If a Democratic vanguard emerges in January and is dynamic and popular, then this country will change for the better. If not, it will be clear that the Democrats spent the last five years as a bad understudy does: Hoping for the star to get sick instead of rehearsing their lines in preparation for the spotlight. Well, the political star, the Republicans, got sick and now it is time to see if the understudy can act.
Since Sept. 11, Democrats have been losers. In the 2002 election, they lost two Senate seats and seven House seats. In 2004, they lost four Senate seats and four House seats.
They have abandoned liberalism to become George W. Bush reactionaries; whatever Bush is for, they are against. Because of this, Democrats can be labeled pro-gay marriage, anti-free trade, anti-tax cuts, pro-terrorists’ rights, projectionist and anti-Social Security reform by their opponents. At the least, this is a difficult platform to campaign with, especially if the candidate is endowed with a voting record contradicting it. At the most, this is an abandonment of liberalism.
The party allowed itself to be defined by others and when it did try to define itself, it became a bad joke. The biggest punch-line – Sen. John Kerry’s (D-Mass) presidential campaign, in which liberal baby-boomers and other descendants of the sixties wrapped themselves in Kerry’s service in Vietnam in order to prove their patriotism.
They attacked Bush, in essence, for not going to Vietnam (which was redone this past week with jokes about Bush being in Vietnam for the first time in his life for an economic summit). What does that say about the changing views of that generation? They can protest the draft and march for peace, but cannot tolerate another member of their generation joining the National Guard so he would not have to go to Vietnam?
Acting outraged at Bush’s National Guard service was self-serving and resulted in bad press (witness Dan Rather) for the Left. Needless to say, Democrats, by trying to flip the patriotism-national service image back on the Republicans failed to win voters and made things worse – Democrats were “flip-floppers.”
But that is the past and voters have returned to “The party that votes for you,” as a bumper sticker read. Voters from Virginia, Montana, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Rhode Island rejected current Republican Senators. The old red state-blue state map from 2004 is no more.
Instead, there emerged two distinct Senate blocs, reminiscent of the Civil War: The deep blue of the Northeast bloc and the deep red of the Southern Senators. This seems to stand out though, as the only areas of the country that can be painted with such broad strokes. The Midwest and West seem purple now, and less formidable. So do the eastern bloc borderlands, i.e. Virginia and Missouri. This is a political map the Left can work with in 2008. But they must see it as their own before they can defend it.
Now that Democrats are winners they must operate in a way that delivers what every winner wants: more wins. Change must come from big, shiny, smart ideas and not reactions, slogan re-articulation and committee-style problem solving. Their style must remind voters of Bill Clinton reforming welfare and passing NAFTA instead of an Al Gore lecture.
Their new states are also theirs to lose in future races. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean was opposed by many in his party for his deployment of party funds and representatives to all fifty states in hope of expanding the liberal voting base. Would Republicans cry out against a national strategy? They would not. They know that is how elections are won.
Instead of reciprocating their gluttonous majority, the Democratic vanguard must take this country forward; must bring the Republicans with them and work with the Executive. The country has a much better chance of moving less ideologically driven, more productive policy to the front of the line. The foremost policy concern: Iraq.
Donald Rumsfeld, at his valediction, said that Americans have never understood the Iraq War. And who is to blame for that, Mr. Secretary? The vanguard should figure out how to explain what has happened in Iraq, what the current policy is and how much it costs, why it is broken and how to fix it.
If the Democrats can complete an enormous, complicated task like that, we just might be willing to forget how pigeon-holed and reactionary they let themselves become at the hands of the Republicans. And we just might, after they do this, let them get us all out of this mess by electing one President in 2008.
[email protected]