The "l" word....hehehe...welp, while I am all for taking back the word I don't think discourse of politics for joe sixpack is ready for us to embrace it. The term liberal generally doesn't fit well with the majority of values that many of us hold. Proggressive is more accurate and allows Democrats to frame our selves and forward looking and Republicans as stuck in the past.
Pathetic.....CBC needs to slow their roll on this race issue. It's not got nothing to do with it. And for that idiot aide, how has the Republican Party been treating African Americans lately?? No votes are a given but Democrats fight for the rights of minorities. Know who brings home the bacon.
I certainly hope that Pelosi sticks to her guns on this issue. Demcrates need to show force on this issue and even if it means kicking someboy off while they are under investigation, then fine. The man was caught on video taking money that ends up in his freezer.
i can't pick. Each is equally brilliant in it's own right. It's not even the comedic factor. Stewart is truely an intellectual and Colbert's starical delivery really exposes people without confrontation.
People aren't dumb and apathetic because we're born that way. It's a slow gradual process. Democrats need to wake-up and realize that republicans have been waging war on the idea of good government for the past 40 years. Apathy is grounded in the concept that there is nothing of value. Look at the themes republicans use. Government is bad, it is too big, it is dumb, it can't compete with the private market, it is inefficient etc., What pride is there in the country we live in? Aside from sanctimonious flag waving, yellow ribbons etc., how much good feeling is there about our national government, state government or local government? People aren't happy about the current status. Dems can offer a better vision.
I dont' think we can wait from the leadership on high. The solution has to be and must be from the bottom up. Sacrifices need to be made on the local level. We have fantastic communication tools now that can link small pockets of activity across the country. The Republican playbook isn't secret. We know what they do and how they do it. Democrats on local levels need to start building social networks. Social networks are the core of the Republican dominance. It's about getting involved in bowling leauges, PTA, etc., Putnam was right.
yes, i agree, my post was a mile wide and an inch deep. As far as the conceptual framework, my issue with the Moralist framework it sets up the party for attacks. Fighting against the bad guys and defending the weak is the moral thing to do. However, however aside from obvious instances of defined morality that all people will agree on, e.g., letting babies starve, etc., people can not agree on morality. It would become increasing difficult to sell the moralist viewpoint as the debate would shift to gray issues.
What can work is the concept is Community Leader. Local, State, Federal and Global. It offers a thread that binds, people, concepts and the party together. You can tie positions on poverty in Africa, the environment, the need to address growth of radical islamists in a far off country in afghanistan during the 1990s through military action, energy policy etc., The treatment of the notion of globalization by the MSM has seasoned people enough to grasp what happens over there effects me over here concept.
In contrast, the Republicans have done a great job of selling "Leader". Yet now it has backfired because people see the party as leadership of the few, for the few. "Family", "Safety" used to win by Republicans worked well but has been tainted. Democrats do well on bread and butter issues and it isn't that people don't believe what Democrats are selling, rather it is as Lakoff puts it the issues are too seperate.
NOLA, 9-11 etc., reinforced the localness of issues that require people to band together. Actions within a Community Leader concept offer notions of a person/party bringing all together. It is concept that allows people to evaluate candidates as those taking action but action for all people. It is a non-partisan word that affirms the role of politicians but brings them back to the hometown character model.
I believe this is the frame Democrats need to operate within. American's inherently tend to view politics both domestic and international in a pragmatic frame of mind.
The mind set is rooted in the day-to-day lives of all people. People are accustomed to thinking in this mode. It offers Democrats an avenue to communicate and speak with the American people as opposed to speaking to them. Accordingly, debates regarding all issues in the future will be viewed as discussions with the American people and not debates about topics that affect them but don't involve them.
All decisions involve a little bit of give. Dare I say, flip-flopping? A Pragmatic frame allows Democrats a little wiggle room to make concessions to solve problems. People know that sometimes you have to do things that may same a little hypocritical but need to be done nonetheless. Working within the frame and using the language will neutralize or at minimum mitigate criticisms and organized opposition by Republicans. People understand tough decisions and respect those who have to make them even when the finality is a bit contradictory to what was previously stated. People don't understand those who change opinions as the winds do.
Most importantly, I believe the Pragmatist frame will allow Democrats to be a big tent party. Democrats in conservative areas won't feel alone from Democrats in liberal areas. Democratic Leadership need not attempt to create an heir of being all things to all people but rather act, speak and lead like problem solvers who take differing viewpoints and build a consensus at minimum in philosophy across to the greater Democratic Party.
Of course execution is the key. Democrats can not pay lip service to opposing view points. The work will be dirty in the sense that TV can not be the only medium of communication. Town hall meetings at places of employment, supermarkets, and shopping centers are the key. We need to remember that people generally hold the belief that politicians work for them. Negative opinions tend to be rooted in politicians who seemed detached and disconnected from the people. Bush was masterful at the, I'm maybe be dumb, not know how to explain things but I'm like you frame. Taking it to the streets (TTS) strategy helps to reinforce the Pragmatist frame. Democrats know that peoples' lives are too busy and stretched to the limit but that doesn't mean that people don't care and aren't concerned about the direction of the country. If the party can adopt TTS, then people see through actions that politicians are meeting people on neutral territory, meeting people halfway, adjusting to the schedules and lives of those who are being served rather than those who are serving.
Overall, the Pragmatist frame places Democratic Party as the Party who solves problems, considers all viewpoints and makes tempered decisions. Independents, RINOs, and the base will can appreciate the Pragmatist frame.