What Kinds of Democrats Can Win in Conservative Seats?

[n2doc]

Posted by Ryan O'Donnell on March 21, 2014
The debate between Daily Kos creator Markos Moulitsas and centrist messaging shop Third Way has sparked a good conversation about what to do about conservative Democrats in seats at higher risk of flipping red.

Count us on Team Kos for this one.

Third Way argues that some of the conservative Democrats named by Markos (Max Baucus, Evan Bayh, Mary Landrieu, Joe Lieberman, et. al.) have greater political courage than, say, Chuck Schumer, because they voted for bills like the Affordable Care Act which carried real electoral risk for them – which is not untrue.

But David Atkins makes the crucial point that for an organization that claims to care about the Democratic Party’s electoral well-being, Third Way has a curious pattern of griping with the left positions that actually play really well in swing districts

more

http://primarycolors.net/the-case-for-progressive-candidates-in-more-conservative-seats/

[truebluegreen]

1. Kos is right, Third Way is wrong (surprise!)

Working class whites are never going to vote for us because of social issues, but they might for economic ones. If anyone makes the case, which is rare.

[kimbutgar]

2. Why not go populist

Why the hell not you can you have clean water, good schools, higher wages, a helping hand when you need it ?Why the hell not.

People need populist, they need to hear positive. Our country has gone so negative it's hurting our souls.

[adigal]

3. Yes, populist. Everyone is hurting. Let's focus on that, not our differences

and then, once in office, work on the social issues, also.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

4. The Dems have made a huge mistake in the past couple of decades by emphasizing

social issues over economic issues. This is not to say that social issues like GLBT rights and secular education are unimportant. But if working-class white voters, who like to see themselves as socially conservative, even if their actual behavior says otherwise, think that the Dems are ONLY about social issues and never pay attention to economic issues, they will either not vote or they will vote for Republicans who "share their moral values."

Dems need to take a lesson from Huey Long. He traveled throughout Louisiana as a salesman in the 1920s, and he noticed two things: the whole state had almost no paved roads, and a lot of children never went to school, because the schools charged more for textbooks than many families could afford.

Long campaigned for governor by emphasizing two issues: paving the state's roads and providing free textbooks in the public schools. As a documentary about him noted, most white politicians campaigned on the basis of keeping African-Americans "in their place," but Long never mentioned racial issues at all. He just kept emphasizing two of the state's obvious needs.

People who might have otherwise voted on "keeping the n*****s in their place" could see that Long understood what they needed economically.

We're in a totally different society now, of course, but I'd say that anyone who wants to challenge Mary Landrieu in a primary should take a look around Louisiana, talk to its white and black working class people, figure out what needs are not being met, and campaign on two or three of them.

[socialist_n_TN]

5. Agreed Lydia. I have said for years now that southern Dems need to......

dust off and update some of Huey Long's speeches and go with it.

I really don't see what the problem with this is either. The most popular argument against that I've heard is that you will be accused by the RW of "socialism" and "class warfare" and lose the election. From what I see, most of these seats (if not ALL of these seats) are "lost" anyway already, so you might as well try something different. As to the "socialism" argument, that should be easy to refute. These positions are POPULAR with the average person. So how can it be a bad thing to argue FOR popular positions?

I just don't understand southern Dems sometimes.