About changing the Dem platform for Issue X

[MisterLiberal]

I'm getting more than a bit tired of hearing people telling us to change OUR platform over to the Repukes.

It's WRONG and I can prove my point quite easily.

Would you or would you not want the Repukes to alter THEIR platform to match OURS?

OF COURSE YOU WOULD!

Why? Because even if a Repuke gets elected, they're doing what WE WANT THEM TO DO!

So why on Earth would anyone want us to adopt the Repuke platform?

IT BENEFITS THEM IF WE WIN OFFICE OR NOT!!!!

No one can guarantee that changing on issue x or issue y will win us ANY OFFICE!

Even if they could, would you be willing to sell your political soul for an office that just as well would be a Repuke? After all, the democrat who won would be standing on the Repuke platform...

This is political suicide! It doesn't strengthen our party, it weakens us as a "me, too" party. It also weakens us because those of us in the party that start seeing these foundational pillars falter will start looking at and voting for third party candidates, because they will be the only ones left who stand up for progressive views!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. I agree completely.

But further, position shifts should only occur when you're getting blown out. 2% is not a blowout, by any means.

[XemaSab]

2. I don't think position shifts should ever occur

when we're standing up for what's right, such as civil rights, labor rights, voting rights, women's rights, or any other rights. Or the environment, or helping those less fortunate than we are.

We can compromise on individual pieces of legislation, but only where the legislation moves the country forward, not backwards.

Edit: spelling :-)

[MisterLiberal]

4. BINGO!

That's what I'm talking about!

It would be MORALLY EVIL to back down on an issue because you might get some kind of advantage.

[bryant69]

8. Well

I am troubled by these suggestions as well, in general. Certainly the right wing has a lot of helpful suggestions, most of which involve shooting ourselves in the foot.

That said, I don't agree with the second statement. It is not necessarily MORALLY EVIL to back down on an issue because you might get some kind of advantage. In order for us to successfully defeat Republicans Agenda and put forward our own, the party and individual Democrats do have to pick their battles and fight on terrain where they can win. The party has to do well, as well as doing good.

And of course, on some of these issues, there is genuine disagreement in the party.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[XemaSab]

11. There's a difference

between fighting, holding your ground, and backing down/retreating. Too often the Democrats have retreated on issues that some focus group says aren't winners. The abolition platform wasn't a winner in the South prior to the Civil War, but does that mean Lincoln should have dropped it? Absolutely not.

[MisterLiberal]

12. .

Of course, I'm talking about the platform!

Once it's our platform, we should be running ON it, not FROM it.

[flamin lib]

3. I'm with you.

Why would anyone vote for Repub Lite when they can vote for a full bodied @$$hole?

Nope, our platform is fine, it was and is the delivery that sucks. Bush should be vulnerable on SS. As I understand it the Brits had a system much like ours 20 years ago. They enacted the same measures Bush is talking about. Immediately the benefits went down because 1) management fees ate up 40% of the private accounts and 2) the cost of goods indexing cut benefits as well. Originally the system paid out 30% of current average wage now it's down to 10% and they are looking at going back to the way that worked.

If I'm mistaken please correct me and feed me as much fact as possible.

[MisterLiberal]

6. I dont know about the British

But you're right; our delivery is all that needs work as well as access to the media.

Whenever we see them slandering us, we need to speak up en masse!

Anyone here want to change our platform, please address my first post.

I'm tired of seeing "We need to become Repukes on Gun Control" or "We need to become Repukes on Abortion" "We need to become Repukes on Gay Rights".

[flamin lib]

9. I have a short address book that I send political alerts to.

It has mostly Dem friendly addresses, but a few Repubs as well as long as they behave.

I'm open to putting anyone who does a similar thing on my list and reciprocating. We can pick the best of each other's work and send it to our respective address lists. The Republicans are doing this to good effect--near the end of the '04 election I was getting at least one lie filled right wing email a day!

It's grass roots at a very personal level.

[Warpy]

5. Correct, moving to the right has only resulted in

losing all three branches of government. Now, with the voting process so completely compromised, even moving back to the left and embracing working class economic issues may not be enough.

However, we know that moving to the right won't work, in any case. We know that if womens' rights are abandoned, women will abandon the party. We know if labor rights are abandoned, labor will abandon the party (as they already have for economic reasons).

This is why there are so many DLC/GOP mole posts lately about making the Democrats a "big tent" party by abandoning core Democratic values.

Well, I dunno about you, but I'm not going to be in that circus.

[MisterLiberal]

7. That's not a circus

That's a freakshow.

[damntexdem]

10. I agree on most issues, but not on issue X.

X is just too big a drag on us, so in the interests of selfish, short-term partisan gain, we should drop our principled support of X and endorse the GOP's anti-X stand.

OK, now, all march in step with the DLC!

[MisterLiberal]

13. LOL

I notice that not one single person who is a "Democrat" wanting to change our platform has posted here.

Hmmm, maybe the light's too bright here.

[DaveinMD]

15. I posted below

and issue X (gun control) is a DLC-backed issue by the way.

[DaveinMD]

14. dropping non core issues

I suppose this is response to the gun thread. I said it there, I'll say it here. That is not a core issue. Its not on the level of reproductive freedom, civil rights, civil liberties, economic justice and fairness, access to quality health care and so on. In fact, many great Dems are pro gun. Howard Dean for instance.

[MisterLiberal]

16. Pro-gun

Pro-gun doesn't mean automatic assault rifles. The Democrats have stood for REASONABLE restrictions for decades.

And now the board is full of "suggestions" to dump our protest of reasonable restrictions on weapons; to "soften" our stance on women's rights; to reject our gay friends all in the name of political victory.

However, they even guarantee a victory so you would be selling your soul for a MAYBE.

We've TRIED the compromise route and we always lose!

JUST ONCE LET'S RUN ON THE PLATFORM WE SAY WE BELIEVE IN!

What's wrong with that?

And I like Howard Dean. He's Presidential material but on this issue, we don't see eye to eye. Anytime the NRA gets their hands in the pot, I'm leary.

[slackmaster]

18. There is much right with what you're saying here

Pro-gun doesn't mean automatic assault rifles.

That's right. Very few people would seriously entertain the idea of repealing the National Firearms Act of 1934.

The Democrats have stood for REASONABLE restrictions for decades.

You're for reasonable gun control, I'm for reasonable gun control. Ask an NRA member and he'll tell you he's for reasonable gun control. Claiming reasonableness serves no purpose, it merely implies that anyone who has a different position is not reasonable. Two reasonable people can disagree about an issue and still both be reasonable.

[slackmaster]

17. You're adopting a seige mentality, MisterLiberal

Rejecting a position simply because it resembles that of the enemy makes no sense to me. I base my views on my own observations, knowledge, and experiences. I think people should call each issue as they see it.

Would you or would you not want the Repukes to alter THEIR platform to match OURS?

OF COURSE YOU WOULD!

You fail to account for diversity of opinion within our own ranks, MisterLiberal. We are not of one mind on every issue. I know that you and I agree on many things and disagree on some. I don't expect you to change your attitude to match mine, nor should you expect me to acquiesce to yours.

The least common denominator is liberty. The pursuit of happiness. Live and let live. Let us be liberal where it makes sense - Public education, health care, environment, and so on. Let us embrace the good side of conservatism as well - Respect for privacy, self-determination, fiscal responsibility, the common defense. It's really not that hard.