Harold Ford, Martin O'Malley think Bush is on the rocks, plan to "capture the center"...eeek

[madfloridian]

I do not want to hear another word about the "center". Not after what the center right Dems did to us this week-end. This is nothing but spin.

We just gave Bush a huge victory, gave him more power, gave Gonzo more power....and they think Bush is "on the rocks". He is winning the battle, my friends.

From the Washington Post today:

Our Chance to Capture the Center

With President Bush and the Republican Party on the rocks, many Democrats think the 2008 election will be, to borrow a favorite GOP phrase, a cakewalk. Some liberals are so confident about Democratic prospects that they contend the centrism that vaulted Democrats to victory in the 1990s no longer matters.

The temptation to ignore the vital center is nothing new. Every four years, in the heat of the nominating process, liberals and conservatives alike dream of a world in which swing voters don't exist. Some on the left would love to pretend that groups such as the Democratic Leadership Council, the party's leading centrist voice, aren't needed anymore.

More on that ethereal "center"....from the WP op ed by Harold Ford and Martin O'Malley.

But for Democrats, taking the center for granted next year would be a greater mistake than ever before. George W. Bush is handing us Democrats our Hoover moment. Independents, swing voters and even some Republicans who haven't voted our way in more than a decade are willing to hear us out. With an ambitious common-sense agenda, the progressive center has a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to win back the White House, expand its margins in Congress and build a political and governing majority that could last a generation.

Harold, get back to me on that "center" stuff after our party figures out why they voted to give Gonzo more power after watching him lie day after day on TV.

Oh, and Harold, this is not the very best week to reach out to the center and put down "the left". Not a good week at all.

They can not resist making stabs at that group they call "the left"..that term that to them encompasses nearly everyone but their little elite group.

[jgraz]

1. If Harold Ford knew how to win elections he'd be a Senator right now

The guy's worthless.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

8. Oh, that's fucking rich.

How many conservatives are there in Berkeley? Twelve?

[jgraz]

14. Yeah, about 12

And if Ford were running here, he'd be pandering to each one of them.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

18. You actually believe that?

What are you, ten years old? Harold Ford is a politician, which at heart means he's got to be a reasonably pragmatic person.

[jgraz]

20. Yes, let's throw ad hominems around now

Just so long as you remember to whine about them in another post. Oh, I see you've already done that.

Get back to me when you have something substantive to add to the conversation. I won't be holding my breath.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

27. It's not an ad hominem.

I honestly do think that your view of politics is relatively juvenile, if you actually believe that Harold Ford would be compelled to appeal to conservatives if running for office in Berkeley, CA.

[madfloridian]

29. Harold Ford's view of us is filled with arrogance.

He does not think the people of the party are worthy of his attention.

He ran as an almost Republican in TN and lost anyway.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

41. who do you propose should run in tn?

al sharpton? Denis kucinich? Go back and look at gore's positions on a lot of issues when he first ran in tn. And that was before the jesus freaks took over

[madfloridian]

59. I think that is being overdone....the red state stuff.

Harold Ford was anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-those who weren't Christian enough for him. It did NOT work.

He practically made it clear that Governor Dean was not welcome in TN...I mean such arrogance. No one spoke up to tell him he was not the boss of all of us.

Harold took every stance he needed to take to win in a red state, and he lost.

Perhaps if he had stood up for what was right.

[jgraz]

30. Ah, so you believe Ford should pander to progressives if he were to run in Berkeley

That's one strong set of core beliefs you have there.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

40. some day you will realise...

that politics is the art of getting people who disagree with you to vote for you anyway.

[jgraz]

43. Thank you for those pearls of wisdom

Unfortunately it means very little. How do you get those people to vote for you? Do you lie about your real agenda, as Bush did in 2000 and 2004? Do you just adopt their views in order to gain their votes (and money)?

Or do you stick to your core beliefs and work to convince those who disagree (also known as "leadership")?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

46. read post 26 and my response. N/t

[jgraz]

48. OK, so the only problem is that Harold Ford's methods for doing so are poor

He wasn't able to win his own election, so why should his methods work on a larger scale?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

50. my response to 26

it doesn't matter how passionate you are about your program of forced sterilisation, people aren't going to vote for you. Ford's point is that tailoring the message to the policies is possible. I do not see him advocating any policy changes. Anyway i thought ford ran a decent campaign. I expected him to lose by 10 points at the start

[Richard Steele]

22. Yes, yes it it is. "Humor is TRUTH, only faster".

nm

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

35. Harold Ford got sunk by a bunch of racists

Don't start that "doesn't know how to win elections" bullshit.

[jgraz]

45. Ah, so he would have won if only he didn't have to contend with racists in the South...

Yeah, no way he coulda seen that one coming. :eyes:

[mitchtv]

55. Harold Ford is an idiot

if people have the choice of voting for a real republican, and someone masquerading as a republican, they will vote for the real republican, (paraphrased). HST

[jgraz]

61. That's the only word for him: idiot

I keep hearing Stephanie Miller's "You are an idiot" drop every time I see his smarmy face.

[guruoo]

57. I believe his votes on critical issues are what did him in...

His votes on the war, and in support of the deregulation of credit cards
were two of the issues that were most often raised among Democrats I know.

However, I did vote for him,
albeit reluctantly.

[tnlefty]

64. And I worked to try to get him elected, although reluctantly...

don't forget the Military Commissions Act vote, either. I was amazed at the numbers of people who didn't turn out to vote at all, and I can't help but wonder if they're just not inspired by any candidate. What I would give for a populist, tell it like it is candidate, who doesn't pander to the right to run, but just states issues as they are. People can say what they want about the south, but from my experience, farmers, blue collar workers are some of the first to smell BS and they'll jump the other way even if the other way isn't what they really believe nor want.

[Me.]

2. Harold Ford Is So Impressed

with himself. He;s under the impression we all are. Best answer to this is post #1 above.

[Me.]

3. Also, My Contention Is That The Country Is Not Moving Right Or Even Center

but left or progressive, though some may doubt it at this point.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1532702

[madfloridian]

4. It is all about them, not about us at all.

He said they would be the policy shop for the nominee. Well, looks like they are the policy shop for the candidates.

"That's why they have begun putting forward smart, New Democrat plans to cap and trade carbon emissions, give more Americans the chance to earn their way through college, achieve universal health care through shared responsibility, increase national security by rebuilding our embattled military and enable all Americans who work full time to lift themselves out of poverty."

It is about New Democrats, Blue Dogs, all about them. The people of the party do not matter to them.

[Me.]

6. Oh, Those Code Words

earn, share translates into no free rides for any of you, unlike us (DLC) you're going to have to pay (through the nose with lives and lost jobs) for the little we will allow you.

[Robbien]

5. The DLC/DSCC/DCCC are all working to push Progressives out of the primary

by force, or starving us of their support and money. Rahm is currently working this plan.

Of course Blue Dog centrists have a leg up.

[Blue_In_AK]

33. Sadly, I believe you are correct.

As many of you know, we had a great progressive candidate for Don Young's seat last year, but she couldn't get any help from the national or even the state party. She was given NO chance of even gaining 10% of the vote when she announced her candidacy during the summer and was outspent by Don Young 10 to 1. Incredibly, with only five months of campaigning and in the face of overwhelming odds, she was able to garner over 40% of the vote. Her campaign did projections after the election that showed with the momentum she had going into the election, if she had had two more weeks and 80,000 more dollars, she could have won.

She announced her candidacy for the 2008 election at a peace rally here last spring when there was still snow on the ground. Despite that, the national party has gone out of its way to ignore her and has been actively recruiting more mainstream, moneyed, "electable" Democratic figures here. The state party chair last week abruptly quit his post and announced his candidacy because, in his words, "All this stuff has been coming out, there's been a barrage of new information about the corruption and the ethics violations, and I thought, 'You know, somebody's got to run against him,'" he said. "I just figured I'd do it."

The local newspaper reports "For the first time in years, Rep. Don Young has a challenger with fundraising juice: Jake Metcalfe, a former Anchorage School Board president and former head of the state Democratic Party, who announced his candidacy last week. Democrat Diane Benson, who challenged Young in 2006, is also running. There may be more."

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. This kind of disrespect from the party and the media is infuriating. So wrong on so many levels -- are they discounting Diane Benson because she's a progressive, because she once ran for Governor as a Green, because she's a woman, or because she's Native? Or does the combination just make their heads spin?

We will not give up. The people's voices must be heard.

http://www.actblue.com/page/dianebenson2008

[Robbien]

56. That is the standard story running through all the 2004/2006 elections

When the Chicago Trib did that huge piece on Rahm Emanuel, Rahm proudly said that pushing center-right candidates into primary races was how HE won the 2006 election for the Dems.

We should make sure we never ever ever give any money to the DCCC, DSCC or DLC or any of their candidates. Every single penny needs to go to a progressive.

[Blue_In_AK]

58. I really jammed up the Alaska Democratic Party

when they called for a contribution the other day. I told them their performance last year with Diane was abysmal, that I was extremely disappointed in Metcalfe's move to enter the race, and that this was absolutely the last contribution I was giving to the party unless they threw some support Diane's way. And I WILL be keeping track. From now on my money's going to the candidate, not the party.

[Selatius]

7. You need policies that win the left and the center. Ford should go back and relearn FDR/LBJ

Those two leaders knew how to push through economic programs that likely few others were willing to do for fear of shaking the boat.

For example, fair trade. I'm sure by now even ordinary folks in the middle are starting to see the decline in real wages in the vacuum left by manufacturing jobs that went buh-bye years ago because of unregulated free trade.

Playing to the center and taking the left for granted isn't the way. You must forge a policy that is popular with most people. It should be vastly easier for a Democrat to do that than for a Republican.

If you believe in universal health care, like most people, it should be easier for the Democrat to get his message out than the Republican. The Republican would like to never talk about the issue. Michael Moore's standards are rather high for our political reality, but John Edwards plan, at least according to Krugman, offers the best hope towards transitioning to single-payer in the future.

Unfortunately, with the health care debate, I doubt the Democratic leadership has the fortitude to eliminate private health insurance as the primary vehicle of care before they cave in and simply throw subsidies to these companies (Uh, this is why the term "corporate welfare" was coined) in return for covering people whom they would otherwise never cover like people with "pre-conditions" and people who are too old and thus unattractive to cover in terms of risk.

But if we listen to what people like RFK, Jr., is saying, the point of government is to serve the people, not to pay corporations to clean up their own messes on the taxpayer's dime. Ideally, the corporation pays to clean up its own messes, rather than externalizing the costs and internalizing the profits.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

9. Our policies ARE more popular than Bush's...

...at least in the domestic sphere. Vastly more popular. Unfortunately, there's not a hell of a lot we can do in terms of real change right now with Bush waiting to veto every constructive bill we give him, and without a large enough majority in the Senate to override his veto. We can say "no" to his unpopular policies like destroying social security, and we have. Honestly, I don't really see the point of debating policy at this point. Our policies are popular. But we can't promote them when all our candidates seem to want to talk about is whether we should nuke Pakistan or just bomb them with conventional weapons.

[Selatius]

13. No, the debate needs to be hashed out now.

Because we all know Bush is going to send every piece of legislation worth a shot to the bottom of the ocean, so we're left with big issues to discuss while waiting for Bush to go away. The biggest on the domestic front probably being universal health care. For example, you're not going to win anymore by simply saying you're for universal health care. You're going to be forced to show us the details, the goods of your plan. The devil is always in the details.

You can say you're for fair trade, but again, what are the details of the proposal? Will it upset certain interests that donate big to the Democratic party? Like the financial sector? If so, what do you do? Balance the interests of a rich few against the interests of the great poorer masses as if the few were equal to the masses?

[ShaneGR]

10. You don't win a national election without winning over some of the center... period

There is a reason we've only had one Dem President since 1980.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

11. Don't tell that to most of the people here.

You'll be accused of being somebody's lapdog.

[jgraz]

17. No, you'll just get accused of spewing silly talking points

In case you haven't noticed, the CENTER in this country wants us out of Iraq, doesn't want to be spied on and thinks our elected officials should actually obey the law. A majority wants Cheney impeached, and we're evenly divided on impeaching Chimpy.

I'm all for going after the center, but Ford's definition of the center is a redneck who only displays his confederate flag on Lee/Jackson/King Day.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

So let me get this straight...

The 2008 election should be about impeaching Cheney.

[jgraz]

31. OK, I'll let you get it straight

Keep trying, you're not there yet (hint: you're not even close).

[madfloridian]

19. After what the "center" did this week....

they need to hush for a while.

[truebrit71]

15. Yeah, because voter fraud and a right-wing media is a fucking myth right?

Riiiiiiiight....

Gore won in '00 and Kerry won in '04...

There hasn't been a REPUBLICAN legitimately elected since the current fuck-ups father was in office...

[madfloridian]

16. The center like the ones who sold out to Bush and Gonzo this week?

This is a little ironic. The "center" gave our rights away, our personal freedoms...and this is not a good week for Harold to do this.

We are supposed to make room for them, but they don't want the rest of us.

[madfloridian]

28. What you really mean is that we need to appeal to the right wing...

and to hell with our own party.

[Hippo_Tron]

54. And today's center is the right, pre 1980's, we should be working to change that

The DLC believes that we need to adjust policy to appeal to the center, which wasn't even the center before Raygun fucked up the political landscape. I think that we need to work on changing the political landscape back to what it was in the late 60's and early 70's so that genuine liberals could get elected in what are now called red states.

Don't you think it's a problem that genuine liberals like Ralph Yarborough (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Yarborough) once could get elected in Texas, but now we have to settle for "centrists" if we want to win?

[Wiley50]

12. "Harold, Call Me" not n/t

[Richard Steele]

21. The "center" is a RW propaganda fabrication. The vast majority of this nation's citizens are LIBERAL

They just don't REALIZE that they fit that label, because
the people who own the news have spent decades deliberately
lying to them about the very nature of reality.

[kenny blankenship]

23. By validating the NeoFascist ideology of Bush--they can fuck themselves

right after they drop dead.

[tnlefty]

24. I do hope that they were watching Washington Journal this morning

when this was mentioned. Many of those coveted Indies were calling in and mentioning that the DLC doesn't represent the center as the center has shifted to the right and that the right is out of control.

Many more callers requesting a true left shift to actually get back to center.

Boy don't they enjoy taking "party faithfuls", or as I call them "the base" for granted?!? Sheesh!

Rec'd, BTW.

edit to include 'as'

[madfloridian]

25. They entitled their summary of their convention: "News From The Real World"

News From The Real World
http://dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=131&subid=192&contentid=254409

That title says it all, doesn't it?

This was not a good week for that WP op ed.

I could tell them about the "real world"

[jobycom]

26. He's right on where elections are won, but he's wrong on how to win them.

He's right that the center is what decides elections, and that the Democrats have to win the center to win. That's simple mathematics. The center is a moving point, based only on the two extremes. Each extreme, basically by definition, makes up about a third of the vote. The center makes up the other third. The only way to win is to get the majority of the center to vote for you.

Where he's wrong is how to win the center. The Democratic strategy during the 90s and early 00s has been to tell the center what the Dems assumed it wanted to hear. They put on a wig and some lipstick and say "Hey, look. We're the center. We believe what you do. Vote for us."

The problem is that the center doesn't vote for what people who believe what they do, because they basically don't have any beliefs. Or any strong convictions, anyway. That's why most of them are in the center in the first place. With a few exceptions, they don't wake up each morning and thing "This world needs a centrist ideal, and by golly gum I'm going to fight until I get it." They wake up each morning and thing "I wonder if this bagel will make me fatter. What's on television? Is my car out of date? Will that thing I'm working on at work come through, or should I change careers. Hey, look, an article about politics. I can spare a couple of seconds--it is my civic duty to learn this stuff, after all. Where's my damn coffee?"

So when they spend their two minutes a week reading about politics, they don't say "That candidate wants what I do, so I'll vote for him," they say "Well that person sounds pretty passionate and smart, I'll vote for him." Now, which candidate will sound passionate and smart to a person who is worried about his job, car, and coffee more than his politics? Why, the one with the most passion, of course. The one who says "This is what I believe and why I believe it, and by gum, that's what I'm going to do." Mr. Middle may not even understand the issues, but he's not stupid. He can tell conviction when he hears it. Then he turns to the Democrat. And that Democrat has a fake wig and a fake coat that doesn't completely fit, and he says "Well, um, vote for me, because, like, I'm sort of your kind of guy, in appearance, anyway."

Easy choice for Mr. Middle.

Now, if instead, he heard the Democrat shouting "The problem with the country is that we have a bad health care system! Poverty is too high! We are not fixing our infrastructure!" Mr. Middle is going to say "Damn straight! What can you do about it?" To which the true Democrat says "Well, I'll tell you. We have to spend money smarter. We have to quit wasting money on losing war efforts and fix bridges. And fix cities that have flooded out. That will not only fix things, but it will create more jobs, more industry. We will grow the economy. We will spend money defending our nation, but not waste it on bad wars. And sorry to say it, but we have overspent in the last eight years, and we have to get some of that money back. We have to raise taxes. We will raise them fairly, making those who have benefited most pay the most. But the result will be a stronger nation, and children who grow up with a future, and who will be able to look back on our generation and feel grateful, rather than angry. The way we look at our own parents."

Then Mr. Middle begins to get it. He doesn't become a lefty, but he begins to see why the lefties would be better at running our nation, his nation, than the righties.

THAT, Mr. Ford, is how you win elections. Ever see that cell phone commercial where the dude encounters a rival cell phone company? He has his old company at his back--hundreds of technicians ready to make his phone work--and he sees a new company in front of him, looking pretty good. So he asks direct questions, and he gets half-hearted, misleading answers crafted to sound like they are saying something when they aren't. The new company thinks he's dumb enough to fall for them, but he isn't. He gets more suspicious. He looks closer, and sees that most of the technicians behind the other guy are cardboard cutouts, meant to make the new company look like the old one. So he pokes one, and they all fall down.

That's what Dems like Harold Ford look like. They try to look just like the Republicans and sound just like the Republicans, but it's not what they really believe, so in the end they only look phony, and the whole charade collapses, and the Republicans win--not because they are better, but because they at least look like they say what they believe. Mr. Middle doesn't know shit about politics, but he's not stupid. He knows when he's being gamed.

Now, the solution is to say what you mean, to treat the voters as though they are smart enough to understand you. That's how Clinton got elected, defeating a president that a year before looked unbeatable. That's how Carter got elected. It's even how Reagan got elected. That doesn't mean you have to be a flaming left-winger who thinks Kucinich is too far to the right. And it doesn't mean you can't by somewhat moderate and win--in some districts, you have to be a moderate to win. And it doesn't mean you don't tailor your arguments to the middle. Use language they are comfortable with--talk about money, income, cars, tax and interest rates.

But it does mean you argue YOUR point to them, not the Republicans' point. You say "This is what I will do, and this is why it will work." And they just might believe you. They sure won't believe you if you don't. And if by some miracle you win, what good does it do? They expect you to act like the person they elected, so you wind up doing what you don't believe in, anyway. Might as well let a Republican do that.

[jgraz]

32. Damn fucking straight

There is no more American value than standing up for what you believe in. That's how you win elections.

[Selatius]

34. THAT is how you win. n/t

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

44. great post

i basically agree with everything you said, though i think your criticism of ford is a bit harsh. Remember that clinton did demonstrably take a more centrist position on many issues. This certainly did help him in the burbs.

[jobycom]

53. Mebbe.

I didn't mean to criticize Ford, I meant to disagree with this one thing he said. He wouldn't have gotten elected in Tennessee sounding like Dennis Kucinich. I respect him, I just disagreed with him.

On Clinton, I think Clinton ran a more liberal campaign than he gets credit for. He got elected promising to allow gays in the military and provide a national health care program. He promised to raise taxes on the wealthiest, to make them pay their fair share, and to provide national job training programs. He sounded pretty liberal to me. In fact, I was thinking of him as my example throughout that post. What Clinton did was not to take a centrist position, IMHO (and I know not everyone agrees with this) but to explain how his plans benefited those in the center. That's a fine distinction, and it's one few politicians could make, so many people who thought they were doing the same thing he was really weren't. So they lost. Remember, his first enemy in the Congress wasn't Gingrich or Dole, it was Sam Nunn, the centrist Democrat.

Just my thoughts.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

66. Clinton Ran A Populist Campaign In 92

He said he wanted America to be for "people who worked hard and played by the rules."

[SaveElmer]

36. Good...

That is where elections are won!!!

[madfloridian]

37. But we lost.

We got back some power and we gave it away.

So we lost anyway didn't we.

It is like they are moving further and further away from the rest of us.

It is a form of arrogance.

[SaveElmer]

38. Of course we didn't lose...

We are half way there...polls are looking very good for 2008 20+ gain in the house, 3 or more in the Senate...

[madfloridian]

42. But we still lose...when we give up our freedoms because we are afraid.

That is what happened this week. They gave our personal freedoms away, even more than Bush wanted.

That made our party the loser.

I am to the point where the words mean very little anymore. Actions mean more.

[jgraz]

47. Are you crazy??? That's not losing!!

We may end up living in a corporate-owned police state, but there'll be a DEMOCRAT in the White House!!! And, after all, that's what really counts.

[madfloridian]

51. Nail on head.

That is what we have done and are doing.

[Gold Metal Flake]

39. Kos' LithiumCola reconstructs the DLC's Bushco-like doublespeak

Check out the fun at the link:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/7/10145/65624

A teaser:

A majority comes hard for Democrats. In the past 150 years, only three Democrats, one of whom was Franklin Roosevelt, have won the White House with a majority of the popular vote.

The key moment in this poison pill letter, this blatant warning and threat from Washington to us, is the sentence "A majority comes hard for Democrats" and the distorted info that backs it up. Why do Ford and O'Malley claim a majority is hard to come by? "In the past 150 years, only three Democrats, one of whom was Franklin Roosevelt, have won the White House with a majority of the popular vote."

This is just disgusting.

First, when O’Malley and Ford tell us that "In the past 150 years, only three Democrats, one of whom was Franklin Roosevelt, have won the White House with a majority of the popular vote," they neglect to mention that the other two, Johnson and Carter, came after Roosevelt.

Since Roosevelt won his last election in 1944, and won it with a majority of the popular vote, O’Malley and Ford could just as easily have written, "In the past 63 years, only three Democrats, one of whom was Franklin Roosevelt, have won the White House with a majority of the popular vote." But that wouldn’t sound so hopeless; especially when we consider that in this same time-frame there were only three other Democratic Presidents at all: Truman, Kennedy, and Clinton. Three won with majorities. Three didn’t. What lesson really follows?

Edit: spelling

[Solly Mack]

49. "...progressive center ..."

I want a pony

[hatrack]

52. Harold? Don't call me, OK?

:puke:

[madfloridian]

60. Bush just played the fear card and brought 57 Democrats to their knees.

So he in no way on the rocks. We made his illegal acts legal.

[JAbuchan08]

62. If these candidates abandon the left and the right hates them

how the heck is the center going to be enough to get them elected?

[Tsiyu]

63. I have seen Harold Ford in person

I live in TN.

To me, Ford is in it for Ford.

He is trying very hard to appeal to rich white guys, to the elite sytem that is politics in Tennessee and DC. He's forgotten the voter.

Had he taken on some leftish positions in his campaign: health care, anti-war, progressive, he would have had a real chance.

Instead he went for the "I'm just another mouthpiece for insubstantial bullshit" routine. He never connected with the working class base here because I think he believes he is above us all.

Sad, but he is just another pretty boy, and not man enough to lead anyone anywhere.

[Geek_Girl]

65. I guess by center they mean the portion of the populous that is clueless

or isn't paying attention.

I can't think of one person that buys into the centrist ideology. Most of the people I know are knuckle dragging theo-cons or people getting tired of being fucked in the ass be corporate America or sometimes both. I know no one that loves Corporate America as much as the DLC.