And the debate goes on
I read this, and thought about you malcontents who wonder if the way for the Dems to win is to cater to the "swing vote." Of course, I think this approach is back asswards. The author's concept that support from the "base" is a given is predicated upon the idea that the "base" can't be expanded to include the millions of disaffected citizens who haven't voted in the past. I'm still waiting for someone to show me a logical argument that supports that premise. One can say that past performance is the proof here - people who haven't voted in the past won't vote in the future. But I think that approach is too limited - it is founded on a fundametal lack of imagination. I also think that the argument could be made that past performance tells us that the Dems will lose if they keep trying to cater to the middle.
By the way, considering how little traffic this blog has gotten recently, I thought I should tell those of you who didn't realize it - if you go more than two weeks without making a comment, Victor has the right to begin randomly distributing your e-mail address to some of those maniacs who occassionally post those wacko comments.
posted by Dumplingeater @ 9/15/2005
1 comments
1 Comments:
If I understand your comment correctly, this is your point:
The best approach to move the country in the correct direction doesn't involve arguing about which of two strategies is best: (1) reaching out to swing voters who might vote Democratic if Dems advocate policies that are more moderate, or, (2) reaching out to disaffected voters who would be more attracted to more differentiated policies that distinguish Dems from Republicans more clearly.
I guess the idea is that creating change isn't a zero-sum game. You can move to capture votes in both directions at the same time. I question that assumption, but it seems like an interesting approach.
But if it is a good approach, then it leaves me with some questions: Does that mean that we shouldn't criticize moderate Democrats or the "Republican-lite" trend among the leaders of the Democratic Party? And does that approach lead to the conclusion that it is best to promote a straight-ticket vote?
Post a Comment
<< Home