Why is the Democratic party so slow to evolve?

[Harmony Blue]

I think it is pretty clear that centrism is a failed approach. It worked in the 90's for Clinton, but as anyone can see Clinton's centrist proclamations these days is rubbing people the wrong way. You can be pragmatic and compromise but still stand for something. When you are a centrist you don't stand for something you are in essence willing to compromise from the get go or fearful that you may cause a schism by rocking the boat. This leads to apathy which is very apparent.

I don't believe in blaming people, election results, supreme court nominees, or decisions. But the idea that centrism is the way for the Democratic party needs to end starting today in my opinion. Lets face it, if you are down for the count in a fight might as well go down swinging in something you believe in.

[MannyGoldstein]

1. "Few men have virtue to withstand the highest bidder"

- George Washington

[ananda]

14. This from a plantation slave owner..

I wonder how much our slaveholding background and history of genocide towards the natives
reflects on the current state of our obsession with entitlement on the part of almost everyone
who somehow conforms with or colludes with the idea of rich and white privilege.

[DonCoquixote]

2. Because, like any tragic flaw

Our virtue hurts us: we are a group of diverse people who want to think things out, as opposed to the GOP that will just follow orders like Ze Good Nazis that they are.

[Scuba]

3. I wholeheartedly agree. There are a lot more votes to be had by moving left, and further left....

... than by moving right or staying where we are.

How many more votes would we have gotten yesterday in Wisconsin if Tom Barrett had proposed a $10/hour minimum wage? Yes, we would have lost a few, but we would have gained tens of thousands.

It's pretty obvious that standing pat isn't the path to victory.

[loyalsister]

4. Tens of thousands of who?

Was there a liberal third party candidate who got tens of thousands of votes? Where do these assumptions come from?

[leveymg]

5. In '08, there was a whole demographic block of under-25 voters who turned out who didn't in '10.

That's part of it. Another is the fact that committed progressive like me worked like hell to elect the Hope & Change Obama -- I knocked 4,000 doors that summer and fall -- but for the Save the Status Quo Obama who we elected, I don't think so, not so much this time.

[loyalsister]

9. I see and hear these assertions often

But, I am not convinced because I have heard as many stories from satisfied voters.

[Scuba]

11. You're not convinced people stayed home? And your logic is that others didn't?

What are you trying to say here?

[loyalsister]

15. Apparently there was a very high turn out Tuesday

I am not convinced that there is a large group of progressives somewhere who would have pushed the turnout up to 150% and swung the election to Barret.

[Scuba]

16. You're correct, sort of. There is not a large group of progressives out there waiting....

... but there is a very, very large group of unaffiliated, disenchanted potential voters who would become progressives if the Party gave them a good reason or two.

Half the electorate in this country doesn't bother to vote because we've not given them a good reason to do so.

Get it?

[loyalsister]

18. How do you know that they would be progressive?

nt

[Scuba]

19. Because we would use progressive policies to pull them in. Is this really that hard to understand?

[loyalsister]

24. I fail to see how you know all of this

You are claiming that there are a significant number of people who support such policies but either don't vote or vote for other candidates. Do you have data to support this belief?

[Scuba]

26. Why would they vote? No one represents their interests.

[loyalsister]

27. Again, how do you know that there are numbers

significant enough to potentially compromise representation of interests of people who do vote?

There is no real data to back up this hypothetical on either end. The data that does exist is election results and exit polls. There is a massive range of interpretations for all of it.

We can speculate all we want on how to change other people's minds. But, I don't think anyone has an answer that can be applied in absolute terms.
My strategy is to help make sure the people who do tend to agree with Democrats are informed and make their way to the polls.

[Scuba]

7. Nope, I'm talking about the half of the electorate that doesn't vote....

... we need to support policies that will get them to vote for our side, and that ain't tax breaks for billionaires.

[loyalsister]

8. Do you have evidence that that is the single issue that will bring people out?

If so, I'm sure your state party and the Obama campaign would appreciate it if you sent it to them.

[Scuba]

10. Unlikely that a single issue will draw many. However, there are a plethora of available issues...

... health care

... education

... legalizing weed

... progressive taxation

... workers rights

... consumer protections



Get the idea?

[loyalsister]

17. Not really

My understanding of your original claim is that if Dems were to please a group heavily invested in a single issue, they would capture a significant number of new votes.

If we spend a lot of time in a circle of people who agree with us 100% it's easy to convince ourselves that just about everyone else does, too.

The truth is that the range of opinions and primary concerns of the electorate is hugely diverse. The belief that a simple platform of further left movement of your laundry list will bring in a significant number of new voters is delusional.

[jeff47]

23. Here, lemme help you understand

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/example

They are not talking about a single issue.

[loyalsister]

25. Based on that

Losses should also be considered. Some of the changes suggested here also have potential to alienate some voters.
Wouldn't a numerical calculation would evaluate the proportions and sensibility of such shifts.

"an instance illustrating a rule or method, as a mathematical problem proposed for solution."

My question was- is well defined information available to make the predictions necessary to suggest the possibility of a desired effect\solution?

[Harmony Blue]

12. Maybe I am naive

but I always thought public unions, public schools, and fair taxation are all cornerstones of the Democratic party, but also any Democracy really.

For the greater good, or common good for all. Where we all pitch in cooperatively to help one another, show empathy to those in deep pain/sorrow. Use reason and logic to support or dispute scientific evidence.

When the Democratic party doesn't come to the defense of public schools, public unions, or the scientific community what is left? We the people are the government, so anytime someone rails against the government we should take it personally as it is a direct attack against us and democracy itself. But we don't? Why? The paradigm has to shift where we start to defend in what we believe in, and most importantly explain why!

Critical thinking is under siege for the obvious reasons, so we must return to the building blocks of any Democracy.

[mmonk]

6. Because it de-evolved in the 80's

and has to start over evolving again.

[cali]

13. agreed.

might as well go down swinging.

[Blue_Tires]

20. Dems will remain married to centrism

because too much leftist rhetoric will shut off the corporate donor streams...And as "political speech" goes, one corporation's check is still several times the amount of the combined contribution from most 99 percenters...

I hate it too, but this was the playing field even BEFORE Citizen's United...Now it truly is the ol' proverbial whorehouse auction...

[Harmony Blue]

21. I am not convinced that would happen

Look at the extreme rhetoric coming from the right and how the corporate donors (with the exception of Rush) still are there. Also, corporations are not really in the center as it is clear that they are part of the political system now. The gloves are off with Citizens United so staying in the center is a disadvantage. The Republicans learned about this lesson in 2010, but appears the Democrats are slow to catch up. As a result, Democrats are behind the curve, on the defensive, and allow Republican party to control the rhetoric.

[Blue_Tires]

22. But the corporate donors want things to skew as far right as possible

because it benefits their bottom line...

One-percent donors do NOT like words like socialism, environmental protection, taxes, tariffs, worker's rights, consumer protection, diversity, organized labor, tolerance, anti-business, etc.

[mick063]

28. Fox News

Fox News, Fox News, Fox News.

This is what is different then 15+ years ago.

This is why centrism doesn't work. This is why compromise doesn't work. This is why populism doesn't work. This is why sound, factual based argument doesn't work.

It all starts with and it all ends with Fox news.

Fox News, Fox News, Fox news.

[dinopipie]

29. Moderates, Conservadems, DLC, t_rdway..

who hijacked the party.

The party has to pick people or fascism they can no longer have it both ways