Not as Lame as You Think -- Dems Learn The Art of Opposition

[AtomicKitten]

Not as Lame as You Think
Democrats learn the art of opposition.

By Amy Sullivan
May 2006

The first week of March should have been a bright spot for Democrats in an otherwise bleak five years. With the president's approval numbers reaching Nixon-esque lows, and Democrats outpolling Republicans by 15 points—the party's largest lead in a midterm election since 1982—it was beginning to look like the long-suffering Democrats had rediscovered their mojo.

But you wouldn't know it if you picked up a newspaper that week. “For Democrats, Many Verses, but No Chorus,” declared the headline on The New York Times' front page on Monday. Reporting that “Democratic candidates for Congress are reading from a stack of different scripts these days,” political writer Adam Nagourney described targeted local campaign strategies as “scattershot messages” that “reflect splits within the party.” The next day, The Washington Post featured a story that declared, “Democrats Struggle to Seize Opportunity,” and questioned whether congressional Democrats could regain power without “the hard-charging, charismatic figurehead that Gingrich represented for the House GOP in 1994.” Picking up that theme on Wednesday, Slate's Jacob Weisberg lambasted Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Harry Reid (D-Nev.), and Howard Dean, calling them “The Three Stooges” and indicting them as “useless and disastrous.” And as if on cue, the Republican National Committee released a web video on Friday titled “Find the Democratic Leader.”

Democrats are lame, feckless, timid, and hopelessly divided, with no ideas, no vision, no message, and no future: You'll never fall flat at a Washington party by repeating this bit of conventional wisdom because everyone “knows” it to be true. Jon Stewart compares congressional Democrats to the fuzzy-but-not-fearsome Ewoks. The Onion gets an easy laugh from a parody headlined “Democrats Vow Not to Give Up Hopelessness.”

Of course, we chuckle because the jokes contain an element of truth. On some of the defining issues of the day, Democrats are indeed conflicted and divided. Most Americans and virtually the entire Democratic base wants universal health care, and yet congressional Democrats compete to offer marginal changes to the system. On a key economic issue like bankruptcy, too many Democrats sell out to lobbying interests, making it hard for the party as a whole to attack Republicans over it. Iraq has dominated the political scene for nearly four years, but Democrats couldn't agree whether to get into it, and now they can't agree on how to get out.

more...
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0605.sullivan1.html#byline

[rodeodance]

1. "Paradigm shift"----it has been a long time a coming.

.....Paradigm shift

In 2002 and 2003, Joshua Micah Marshall wrote a series of articles for this magazine about the myth of Republican competence. In one of those pieces, he referenced Thomas Kuhn's famous paradigm theory, which maintains that people can hold fast to a theory or narrative even as vast amounts of contradictory evidence piles up. At the time, there were plenty of indications pointing to GOP missteps and policy failures. But Republican message discipline, and a general awe of the Bush White House's corporate authority model, ruled the day. Everyone “knew” the Bush administration was a well-oiled machine. It took three more years, more than 2300 U.S. troops dead in Iraq, a botched relief effort for Hurricane Katrina victims, and the vice president shooting a guy in the face for the narrative to change. Yes, it is possible for conventional wisdom to be that wrong.

[rodeodance]

2. she is right about this: I think that getting whacked with "Hilary Care" i

what hold many back!

...Of course, we chuckle because the jokes contain an element of truth. On some of the defining issues of the day, Democrats are indeed conflicted and divided. Most Americans and virtually the entire Democratic base wants universal health care, and yet congressional Democrats compete to offer marginal changes to the system.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

5. Hillary care might be better than the hilarity care many of us don't

receive now.... (I don't have a clue what Hillary care was all about so be gentle)

[iconoclastNYC]

17. That plan had many flaws

But it was early in the adminsitration. If they would have tried it again in the second term they might have had some success.

Also if we tried it now we could mobolize the netroots to promote it. Also we have Michael Moore's movie coming out. I think we'll get single payer in the next Democratic administration.

Time to throw the money changers out of the temple.

[ProudDad]

29. I'm afraid that by the 2nd term

there was a repuke house that wouldn't pass ANYTHING for the people

[Greyhound]

35. "Many flaws" is an understatement of momentous proportions.

Just like his administration, the "plan" she came out with was simply a political power grab combined with a (at that time) massive corporate giveaway. It would have created even more bureaucracy, increased the price of delivery, restricted patients ability to redress medical malpractice, and still would leave millions uncovered. IOW a typical DC clusterfuck.

[Mythsaje]

3. Interesting article...

if anything it gives lie to the whole liberal media meme, considering that the media had no trouble trotting out Repug talking points while Clinton was in office, yet doesn't cover the opposition party unless the Dems wrangle some way to make it unavoidable.

[rodeodance]

4. I think Newt's power-point presentations were a hit--clear and repeated

over and over. It worked (damm).

.....What the GOP did so brilliantly in 1994 was exploit Clinton's weaknesses (his 1993 tax increase, his wife's failed health-care initiative), as well as the sense among voters that reigning congressional Democrats had become complacent and corrupt (reviving the Keating Five and House banking scandals). Well, guess what? This is precisely what congressional Democrats have been getting better at doing over the past 18 months. And just as most observers missed the coming Republican revolution in 1994, so they're missing a similar insurgency today.

[seabeyond]

7. liberal media, attacking the christians. repugs throw 2 yr old tantrums

i think those three things are more why they present the repug adn they feel comfortable ridiculing the dems, dissing the dems. the media can say what they like to the dems and the dems dont react like the repugs. media dare not challenge repugs. they are afraid. but they are not afraid with dems. for example, companies like coca cola now shoots hippies in ads. would never be a fundie they shoot. oh the funny in that.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

14. Clinton's 1993 tax increase was a fantastic policy success

It was the foundation of the prosperity of the 90's and the budget coming back into balance.

Thanks to M$M it was a PR bonanza for the repugs.

[welshTerrier2]

6. it's a good article BUT ...

we are so conditioned these days to see everything in black and white ...

I think the article makes numerous good points and supports its case with lots of examples ... i think themes like "Democrats do have ideas" and that there is party unity on many issues are perfectly valid ...

having said that, however, things are nowhere near as rosey as the author suggests ...

Let's talk about leadership and ideas ... with all due respect to the points the author raised about our lame media, Democrats do way too little on a number of issues ... i've raised this point many times here but go look at Democrats.org ... no mention of foreign policy on the homepage ... all kinds of issues are listed but NOT foreign policy ... that is just NOT leadership ...

and I just posted a long thread about the critical Iran issue ... some are saying it could cause WWIII or a nuclear confrontation or a multi-generational war between Islam and the West ... have Democrats demanded that bush return to the Congress before taking the country into another war? are they speaking out in an effort to challenge his power to do this?? not on Democrats.org and not any other place I've been able to find ...

and what about Kerry's recent remarks on his Iraq plan?? no discussion; no unity; no "Party" ...

and the article heaps all kind of praise on Schumer and Emmanuel but fails to even address the criticism by those who see a party run by DC insiders that pays inadequate attention to the grassroots ... all the article seemed able to do was bash liberal bloggers and heap praise on the "political strategists" ...

the article made a number of good points; this one was not among them: "But not putting forth a plan was the plan." it apparently never occurred to the author that some of us look beyond the political strategy to articulating a vision ... blaming the media, liberal bloggers and anyone else who worries that the Party has not adequately conveyed one fails to acknowledge that that is nevertheless the perception many Americans still have ... and, at least to some degree, I believe the perception is warranted ...

[seabeyond]

8. the battle that has been fought on this board for a while now, with many

every person dissing the dems on this board ignores so much of what is really happening, just like the media in this article. i have watched cspan with house members on the floor, seeing hwat they do and isnt reported. i have stayed up with each of these events seeing what dems have accomplished in the "weakness" of minority. i have been disappointed how so many on this board ignore so much of facts to present the same false cry of dems of the media....

excellent article. thank you for sharing

[blondeatlast]

9. While we bitch and moan that the Dem leaders aren't vocal enough, I

always wonder what's happening behind the scenes.

Unfortunately, many of the DU naysayers will miss this article entirely or pick and choose the bullet point failures.

This article made my day. Thanks!

[seabeyond]

10. sheeeit, they wont take time to read cause it doesnt fit their agenda

kinda like repugs wont read all the sheeeit on their oh so christian straight shooting leader cause they may not be able to blindly follow their really not very christian lyin theivin corrupt leader.

[AtomicKitten]

18. Clinton had many little victories in spite of a hostile GOP Congress.

Sometimes people only see the "stunts" when it's the day to day little victories that constitute real progress.

I think in reality if people took the time to poke the Dems with a stick, they'd find they are indeed still very alive. :)

[blondeatlast]

11. This post inspired another--let's give credit where credit is due:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2569117

For a severely minority party, our Dems have kicked some serious add at times.

[sendero]

12. This is an uplifting article for Dems..

.... and I certainly enjoyed reading it and I definitely learned a thing or two.

But is it a bit one sided also. For example, the Reid "stunt" still has not produced Phase 2 of the intelligence report, a key fact which is not mentioned.

Saying that the Dems have put out some banana peels seems fair enough, but it seems like they could do a lot more to me.

[seabeyond]

13. they have been busy with all the other crisises that we bitch they

arent taking care of with a majority that doesnt follow rule. ok...... lets get back to that, and dsm and nsa and and and....

but you are right it hasnt produced. and who is responsible for this????

good of you to point out to diss, diminish, confirm the projection of dems and not laying the responsibility squarely where it belongs. i will wait to hear from raed or others what is up with this before making any assumptions.

maybe that is the lesson for this article. maybe we dont KNOW what is happening, always.

[PATRICK]

15. In keeping with the

style of the article, stepping back and putting things in parallel perspective, I would have to say that after removing some of the re-balancing in this long well thought out piece, we are right back where we started.

Calling the Social security strategy brilliant and the GOP Revolution accidental seems a matter of choice rather than logic. It is crudely illogical, but comforting to switch the "conventional wisdom"(what the media settles upon on any given day).

It could be said with only a slight difference, but more fairness, that today's Dems are sitting pretty on the gift of the other party's failures, and their fecklessness matches what was actually happening way back then. Only back then, the Dems were not as bad the media painted them and were committing no atrocities, not stripping the nation to its core. Only back then did ES&S rediscover the joys of Stalinist vote counting with optical scan, which now is a huge represser of "accidental" voter surges. And who in their right minds think that when the smoke clears in November the Progressives will be the dominant force in the Democratic party? By definition the democratic wing of the party is not tyrannically ruthless and addicted to grandiose lying. Nor does it enjoy the ascendant favor of the corporate media, nor ever will without a real revolution in public information.

The hope in history is not in its gray repetition but in steady progress to a better world. Much of what the article reinterprets is not that hopeful, wistfully benign and then once the heartstrings are pulled, absurdly unfair in re-evaluation. The paradigm shift or just plain reality will never be fair if conducted by the media. That point was clearly made. Whether the people get to voice themselves in November will be the shift and that will be largely left to the outrages of the GOP, the turnoffs in policy fighting the magic button on vote tabulations. That is more than clear. But what is most clear is that taking any refuge in comforting assumptions, or brilliance, means nothing except peril if the party suppresses itself- and counts that as wisdom.

[ProSense]

20. I don't think the article says

anything about progressives will be the dominant force in the Democratic Party, unless Slaughter, Schumer, Reid, Murtha and others mentioned are the progressive forces.

Spotlighting the good Democrats do shouldn't be misconstrued as a declaration of victory, nor should it suggest that they are now going to rest on their laurels.

Two points:

First, Gingrich's plan (it wasn't earth shattering news), launched six weeks before an election, could not IMO have have had a huge and profound impact on how people voted, even with massive media coverage.

Second, you say: "Dems are sitting pretty on the gift of the other party's failures..."

It has taking the public a long time to come around on some issue and they're not there still on others. The public is not made up of only Democrats. A large majority of Republicans still support Bush, but they are coming around: In California, a recent poll showed his disapproval at 32% among Republicans.

I'm grateful for all the efforts on the part of Democrats to sway public opinion because believing it will happen due to a "shift...that will be largely left to the outrages of the GOP, the turnoffs in policy fighting the magic button on vote tabulations," is taking a lot for granted.

Here is the key: people, aided by the media, are pretending the Bush administration, an administration known for its secrecy, deception and illegal activities, is imploding by accident. The reality is that none of what we know is being revealed by Republicans or the media, it's just not happening. The GOP even tries to take credit for the criticisms. They tried to do it for the Dubai deal, domestic spying and every issue that has come under public scrutiny.

No doubt the media is biased and a new way to disseminate information is sorely needed. Which is why the Democrats' Social Security strategy was brilliant. They took their case directly to the public while Bush was on his traveling sales tour and all over the media. The Democrats coincided with the launched of a great website to disseminate the information.


Democrats Set Out on “Fix It, Don’t Nix It” Social Security Tour
Friday, March 4, 2005
http://reid.senate.gov/record2.cfm?id=232855


http://www.americansforsocialsecurity.com/


Unlike the Gingrich plan, which only had six weeks to impact (the public doesn't pay that much attention and that wasn't enough time for most voters to hear about the plan and read up on it), the Democrats' SS strategy had to effectively kill Bush's scheme for the run of his time in the WH. A failed strategy would have meant certain victory for Bush, and a partially successful one would have meant certain revival and the more difficult task of trying to merely halt it again.

The article gives credit where credit is due. I think the Democrats will remain vigilant.

JMO

[sandnsea]

21. "it could be said"

doesn't mean saying it would be true. Social Security, specifically, was a crafted strategy by the Dem Party, more specifically, Nancy Pelosi. It was NOT just sitting pretty on the other party's failures, the other party wouldn't have failed on social security if not for the tough fight by Democrats.

The same is true of much of what has happened in the last 2 years. The Democrats have put up a battle royale and most of the time all they get for their efforts is for the "netroots" to sit back and throw rocks at them.

[OzarkDem]

26. Good analysis

I also fear that the Dem attitude that "we will win because the GOP fails" is a bankrupt strategy. It doesn't create a solid base of support for the Dem party. If voters still don't understand what our candidates stand for, they're not likely to give them a great deal of support. And that means their chances of winning in November and in 2008 are built on a very shaky foundation.

Come on, DC Dems. Its not so hard to get off your arses and start working together.

[ProSense]

28. That the exact opposite of what the post implies

by this statement "Dems are sitting pretty on the gift of the other party's failures..."

Also, nowhere in the article does it say the Democrats expect to win simply because the GOP fails. The article is about the actions Democrats have taken and are taking that aren't being discussed. And here again, some are trying to ignores these actions.

[OzarkDem]

31. No one is ignoring them

but we're saying its not enough. The article in the OP was complimentary to Dems for starting to turn the corner, but its obvious to all they still have a long way to go.

And November is getting closer every day, they're running out of time.

[ProSense]

33. The article mentions these issues.

Just because a goal hasn't been achieve doesn't mean they are not fighting hard to achieve it. They're running out? Go to the DNC, the Senate and House Democrats web sites and they list a position on health care. That's what's important for the November. Also, the position each candidate is running on in their home state.

The Democrats agreeing on a health care policy (most will probably coalesce around Kennedy's or a similar one) that will put to the floor and voted on is not an issue for the election. That's not to say it wouldn't be great, but there could be six new Democratic Senators this fall, and they will also have to weigh in. Republicans will have to weigh in.

The issue for the election is a message, the position posted at these websites.

[rockymountaindem]

16. This is a great article. Everyone should read it, but I know the

BS complainers won't. They'd rather just piss on Democrats all the time. Gee, I wonder why?

[AtomicKitten]

19. IMO it's the "Dems are dead" meme they choose to perpetuate.

rather than choosing a genuine hopeful activism.

[OzarkDem]

25. Because that's the reality

The article doesn't highlight any substantial progress on Dems part, only small glimmer of hope. They still don't have a substantive plan for health care.

We hold our party leaders accountable because that's what needs to be done. Its their job to lead and they're not doing it.

[mtnsnake]

22. Very interesting. Kind of like a chess match. If the premise is accurate,

then we can hold out hope that Democrats indeed are quietly taking care of business and that there is a purpose to the madness.

When Feingold offered his censure move, I wondered almost immediately if there was a behind-the-scenes reason why Democrats didn't jump aboard with him. I suspected that Democrats were upset with him because they have a much broader plan when it comes to punishing Bush, and they didn't want to "ruin" it by broadcasting their future intentions (impeachment). Reading this article makes me think that Democrats most certainly DO have a plan and that they're plotting and planning in secret, which is fine by me.

I just hope there is a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes that we don't know about, as the article suggests, concerning the plans of our Democrats. If the premise is correct, we should be in for a victory in November. If it isn't...and Dems are just being "silent", with nothing going on secretly, then we could be in for a letdown again. Hopefully, it's the former, but we'll find out soon enough what, if anything, our Dems have up their sleeve.

Anyway, go Dems, go!

[PATRICK]

23. How many times

have we wondered about that secret road only to have "what you see is what you get." This is not to take away anything from what the Dems do and say, only that the hope for more behind the scenes or for a repeat of some future pattern(not screwed with by GOP fraud and the media). It gets pretty misty when someone wants us to believe in some grandmaster strategy beyond what is apparent, to believe that the Social Security fight is emblematic not the SCOTUS appointments.

It was pretty plain that Kerry had no plan for the necessary, predictable Bush fraud and less than hoped for effect on vote suppression, etc.. I think when the emotions engage either way the simple plainness of Democratic strategy and actions dissolves. You can characterize the general posture as wisdom but it has cost us several elections with no halting of the fraud and nothing but slowing of some parts of the agenda and a few of the most egregious crony appointments. The article is something else, something that appeals or argues with reality and the camp of pessimism by stressing a happier interpretation that has been all too often a vain hope. It leans to the best interpretation. That is what I think, IMHO, and shows that in the WAY it downplays the GOP and upgrades the Dems. It idealizes what is kept silent in the media and the parallel of hope. In real legislative performance much worse happened under Daschle's soft sell- when the secret plan of people far smarter than we, far wiser than we was an accepted premise- forever invisible except for failure.

Eventually this hope will be well founded simply because the people want it, but to call this the best of all possible opposition parties is a stretch and certain vindication in November another theory set to crash or be dampened from what it could and must be.

[mtnsnake]

27. I hear ya

How many of us waited and waited in frustration for the man to pull the rabbit out of the hat during that dreadful 2004 campaign? Surely we thought Kerry had a trick up his sleeve. Otherwise, why would he just sit there and take all that horrific shit they hurled at him day after day, week after week?

We never saw the rabbit, did we.

All we can hope for is that this time is different...that there's a method to the madness...or the silence, I should say.

[OzarkDem]

24. Dems still aren't working together

Its still "many voices, but no chorus". If they would put aside their egos and craft a sound message AND media strategy, they could be heard.

They still haven't done that and its unprofessional of them to keep blaming the news media.

[ProSense]

30. That defies the facts:

http://democrats.senate.gov/agenda/

http://democraticleader.house.gov/

http://www.democrats.org/agenda.html

[OzarkDem]

32. They're still nibbling at the edges

of a real comprehensive health care agenda.

Go out on the street or to the office and ask someone if they understand the Dems message or agenda. Its not getting out there yet.

[ProSense]

34. The guy on the street

couldn't tell you what the GOP agenda is. The fact is the Democrats are working to get the message out. The fact that all the polls show people leaning heavily toward Democrats (with double digit leads) indicates that the message is getting out (yes, part of it is because the GOP is seen as corrupt).

[depakid]

36. Yep- and he wouldn't agree with it if he knew

That's where the Dems have been profound failures. By not fighting back against these policies and creating controversy. On issue after issue, a substantial number either punt- or actually go along with what would be immensely unpopular positions- if the guy on the street knew about them.

The GOP rarely gets called on their extremism- rarely ever taken to task, and so they cultivate an image that's a lot more reasonable - and looks more economically friendly than it is.

Until the guy on the street gets that he's been taken for a fool- repeatedly- the Dems are destined to remain in the minority.