It's Not the Message, It's the Math

[howmad1]

I have a pretty close relationship with my Congressman. I've been asking him about a national message from the Democratic party. I'm sharing his response and would welcome any feedback that I will pass on to him.


"With Republicans on the ropes, a grim campaign ahead of them, and the prospects for losing Congress growing with every scandal and gas price increase, I am asked this question more than any other: “When will the Democrats have a national message?”
At diners, supermarkets and airports, people want to know when my Party will do what the Republicans did in 1994 when they took control of the House – launch a “Contract With America.”

Here is my answer;

First, in 1994, the Republicans did wrap a national message in a shiny package called the “Contract With America”. But they didn’t announce it until September. Why? Because they knew that the “Contract” wasn’t sound public policy, it was a marketing gimmick. And they followed the important marketing principle of never launching a product too early. First, because they didn’t want people to forget it before Election Day. And second, because they didn’t want to give the public too much time to discredit it. (They didn’t need the public’s help with that; they’ve ignored or broken virtually every provision of the “Contract”).

There’s another drawback to a national message. The Republicans are in such desperate straits that the only way they can retain control of the House is to “localize” the elections by focusing on the individual records of a specific Member. Why would we want to help them by creating a straight-jacket national message that may play in some areas but not others?

If the Democratic leadership can fashion a truly effective message that appeals in red as well as blue districts without losing one or the other, fine. That will be very hard to do. We need to pick-up fifteen seats to win the House. For the first time in twelve years, we can defeat Republicans in red and blue states throughout America. We can pick-up seats in North Carolina and New York; in New Mexico and Ohio. But, a “national message” that is broadly supported in my congressional district may be a prescription for loss in a North Carolina district (and vice-versa).

So a “national message” may sound good, but it amounts to a “win-some, lose-some strategy.” And we can’t afford to lose any this year.

Some say it shouldn’t be about winning, it should be about what we stand for. They demand a message – as long as it’s their message. They demand that we stand for “something”. But it has to be the thing that they stand for.

I stand for having more Democrats than Republicans on the first day of the 110th Congress, when we elect a new Speaker. That is the most important vote we cast, because it determines thousands of other votes in the next two years: whether the House prioritizes oil company tax cuts or energy independence; Halliburton’s financial security or true national security; competence or corruption.

The only way to get to 218 is to let Democrats speak to their vision in their own districts; and then reconcile those visions within the Democratic Caucus and on the Floor of the House when we are in the majority.

Having a pure message that criticizes bad Republican policies and proposes our better solutions is fine. Having enough Democrats in the majority in Congress to stop bad Republicans policies and pass Democratic solutions is even better.

So the upcoming congressional elections aren’t about the message. They’re about the math."

[BeFree]

1. Yeah, math, I'd vote for that

and.... Your Choice: More Competence, or More Corruption.

and;

Ask yourself: Who's been in power the last 6 years?

[msongs]

2. thought the "math" was gonna be about the fraudulent votes counted

in favor of the repubs against the dems. oh well.

Msongs
www.msongs.com
batik & digital art
get YOUR pics on shirts!

[BillZBubb]

3. There is a hole in that "logic" a mile wide.

It's the usual recipe for Democratic failure on election day: Every man for himself. The fundamental problem with it is is makes it easy for the Repugs to blast individual candidates as "having a secret liberal agenda" or similar BS. The Repug candidates can all say here's what I and my party stand for: Strong defense, lower taxes, less government, restoring traditional values. Our Democratic candidates can't make a similar, well understood claim. It will really help incumbent Repugs win.

The Democratic party needs a list of 3 or 4 key issues on which all our candidates agree. They don't have to be totally detailed, but clear enough to let voters know what's going to happen if we win. Run on those then let the candidates also add a few local issues. Certainly our party isn't so devoid of ideas and principles that we can't come up with 3 or 4 issues that differentiate us from the Repugs? Surely????

The elections ARE about the message. Until our side learns this lesson, we'll continue losing.

[rucky]

6. Only because you re-worded it.

regionalizing the message is not equal to not having a message.

[orleans]

4. Get a Message: We Won't Fuck Up The Country OR The World

math is good but can't we at least get a tag line?

[rucky]

5. You should be getting paid for this.

makes total sense. Excellent analysis.

But what should he tell his constituents who ask?