing terrorism by addressing its real causes
6. jobs and globalization
7. spying on Americans
8. social safety net
9. alternative energy sources
10. overly centralized corporate controlled media
11. massive budget deficits

some of the will be's:
1. whether respecting that someone was a POW in Vietnam has anything to do with being president
2. whether the fact that someone's husband was president means they have "prior experience"
3. whether Hillary is too "polarizing"
4. whether we can turn the country over to someone who will appoint "activist judges"
5. whether the Dems should nominate a prior "loser"

how pathetic are we???

[Totally Committed]

24. Love your list of "should be"s...

But, agree with your list of "will be"s pretty much. The answer to your question: Pretty wimp-ass pathetic, at the moment.

TC

[Stinky The Clown]

25. How about .....

.... conflating your 'ought to be's

Domestic policy that enables prosperity for ordinary people

Foreign policy that respects other nations

Its easier to stand for fewer issues, it is easier to sell those broader themses, and if you stop to think about it, all your 'should be's really do fit into those two very broad categories.

[welshTerrier2]

27. works for me

just trying to put down some of the specifics to highlight the tragic reality that we never actually choose candidates based on the REAL issues ...

while my focus was clearly a "laundry list" that would need to be "politically framed" in a more palatable manner, some degree of specificity, probably a bit more than just two, is necessary ...

it would be great to hear the views of our reps on all the details i listed ... campaigning is another matter entirely ... being politically palatable shouldn't be an excuse not to provide full details in an appropriate forum ...

[Stinky The Clown]

29. You're right ........

..... I went a bit afield ...... looking for real issues and then framing a political posture.

[blm]

26. Trusting the American people enough to treat them like REAL CITIZENS

who can handle information like real citizens.

The books need to be opened, and the CITIZENS of this country need to know what was being done in their names all these years - because they sure as hell will suffer the blowback - ask any 9-11 family. Most every one of them wants to KNOW MORE than what they are told.

[welshTerrier2]

28. an informed electorate ...

i've been a broken record about this on DU ...

we cannot aspire to democracy with an ill-informed electorate ...

i know you've been campaigning on "opening the books" ... i couldn't agree more ...

but i think you should go further than that ... our elected "representatives" need to recognize the critical need for them to educate their constituents on the great issues of the day ... too many of our reps are invisible in their own districts ...

they need to make regular, free public appearances to interact with regular citizens ... it's not just about "listening to voters", it's also about teaching them and involving them in their own democracy ... making a speech to the CFR or appearing on MTP is not adequate ... our reps need to do a better job "cheerleading" for more citizen involvement and more citizen awareness ...

[Stinky The Clown]

30. I don't want to get into names and I hope you won't either .......

.... but I dare say there are pretty damned few who would be willing to open the books. Many would just love to open the *other* guy's books. I'm looking for someone who wants to open all the books except those that *genuinely* need to remain closed.

Apart from current issues, like the 9/11 stuff you cite, why on earth is any 'book' from WWII still closed? Many are. Why are the 'flying saucer' books still closed? The Kennedy/King/Kennedy assination books? (No, I'm not going tin foily .... but my point is that kind of closed book *causes* tin foilyness.)

It is long past time for some bright, Tropic of Cancer intense sunlight to shine into all the cobwebby corners.

[blm]

31. That's exactly my point - and it's one of the reasons I don't use names -

People really should figure it out for themselves....examine the records...look at the battles that have been taken on and see who comes down on the side of opening the books - ALL THE BOOKS - to see who would really do what NEEDS to be done.

That's the only way to prevent any future 9-11s and future UNNECESSARY wars from happening.

Anything else is a waste of breath and energy - because nothing else comes even close to being as powerful a measure.

[POAS]

33. It's the economy, stupid!