It isn't Rocket Science. Dems should just stop being the Party of Hamlet

[Armstead]

All this agonizing and overthinking and strategizing and bickering....The Democrats (and all of the left half) have become the Party of Hamlet. No longer is the Kicking Mule its symbol of relentles determination....Instead, it's the gloomy overanalytical Dane.."To be or not to be?"

Should Democrats go for the so-called Center or go left? Should it seek swing voters or rally the base? Should it be the party of traditional values and out-moralize the GOP? How open can we be about the Liberal Agenda? Should we even be associated with liberalism? How do we win the NASCAR Dads? How do we frame our message?.....blah, de, blah, blah,blah.

IMO it's real simple. We all know what's wrong. A vast number of apolitical people know what's wrong. Even many of the grass-roots conservatives recognize what's wrong, even though they keep trying to deny it.

It's real clear. America has turned our fate over to a small but powerful clique of oligarchs in charge of massive, cumbersome and abusive corporations. Not necesarily a conspiracy. Just your basic accumulation of increasing wealth and power by those who already had more than enough to start with. And the interests of the elites are not the interests of the majority of Americans.....

AND more importantly, the value system they represent are not the true values of most Americans.
But over the last 30 years, a massive amount of Snake Oil was shoved down our collective throats. Nonsense like "You have to work harder for less money, and you will eventually be better off." Meanwhile, while the average working stiff has gotten shafted, the ratio of ceo pay to the average worker has gone from 8-1 about 30 years ago to more than 400-1 today.

And nonsense like "Shipping our jobs and economy over to China will make our economy stronger." Or the "Allowing a few mega-corporations to wipe out all competition will increase our competativeness."


Finally, finally after 30 years of this double-speak, people are noticing that they've been lied to. The rosy future they were promised earlier is here, and it's dark, rther than rosy.

People either know or sense this. The reaction to the port deal, for example, had as much to do with revulsion at the Selling of America as with any security concerns.

So how do Democrats deal with this in a politically potent way? It's SIMPLE!...Less Hamlet and more FDR. Stop agonizing over what Karl Rove will do, or how some unchangable freepers will react. And stop kowtowing to the media snarks. And forget "framing." Just start speaking some plain honest truth and advocate for what we really believe again.

Tell people that the Democrats/liberals/progressive recognize these problems. And make it clear that we REALLY will stand up and fight to reverse them, and defend the interests of the majority and the temporarily or permanently disadvantaged again. Advocate for and defend a return to a more human-oriented economy and sense of community, instead of a Milton Friedman Profit Uber Alles one based on "Every Man for Himself.".

It really isn't as complicated as we often make it. Nor does it have to be divisive. We all know what's wrong, and the basics of what needs to e done to fix it.

[redqueen]

1. I agree...

And I think most of us DO know this... the trick is... how do we tell the leadership? You know, the guys running the ads? The guys who seem too afraid to do much at all besides letting Dean do most of the heavy lifting?

[Deep13]

2. The Tao of Pooh

While Pigglet ponders and Eor frets, Pooh just is.

It's a book I saw once, kind of an existentialism for dummies sort of thing.

If you are a Democrat, then BE a Democrat and stop worrying about it.

[Armstead]

3. Maybe the current Democratic Donkey is Eyore

Just a different metaphor yourt post made be think of.

[LSparkle]

4. Love your screen name ... and your ref to "Tao of Pooh"

R u a MySTie?

[Deep13]

8. In the not too distant future...

...way down in Deep 13,
Dr. Forrester and TV's Frank
were hatching an evil scheme.

They hired a temp by the name of Mike,
a regular joe they didn't like.

Their experiment needed a new test case,
so they conked him on the noggin and they shot him into space.

"We'll send him cheezy movies.
The worst we can find."

"We'll make him sit and watch them
whicle we monitor his mind."

Keep in mind Mike can't control
where the movies begin or end.

He tries to keep his sanity,
with the help of his robot friends...

[Armstead]

18. This is "duh" question but what is that?

[Deep13]

20. LSparkle asked if I liked Mystery Science Theater,...

...which was on cable TV in the 90s. That was their theme song for awhile.

[Armstead]

22. Ooooooo. Iused to watch it ocasionally but don;t rmember that

[rniel]

5. well

to even respond to this post is going to make me a hamlet I guess but I don't think FDR had a problem with the media not giving him enough coverage. You can have all the right ideas and still lose if you can't get the message out.

[Armstead]

6. You're thinking too much

There were media barons back then too. Many of them more reactionary than today's.

And there's two ways tro deal with it now. Go on offense, remind the media that they still are merely leasing a PUBLIC RESOURCE, and stop wasting airtime by echoing Republican talking points.

[BootinUp]

7. So do we wait for another Great Depression.

I mean FDR had some major fixin to do. People supported him to the hilt. If you think any politician can get support right now for those exact same policies you are nuts. In fact what is ignored in these "Spinal Chord" meme type analysis is the current political climate and what are realisitc legislative goals. Sorry had to post my opinion too.

[Armstead]

10. Okay Hamlet, here's my response

Agree or disagree but our BIGGEST problem is not what the majority of average Americans really think.

It's what we think they think. And the fact that we spend so much time worrying about it.

What do you believe in? What do you think is wrong today? Why are you a Democrat and not a Republican?

Presumably, if you are basially on the liberal side (even a moderate one) you ought to trust in your own beliefs enough to believe that they are also held by enough other peopel to be worth advocating for.

The notion that the nation is so much more conservative than it used to be is a fallacy that is self-defeating. Most people believe in liberal policies and principle on individual issues. In two Red States that went for Bush in 04, for example, the same voters passed an increase in the state minimum wage.

Believe in what you believe in. It really is that simple.

[BootinUp]

13. The idea that you don't have to be a politician

to be a politician. Its such a crock. Forget compromise, dictatorship!

[Armstead]

17. I didn't say that

I asked what do you believe in, if you don't have to look at it through a political lens? What do you believe are the roots of current problems, and what are the solutions?

That's the starting point for everyone who is not a Republican conservative.

If we all press to have our true beliefs represented in the political process, then we'll start having politicians who are both strategically smart and authentic.

[BootinUp]

19. I do, every time I vote or contribute or sign a petition.

I don't change my opinion because of polls. Would I choose to use different rhetoric that appeals to my target audience? Sure. Do I favor compromise to achieve goals that I think should have priority? Sure. Do I think that a refusal to recognize political reality is damaging my party? Yes.

[Armstead]

21. What is political reality?

For much of the last year, Bush's approval ratjings have been steadil;y dropping and are now around 38 perent. The Republican Congress's approval is not much better.

Seems to me that there is fertile field for offering something that is clearly different.

Especially at you look at specific issues. Why do you think Bush got beat up so bad on Soial Security -- a LIBERAL program? Why did two Red States vote to raise the minimum wage.

The more that Democrats avoid these nd otehr core issues, the less they offer to voters.

[BootinUp]

23. Its making a serious effort

to win one or two red states. I don't care what it takes.

On edit, Ok I do care.

[Armstead]

24. Candidacies should represent their constitutiencies but...

I maintain that a clear message aimed at the working and middle class and disadvantaged that are all being squeezed by the same forces would acomplish that.

The fundies who are determined to buy into the "Praise Jesus, You're Fired" message of the GOP are a lost cause anyway. But a lot of blue collar Reagan Democrat types are as fed up with the current situation as anyone. They can be won over, if they actually are convinced that the Democrats will fight for them.

Don't forget what it used to mean to be a blue-collar Democrat, who supported the donkey because they knew it would kik for their interests. People have not changed that much.

[BootinUp]

25. "People have not changed that much"

Ok I agree, but an honest discussion of what has changed might get me kicked off this forum though.

[Armstead]

27. I doubt it...

I think you're safe s long as you use some discretion in how you rant against us radical nutball lefties. :)

[radio4progressives]

35. Wait for another Great Depression ? Honey don't look now, but to a lot of

people, and i do mean a lot of people - we are there.

We'll never have a "great depression" again - at least that's what the Federal Reserve was supposed to prevent from happening.. but hey, I could be wrong - they could be wrong, we could have been lied to about that too.


but just wait until the big news that our treasury has been completely squandered by these bastards - emptied - to pay for these military adventures and to line some pockets like Halliburton, the MIC, Oil companies. I mean I think people know it intuitively even if it hasn't exactly been spelled out directly. Deficits, and national debt is reported and the indicators have been very grim as to our economic well being as a nation. but it's when people are losing their jobs and can't find more work, or have to work two and three jobs to bring home what they used to get by on with one job.

That's happening right now.

If you're lucky enough not to be one of those folks, then that's nice for you. But that's not how it is for many of us.

[BillZBubb]

9. Ask 10 Democrats for an agenda and you get 10 different ones

That's the problem. We are too loose a confederation. Like the Articles of Confederation in our own history, that makes us weak, indecisive, and unruly. Each Democrat seems to act like he's a free agent, independent, not a member of a party committed to certain basic ideals.

We need a Democratic equivalent of the Constitution that unites us in a common set of beliefs. That way we wouldn't have to suffer supposed Democrats supporting a Republican president in a war based on lies or in gutting the working class.

[Armstead]

12. I think Step One is to acknowledge beliefs and fight for them

Diversity has always been one of the core Democratic values. And it's a double edged sword. People may have differing priorities, and differing specific ideas about policies.

But there are certain principles that I think already unite us in terms of Power and Wealth. I believe that there are certain common problems that can unite our side of the fence, and that can be politically sucessful too.

It is getting more and more difficult to defend Free Market Corporatism, because resentment against the results is gaining traction in the grass roots.It's less of a "left/center" issue than one of whether one stands on the side of the interests of the majority or the elite minority....The GOP already stands for the elite.

[eallen]

29. I disagree. The pure anti-corporate message is a loser. Deservedly so.

It would turn the Democratic Party into the enemy of the small businessman and the entrepeneur. And there's nothing inherently wrong with large corporations either. There are some good messages related to this that distinguish us from the free market fundamentalists:



* The realization that capitalism and corporations operate with a legal environment the government defines, and that people debating what that environment should be is a legitimate political practice, not an intrusion into an assumed natural order.

* Support for separating government and business, and ending K-street.

* Support for regulation to prevent corporate abuse of environment or labor.

* Recognition that people are not pure laborers, consumers, and investors, but also at times children, aged, and otherwise dependent, and hence support for social programs from public schools to social security.



But ranting about the evils of Corporations, per se, is silly. And most Americans will realize that.

[Armstead]

30. Being anti-corporate abuse is not being anti-business

The proposals you mentioned are totally contrary to the propaganda and false values that have been beaten into our heads over the last 30 years. Even doing as you decribe is considered "too radical" and "too far left" by centrists and conservatives.

The ONLY way to get where you suggest is to break the phony mesages that have been beaten into our heads over the last 30 years by the corporate aristocracy and their minions in the media and the Beltway Elite. "Rules? Abbolish K Street? what are you a Commie?"

Call it anti-corporate if you want, but we must address core fallicies and issues in a plain spoken way.

It is not healthy for society or the economy to have allowed industries that once had a multitude of companie -- big, mid-sized and small -- to have congeled into a handful of monopolistic giants over the last three decades.

It is not healthy to support practices like shipping jobs anmd productive cpacity overseas.

It is not moral to have corporations with a handful at the top making immense fortunes while laying off or cutting wages and benefits to the majority of lower level employees.

[eallen]

41. I agree: opposing corporate abuse is not the same as opposing business.

Big or small. Which means we should be careful to send the message that we're against corporate abuse, not against business, capitalism, or corporations.

[radio4progressives]

36. No, It is not silly. and it's not the same thing as Small Businesses

Small Business are not Big Multi-Nationals - Corporations is who everyone understands is the issue.

[eallen]

40. Speaking as a small businessperson, we need the big businesses, too.

Some business processes scale. Some don't. Some work only in the large. Many small businesses have larger businesses as their customers, and almost all rely on bigger businesses as their suppliers.

If Corporations per se are "the issue," the message you're delivering is to get rid of big business. Which most Americans will recognize would ruin the economy and is pretty damn stupid. If you now backtrack and say "no, no, I don't want to get rid of them, I just want to..." then you need to rethink the notions that Corporations are the issue, rather than something else related to them.

[Armstead]

42. No that's not the issue -- It's HOW big and HOW they behave

You are correct that some activities require large corporations. And the economies of scale come into play too.

However, that is a very different issue than what has been happening over the last 30 years. What has happened is that large corporations have gone far beyond reasonable boundaries, and now monopolize industries that used to have a healthy mix of competitors of all sizes.

Big companies swallowed up or killed off medium sized large businesses, and smaller businesses along the way. It has been a frightening progression. If two businesses swallow up five competitors apiece, and then merge, the industry has changed from having 12 businesses to having One Mega Business....That is not good for free enterprise, or for smaller businesses who who no choice but to buy and sell from this monolithic corporation.

The same dynamic has occurred across industry lines. In oater words a company that started out as a soft-drink maker expands into operating stors, restaurants, community water systems, etc.

This is not good for the business climate, consumers, workers or the survival of democracy. We are seeing the effects everywhere. Why the hell should the same company -- Halliburton -- be feeding our troops, working in Iraqi oilfields, "rebuilding" Louisiana and basically having many sectors of the economy and public infrastructure in a hammerlock?

The issue is not whether we will have some big businesses where they have an appropriate role. It is whether we will have an economy that is based on competition in the positive sense, or if we will turn everything to a handful of de-facto private governments whose only interest is profit.

[eallen]

46. Ah, see. That pro-competition message harkens back to Teddy Roosevelt.

[Armstead]

47. He was a Republican, but yes that's the core of it

We need to do some new "trust busting," or at least stop the continuing trend towrds consolidation. It is undermining the economy on many levels.

[BootinUp]

53. I agree with you here

Board Room deals have screwed me over before. And countless other Americans too of course.

[Armstead]

54. OMG -- Stop the presses

Agreement on something. What a concept. :toast:

Seriously, here's an example from my own family of why I think this is important, and is an issue that can resonate with a majority, if the Democrats address these issues and mean it.

My brotehr worked for a successful regionl printing company owned by a local family. He had a good job, was treated well and was reasonably paid. The company itself also made a good profit and had satisfied clients.

Then the owners sold out to a large national corporation that was in the process of building a national empire, by swallowing up local and regional printers. (And using their dominance to make it more difficult to compete with them.)

Almost immediately, the corporation sent in a bunch of hatchet men who screwed up the business, and putting the squeeze on employees by making them work harder for less money. It just became anotehr "unit" in a large empire.

One of their excuses was the competition from Asian companies who had gained unrestricted access to the US market while operating sweatshops overses. Thanks to "free trade" policies.

Within a year, it went from being a prosperous and well run company that provided good jobs and quality service to becoming a glorified sweatshop in whih the local employees had no say over the endless stream of bad decisions that were being mde from afar.

That's just screwed up on many levels. It what happens when all restraints on corporate consolidation, labor policies and trade are removed in the GOP CONservative free market.

The days when these thiongs were considered "beyond the pale" is not that long ago. They have been made possible by an artificial lowering of standards and values over the last 30 years, in which the unaceptable was sold as being acceptble and "business as usual." Most peopel don;t like the results, and it would not be unrealistic to t least restore some standrds.

People want and need something like a strong Democratic Party to tame such corporate beasts, and encourage a diversity of well-run and reasonable companies again.

[PsN2Wind]

11. Agreed Armstead

We can't be all things to all people if we are a weak minority party.
It's well past time to try and reclaim those defectors from the party that have hurt our cause the most, that IMHO is the working-class, blue-collar workers. Many have decided that, rightly or wrongly, the Dems have a goal to protect the rights of everyone with the exception of the white male. They also see Clinton's signing of NAFTA as proof that there is little difference in the two parties when it comes to blue-collar jobs. Couple that with the idea that "Liberals" believe we should allow unfettered immigration which helps keep their wages low and there isn't much reason to expect the return of those "Reagan Democrats".
A strong message of helping those in the middle-class and lower to move up the economic scale. Also that we can protect our country without sending their sons and daughters to fight and die in preemptive wars. That health care can be made affordable for virtually everyone that has a need. Well, I could go on but you get the picture.We can tilt at the windmills when we have a horse but right now we ain't got a horse.
I don't mean that we should abandon our principals but if we are not in the game we can accomplish nothing. So first we need at least one branch of government. The SCOTUS is lost to us for years to come, so it has to be the Executive or Legislative, both would be nice.

[European Socialist]

14. Good post--And yes, this economic nonsense has been going on 30 years.

[Armstead]

32. Yes, 30 years of "Just go along with us and things'll get better."

Well it's now the future and things have gotten worse for more peope. And more and more are relizing it.

[AtomicKitten]

15. I think we just need a voice. A loud and clear one.

[Armstead]

16. We need a collective voice

It's a chicken-and-egg thing, but if we start demanding the truth from politicians will have to respond. And out of that will come some individual voice in terms of politicians actually representing our side.

[autorank]

26. 100% correct. The obvious is so....well...obvious.

Get out there and hammer the points home.

Under BUSH and the NEOCONS:

We're no longer a country friendly to the middle class and we're down right hostile to our own poor and those elsewhere.

We are no longer a country with a rational approach to the environment. 60 Minutes runs a great show on global warming and how we're totally screwed. Narry a mention of this in MSM and certainly not from the WH.

We are no longer a country of laws. We surrendered the Constitution to presidential rule.

We are no longer a country of innovation. We do everything we can to send ALL jobs overseas and bring in foreign workers even for the best American jobs.

We are no longer sophisticated or clever in foreigh policy (in order to keep friends, save lives, and advance our interests). We are awkward and heavy handed without any real effect.

We are no longer tolerated and liked on occasion in the rest of the world. We are intensely disliked.

We need a completely new program of honesty in government, inclusion of all the people in the benefits of our government and national wealth, and total dedication to saving both our democracy through free and fair elections and helping save the world through an intensive project to mitigate global warming.

[Armstead]

28. Couldn't have said it better...

[IronLionZion]

31. And Dems need to stop worrying about opinion polls/focus groups

and not be afraid of criticism. FDR was called a dirty commie by the right and a belligerant imperialist by the far left but he didn't give a shit. The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. And the Republicans have a war on fear, while trying to use fear as much as possible to win elections. Of course people will be confused and distrustful of politicians. FDR was a great leader.

Kennedy somehow managed to be liberal and tough on defense...somehow. He took controversial positions and was wildly popular. He lead our country towards Civil Rights even though congress and his own party were controlled by knuckle-dragging reactionary dixiecrats. He was so great that they had to kill him.

and we are better off because of these guys.

It's OK to be liberal and tough. I shudder when I think how radically different our country would be if only Jimmy Carter had used 18 helicopters in Desert One instead of 9. There would be no Reagan, no 9/11, no Al Qaeda, no global war on fear, our manufacturing jobs would not have gone to China, our energy needs would not enslave us to oil, and so on.

[Cocoa]

33. I don't think it's simple

I think politics is incredibly complicated.

I have to work to figure out my own thoughts on issues, then when you consider that politics has to address millions of other people's concerns, it gets really really tricky.

[Armstead]

52. It's both simple and complicated

Complicated when it gets down to the brass tacks.

But simple in terms of morality. I don't think it's all that complicated to recognize that something is wrong when a ceo makes $20 million a year while laying off employees and shipping their jobs to overseas sweatshops. Or when one fmily of siblings is collectively worth about $100 billion while the people working for them have to go on food stamps to supplement their meager wages.

I don't think it's all that complicated to think that it is inappropriate for the Frist family to have accumulated billions of dollars by buying up hospitals, while tens of millions of Americans can't afford any healthcare, and countless millions morte are being st4rapped to the max by the rising costs of coverage.

The list gopes on and on. It hs gotten to the point where things have gotten so screwed up that the least we should be able to do is recognize and agree on the core problems, and have a general set of clear goals to fix it, even if there may be some leser differences on the details of policy.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

34. I have been banging my head against the wall for 30 years about just

these issues.

Just think if FDR had said, "Hmm, I'd better not upset my corporate contributors with this New Deal" or Kennedy had said, "The Repubilcans are never going to go for this Peace Corps idea."

[Armstead]

39. You mean like this?

:banghead:

I'm familiar with the feeling. It's not only the broad sweeping inititives. It's also the little things, like trying to figure out what the "base" is diffgerent from the "center" or "moderate swing voters."

[radio4progressives]

37. Excellent post Armstead, Quite Agree.. "It ain't Rocket Science"...

it's plain as day, and as simple as apple pie.

[mrgorth]

38. You are, of course, 100% right

However those seeking power will continue pandering to the corporations because they need their money to get elected. Name me one anti-globalist who would have a reasonable shot at getting elected el Presidente?

[welshTerrier2]

43. excellently said!!

it really is just that simple: if we want more votes, we damned well better be fighting for the interests of more voters ... tens of millions of Americans no longer vote at all; maybe we should try to understand why ...

[BootinUp]

44. Hey Armstead

just curious, did you pick up the "It ain't Rocket Science" thing from me?

And then you went and used it against me. :o

[Armstead]

51. Your royalty check will be in the mail...

Not really. "Not rocket science" has been a personal fave years before I'd ever even heard of DU.

But maybe I subconsciously and inadvertantly appropriated it from you this time. But if so there was nothing personal about it. More a generic sense of "Why are we all making straightforward things so complicated?" :)

[cookiebird]

45. No memes

Get off the "tax the rich" theme--it doesn't play well in middle USA when the jobs are outsourced because of government regs and taxes. Many of the states apply their own taxation policies and many of those policies do not grow businesses. Take an econ class--what do the rich "do" with their $$$?
it doesn't sit in a mattress or a coffee can ala the depression. Capitalism isn't perfect by a heckuva long shot, but socialism doesn't work, either. Taxing an individual at up wards of 80% is not an incentive for a high level of productivity in any market. Talk to a small business owner in your community--like an auto mechanic, bookstore, or local coffee house owner. I've worked for all 3 types of small businesses--taxing the productive folks to bring about social justice is looking behind us, not in front of us. We have to have work for folks to do, to develop skills and have opportunity for further education--and maybe to start their own businesses. Thank you for your patience.:rant:

[BootinUp]

48. this post will be popular. n/t

[Armstead]

49. I'm not talking about socialism. This is much more basic than that

It's a Republican meme to say than anything other than hard-core Milton Friedman capitalism is automatially socialism.

This is much more basic that "socialism" versus capitalism. It is more in the relm of common decency, and whether the US will be able to maintain a broadly-based functioning economy and a middle class and civil society. That's what has to be dealt with now. Tht transends ideology.

There is a middle ground on all things. I would agree with you that a small business should not lose most of his or her income to taxes. But that's a far sight different than not allowing large profitable corporations to set up a post box offshore and avoiding any taxes. Or making it possible for the Uber Wealthy to use tax shelters and creative accounting to pay less than the average schmuck making $30,000 a year.

The money made by the oligarchs doesn't go into a mattress. But much of it goes into using their acumulationg wealth to tale over more and more of the existing economy -- and thus depriving everyone else of their share and participation. When a iog corporation buys out another corporation, they are NOT "creating wealth." They are merely sucking up anotehr existing soure of wealth for themselves.

And then when they add insult to injury by getting all these bennies from the public trough claiming they are creating jobs they instead ship the jobs overseas.

[timbnyc44]

50. Pandering and hedging will never work...

...because when public opinion finally changes - as it is doing now- the Dems will be so compromised that the public won't embrace them, either. We need Dems who take strong stands and aren't afraid to call the other side on its misdeeds and screw-ups.

[Armstead]

55. Yep.

Should look at Iraq s an example. If more Democratic politicians had gonbe with their gut instincts, instead of trying to waffle on it, they'd have a lot more credibility on it now that the majority of Americans realize it was a bad move.