You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #153: OK, but [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
forgethell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-08-05 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #152
153. OK, but
how many Bill Clintons does this party have? 1!! and he can't run again. Hilary will be no substitute.

Clinton, despite his faults, had a lot of charm. The same cannot be said for any other Democrat that I can see. When you say "framed" and "talked about differently" what you are saying is "misled", or even "lied". Remember "He kept the promises he meant to keep"?

That is to say, despite what many, maybe most, people on this board think, "rural" is not the same as "stupid, and neither is "conservative", "Southerner", or "pro-life". They remember, and nobody likes being talked down to.

"Framing" will not work for people who look at actions rather than words. They are interested in the results, not explanations or excuses. We have values, they have values. And the smart ones look to see how their values are being treated.

But as you say, abortion is not the only issue that "rural" people are concerned about. High taxes (in their opinion), gay-marriage, run-away courts, national security, etc. As a lone liberal in a conservative workplace, I talk to these folks alot, and I pretty well know what they think, and why they think it. They prefer the issues be addressed head-on, and frankly, so do I. We disagree with each other, but we know where we stand and remain friends. "Framing" seems too much like 1984 for my tastes.

"Focus" now. I like that. I think we should talk about the issues that we think are important, and try to keep our attention, and theirs, on them. Always remembering, of course, that their issues are as important to them as ours are to us.

Let me ask you this: Would we give up our positions on the social issues if we could get our way on the economic ones? Well, I would, myself, because, as I have stated previously, I am an economic Democrat. But most here wouldn't. And that's fine. But then, why do we expect social conservatives to cave for their own economic benefit, if we wouldn't do it?

I don't really know the answer as to why we don't win elections, but I suspect it has a lot to do with pushing the social envelop faster, not further than we should.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC