Skip to main content

View Diary: Three Times In a Row (86 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No, the people want "strength". I read it here. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Fabian, fizziks

    Bush was simple minded, and maybe evil, but he was "strong". And so the American electorate did what it does best, which is to completely baffle me.

    People are fungible. You can have them here or there. - Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, responding

    by peterborocanuck on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 05:34:17 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  People want more than one thing. (0+ / 0-)

      But yes, we have shown a reluctance to go with "weak and right" over "strong and wrong". What can I say? Baffles me too. Weak can become strong over time, but wrong rarely admits itself to be.

      •  problem as I see it: (0+ / 0-)

        Americans seem to lack the insight to understand that "strong" means more than merely unlocking the armory.

        People are fungible. You can have them here or there. - Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, responding

        by peterborocanuck on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 06:26:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That's more of a media thing (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          peterborocanuck

          I think what voters see as strong are candidates who are able to clearly, and without reservations, express what they actually think. No equivocation, no philosophizing, no acknowledging that the other guy may have a point or three. Democrats seem to fail to realize that politics is war by other means and that you need to express yourself forcefully. If you can't stand up for your ideology (or even have an ideology), voters simply aren't going to support you.

          •  At this point, (0+ / 0-)

            standing up for liberalism must feel a little like standing up for a child molester's right to privacy, or a Dahmer's right to life.

            People are fungible. You can have them here or there. - Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, responding

            by peterborocanuck on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 08:28:40 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Goldwater... (0+ / 0-)

              ....stood up for libertarian conservatism at a time when it was totally discredited. Within four years, Republicans took the White House (and held it in every election except for 1976 until 1992) and within 16 years, they took the Senate. They turned conservatism into the ideology that everyone claimed to follow. We need to make progressivism an ideology that everyone wants to follow. The first thing you have to do is be proud of it.

      •  The problem.... (0+ / 0-)

        ....is that the Democrats run people who have lots of good ideas on paper and no way of articulating them. Look at poor Michael Dukakis. He did a fine job as Governor of Massachusetts and he was up against Reagan's bumbling Vice President. But Dukakis had no vision. He was a competent technocrat with no real uniting philosophy. In addition to not being able to create a narrative, he stunningly never made any serious response to major attacks on his character, his manhood, and even on his family. Voters see that and say, "well, if he can't stand up to the Republicans, how can he stand up for us." Sort of like scared kids going to the schoolyard bully for protection when no one else will help them out.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site