The Lone Reason: A Dangerous Trap

[Pacifist Patriot]

Constructive analysis is typically complex, especially in the political arena. There are no single causes for any particular outcome. No two situations are exactly alike although they may have similarities enabling a degree of comparison.

Kerry didn't lose the election because of election fraud.
Kerry didn't lose the election because he ran a terrible campaign.
Kerry didn't lose the election because more American voters are idiots.
Kerry didn't lose the election because of talented Republican operatives.
Kerry didn't lose the election because of the fundamentalist Christians.
Kerry didn't lose the election because of a pitiful response to the Swift Boat liars.


Hackett didn't lose the election because of election fraud.
Hackett didn't lose the election because he couldn't possibly have won in a Republican dominated district.
Hackett didn't lose the election because more OH2 voters are idiots.
Hackett didn't lose the election because he was too much like the Republicans.
Hackett didn't lose the election because he was too dissimilar from the Republicans.
Hackett didn't lose the election because his opponent was a lying bitch.

Kerry and Hackett lost because of a combination of these things. We must be prepared to rationally examine ALL of these reasons. Fixing a flawed election system won't make a bit of difference if we lose our message, run wishy-washy campaigns, and field weak candidates. Running kick ass candidates in slick campaigns won't make a bit of difference if we have a flawed election system with record lows in voter confidence.

I haven't even listed everything here. If we're too succeed we have to be able to multi-task, perform complex analysis, organize to coordinate and support the efforts of people who are focusing in different areas.

One person cannot tackle every single issue, but we can all certainly respect those who are putting their time, energy and resources into the area they feel the most passion. If you are not as concerned with the threat of election fraud and think the campaigns are crappy, go make your voice heard in that arena. If you think the candidates were just fine and are kept up at night by the thought of vote tampering, go advocate for fair and open elections. We can work together without tearing each other apart.

Our democracy is a work in progress, let's not vandalize the construction site.

[HereSince1628]

1. Well said.

[electropop]

10. We can't afford to waste anybody.

Every part needs addressing, and every part is valid.

[CitrusLib]

2. Excellent. Nice summary!

[Pacifist Patriot]

3. Thank you....

but then I'd expect you to worship at my feet. ;)

[Fly by night]

4. Great, PP. There are many oars on this Democratic row-boat. Just grab one.

I agree totally that there are many avenues for attacking the great beast that has highjacked our country. The key is to find that avenue that means the most to you and/or that your talents will make the greatest difference in, and then get to rowing. We need to take all the idle passenger seats out of our boat (particularly the seats currently occupied by those who don't like others' rowing technique or choice of oars), at least until we can right the ship of state.

Many years ago, I saw a Winslow Homer painting with a lone fisherman out in stormy seas, rowing for dear life toward a distant, fog-enshrouded lighthouse. Someone had written underneath:

"Pray to God ..... but row toward shore."

The Democratic Party (and the country) needs fewer idle pray-ers (and neigh-sayers) and more energetic paddl-ers at this moment, IMHO.

[Pacifist Patriot]

5. Exactly! Thank you for understanding.

I didn't want to offend anyone, but the squabbling was starting to grate on me. I like your analogy of a large row boat. It doesn't go anywhere without effort and if only one person is putting in the effort (only one issue is being worked) it will go around in circles never making any forward progress.

[theboss]

6. Stop looking at each election individually

Look at the overall trends.

Why have we only won three presidential elections since 1968?
Why have we made no progress in regaining the House since we lost it in '94?
Why did our minority status in the Senate only grow?
Why have we steadily lost governorships since 1990?
Why have the majority of state legislatures gone Republican in recent years?
Why has New York City (for God's sake...New York City) elected a Republican mayor three straight times?
How did Swartzeneger end up in charge of California (for God's sake...California)?
Why is FoxNews beating all the other cable channels combined?

I'm sorry. I think that there are some serious questions about the way we conduct elections in this country. I'm not naive.

But to think that Democrats would hold the White House and Congress and control the states if not for the dreaded Diebold is ignoring some pretty scary trends over the last 30 years.

Look, we are a minority party now. And that can change very quickly if we are smart. But to think that we are not is simply going to lead to greater disaster.

[Pacifist Patriot]

7. That's exactly what I mean.

There are more complex patterns arising from individual results and not enough questions asking "Why?" and connecting ALL the dots.

One of my pet areas is education. I think public schooling (textbook acquisition committees, trend towards zero tolerance policies, authoritarian classroom environment, etc. -- not the typical issues of funding, test scores and graduation rates) has contributed to the minority position we are in today. School boards are key and hardly anyone ever mentions their impact on the national scene.

[Pacifist Patriot]

8. My apologies to my fellow females....

and any offended males.

I meant no gender-specific offense when I used the derogatory term for Jean Schmidt. I have seen her referred to in such a manner so that is why I chose those words. Asshole has a masculine connotation to me, but that is used quite frequently here so perhaps I should have chosen that word instead.

I have no personal feelings about Ms. Schmidt one way or the other though I am offended by her actions and the activities of her campaign. I hope the essence of what I was saying will be accepted without a perceived attack on a specific gender. Thank you for understanding.

[Bouncy Ball]

9. No apologies necessary, in my opinion.

Recommended and kicked.

[Jackpine Radical]

16. My dog might have been a little miffed at you.

His best friend, the neighbors' mutt, is a bitch.

[LisaLynne]

11. Excellent point.

I think oftentimes we (a big huge collective we there) tend to want to be able to have one explanation for something that happens, but usually, there is no one answer -- it's a combination of things, as you have pointed out about the recent elections. Many causes converging to produce an effect or event.

That's why it's great to see people who are passionate about voter reform while others are interested in finding ways to get the word out while others yet are looking at what the message is and should be. All of these things need to be addressed.

[Pacifist Patriot]

14. I would love for there to be one explanation.

MUCH easier to fix. Even the single charge that biased media is responsible doesn't account for the myriad causes for a biased media. This is deep stuff we're having to address.

[PATRICK]

12. Infighting among reasons

makes for a weak excuse. One reason and faction pitted against another highlights the entire problem. The "reason" for losing is taking a serious multifaceted problem, each critical, too blindly and simply. A failure that is in professional campaigning one should demand at this level. Shuffling the blame off to separate excuses and onto the minions or advocates of separate tasks is evasive fault shifting at its most self-revelatory and most inexcusably defensive.

The WHOLE truth has been nakedly revealed. One cannot go back to thinking that Dems can parse issues to get swing voters thrown in "adequate" vote fodder numbers to offset all else. In fact a sort of myopic tunnel vision denial is hard in the arteries of some party leadership. Without getting too idealistic or preachy is it too much to demand truth and professionalism from the "smarter" party? Bullied by a fraudulent situation even the most liberal person can get weakened by even a minimal diet of MSM crap. Most of the professional responses against ALL of the problems listed above were not only divided but misinterpreted and estimated poorly- at least in the past. hackett was in a district where not much could be done against the disadvantages, such as dealing with possible vote fraud or GOP gerrymandering. A national campaign demands much more. Hackett signals that it is worthwhile and necessary to do so, not overlook and concede as has been the case.

The turning point for a genuine energetic, competent campaign would be to turn the electorate from the grass roots up and collapse the media filters back to the truth. The latter is much less likely until it is literally forced to. Thanks to universal defeat on all fields of power and communication no concession can be made anywhere, no bickering or excuses acceptable, and certainly no blindness to the facts. I don't feel confident the leadership grasps the dire straights of the entire situation. To put it mildly.

[proud patriot]

13. Very Well said

:patriot:

[frictionlessO]

15. Yeah! What she said!

Good job, its high past time we close ranks and punch that clock. Pick your battlefront then give it your all.

Thank you thank you!