Democrats Need to Stop Relying on Ex-Republicans to Defeat Current Republicans.
To get an idea how there's little difference between the movers and shakers in the two major political parties: Michael Bloomberg, a former Republican turned Democrat, may become the candidate to challenge President Trump, a former Democrat who ran as a Republican.
This possible scenario also highlights one of biggest problems with the Democratic Establishment: they depend on ex-Republicans to help win elections against current Republicans.
It's been that way since the historic shellacking the Democratic took in 1984. Democratic insiders believed that the reason Republicans were winning was a combination of the Trickle Down Economics, neo-conservatism and "family values." There is some truth that getting the factions of social conservatives, pro-war Republicans and the wealthy (political affiliation is not relevant, as the possibility of Bloomberg vs Trump has made clear) helped the GOP stay strong through various Democratic waves. But at it's core, the GOP succeeded because of one important reason: they promised to make American's lives better, and did just enough to make that illusion look like a reality.
Whether the Democratic Party know this or not doesn't matter much now. What does matter is that instead of countering with their own narrative (like say, FDR, whose progressive policies were so popular he would get elected until he died in office, and presidential term limits would instituted) they decided that the best solution was to seek and support "Republican-lite" candidates. Democrats who may be tolerant about minorities and women, but "understand" why some would want marijuana illegal, or send troops to fight the latest "dictator" whose country just happens to not want to do business with American companies.
The formula didn't really last long after Bill Clinton, as Al Gore and John Kerry discovered. But with Barrack Obama, the Democrats stumbled into a modified version of "run GOP-lite:" add a pinch of identity politics to help those neo-liberal policies pass with little push-back.
We're now in an era where the neo-conservatives policies of the GOP, the neo-liberal policies of the Democrats, and the geopolitical actions of both have made made the lives of the average American worse, not better. The Republicans will stick with Trump until he's no longer useful to them, so in this depressing two-party system, the Democrats need to abandon the formula they've been using.
But instead:
This possible scenario also highlights one of biggest problems with the Democratic Establishment: they depend on ex-Republicans to help win elections against current Republicans.
It's been that way since the historic shellacking the Democratic took in 1984. Democratic insiders believed that the reason Republicans were winning was a combination of the Trickle Down Economics, neo-conservatism and "family values." There is some truth that getting the factions of social conservatives, pro-war Republicans and the wealthy (political affiliation is not relevant, as the possibility of Bloomberg vs Trump has made clear) helped the GOP stay strong through various Democratic waves. But at it's core, the GOP succeeded because of one important reason: they promised to make American's lives better, and did just enough to make that illusion look like a reality.
Whether the Democratic Party know this or not doesn't matter much now. What does matter is that instead of countering with their own narrative (like say, FDR, whose progressive policies were so popular he would get elected until he died in office, and presidential term limits would instituted) they decided that the best solution was to seek and support "Republican-lite" candidates. Democrats who may be tolerant about minorities and women, but "understand" why some would want marijuana illegal, or send troops to fight the latest "dictator" whose country just happens to not want to do business with American companies.
The formula didn't really last long after Bill Clinton, as Al Gore and John Kerry discovered. But with Barrack Obama, the Democrats stumbled into a modified version of "run GOP-lite:" add a pinch of identity politics to help those neo-liberal policies pass with little push-back.
We're now in an era where the neo-conservatives policies of the GOP, the neo-liberal policies of the Democrats, and the geopolitical actions of both have made made the lives of the average American worse, not better. The Republicans will stick with Trump until he's no longer useful to them, so in this depressing two-party system, the Democrats need to abandon the formula they've been using.
But instead:
- They embrace identity politics to try and salvage falling campaigns;
- They blame the True Base for their failures;
- They run policy-free campaigns.
Here's the thing: the country is becoming more diverse and recognizing that is important. Before we know it, what's left of the Working Class will be majority people of color. But this does not mean that just running a person of color who's GOP-lite will get minority votes.
It certainly does not mean that the solution to beating a rich former-Democratic-now-Republican is to run a rich former-Republican-now-Democrat. Odds are this will not work.
Being black or gay or rich or a woman should not be a selling point for running the country. Being someone from the other party who now "sees the light" should not be a selling point for running the country. The policies these candidates push for should be the selling point.
The candidate who pushes for policies that will actually improve people's lives will be the candidate to beat.
Comments