Plotting a Campaign for 2006 & 2008

[housewolf]

From Michael Berube's blog -


Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Plotting a Campaign


<snip>

The Democrats need a unifying theme, a plot, some strong images, and a good mixture of negative and positive talking points. They cannot, as every one keeps stressing, merely run a negative campaign. True, their base will come out to vote against the Republicans. But they need more than their base to win.

The unifying theme of the campaign should be “work” and “fairness.” I know that’s two themes, but the point is to articulate them together. I’m not a PR guy, but the slogan should be some variant of “You Get What You Work For” or “Working for America, Working with Americans.” The basic message is that the Democrats will work to give every American access to a decent job and that they will work to protect the ability of working Americans to afford health care, retirement, college for their kids, and a decent life during their working years.

The negative side of the campaign obviously comes from emphasizing how Republican policies threaten all of those basic amenities. The “fairness” theme has to show how we are becoming two nations, the privileged and the scorned. Start with the basic fact that Congress would never subject itself to the kind of inadequate health insurance that most Americans must accept—if they are lucky enough to have health insurance. Move from there to comparison of pension plans for the wealthy compared to what the average worker has to look forward to. Then show how the groups who can afford hiring full-time lobbyists and to make large-scale campaign contributions get special favors. And, finally, explain how the Republicans want to dismantle the safety nets of Medicaid and Social Security.

The positive parts of the agenda are, in many cases, straight-forward enough. A minimum wage bill; various small steps (for starters) to address the problems of health care and outsourcing of jobs; funding for education instead of grand-standing rhetoric about it; repeal of the various loopholes that reward companies and individuals for economic actions that harm the community as a whole.

<snip>

Along with promising legislative attention to the needs of average Americans, the Democrats should also stress successful government and citizen joint initiatives. Gar Alperovitz had a great column on this topic recently over at Tom Paine. The Democrats need to tell these stories as a way to begin rehabilitating Americans’ image of their government. One of the biggest problems the Democrats face is the loss of faith in government.

Read the rest, there's much more ...
http://www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/plotting_a_campaign/

[ndcohn]

1. right general direction...

but fairness sounds too much like class warfare/whiney. It'll alienate too many upper-middle class voters. Maybe the better terminology is "Opportunity for every American" or as Stanley Greenberg advocates "Building a 100% America"... or even combining the two, "I believe in building a 100% America, where every American has the opportunity to sucseed, not just the privledged few."

Just about every single issue can be linked into that broader theme, whether that be health care, energy, trade policy, whatever. It also can fit into a variety of different offense-defense stratgeic paradigms for both 2006.

Regardless of the precise theme though , the Democrats in 2008/2006 need to shift the focus of the electorate from social issues back to fundemental questions of the role of government. In the post vietnam/watergate era culminating in iran, the american populus lost faith in governments ability to responsibly act to help people. However, i believe that in the early 90s/late 80s, America became disillusioned with conservative economics and their critique of government. In this context, it makes sense why Bush in 88/92 stripped the Reagan agenda from a broad critique of government, to tax cuts and the cultural war. However, this was not enough to overcome the momentum for change, considering our economic conditions. This is proven by the 2000 election; even in an a time where the economy was fantastic, Gores Populist message and Naders even more liberal message garnered a combined 51.11% of the popular vote. Rove's sucsess now is attributable to the favorable lines that were drawn in the early 90s on these issues, as well as the war on terror. But, I think that the public is going to begin to demand real action on real issues, in particular as the war on terror fades, and the president himself focuses on domestic issues. This is definetly confirmed by recent polls. Bush's approval rating is down to 44% according to Quinnapiac, 46% CBS News, 49% Democracy Corps. Congress Approval rating is down even further, 29% according to CBS News. Even better for the Democrats, only 37% of Americans think that we are heading in the right track, and only 37% of the 57% who say we are heading in the wrong direction site Bush's leadership as one of their top 2 reasons. Considering that Americans are begining to believe more and more that the middle class is under siege, the economy is stagnant, it seems probable that atleast in 2006, and probably in 2008, the electorate is going to demand serious change.

Thus, the Democrats need to do everything they can to keep America focused on these problems, and positioning themselves to be the party that can resolve them. If the people force the repuublcians in 2006/2008 to confront americas problems, then we have them right where we want them. With small government conservatism long since dead, replaced by a corrupt and ineffective form of liberalism <"compassionate conservatism" lol>, the Republicans will be forced into a clash between two fundemetnally different ideologies which now decisively favors the democrats.

However, this ideal scenario is not easy. It requires that the Democrats have real solutions, a real message, an effective mix of offense & defense, and preferably new faces. Dont forget effective campaign management either.

[newyawker99]

5. Hi ndcohn!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Stevepol]

2. I disagree with the unifying theme: it should be the voting machines.

Unless there's a paper ballot and required audits for all elections using the electronic voting machines to count votes, a Democratic candidate has no chance whatsoever. The 02 elections in GA showed that and the 04 national election just confirmed it in spades.

The only way to turn things around is to repair the damage done to our voting process by these machines. Even if that's done, it will probably take 15-20 years to regain democracy in America. But all these rosy expectations about the next election cycle are absolutely meaningless unless there's a qualification about the voting machines. EVERY COMMENT OR DISCUSSION ALONG THIS LINE SHOULD MENTION THE VOTING MACHINES. I'm afraid the only way for anything to be done is for something to come about like the Civil Rights movement of the 60s.

[leftchick]

4. yep...

Without addressing election fraud first everything else is moot.

[ladjf]

3. Stop the voting frauds or everything else is moot.