General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat you get (the 9 points that every Democrat should commit to)
Last edited Thu Mar 27, 2014, 02:42 PM - Edit history (1)
In a thread earlier this week, I argued that this year, people are not inclined to vote our way and we cannot just blow this off as bad luck or bad timing. We cannot expect anybody to vote for a Democrat in 2014 (or any other year) if we don't tell them what they can expect for their vote.
This came out of the discussion of the excellent Kos rebuttal to Third Way. There was a question whether we are trying to kick the Third Way out of our traditional big tent. My point is that the tent must stand for something or else there is no point in having the tent. At best, the Third Way doesn't agree with core Democratic principles. At worst, Third Way types actively work to undermine our efforts to achieve progress.
Obama offered practically no specifics in either of his campaigns and therefore entered office without any recognizable mandate and seems bound to leave office with a very low approval rating. But worse than that, while Kos correctly pointed out that we have made big strides in getting rid of many of the Third Way snakes calling themselves Democrats in the Senate, there are still too many in the Senate who do not believe in our core values. And there is nothing unifying House members around these values.
In short the Democratic Party is every person for himself or herself.
That will not work. We need to take a clear stand on the most important issues in front of us and we must insist that anybody seeking our votes makes the same commitment to these principles. The good news is that polls indicate that huge majorities of the American public actually agree with us on these issues. It is time that we act like Grover Norquist and require that national Democrats take OUR PLEDGE.
This should not be hard. After all, the Democratic platform speaks to most of these issues, although that is largely ignored. And the State-of-the-Union address also speaks to these issues every year and is then promptly ignored -- even by the President. We cannot count on the Beltway to change itself. We must drive the change. With that in mind, I humbly submit for your consideration a list of the 9 most central values that every Democrat should support and use as the centerpiece of their campaign, just as Republicans did in their great victory built upon the Contract with America. I realize these principles don't stake out the most liberal position in every case. I have attempted to state each of these points as simply as possible so that the average American can understand them. If stated correctly, almost any average working American should be able to support most of these principles.
Thank you for your consideration. If you think this approach has merits, I would appreciate suggestions of what steps could take this forward, putting us in a position to get pledges of support form every nationally elected Democrat. We need to get all of them on record behind these things. This is how we win and this is how we take office with a real mandate.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Medicare for All, including dental, optical, hearing aids, mental health and nursing home services.
Lower the Social Security eligibility age to 55, increase benefits.
Thanks for the OP. Giving the voters a reason to vote FOR Democrats will have a much greater positive impact than just giving them reasons to vote against Republicans.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)affordable HC for all Americans. Almost all working people would agree with that goal. If you get too specific, the detractors can use that to divide and conquer. I think it is wiser to start with the goals. If there is another way to get affordable HC for all, I can live with that, although I believe strongly the lowest cost, fairest, result with the highest consistent quality would come from a single payer solution.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)Great list, I concur.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)I might want further discussion on what work visas in industries where there are unemployed Americans qualified to do the work; consider for example agribusiness in California. Would those positions be filled by Americans?
Bryant
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)But the basic principle is that we should not be authorizing the importing of cheap workers in fields where Americans are qualified and willing to do the job. I updated the graphic to include the willingness part.
This really comes to play in the IT industry, but there may be other industries where the principle applies too. The point is Democrats should put American workers first very time. No exceptions.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Last edited Thu Mar 27, 2014, 02:45 PM - Edit history (2)
I am going to start sending them this set of principles with the message that I will only contribute to candidates that sign on to this. If enough people do that, it can take on an energy of its own.
If anybody wants to send this to friends, candidates, Grover Norquist or whomever, you can download a PDF from:
http://tinyurl.com/WorkingForAmericans
Zoonart
(11,861 posts)Yes and YES
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Last edited Thu Mar 27, 2014, 02:59 PM - Edit history (2)
I revised this post to provide a sample email that matches the revised theme "Working for Americans". In this case, this was an email to one of the many organizations that wants my money and claims to pursue Democratic ideas.
Dear <addressee>,
You are asking for my money. I only support candidates and organizations that will uphold the most important core values of democracy and progress. I have attached a document that lists nine values every thinking American should agree to and agree to fight vigorously for. If <organization name> commits to these nine core principles in a public way, I will be happy to support your organization financially. Please let me know where your organization stands on these nine crucial issues so I can plan my allocation of support.
Sincerely,
<me>
====
I strongly suggest we all use something like this when these people come asking for our money. If they cannot commit to these 9 things, which should be VERY easy, they don't deserve a penny of our support.
Zoonart
(11,861 posts)Can I use this?
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)They are accustomed to their wall street backers making demands of them. It is about time that we make demands of them, and some of those demands are counter to what the Wall Streeters are asking for.
The people need to push back.
Wounded Bear
(58,648 posts)The RW will exploit any title including the meme "What you Get" as a LW giveaway, and the low information voters will fall for it.
I'd prefer more of a "What we'll fight for" kind of tone.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)"What we'll fight for" is closer, but it doesn't quite hit home for me. I think the concept of people fighting even more in DC is not very appealing.
I really think the "Contract with America" title was brilliant because it transcended party and it communicated sincere commitment. The only problem with that one was that some of the things in that contract were really insidious. But that serves as an example that the public will back a person operating with a plan and with confidence, even if they don't understand the plan.
In this case, all 9 of these points are well understood by Americans and they get very strong majorities. The title needs to reflect that. I definitely welcome ideas.
And by the same token, this probably should not be framed as "the Democratic" position. If a Republican really supported these things, I would vote for him or her. Maybe it is better to frame it as a plan for progress.
Wounded Bear
(58,648 posts)"Fighting" is kind of discredited these days by congressional malfeasance.
"Work for" should be a positive message, though the RW has discredited that with its socialist/soviet/communist memes involving anything related to being supportive of workers.
But "Working for America" shouldn't be a losing term. I'd wish that some politicians would get on the "you work hard, so I will too" bandwagon.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)That is sort of a double entendre. It can mean representatives working for America (or Americans) rather than the special interests. It can mean these policies will work for America.
Which do you think is stronger?
"Working for America"
or
"Working for Americans"
Wounded Bear
(58,648 posts)I guess "Americans" might be better, as I think we need a focus on people, not large amorphous entities like the country.
But I think either would work.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Check it out.
I would be curious what kind of reaction we might get from Tea Party members now that it doesn't mention Democrats explicitly. Really, Tea Party people should be in favor of most of these things if they could set aside their rage about a black man living in the White House.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)And neither do many of our current representatives. More, at this point even if they make some kind of pledge it's clear that they cannot be trusted.
So now what?
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Obama is only around a couple more years. This idea came from the Kos rebuttal to the Third Way. They aren't going away. We have to fight them. Kos argued that the grass roots work has resulted in a significantly more progressive Senate on the Dem side of the aisle. I see this as a tool to keep the pressure on anybody with Blue Dog tendencies.
In my view there isn't a single House District in the country where these ideas are unpopular. Therefore there should not be a single Democrat allowed to NOT pledge to support these values.
I take your point that behind closed doors when the lobbyists are handing out lots of bribes (er, I mean perfectly legal campaign contributions), some of these guys will sell us out. But even so, there is a value in getting them on record with a pledge, for the same reason Grover Norquist does that. It allows more public leverage, and makes it more painful for anybody to undermine these values.
I don't believe something like this can come together fast enough to be a big factor in the 2014 election cycle, but we need to start.
Obama is a lame duck. I am over him. He has one job now, and that is to veto all the crap that Republicans are going to be trying to pass in 2014 and 2015. To me, a more pertinent question is how many of these things would Hillary really embrace? If the number is less than 9, she has a problem with me, because every Democrat should be able to support every one of these items. This is not a very high bar.