January 2, 2005
8 LITTLE WORDS:
So What Happened in That Election, Anyhow? ADAM NAGOURNEY, 1/02/05, NY Times)
[U]ncertainty is fueling the Democrats' angst as they trek again through the electoral desert.The so-called values issue was the first widely-used explanation for Mr. Kerry's loss, after 22 percent of respondents in exit polls listed "values" as the main factor in their presidential votes. For a while after Election Day, it was rare to hear a Democrat talking without hearing a mention of God, church or the need for the party to learn how to talk about abortion rights and gay marriage.
Joe Manchin, the new governor of West Virginia, a Democrat whose anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, anti-gun-control views lifted him to a double-digit victory even as Mr. Kerry lost his state by 13 points, said last week that he had little doubt about why Democrats lost the presidency and seats in the House and Senate.
"It's the values - my goodness, it's the values," he said, adding: "But to allow any other party to say that the Democrats aren't for family values, they are not for people who go to church, they are not for people who like to go hunting - that's wrong. For the Democrats to sit back and allow that to happen, is even more wrong."
But the importance of values is disputed by more than a few Democrats, who obviously would prefer not to follow a plan that might irritate some fairly crucial parts of the base, be they secular Democrats, abortion rights advocates or supporters of gay marriage.
"Values obviously are important," said Terry McAuliffe, the national Democratic party chairman, whose term expires in February. "But clearly, the overriding issue in this election was terrorism and national security. You don't get to those other issues until you have checked the box on national security."
Timothy J. Roemer, a moderate former Indiana congressman running to be Democratic chair, said: "We did not have a very compelling message about how to make Americans feel safer in a post 9/11 world. The message was more about Iraq, where our base voter was, than it was about talking through how, for instance, Truman and President Kennedy made Americans feel safe in the Cold War."
Senator Charles E. Schumer, the new head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, argued that the problem this year was broader than issues like terrorism or values, saying that Democrats never laid out a program of what they would do should they win the White House.
"You could describe George Bush's overall campaign message and theme in eight words: 'War in Iraq, tax cuts, no gay marriage,' " Mr. Schumer said. "And these weren't just slogans. For better or for worse, he tried to implement all three. And the challenge for Democrats - we don't have to do it in eight words - but we have to have a succinct program - not just slogans, like better health."
"No war; raise taxes; gay marriage"--folks aren't confused about what Democrats would do with power.
Posted by Orrin Judd at January 2, 2005 12:01 AM
You described the Democrats message and theme in only six words. How easy was that?
Posted by: AllenS at January 2, 2005 4:36 AMPinkos, Punks, Perverts.
Posted by: h-man at January 2, 2005 6:50 AMHA! h-man did it in three.
Posted by: AllenS at January 2, 2005 6:52 AMThree words: Leoniadas and Lycurgus would have been proud.
Posted by: Lou Gots at January 2, 2005 7:31 AMHe left out the Prudes (like the burger and tobacco banners who ally with the PETA folks.)
Posted by: Raoul Ortega at January 2, 2005 1:39 PMfeelings, feelings, feelings. What are we,in a song? Americans don't want to feel safe after 9/11, they want to, in fact, be safe.
The Dems want to be like the nurses that Richard Speck killed in 1966. They hid underneath a bed and felt safe, as Speck pulled them out one by one and killed them.
Posted by: ray at January 2, 2005 2:27 PMBut the importance of values is disputed by more than a few Democrats, who obviously would prefer not to follow a plan that might irritate some fairly crucial parts of the base, be they secular Democrats, abortion rights advocates or supporters of gay marriage.
I doubt those three groups add up to 35% of the electorate. Is the Democratic winning strategy to pick the losers?
Posted by: Matt Murphy at January 3, 2005 2:01 AM