Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Stop Promoting Marriage! Previous entry: Dear Crazy Wingnut Christians, Victoria Jackson And Otherwise,

Yes, But How?  And Then What?  And Then How Again!

Ezra notices the start of one of my favorite election year tropes: sure politicians have all these goals, but how are they going to accomplish them? 

But will Obama, amid the pulsating theatrics, also attempt the less glamorous and more difficult task of explaining specifically where he wants to move the country, and how he proposes to move it, above and beyond reciting his policy positions? History, as well as recent public-opinion polls, suggests that he badly needs to do so. As a lifelong Democrat who supported Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton during the primaries, I would like to see him succeed in fulfilling his promise.

It’s never quite clear what this is supposed to mean, and Sean Wilentz comes to the same conclusion that people making this criticism always come to - Democrats can find their message by being more like Republicans.  John McCain was tough and Obama was too liberal!  And…and…yeah!

Nobody making this criticism, as of yet, has been able to articulate what they actually want from the Democrat in question to accomplish the stated goal.  Stop talking about policy and start talking about how you’re going to accomplish your policy - well, the educated guess probably resides in persuading the legislature to write and pass bills which the president then signs into law.  During this process, he and dozens of surrogates will likely head out on the stump and into the media in order to drum up support for the measures which he’s seeking.  If that’s the question they’re actually asking (which it isn’t), then there’s the answer. 

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Jesse Taylor on 05:50 PM • (8) Comments

Your right—the criticism is silly; however, the criticism highlights the fact that the Democratic party has no governing ideology—it believes in nothing accept to say we’re not Replublicans. Ultimately, the party has no long term solutions to problems, because it lacks any ideas about what government is about and what its purpose is. Unions vs. Free-trade, Anti-war vs. military-contractors, regulation vs. freemakets, public programs vs. private contractors: the Democratic party has faild to establish a coherent voice on any one of these issues.

Comment #1: sjk  on  08/24  at  07:44 PM

Of course. they aren’t really asking a question at all.  They are never interested in plowing through detail specific wonk publications, when it comes to this level of detail you can hear them practically bragging that their eyes are glazing over!  No, this is just another way to kvetch about stuff in a way that makes it sound as though the complaining person has issued a specific request and not been satisfied with the response.

Comment #2: catalexis  on  08/24  at  07:44 PM

because it lacks any ideas about what government is about and what its purpose is. Unions vs. Free-trade, Anti-war vs. military-contractors, regulation vs. freemakets, public programs vs. private contractors: the Democratic party has faild to establish a coherent voice on any one of these issues.

I think the Democratic Party has the ideas and lacks the voice, honestly.

Comment #3: Jesse Taylor  on  08/24  at  07:51 PM

History, as well as recent public-opinion polls, suggests that he badly needs to do so.

Wow.  The man isn’t even elected yet and he’s already being blamed for everything that’s gone wrong in this country for the past 8 years that he wasn’t president.  I knew that would be the big Republican strategy of Obama’s first 100 days, but I didn’t think they’d start so soon.

Comment #4: The Opoponax  on  08/24  at  08:06 PM

Unions vs. Free-trade: Democratic party believes unions need to be enormously strengthened, that free trade needs to be moderated but retained, to encourage economic growth but to keep it domestic and across social classes.

Anti-war vs. military contractors: Anti war. What military contractors has the democratic platform gotten behind?

Regulation vs. free markets: free markets are important but they’ve gotten out of hand. They need to be brought back into line.

Public programs vs. private contractors: public programs. Private contractors only when A) significantly cheaper and B) obviously in the national interest.

How are those points incoherent? How do they fail to represent the democratic party?

Comment #5: Erl  on  08/24  at  08:24 PM

I recall distinctly when W. said in 2000 that the U.S. would never engage in nation building—that an military intervention would be a quick get in and get out. I then decided politician’s plans are bs—pick the guy you think can handle things as they arise.

Can McCain handle the next four years? Emphasizing the need for a good “commander-in-chief” implies four more years of war.  He seems hell-bent on “bomb bomb bombing Iran.” Even if I thought more war was a good thing, I don’t like that McCain is insulting my intelligence by stating that offshore oil drilling will cut the price of gas right now, no more than I like that he insulted my intelligence by stating that eliminating federal motor fuel taxes would save me more than 30 cents a day.

Anyone who can peddle bs like McCain is either a liar or an idiot—neither one do I want in the White House.

Comment #6: Hector B.  on  08/24  at  10:01 PM

Ezra notices the start of one of my favorite election year tropes: sure politicians have all these goals, but how are they going to accomplish them? 

For some reasons that brings to mind a dialogue snippet from a movie trailer I saw yesterday… paraphrased,
“So, how are you going to accomplish that revolution of yours?”
“What a f***ing bourgeois question is that?”

Comment #7: inge  on  08/25  at  08:33 AM

I think the Democratic Party has the ideas and lacks the voice, honestly.

I think that they have the voice but choose not to use it.  Like many political parties they feel that talking about the nitty-gritty of running a country will alienate the voters and so they cloak everything in idealism, patriotism and rhetoric.  They have all the tools needed to start to reestablish the government as a functional entity- they simply have to put people into position who will use the legislation already in effect which has been largely ignored or avoided by the Bush/Cheney appointees.  The real question is do they have the will to do what is right and then start the process of fine tuning and modernizing the administration.  Do they have the will to tell the people upfront that what their plans are?  Do they trust us or not?

Comment #8: Hawise  on  08/25  at  09:20 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.