A new ‘New Direction’?

September 15, 2006

I appreciate the fact that congressional Dems believe the old adage that you “can’t beat something with nothing.” I also think, on balance, Dems were probably right to unveil a legislative agenda in advance of the elections, letting voters know what they can expect from Congress if Republicans lose their majority.

But to hear that Dems are still fiddling with their agenda items with less than eight weeks to go before Election Day is a little painful.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, the woman who will become speaker of the House if Democrats get lucky in November, began her weekly news conference yesterday holding up a red-white-and-blue brochure.

“I hope you all received ‘A New Direction for America,’ ” she said, standing at a lectern that bore the same slogan. She called the manifesto “a compilation of many of the initiatives taken by our House Democratic Caucus that encompasses our new direction for all Americans.”

It was a handsome booklet, full of homey photographs and popular proposals.

So far, so good. What’s the trouble? The “Six for ’06” strategy, released in July, is still getting little touch-ups, even now, suggesting that Dems haven’t quite made up their minds.

As Dana Milbank noted, “For those keeping score at home, Democrats arrived at “New Direction” yesterday by downgrading one of the “Six for ’06” issues (health care) and upgrading three others (honesty, civility and fiscal discipline), for a total of eight items on the contents page.”

Even if we put aside the logic behind “downgrading” health care, which strikes me as odd, there’s a broader problem: why are Dems still fiddling with the agenda they released nearly three months ago? And why on earth are there eight issues on a “Six for ’06” platform?

For months, I was frustrated with reporters who refused to show even a hint of interest when Dems held major events to unveil policy agendas. Given that the Dems apparently are still a little confused, and keep re-releasing slightly altered lists, maybe the reporters weren’t so negligent after all.

Republican’ts’ “The Base” is a collection of unaffliated conservative movements allied only in their fear of Democratic competency (i.e., Bill Clinton and the Clintonistas). The Democrats are a collection of one issue advocacy groups with no sense of priority or unity of mission that squabble endlessly over whose issues are more important. Hence, eight weeks before the election they are still “tuning” their message.

My definition of politics is the act of relating two things that have absolutely nothing to do with each other (“Terrorism” and “Civil Service Rights” if you remember the Max Clellan/Saxby Chambliss contest). This is not a problem when you have first rate politicians, who knew when to tie two issues together to achieve both when each is impossible (amnesty and border security, say). But when all you have is second rate politicians (as we do now), issues get tied together to prevent any progress in this country.

Sucks, really.

  • This is exactly the problem Dems have faced for more than a decade — an inability to come up with an agenda and actually stick to it.

    And why the hell did they drop health care? It’s one of the key issues for American voters and Dems are the only ones who seem interested in fixing the problem. So they downgrade it?

    I realize most of us on the left like the “think for yourself” mentality, but there are times when a united front is best. It’d be nice the Dem leaders would realize that.

  • One issue is about all that the media and the voters can handle. And even then only if you repeat it over and over. I give it to you on a silver platter – Competence! – and you still bungle it. It boggles the mind.

  • Bill Clinton himself could stand in front of the White House with a flame thorwer, screaming, “these people are morons!” and the media would put up coverage of some dead blond. The Dems do need focus, but nothing will penetrate the media minefield anyway. Voters are going to have to figure this out with their wallets.

  • As ‘bagger often says of the Repubs, “can’t anybody here play this game?”

    Stuff like this drives me frickin’ crazy. Yes, you can’t beat something with nothing, but you can and should beat nothing–the Republican record of success or even competence–with anything. Just STICK WITH IT.

    Also, though I give Pelosi a lot of credit for holding the caucus together these last few years, she is absolutely terrible as a public figure, and it’s going to get worse as the ghouls really start to come after her. That too must be addressed.

  • So what you’re saying is: Bill Clinton should stand in front of the Whitehouse and burn a blond girl with a flame thrower, screaming “these people are morons!” and the media would practically have to cover him.

    Sounds foolproof to me! 🙂

    ———-

    All of this campaign stuff is starting to sound like Monty Python sketch.

    — Nobody expects a Democratic Opposition! Our 6 main platforms are security, jobs, college, gas, health care and retirement! And surprise!

    — What about honesty, civility and fiscal discipline?

    — Oh yes, of course. Our 9–

    –10.

    –Our 10 main platforms are are security, jobs, college, gas, health care, retirement, surprise, honesty… um… civility and uh… fiscal discipline!

  • Lance nailed the traditional Democratic problem, that the Democrats are a collection of one-issue advocacy groups. I don’t deny the importance of their myriad single-issues, but when they don’t get what they want, they vote for Nader or the candidate from Venus.

    There was a hiatus when Clinton was first elected because progressives got tired of constantly losing. The result was more progress all round.

    It’s no secret what Americans want. Reformed health care, retirement security, an economy whose strength is felt by families, greater access to secondary education. The war in Iraq is a separate issue, and covered by a new, sane foreign policy.

    The above issues could be replaced by others, but adding to the core obscures focus. A change of power is the best chance of addressing more specific issues. The Heinz 57 approach is a recipe for losing.

    And WHY can’t the Democrats come up with a slogan more exciting and apropos than a cup of warm spit!

  • Oh dear, did somebody say ‘terrorist’ in front of the Democrats? Now I have to get in the fish tank and sing:

    And did those feeeetttt!
    in ancient time
    walk upon England’s mountains green

  • I don’t know why anyone expects the Democratic Party to have agreed to any broad plan or sets of specific plans. We never have. It’s a waste of time trying to imitate the fascists’ “contract” of a dozen years ago. Back candidates, think local, win the elections. Quit making up unnecessary internal issues to squabble over.

  • Maybe Ed Stephan is right.

    The Nazis were disiplined, and brutally effective. The Allies… not so much. I’d like to win more, but not at the cost of becoming a fascist.

    But I sure wish we had Howard Dean running the message machine instead of Nancy Pelosi.

  • Stirling Newbery at TPMCafe makes a point that I have made in the past. The Democrats at this late stage of the game should be focusing on GOTV (Get Out The Vote) and KITV (Keep In The Vote). This is simple. Focus on Iraq, wage stagnation, and Bush’s secret plan to dismantle social security. That’s the GOTV. The KITV part is hammer the Republicans for not being Republican enough.

    Motivate our voters. De-motivate their voters. Don’t confuse any voters with minutia.

  • “It’s no secret what Americans want. Reformed health care, retirement security, an economy whose strength is felt by families, greater access to secondary education.” – Alibubba

    God, I wish there was one Democratic candidate anywhere who could say that as well as you did.

  • They flounder because nothing they do gets coverage. I think the biggest hammer in the GOP toolbox is their control over the media.

    They’ve fooled the people into believing that it’s a ‘liberal media’ when they monopolize the air time.

    Of course, that’s just part of the golden rule. He who has the gold makes the rules.

    Maybe ultra-rich lliberals should start buying news channels. I agree that I’m not willing to become a fascist to play their game, but let’s at least not go quietly into that good night.

  • This is from one of CB’s other posts today, above:

    * And I’d be remiss if I neglected to mention that Rep. Bob Ney (R-Ohio) will reportedly plead guilty to federal criminal charges related to his dealings with the corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Ney, who maintained his innocence for months, has also apparently entered an in-patient rehabilitation center for treatment of alcoholism.

    Dems could air stuff like this on TV commercials and just run on, “Don’t elect this bunch of assholes.” That should be enough to win with.

  • Funny (I’m picking up on Lance’s #1 comment) that no one makes much of the fact that both Osama and W are dependent on which each calls “The Base.”

    That said, something about Pelosi’s statement reminded me of why I quit the Democratic Party a couple of years ago (after a long life’s adherence). A kind of ineffectual single-issue shouting has taken over. But the point is — I think even Democrats are tired of Democrats now, tired of being Democrats, and that includes Democrats in Congress. I think a kind of anomie has overtaken them, egged on by the constant, nagging putdowns from the far right. This will continue if they don’t take a deep breath and express some pride and conviction.

    Swan’s “Don’t elect this bunch of assholes” would not be a bad idea at all. I’d like to hear more about “play by the rules” and “unprincipled and irresponsible” — both of which phrases appeal greatly to moderate Republicans who are dying to separate themselves from their criminal, crummy, and dare I say yahoo leadership.

    Ed Stephan’s point is good except when you live, as I do, in a district where no Democrat even runs.

  • Swan makes an excellent point. You can say just about anything in a paid ad. Such campaigns are expensive, but well -conceived and well-produced ads are effective.

    Unfortuantely, 99% of political advertising is done near election time. There’s no reason the Democrats couldn’t produce a series of ads directly challenging the Republicans on specific issues and lies. It costs less to produce an ad than to place it. (15-second TV ads are allowed if you run them back-to-back.) So, several versions could be produced, and all of them run as a “reminder” campaign throughout the year. This would not be mass advertising or frequent. Just enough. It’s not the exactly the same, but remember the effectiveness of “? and Louise” that killed Clinton’s health care reform effort.”

    It would be amusing to see them air on Faux News.

  • Bruce Bartlett (domestic policy adviser to President Ronald Reagan and was a treasury official under President George H.W. Bush) sums it up well, unfortunately…

    “…the current Democratic leadership is not really up to the job of leading a serious challenge to Bush and the Republicans. I don’t know any Republican who doesn’t give thanks every day that Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada and Rep. Pelosi are the Democratic leaders. They are so ineffective that they really do half the Republicans’ job for them…”

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/09/democrats_in_power.html

  • Here’s the Dem platform for 2006 and 2008: NO FEAR

    That means taking solid and realistic action about terror and not just speachifying about it. Take the fear out of being sick with effective healthcare reform. Let’s not fear for the nation’s economic security by stopping the hemmoraging of cash from the treasury. Let us not have to fear the president by offering solid checks and balances to uncontrolled power. Let’s quit fearing the rest of world, because, to twist he phrase of Carl Sandberg, good neighbors make the best fences. Let’s not fear Mexicans by helping economies south of the border do better so folks don’t have to leave their families and cross the Rio Grande in the dark to make any sort of income, etc., etc., etc.

    There are even plenty of bumper stickers and T-shirts that already say this and it would appeal to the younger voters too.

  • Not only is this erection nude, it’s limp and toothless as well; IOW, not much of an erection at all. And if they’re downgrading healthcare at the expense of civility, the’re not going to have much life, either.

    It’s hard to run on a “able” or “competent” ticket, when you can’t even construct a clear platform…

    • Comments are closed.