There has been a long term conflict within the Democratic Party, about how to win elections, and that has translated into differing strategies about the 2018 campaign. In the one hand, we have a progressive approach with a strong liberal economic message. On the other, we have a more moderate approach, that is more traditional and less about identity politics. My question is this. Does it have to be an either or proposition?
The largest number of Democratic congressional candidates in decades is putting into play dozens of House districts across the country, raising the possibility of a bitterly contested midterm election cycle next year as the party and its activists try to take advantage of President Trump’s unpopularity to win a majority in the House.
Yet these candidates and their supporters are also waging a battle among themselves about what the Democratic Party should stand for. After a string of defeats in special elections this year, activists across the country are pitted against Washington-based leaders and strategists about what the message and the tactical plan should be to win the 24 seats needed to take control of the House.
Democrats as well as independent observers believe that figure is attainable given historical trends, Trump’s and the congressional GOP’s sustained unpopularity and the ballooning number of candidates with gold-plated résumés willing to run.
What they don’t agree on is how to do it — by exciting the base with a liberal economic message and fiery candidates in the model of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), or by keeping the party’s doors open to moderates and independents with centrist contenders, ideally with business or military experience… [emphasis added]
From <Washington Post>
In my opinion, all candidates must be committed to a liberal economic agenda. However, candidates need to tailor their message to coincide with issues that are important to the voters in their districts.
I can’t stand Joe Manchin (D-WV). In most things that he does, he acts more like a Republican than a Democrat. However, I’d rather have him that a Republican in his seat, because he counts toward a Democratic majority, with all the power and control that would bring. But a better solution might be a candidate that campaigns like Manchin, but works to educate his constituents over time and acts more like a Democrat.
In summary, we need both approaches working together, not a battle between them.
For now…
RESIST!!
In 11/2018…
VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO!!
19 Responses to “An Either/Or Proposition?”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
“Identity politics” is, it seems to me, a term that Republicans threw at us to divide us. I don’t think we should use it or allow it to be used among us. I prefer terms like “diversity” and “equal justice” and the like. And, for one thing, “Equal justice” is the RIGHT thing to do. For another, we abandon talking about it at our peril. For a third, if and when we get into a position to legislate and enforce it, we had better by God do so and not JUST talk.
Heaven knows I understand the notion of electability, and we certainly need to consider electability. But I think maybe we should consider it AFTER we can agree on our platform. There’s an old saying, “If you don’t know where you’re going, you’ll probably end up somewhere else.”
I am 71 and a life-long feminist, and as such, it pains me to say this – but I DO NOT EVER want to see another woman go through the hell through which Republicans (and not just Republicans) put Hillary Clinton. Any form of public service requires sacrifice, of course, but no form of public service should require crucifixion. It’s just too much to ask.
JD, my meaning and your definition are completely opposite. I used this definition:
I’m perfectly happy with diversity and equal justice.
Hey, I didn’t say it was my meaning, and it wouldn’t be the first time Republicans have thrown something at us as a slander which means exactly the opposite of who we are and what we are doing. But for that reason I don’t like us even using the term.
I hear you, but they are going to twist whatever we say no matter what terms we use. For example I have seen them say “equal justice” = unfair preference for mud people.
I saved this cartoon to my hard drive to send a copy to hubby (ONE copy just to him), but am not going to post it here for copyright reasons. But this is the link:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/6/13/1671292/-Cartoon-Who-s-dividing-us
And this is what I was talking about. Unfortunately they have a head start on us with this of about half way around the galaxy. I feel safer with “equal justice.” Yes, of course they will twist anything.
An excellent cartoon.
Considering where I’m from, a deep red state, I don’t see us or want quarreling, but rather to address the issues that concern and are most important to us all. For whatever state one is living in, and for the nation. In other words, working together for a great common cause. Our democracy.
Pat, I am sorry to have to say this but I don’t think Republicans are interested in “our democracy” because true democracy threatens their wallets and their power.
True THAT, Lynn!
I do not think we ought to push identity politics, but as per your other posting today, I think we need to push for equality politics across the board! Gay, trans, hetero, black, white, green, whatever, we need to push for acceptance and caring, but not apologetically!
Fake news, and propaganda, Theocratic drivel, however, are not entitled to equal time, and we do not need to apologize for this, as these things are hate, and greed, driven!
Perhaps it is time for Democrats to go back to the Declaration of Independence, a foundational document of the US Constitution, and start building a platform. It says in its second line:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
It is time to listen to the people because without the people, the party is going nowhere. It is time to build consensus as a party, and leave the egos at the door.
It seems to me that the average American wants, in no specific order, affordable healthcare, jobs at a reasonable rate of pay, a decent standard of living so they can send the kids to university, a decent public education system, action on climate change and the environment, an economy that works for all, and big money out of politics.
So, Democrats, pitter patter, let’s get at ‘er!
I have always believed in life, liberty, and the happiness of pursuit.
Tee Hee.
For once I’ve read the comments on PP before throwing in my own, foreign ten cents worth and I’m glad to see that overall the progressives here want to see a party that is progressive too, but most of all that the party is based on equality and therefore the same rights for all. A Democratic party that listens to all and represents all.
Forget about “identity politics”, embrace all. But of course “all” does not mean a 100% of the population, that is an illusion and beside the point; some groups Democrats should not cater to represent are the 1%, elitists, or theocrats. However, if individuals of these groups feel comfortable in the new party, they shouldn’t be shunned, but welcomed, but without the power to dictate as they do now. Money and social status belong in the past.
But as said before: there needs to be a secular platform, a realistic road map of where America wants to get to, how to get there and how it wants to be when it gets there. Without it there’s no convincing voters of joining on that trip, or of diverting a little to avoid obstacles without losing the way completely. And every candidate may still have his favorite itinerary for his little part of the way, as long as it gets him and his constituents to that same goal.
Meanwhile:
Oh, I’m ALL for equal treatment for the 1% – which means a lot less favorable treatment than they are receiving now! I’m happy to stand up for those “rights”!
I even support the rights of Republican Supply-side pseudo-Christians, with the caveat that their rights end at the tip of my nose.
Thanks all. Totally pooped hugs!