New Democrat Strategy: Outgun, outpray, outfamily Republicans. Unless I missed it, I don't see gay issues discussed here.
Democrats' Rural Strategy
Full Version: Dems Go After the Rural Vote
The beginning of the article:
[quote] Lincoln Davis is running for Congress in central Tennessee, in the district where they've been distilling Jack Daniel's whiskey since 1866. Davis is a Democrat, and he knew from the start that if he was going to win the race for an open seat, he was going to have to get past the wine-and-cheese stereotype that Democrats carry in rural America.
''We've allowed our opponents to define us as people with no normal values,'' Davis, a state senator, told me. ''We don't like guns, we don't pray, we don't believe in Christ. And I said from the start, 'Nobody in this campaign is going to outgun me, outpray me or outfamily me.'''
True to his word, Davis came out in favor of posting the Ten Commandments in public, and he got help in his primary campaign from the National Rifle Association. He won the nomination easily. Publicly, the Democratic Party in Washington touts his campaign as one of its best chances to pick up a much-needed House seat in November.
While I'm all for the Democratic candidates fighting back against the Republican tactics, this isn't exactly the example of someone I would vote for. Of course, I'm not in Tennessee...
[quote] Lincoln Davis is running for Congress in central Tennessee, in the district where they've been distilling Jack Daniel's whiskey since 1866. Davis is a Democrat, and he knew from the start that if he was going to win the race for an open seat, he was going to have to get past the wine-and-cheese stereotype that Democrats carry in rural America.
''We've allowed our opponents to define us as people with no normal values,'' Davis, a state senator, told me. ''We don't like guns, we don't pray, we don't believe in Christ. And I said from the start, 'Nobody in this campaign is going to outgun me, outpray me or outfamily me.'''
True to his word, Davis came out in favor of posting the Ten Commandments in public, and he got help in his primary campaign from the National Rifle Association. He won the nomination easily. Publicly, the Democratic Party in Washington touts his campaign as one of its best chances to pick up a much-needed House seat in November.
While I'm all for the Democratic candidates fighting back against the Republican tactics, this isn't exactly the example of someone I would vote for. Of course, I'm not in Tennessee...
Of course, what's important is not a party-wide effort to hold true to any of these TradVals principles, but for candidates in conservative districts to win election by convincing enough voters that Dems aren't really Godless commies. The Party's cool with this, because a) there will always be more left-wing Dems than conservative Dems and 
liberalism will always prevail, at least in the Party, because even Dems who win in conservative districts will vote liberals into leadership positions, just as liberal Republican Connie Morella will probably vote for Hastert, DeLay, etc. for GOP leadership positions (and just as there will always be more conservative Republicans than liberal ones). So the point is to say and do whatever is required to win, not to actually do anything significant in keeping with any "conservative" principle. Once elected, incumbents have a far easier time getting reelected. And Mutt and Jeff (or whatever they're names are) are making a killing off of it. I can't help but like this strategy.
liberalism will always prevail, at least in the Party, because even Dems who win in conservative districts will vote liberals into leadership positions, just as liberal Republican Connie Morella will probably vote for Hastert, DeLay, etc. for GOP leadership positions (and just as there will always be more conservative Republicans than liberal ones). So the point is to say and do whatever is required to win, not to actually do anything significant in keeping with any "conservative" principle. Once elected, incumbents have a far easier time getting reelected. And Mutt and Jeff (or whatever they're names are) are making a killing off of it. I can't help but like this strategy.
[quote]'Nobody in this campaign is going to outgun me, outpray me or outfamily me.'
Eerily reminiscent of something George Wallace said forty years ago.
Eerily reminiscent of something George Wallace said forty years ago.
Perhaps the label of "Dixiecrat" would apply here. This is actually a "strategy" that dates back to the Civil War: the Republicans were in control of the Federal Government during the war and forged the reconstruction policies afterward; Southern politics became almost universally Democratic as a reaction. They might be considered an example of "strange bedfellows" in politics: staunchly loyal to the Democratic Party, but not social liberals in the sense that we usually presume in Democratic candidates. Only in America! Well, bless us all --ain't we a crazy quilt...
It's a terrific strategy -- "all politics are local" after all.
Many parts of rural America, however, have a strong history of electing progressive members -- look at David Obey (NW Wisc.), Jim Oberstar (NE Minn), Bart Stupak (the UP and N. Michigan), John Baldacci (N. Maine), and Bernie Sanders (Vermont). Of course, this is not the Bible Belt ...
Many parts of rural America, however, have a strong history of electing progressive members -- look at David Obey (NW Wisc.), Jim Oberstar (NE Minn), Bart Stupak (the UP and N. Michigan), John Baldacci (N. Maine), and Bernie Sanders (Vermont). Of course, this is not the Bible Belt ...
[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
New Democrat Strategy: Outgun, outpray, outfamily Republicans. Unless I missed it, I don't see gay issues discussed here.
Democrats' Rural Strategy
What a shame that gay issues are not being discussed by Democrats, hopefully they will someday be champions of gay rights like the republican party is. Thank you to republicans Helms, Falwell, Robertson et al for all you have done in the battle for gay rights.
New Democrat Strategy: Outgun, outpray, outfamily Republicans. Unless I missed it, I don't see gay issues discussed here.
Democrats' Rural Strategy
What a shame that gay issues are not being discussed by Democrats, hopefully they will someday be champions of gay rights like the republican party is. Thank you to republicans Helms, Falwell, Robertson et al for all you have done in the battle for gay rights.
[quote] New Democrat Strategy: Outgun, outpray, outfamily Republicans. Unless I missed it, I don't see gay issues discussed here.
William, I'm not going to waste time on this digging through previous posts, but from what I remember of some of the things you have said, you are hardly in a position to make this criticism at the Democrats. You have, at one time or another in arguments on this board, disparaged everything that gay rights proponents have been fighting for; supported the right of the Boy Scouts to discriminate against gay people; derided efforts to curb bullying of gay students in high schools; advised us that we should be "thick-skinned" in the face of assaults & insults; expressed contempt for Democratic politicians who have risked political capital to support gay rights; and expressed uncritical adulation for nasty homophobic Republican candidates. So when you to criticize the Democrats for downplaying urban/gay issues (not renouncing support for gay rights, just trying to change the subject), it can only come across as extreme hypocrisy.
William, I'm not going to waste time on this digging through previous posts, but from what I remember of some of the things you have said, you are hardly in a position to make this criticism at the Democrats. You have, at one time or another in arguments on this board, disparaged everything that gay rights proponents have been fighting for; supported the right of the Boy Scouts to discriminate against gay people; derided efforts to curb bullying of gay students in high schools; advised us that we should be "thick-skinned" in the face of assaults & insults; expressed contempt for Democratic politicians who have risked political capital to support gay rights; and expressed uncritical adulation for nasty homophobic Republican candidates. So when you to criticize the Democrats for downplaying urban/gay issues (not renouncing support for gay rights, just trying to change the subject), it can only come across as extreme hypocrisy.
[quote]Originally posted by Billy:
William, I'm not going to waste time on this digging through previous posts, but from what I remember of some of the things you have said, you are hardly in a position to make this criticism at the Democrats. You have, at one time or another in arguments on this board, disparaged everything that gay rights proponents have been fighting for; supported the right of the Boy Scouts to discriminate against gay people; derided efforts to curb bullying of gay students in high schools; advised us that we should be "thick-skinned" in the face of assaults & insults; expressed contempt for Democratic politicians who have risked political capital to support gay rights; and expressed uncritical adulation for nasty homophobic Republican candidates. So when you to criticize the Democrats for downplaying urban/gay issues (not renouncing support for gay rights, just trying to change the subject), it can only come across as extreme hypocrisy.
Wow, Billy. Your list of my accomplishments is impressive. Perhaps when I've achieved adequate fame I'll sign you on to write my biography ("As a young boy, little William was known to disparage and deride his babysitters, while expressing uncritical adulation for Saturday morning cartoons..."). And you even managed to work in the word "nasty," guaranteeing I'll have Janet Jackson songs on the brain all day. (Is is just me, or is "Control" a damn good CD?)
But I'm not criticizing the Democrats. I applaud this strategy. Alas, it might pay off for them - though I still think the GOP will control both the House and the Senate when all is said and done. The Times article, if I recall correctly, fails to really touch on gay issues, and how they might play out, and what gay groups think of this strategy, but that's one of the few things that is not the Democrats' fault.
[ September 17, 2002: Message edited by: William1865 ]
William, I'm not going to waste time on this digging through previous posts, but from what I remember of some of the things you have said, you are hardly in a position to make this criticism at the Democrats. You have, at one time or another in arguments on this board, disparaged everything that gay rights proponents have been fighting for; supported the right of the Boy Scouts to discriminate against gay people; derided efforts to curb bullying of gay students in high schools; advised us that we should be "thick-skinned" in the face of assaults & insults; expressed contempt for Democratic politicians who have risked political capital to support gay rights; and expressed uncritical adulation for nasty homophobic Republican candidates. So when you to criticize the Democrats for downplaying urban/gay issues (not renouncing support for gay rights, just trying to change the subject), it can only come across as extreme hypocrisy.
Wow, Billy. Your list of my accomplishments is impressive. Perhaps when I've achieved adequate fame I'll sign you on to write my biography ("As a young boy, little William was known to disparage and deride his babysitters, while expressing uncritical adulation for Saturday morning cartoons..."). And you even managed to work in the word "nasty," guaranteeing I'll have Janet Jackson songs on the brain all day. (Is is just me, or is "Control" a damn good CD?)
But I'm not criticizing the Democrats. I applaud this strategy. Alas, it might pay off for them - though I still think the GOP will control both the House and the Senate when all is said and done. The Times article, if I recall correctly, fails to really touch on gay issues, and how they might play out, and what gay groups think of this strategy, but that's one of the few things that is not the Democrats' fault.
[ September 17, 2002: Message edited by: William1865 ]
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.