CT-Sen: New Democratic Party Narrative Emerging

Since at least 1992, the easiest and most likely path to national prominence as a Democrat has been through public acts of Sista Soulja. For the past fifteen years (or more), in order for Democrats to gain favor within the national political narrative, it has been deemed necessary that they castigate and distance themselves from members of their own party in the same manner that Republicans would do so. This situation has proven is untenable for Democrats for two main reasons. First, in order to gain national prominence and a favorable position within the national political narrative, Republicans are never required to castigate anyone in their own party for extremism. Thus, the narrative always forces Democrats to look more divided (and hence, no one knows what they stand for). Second, while it may be to the benefit of individual Democrats to repeat Republican talking points about Democrats, it is entirely against the interests of the Democratic Party as a whole. Thus, Democrats have incentives to make their own party appear extreme, anti-religion, soft on defense, etc. This is how we ended up with a situation in the 1990's when a popular Democratic President presided over a nation where the electoral fortunes of the Democratic Party were in severe decline. When the Democratic Party leadership was repeating Republican complaints about Democrats, in Peter Daou's formulaiton, the conventional wisdom triangle closed against Democrats. One only wonders what could happen to the Democratic Party if Hillary Clinton is able to complete her plan of becoming our leader by Sista Souljaing every progressive in the country.

The Sista Soulja narrative does not work for Democrats. Fortunately, via the Connecticut primary, a new narrative is beginning to take its place. In the Hartford Courant, in an excellent article about the local and national netroots efforts on behalf of Ned Lamont, Paul Bass writes about what works now (emphasis mine):The man who was so ahead of the political curve when he entered the Senate 18 years ago is now hopelessly behind it.

In 1988, his sleeping-bear commercial about Lowell P. Weicker pioneered the modern TV attack ad in Connecticut. Joe understood the need to appeal to independent voters, at the expense of his party's traditional liberals, in order to win statewide office. Once in Washington, he realized power lay in building alliances not with fellow Democrats but with right-wingers like Ralph Reed and Charles Murray, not to mention a succession of presidents named Bush.

But now it's 2006. Joe's original party base is hungry to punish Bush, Republicans, and any Democrats who play GOP footsy. They're maddest most of all about the Iraq war, for which Lieberman has been the most vocal Democratic cheerleader.

TV and high-priced hired-gun TV ad makers no longer rule campaigns. Bloggers have taken their place. Politicians have to inspire them, not buy them. Their wildcat work spreads like a virus through computer screens across the country. In just 45 days as a candidate, Lamont brought in donations from over 4,000 people across the country. Thousands more clicked on to volunteer.

By the time Joe saw what was happening, it was too late to order a vaccine. He ran into a perfect marriage of a new technology, an issue geared to people who use that technology (the war), and, lastly, a credible, motivated, intelligent, wealthy candidate. Hello narrative replacement. Rather than labeling members of our own party extreme, the new path toward success is to inspire members of your own party. That we are now seeing articles like this in established news outlets is a sign of the great potential for change this campaign has. But it won't happen unless Ned Lamont is able to gain real traction.

This is an incredibly important race for the future of the Democratic Party. The narrative is already in transition, and we need to bring this one home. You guys have been absolutely fantastic so far, but we all need to continue to give Ned Lamont our support.

Volunteer
Contribute

Tags: Activism, conventional wisdom, CT-Sen, Hillary Clinton, Joe Lieberman, Media, Ned Lamont, netroots (all tags)

Comments

17 Comments

A big race

This is an important race for the Democratic party.  But before I go into that I think we should remember why the Sister Souljah moment worked so well.  I think it worked because many moderate voters felt fundamentally turned off from the Democratic Party.  They saw a party in 1992 that was out of touch with them on issues like crime, defense, welfare, being beholden to interest groups, and being to ideologically liberal.  Bill Clinton's successful presidency gave Democrats the freedom to break away from that past, until Al Gore stupidly listened to Bob Shrum's failed populist line about "the people v. the powerful."

So how does this connect to Connecticut?  This race is a battle between those two wings again.  Joe Lieberman represents the moderate wing of the Democratic party, someone who seen as strong on Israel, tough on terrorism, good on environmental issues, pro-choice (but not pro-abortion), pro-charter schools, pro-free trade, and for fiscal responsibility (which includes occasional tax cuts).  If Lamont wins it will send a clear message to most moderates who agree with Lieberman that the have no place in the Democratic party.  If we want to keep the centrist Democratic vision of Bill Clinton alive, and reject the idea that a narrow ideological minority can push our party out of the mainstream on key issues, we need to stand up and support Joe Lieberman.  

 

by ditka 2006-04-24 10:07AM | 0 recs
Re: A big race

Lieberman represents the moderate wing of the Democratic party, someone who seen as strong on Israel, tough on terrorism, good on environmental issues, pro-choice (but not pro-abortion), pro-charter schools, pro-free trade, and for fiscal responsibility (which includes occasional tax cuts).

Bullshit.

Thanks to the foreign and domestic policies Lieberman has supported, Israel is no safer in the region, terrorism is at an all-time high globally, Bush's disasterous Energy Bill was signed into law, anti-choice Alito is on the Supreme Court, our deficit is monstrous, etc. etc.

Every single one of your characterizations of Lieberman is false, including the claim that the best friend of William F. Buckley and Sean Hannity is a "moderate."

by tparty 2006-04-24 10:16AM | 0 recs
Re: A big race

And here I thought it would send a message to Democrats that they needed to just be more responsive and aware of their constituents. Gosh ditka, thanks for setting me straight.

To think I was prepared to spend my summer volunteering for the wrong guy! The business-savvy, pro-choice, environmentally friendly, fiscally responsible guy who doesn't build himself up by tearing down his friends.

Oh wait, I still am.  

by bruorton 2006-04-24 10:35AM | 0 recs
Re: A big race

I disagree with most of your post, but I'm only going to focus on one part--your Gore analysis. First, the line was "the people, not the powerful." It was not "the people vs. the powerful." That conflation is straight out of the Love Canal-invented the Internet playbook of Republicans who epitomize bad faith. I'm not surprised you repeat it, it's the stock in trade of assclowns like MoDo and Joe Klein, but like so much else about the Gore campaign, he never said it and there's a huge difference in meaning between those two words.

Second, his campaign enjoyed its highest approval when he was in full populist mode. He hit the wall when he got tripped up in the dog's prescription-James Lee Witt microissues. Again, he was done in by bad faith (lies if you will), not a rather bland flavor of populism.

by KevStar 2006-04-24 12:54PM | 0 recs
Re: A big race

Feel free to leave.

by ElitistJohn 2006-04-24 01:14PM | 0 recs
Thanks

Lamont,
What an intelligent response.  I thank you so much for it, you have really elevated the discussion.  I am sure your friends and family are proud.

Actually Lieberman is very good on the environment (he is the sponsor of legislation that will address global warming - climate stewardship act).  Alito isn't on the Court because of Lieberman.  Alito is on the Court because Democrats nominated someone seen as out of touch on terrorism and defense who lost to Bush.  If they had put up DLC centrist in 2004 you would have had a Democrat in the White House picking the Supreme Court instead of Bush.  

But just keep it up, I am sure you will drive all the moderates out of the party and the Democrats you will be a permanent minority.  

by ditka 2006-04-24 10:32AM | 0 recs
Umm....

If you knew who Ned Lamont is and what he stands for you'd know he is also a political moderate, which makes him all that more dangerous for Lieberman as an opponent.

A background piece on Ned Lamont in yesterday's Hartford Courant.

Out Of The Political Shadows

by Scarce 2006-04-24 10:41AM | 0 recs
Ah, I get it now!

If only the Democrats had nominated someone like Lieberman for president in 2004, then it wouldn't matter that someone like Lieberman voted to allow Alito to sit on the court!

Lieberman has had plenty of chances to stand up for Connecticut women, and has turned his back on them repeatedly.

by tparty 2006-04-24 10:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks

Uh, dude, that wasn't Ned Lamont. That wasn't even someone pretending to be Ned Lamont.

So, um, Alito is the fault of Democratic primary voters? Once again I thank you for enlightening me, this time as to who to lay all the blame for our problems: the Democrats!

Hey! I've got it! Let's disband the Democratic party entirely, that way the Republicans will have their hands tied!

by bruorton 2006-04-24 10:42AM | 0 recs
Re: CT-Sen: New Democratic Party Narr

It's been a long time since Sista Soulja.

by howardpark 2006-04-24 10:51AM | 0 recs
The truth hurts

Well if Democrats aren't going to learn from the past and correct their mistakes (namely running candidates not in the political center) they do deserve the blame for what happens.  

by ditka 2006-04-24 10:55AM | 0 recs
Re: The truth hurts

Which past are you learning from?

It sounds like the one in which positioning is everything, appearances are everything, and speaking clearly and then standing up for what you said is political suicide. It sounds like the one where you worry first about dodging the labels your opponent will come up with, not about what the electorate really needs. One where consultants drown out conscience, even common sense. And when it somehow goes bad, where you blame other people for not being smarter.

In other words, it sounds like the driving philosophy behind the last Democratic nominee.

Frankly, it strikes me that Lieberman is the one now living in this past, not learning from these mistakes. If anyone has learned from these mistakes that whatever your ideology you first have to make sense, inspire, and stand fast, Ned Lamont has.

by bruorton 2006-04-24 11:25AM | 0 recs
Re: CT-Sen: New Democratic Party Narrative Emergin

Republicans can get extreme ring-wingers elected (honestly, they are psycho) like Santorum, DeMint, and Brownback. That's OK. But, we can't try to elect more progressive Democrats? SO Democrats must be center/moderate, but Republicans can be super extreme. No thanks ditka. Sure, this country's VOTING population is center-right, but they'll listen to a sane progressive. Some segments certainly will listen to crazy conservatives. Lieberman isn't a bad moderate, he's just a bad Democrat. He needs to shut up sometimes because he makes our party look very bad. That's my main issue with him.

by Airb330 2006-04-24 11:49AM | 0 recs
Not so sure about that

Is someone who knew for certain we were led into Iraq on false pretenses a "good moderate"? Is someone who doesn't wish to "scold" the President for illegal wiretapping a "good moderate"? What exactly then would qualify as a "good moderate"? Or is it now reduced to merely a euphemism, a catch-phrase for "Bush apologist"?

by Scarce 2006-04-24 12:31PM | 0 recs
Re: CT-Sen: New Democratic Party Narrative Emergin

You can try all you want. More power to you. You won't succeed, and in the end you will fritter away the phenomenal potential of the progressive netroots by refusing to bend to reality. These Repub crazies in Congress all won their seats when they were open; none (except for John Sununu, who is not that crazy by those standards) beat an incumbent, let alone an incumbent with a 55% approval rating in his party. But that's a story for another day.

I wonder, why do you assume that all Democrats REALLY are liberals, but are afraid to say/vote that way? It doesn't seem to register in your mindset that Joe Lieberman wins in CT precisely BECAUSE of his moderate reputation, not despite it. Or rather, because of his reputation for sticking to his guns no matter what. It's what won the acid rain wars when he was AG (still fondly remembered), what won Florida for Gore/Lieberman in 2000, etc. All this stuff about Lieberman going on Meet the Press and dissing Dems is so inside-baseball. I follow politics as much as anyone, and even I don't care who says what on Meet the Press. Certainly CT voters don't. What counts to me is how he votes and what legislation he pushes. And on that front, he's rock solid.

by ColoDem 2006-04-24 12:50PM | 0 recs
Re: CT-Sen: New Democratic Party Narrative Emergin

Re: Lieberman winning.

Incumbency and money are why he wins. Many voters vote reflectively without considering candidates outside of my team versus their team. It takes a lot to overcome the power of name recognition and money. If Lamont is given the chance to run an effective campaign, if he is a good candidate and if a lot of other factors you don't consider in your analysis happens- we will know whether  your conclusion is right or not. The assumption that is being challenged is the notion that one has to run rightward in order to win. The challenge is about finding out if one can run moderate to center left. I think what many of you fear is that the progressives maybe right- that you don't need to run right to win. Where will that leave y you?

by bruh21 2006-04-24 02:00PM | 0 recs
Re: YYY111
美女偷拍
黄色电影
免费黄色电 影
在线激情
激情视频
激情聊天
美女
走光
成人
黄色
色情
美女写真
翘臀
诱惑三点
写真
泳装
巨乳
性感写真
清纯玉女
激情写真
人体摄影
成人电影
成人电影免 费下载
激情小电影
村妓
欧美电影
日韩电影
色即是空
性教育电影
激情电影
美女写真
性感写真
清纯玉女
激情写真
人体艺术
免费电影下 载
下载免费电 影
电影免费
激情电影免 费
免费激情电 影
免费激情电 影下载
在线激情电 影
激情电影下 载
免费成人电 影
色情电影
情色电影
三级片
免费三级片
香港三级片
大陆三级片
林心如三级 片
电影下载
在线电影
电影网
电影网站
看电影免费
电影在线
性爱电影
免费色情电 影
十八电影
18电影
av电影
偷拍
美女自拍
美女偷拍
清纯玉女
激情写真
成人小说
色情小说
黄色小说
情色小说
情色图片
色情图片
黄色图片
成人图片
激情图片
色情论坛
成人论坛
黄色论坛
情色论坛
情色电影
免费情色电 影
成人小说下 载
赤裸天使
酥胸
名模
久久电影资 讯频道
色情电影
黄色电影
激情电影
成人电影
性爱电影
免费色情电 影
免费黄色电 影
免费激情电 影
免费成人电 影
免费性爱电 影
三级片
A片
免费A片
色情网站
成人网站
黄色网站
免费色情网 站
免费成人网 站
免费黄色网 站
色情论坛
成人论坛
黄色论坛
色情小说
黄色小说
成人小说
激情小说
情色小说
言情小说
色情图片
成人图片
黄色图片
激情图片
激情视频
成人视频
色情视频
黄色视频
美女视频
美女自拍
小电影
色情小电影
黄色小电影
成人小电影
激情小电影
锐虎娱乐
美女图片
久久精彩电 影资讯
小孩子手机 铃声下载专 家
成人图片
成人论坛
成人小说
成人网站
色情图片
免费三级片
性爱电影
色情小说
免费成人电 影
免费激情电 影
色情论坛
黄色论坛
黄色电影
免费成人电 影
激情小电影
免费的电影
色情电影
黄色小说
黄色网站
免费色情电 影
激情美女视 频
色情网站
by yyy777 2006-09-07 05:38PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------