November 5, 2004 PERMALINK
Our Infrastructure, The Good and The Bad
(posted Nov. 4 11:45 PM ET)
(updated Nov. 5 10:45 AM ET)
As said here yesterday, Dems and liberals need to hit the ground running in order to begin a multi-year effort to better define and articulate our principles, and persuade more Americans to rally behind us.
But we have a problem. We have no leaders.
No one who can quickly design and execute such a campaign.
Neither Nancy Pelosi in the House nor Harry Reid in the Senate (who is expected to be Minority Leader) have the stature and influence to be seen as the leader of the party.
And they are both more skilled at behind-the-scenes Capitol Hill politics than big picture politics.
Some may look to the DNC chair for leadership, but that position is more party hack than visionary.
Because of this lack of leadership, we are going to see tons of ideas flying back and forth throughout the Left, but no way to easily and quickly choose the best and execute them.
However, while we won't have the efficiency of a single leader, we are blessed this time around with some new infrastructure:
Center For American Progress for fresh policy proposals.
MoveOn for grassroots activism.
Democracy For America for supporting liberal candidates at the federal, state and local level.
Air America for engaging alternative media.
Media Matters For America, playing defense against the right-wing media.
And the blogosphere, where individuals with outsider perspective can directly communicate with power centers as well as each other.
But how well can these components work together to revitalize the liberal movement and recharge the Democratic Party? We don't know yet.
It is not the top-down infrastructure of the modern Right, and there is no Grover Norquist-led "Wednesday Group" to tie it all together.
But not everything has to directly emulate the Right. We want to beat them, not tie them.
We have to find a way to work with what we have -- which, it should be stressed again, is more than we have had to work with in some time.
But all of us in this new infrastructure have to step up, and do our best to collectively take the lead.
And if we successfully take the lead, our congressional friends will follow.
QUICK HIT
Still Lurking...
From Knight-Ridder, 9/3/04:
Several U.S. officials and law-enforcement sources said Thursday that the scope of the FBI probe of Pentagon intelligence activities appeared to go beyond the [Larry] Franklin matter.
FBI agents have briefed top White House, Pentagon and State Department officials on the probe in recent days.
Based on those briefings, officials said, the bureau appears to be looking into other controversies that have roiled the Bush administration, some of which also touch [Douglas] Feith's office.
They include how the Iraqi National Congress, a former exile group backed by the Pentagon, allegedly received highly classified U.S. intelligence on Iran; the leaking of the name of CIA officer Valerie Plame to reporters; and the production of bogus documents suggesting Iraq tried to buy uranium for nuclear weapons from the African country of Niger...
..."The whole ball of wax" was how one U.S. official privy to the briefings described the inquiry.
November 4, 2004 PERMALINK
What Happened? What Now?
(posted Nov. 4 2 AM ET)
1. Terrorism
This was the only issue that Bush had consistently positive ratings. He basically bet the farm on it and won.
But he didn't win by simply standing on his record fighting terrorism.
He won by spewing out a steady stream of lies about Kerry's ability to fight terrorism.
For example, repeatedly it was said by Bushies that Kerry would wait until we get attacked to respond, and that Kerry had a strategy of retreat in Iraq that would embolden terrorists.
Both were baseless lies, backed up with overt distortions of Kerry's remarks that were never called out by the media.
And LO can only conclude that Kerry couldn't pick up enough late deciders (undecideds broke to Kerry less than 2-1, violating the so-called "incumbent rule") mainly because of terrorism concerns.
Lies stick when people find them believable.
And Democrats have a wimp stereotype that makes such lies believable.
How can you get past a stereotype?
Dems thought nominating a veteran would do the trick (and that is the main reason Kerry was nominated), but we learned it's not that simple.
The problem is, you usually can only debunk a stereotype by being in power and having the opportunity to directly debunk it.
In the 1980s, post-Jimmy Carter, GOPers were able to paint all Dems as irresponsible stewards of the economy.
Since Dems didn't have any control of the economy, they couldn't prove otherwise.
Then, Poppy Bush screwed up the economy, nullifying the GOP's argument of economic superiority.
And when Clinton was in charge, he did such a good job, the stereotype was debunked, and now Dems have the good economy rep.
But Dems haven't had the opportunity to show their stuff fighting terror since it became a prominent issue.
And Clinton's record on it has been unfairly maligned (easily accomplished, thanks to the stereotype).
As such, Dems will remain susceptible to lies on the subject.
That means terrorism will be a political hurdle for Dems until the GOP, through its own failure, loses credibility fighting terror, or terrorism subsides as a prominent issue.
Democrats can, and should, continue to articulate terror-fighting strategies.
But it's the events outside of our control that will allow Dems the chance to prove themselves.
2. The Religious Right
Some are arguing that Bush won thanks to increased turnout among evangelicals and born-agains.
(Jon Stewart, in a Daily Show interview with Sen. Chuck Schumer, said Iraq and the economy were trumped by "dudes kissing".)
Such increased turnout was certainly part of Rove's strategy. But we don't really know if it worked.
As David Broder reported, 22% of the electorate were evangelicals and born-agains, but we don't know what that number was in 2000.
(In 2000, 14% of voters were classified as "white religious right," not necessarily the same thing.)
In any event, that 22% ain't all of Bush's 51%, and doesn't speak to any mandate for a hard-right social agenda.
In fact, the overall electorate continues to reject that agenda.
55% of voters surveyed said that believe abortion should be "always" or "mostly" legal.
And 60% of voters surveyed said they support either same-sex marriage or civil unions.
We have not lost these arguments. Terrorism, it would seem, has trumped all.
3. So Now What?
After the congressional losses of 2002, LiberalOasis offered a 9-Point Plan for returning to majority status. A lot of it is still applicable.
Most importantly is for the congressional Dems to get into "Government In Exile" mode.
Not regularly obstructing (except on the big stuff), but not regularly compromising either.
But making clear, every step of the way, how Dems would handle issues differently, building an enticing vision what life would be like in an alternate Dem universe.
Having said that, the 9-point plan was drafted to secure a majority in two years.
After several denied attempts to regain majority status, it's time for the party to think longer-term, and not be preoccupied with short-term gains.
The GOP was able to argue that no one knows what Kerry stands for.
But that's an easier argument to make when he comes from a party hasn't expressed a consistent vision for four years.
Since fewer and fewer Americans understand what Democrats as a whole stand for, why should we expect them to quickly grasp what our nominee stands for?
Kerry sought to build a majority coalition by combining the best of Howard Dean's approach and the best of the DLC's into a single vision of pragmatism.
He did a good job of it, and it fit his record and worldview.
But it was still a patchwork job, put together a few months before an election because the party had laid little groundwork.
It's a bogus attack when the GOP says the Dems have "no ideas". We have plenty.
But as they are articulated by our leaders, they often seem scattered and not interconnected into a larger vision and a set of bedrock principles.
Why? Because too many Dems are afraid to articulate our main principle:
Belief in the ability of a representative, responsive and accountable government to address certain community problems and protect personal freedoms.
Granted, it was not the failure to articulate this principle that sunk Kerry. It has nothing to do with terrorism.
But we are headed into some major domestic battles on Social Security, Medicare, taxes, torts and more.
We have to give the public a reason to oppose Bush's efforts.
If we can't explain why it is fundamentally and morally wrong to privatize New Deal programs, they will get privatized.
If we can't explain why slashing taxes further will harm the quality of life for Americans, they will get slashed.
If we can't explain why it is important that all Americans have the right to their day in court, it will be denied.
And if were too afraid of losing again in 2006 to make a true case to the public on these key issues, then we will lose.
November 3, 2004 PERMALINK
3:30 AM ET
What Will We Learn?
Apparently, Ohio doesn't start counting provisional ballots until Nov. 13.
We didn't know everything about Florida 24 hours after Election Day 2000.
What will we learn about how Ohio went down between now and then?
November 3, 2004 PERMALINK
3:15 AM ET
What's In Those Provisional Ballots?
From The Columbus Dispatch:
Heather Kirby thought she'd just have to make sure to touch the right name in the electronic voting machine and she'd be done voting in less than five minutes.
After waiting two hours in line, she was anxious to record her vote and leave.
But things didn't go as planned for the 19-year-old first time voter — her name didn't appear on the voting rolls so she was offered a provisional ballot instead.
Disappointed, Kirby diligently punched out her choice, pulled the paper ballot from the punch machine and examined it for hanging chads.
"I want to make sure this counts," she said, as she held the ballot up to the lights. "I already have doubts that it will be counted since it's a provisional one and I'm so disappointed.
"This was my time to make my voice heard and to use this paper ballot, makes me sad and nervous that it will be for nothing."
Tearrill Watkins of Whitehall also had to punch his vote in using a provisional ballot. The 25-year-old first time voter made sure he registered to vote before the deadline, so was quite upset to find his name omitted from the rolls.
"Man, just as long as they see the important vote — the one for Kerry, that's all that really matters," he said, as he left the polls. "That's all I'm worried about."
