Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat
Self-flagellation and an impulsion to martyrdom are now being practiced by another disenfranchised minority – the Democratic Party. Like other frustrated and angry people who beat the crap out of themselves seeking an answer to their troubles, the Democrats will find it’s not a satisfactory solution. First of all, it hurts. Second, there are no virgins in the afterlife (probably). Third, it’s not the best enticement to those whom you’re trying to recruit. So, as Cher said to Nicholas Cage in Moonstruck when she slapped him, “Snap out of it!”
I realize you already know this, but let’s briefly look at it again. 59,459,765 votes went to Bush. Kerry got 55,949,407. Of course, it is deeply depressing and bewildering that 59 million people would vote for a man who is reckless, arrogant, uninformed, incurious, shallow, and all the other adjectives we thought were proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. But 59 million to 55 million depicts a more complex reality than the red-dominated map, and it clearly doesn’t represent the “political capital” Bush says he earned. Remember, Reagan won nearly 59 percent of the vote in 1984 and Nixon received almost 61 percent in 1972. Moreover, those 55 million Kerry voters weren’t just in blue states; millions are red-staters who are just as appalled as blue-staters at what their neighbors have done. (That said, maybe all the blue states should secede). Furthermore, the Democrats actually made some small net gains in state legislatures. Looking at red states, for example, Democrats re-took both the House and Senate in Colorado, the North Carolina House, and in Iowa, the Dems earned a tie. So, whereas many people I know are in a blue funk about both the prospects of the Democratic Party and the future of the country, I’m only despondent about the future of the country.
The main reason the Democrats lost is that George Bush and the Republicans ran a ruthlessly efficient campaign based on deceit, fear, intolerance and division. Karl Rove didn’t invent this tactical combination. It’s a proven winner in human history. Did the Democrats make some tactical errors? Of course. Was John Kerry a flawed candidate? Yes, like every other candidate in history. Actually, I’m proud of Kerry. I think he handled himself very well in the face of relentlessly vicious attacks by the Republicans. Undoubtedly it would have been better for the Democrats if Kerry hadn’t boxed himself into a difficult and difficult-to-explain position on Iraq. But no matter what the position or who the Democratic candidate, the Republicans would have employed the same deceptions and fear-mongering. And even though Howard Dean presented a more clear contrast on Iraq, he would have been effectively pilloried by the Republicans as well. It’s also important to remember that the Republicans can pound away through the modern American version of old style state television: Fox News Channel and the rest of the right-wing echo chamber that automatically and dutifully inflates putrid stories like that of the Swift Boat Veterans. According to the University of Maryland’s Program on International Policy Attitudes, a majority of Bush supporters have their facts wrong:
•72% of Bush supporters believe Iraq had actual WMD or a major program for developing them
•75% of Bush supporters believe that Iraq provided substantial support to Al Qaeda and 63% believe that clear evidence of this has been found
Steven Kull, the director of the Maryland program, says, “One of the reasons Bush supporters have these beliefs is that they perceive the Bush administration confirming them.” In other words, propaganda works.
I hear some of you saying, “But what about the ‘moral values’ issue?” Clearly it was a major factor in the election result and a reality that the Democratic Party must deal with going forward. However, the pundits, or as Calvin Trillion refers to them, the “Sabbath gasbags,” are focusing on ‘moral values’ to the exclusion of other significant factors. The punditocracy would be listing ‘moral values’ as a footnote had these numbers in Ohio been reversed: Bush 2,796,147; Kerry 2,659,664.
Certainly the Democrats have to more aggressively draw connections between policies and moral imperatives. As many have suggested, the Democrats’ positions on tax fairness, on economic opportunity for working families, on access to affordable health care, and yes, on reproductive rights, all can be framed in terms of moral obligations. At the same time, the Democrats must clearly and firmly advocate the separation of church and state. Bush’s theocratic tendencies represent an attack on a core principle of our democracy and one that has made the United States, at least up until now, remarkably successful in having so many disparate groups “under one roof.” Not to mention that embracing fundamentalism and irrational certainty is no doubt the worst way to fight those threats abroad.
The Democrats also can do a better job in drawing links between unregulated corporate behavior and the state of society. Who and what perpetrates the trash on TV? How many people who applauded the FCC’s punishment for the baring of Janet Jackson’s breast actually have thought about the consequences of almost unrestrained media consolidation on our culture? Why is it that conservative fans of Fox so easily forgive one of the biggest purveyors of pop culture garbage in the world?
In order for the Democrats to show ‘moral issues’ voters that they care, too, about the coarsening of our culture, it’s going to require more than slogans from politicians about “faith and family.” The Dems need to reach beyond party institutions. There should be an organized outreach effort to mainstream religious organizations, for example. Many in these groups believe firmly in church-state separation and many view the government as a positive and necessary force in social action. I’m not suggesting that Democrats try to do what the GOP does from the pulpit. But I do think there has to be a better communications effort to inform non-traditional constituencies about the moral foundations of Democratic Party principles as well as the critical necessity of church-state separation. Perhaps this can be accomplished, in part, through establishment of independent foundations that cultivate a high public profile. By whatever method, the Dems need to highlight the moral dimensions of their policies and also make the case that, as FDR said, “The true conservative is the man who has a real concern for injustices and takes thought against the day of reckoning.”
The worst thing the Democrats can do is try to act like the Republicans. We should have learned that by now. The Democratic Leadership Council no doubt believes that the election vindicates their pulpy “centrism.” My feeling is that the DLC always has suffered from the delusion that Bill Clinton is a poster boy for its approach, when in fact Clinton succeeded in large part because of his personal qualities (the good ones) and policies that produced results rather than because he staked out a blurry middle somewhere near Republican territory.
The Democratic Party can succeed only if it continues to draw clear distinctions from the Republicans and presents itself as a true alternative. I also think that by showing the courage of its convictions, the party will do better on the ‘moral values’ issue even if many in the red states will never sign on to Democratic policies. That’s because a factor in the perception of Democrats being weak on ‘values’ is its apparent weakness on convictions in general. How can anyone ever believe the Democrats will stand up for moral values and what’s right if it won’t stand up for its own core principles?
I would humbly recommend to the Democratic Party mucky-mucks that they pay heed to Winston Churchill (despite the right wing’s pathetic attempts to compare Bush to Churchill):
Although prepared for martyrdom, I preferred that it be postponed.
Never give in–never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.
The Democratic Party will return. Perhaps the bigger question is whether what we love about the United States of America will survive the next four years. Here I’ll quote George Bernard Shaw:
Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.