NationStates Jolt Archive

This is how they can do it:

First, drop the social liberalism. No more support of gay marriage for example. And abortion rights don't need to be defended so vocally.

Gay marriage and abortion rights are important to only a minority of the people who actually vote Democratic. They are far more important to people who vote Republican, as witnessed by the last election.

The Democrats have to focus more on economic issues and less on social issues where they simply cannot win. Hispanics are going to become an ever-more important part of the electorate in the next four years and the Dems pushing radical feminism, gay marriage, abortion rights etc to an extremely socially conservative group is not going to do them any favors.

What the Dems have to do is to focus attention on the loss of jobs that is happening due to unfettered free trade. This will be difficult as Clinton was the one who signed us up to NAFTA.

But with a massive trade deficit, the biggest in American history, one likely to only get worse in the next four years, the Dems have a chance. More and more industrial and manufacturing jobs will be lost to China. And more and more IT jobs to outsourcing in India. People will soon forget that the Dems sold their souls to Free Trade with NAFTA, and betrayed the working class in the process. They’ll see the state of the economy and blame Bush, as fanatically pro-free trade and pro-Corporation as he is.

Wasn’t is Carville who said: “It’s the economy stupid!”. And it is. The Dems need an economic nationalist to be nominated, one who is less liberal on social issues, in 2008. Then they would win very easily.

If the Democrats dropped social issues, I can assure you that they'd lose a lot more votes to the Green Party, including mine.

Effectively, you have just turned the Democrats into being the same as republicans-leaving a one party system. Well done.

The liberals need to stand united. We need a strong voice. We need a clear vision, because a vision of a bright future (rather than an ever repeating status quo,) is OUR parlance. We are the ones who believe that we can do better, that we can provide for all in a fair society that still competes. We are the ones who believe in free expression, art, science, social advancement, the morality of philanthropy, the inviolate rights to one's own body. We don't believe that a collection of cells are life, but that consciousness and a mind are life. We believe that love transcends gender. We believe health and life is NOT a commodity. We believe that normal people don't choose to live in poverty. We believe that the more people you give a chance to, the more wonders can be achieved. We believe the Earth needs looking after, and that the Earth is sometimes more valuable than the bottom line.

I believe we are right, and that it is only a matter of time. One day, when we are old, these thoughts will be considered quaint and conservative, and there will be a whole new group of people pushing the limits (which we may or may not fight against.) The future is inevitably ours. It just takes time.

briliant idea, but why stop there?
the democrat need to be more capitalists, so they take the riches votes. and than they need to be more christians, so they take the votes of the believers. and than they can start war on some countrey without reason onthe middle east, and this is must to make them win.
but then, why someone need to be against the republicans at the first place?

Perhaps I'm a broken record here, but I stand firmly behind my stance that the Democratic party has nothing "wrong" with its message or its stance on issues. What they do have trouble with is their organization and operational style.

Changing your stance on issues will do you NO GOOD WHATSOEVER when the opposing side focuses not on the issues, but on CREATING issuse and using them against their opponents. Kerry had a solid war record until the presidental election, Hilary Clinton is a strongly moderate democrat, most affirmative action programs do not use quotas, the vast majority of democrats are not communists nor socialists.

Yet all of these factors don't matter in an election; because the technique of the Republicans is to turn strength into weakness in their opponents.