, Bob Casey Jr., and the Democratic Party's attempt to move to the right. This is great, because what we are seeing play out online (and offline) amounts to a large scale self-examination and soul searching within the Democratic Party about its direction.
Of course, one of the main discussions has centered around Choice. While it certainly isn't the only difference between the Pennacchio campaign and Bob Casey Jr., it is certainly the one getting a lot of attention.
So, let's address it. But not as an attack on Casey Jr--let's talk about whether or not it is a strategy that will actually work in 2006 & 2008.
Then there is the contending side that feels it is alright to drastically abandon the party platform on Choice because (a.) Casey is the best chance to beat Santorum, so we turn their heads, in this instance or (b.) a sense that capitulating to Republicans on social issues, such as Choice, takes those issues off the table.
I will leave it up to each individual to determine just how often we can "look away," in compromising certain principles we hold dear as a party. Although, I think Stirling Newberry had a great piece on the topic earlier today.
I want to address the second argument specifically.
We hear cries of "big tent," from Casey supporters and the national party. The belief is that if we can neutralize Santorum on issues such as Choice, we take them off-the-table, freeing up discussion on other issues--primarily, economic ones.
This will not work:
"When I teach the study of framing at Berkeley, in Congnative Science 101, the first thing I do is I give my students an exercise. The exercise is: Don't think of an elephant! Whatever you do, do not think of an elephant.
I've never found a student who is able to do this. Every word, like elephant, evokes a frame, which can be an image or other kinds of knowledge: Elephants are large, have floppy ears and a trunk, are associated with circuses, and so on. The word is defined relative to that frame. When we negate a frame, we evoke the frame.
(Don't think of an elephant -- pg. 3)
Two things are going to happen if Bob Casey Jr. is nominated to take on Rick Santorum:
1.) You are never going to "out abortion" or "out social issue" Rick Santorum. Indeed, that is part of the reason he is so reviled around parts like this and in progressive communities across the country.
Like it or not, he is the leader in the Republican Party when it comes to many of the issues we hold dear. Being like him isn't enough, and because Santorum's job is on the line, it is a referendum on him. We must work to create a distinction between our candidate and his re-election campaign.
2.) We are going to activate this discussion and rightward shift nationwide. That's just the fact.
It is already happening. The most disgusting headline I saw today alone was, "Left's winning strategy: swing (a bit) right." (Yale Daily News)
And by capitulating on this issue, we are affirming to the rest of the country that the Republican view on this topic is the right one. And that just isn't the case.
This is one of the best two sentence explanations of this point I have seen so far:
If we move to the right and let Casey embrace GOP frames in PA media markets, then we will inevitably lose in the long run. This race is going to be too expensive to run a self-defeating strategy.
This is going to be a national race. And what we are going to hear repeated over and over and over again is that Democrats think they have a chance to win this seat, and in fact, Casey was selected, at least in part, because he is "pro-life."
Tens of millions of dollars are going to be used to reinforce this message in Pennsylvania. Hundreds of millions of dollars spent by all parties on, what is so far, turning into a national referendum about social issues and soul searching within the Democratic Party.
This race is the presidential race of 2006. And with all that money being poured into a discussion about abortion and Choice, good luck running a Democratic candidate in 2008 who is pro-choice.
----------------------------------------------------
While I had seen the article earlier today, and planned on addressing it, Pastor Dan wrote a nice piece about two hours ago that discusses an interview with Rick Santorum:
Do you think Mr. Casey's candidacy would take abortion off the table in your campaign?
I don't think you can run a campaign without having those issues addressed. Our positions may be similar, [but] my understanding is he's never really taken much of a position on the issue beyond a questionnaire or two. But when you're running for a state auditor and state treasurer, those are not necessarily positions where this becomes an important issue.
Casey Jr. will not be campaigning in a vacuum. The other side is going to spend millions and millions of dollars as well. And that is the point. This issue will obviously not be taken off the table. And among the anti-choice community, Rick Santorum is among the most respected pols. You are not going to out-abortion him. And people will be discussing the issue. Period.
-----------------------------------------------------
Two minute activism
This is a tough transition. But at the same time, I know there are many of you out there who support what we are doing with the Pennacchio campaign.
Win or lose, this campaign is about creating a movement. It is the one campaign in this primary that you can be guaranteed will focus on organization, including and reaching out to the grassroots. This is something that is transferable to any candidate who wins the primary--much like DFAers work our tails off for John Kerry in 2004.
That said, DFA is launched it's candidate recommendation process today. They are soliciting names of candidates that you feel are worthy of their support. Candidates with a socially progressive and fiscally responsible message.
In this primary, I think the Choice is clear.
So, I would ask you to please fill out their form, tonight, and recommend Chuck Pennacchio.
http://www.democracyforamerica.com/candidates/recommendation.php
After you submit the form, it asks you if you would like to forward it on to ten of your friends. I would encourage you to do that as well. And in the email, ask them to forward it to ten of theirs.
There was a discussion about this on another blog earlier today.
Remember, today we're not trying to decide whom to support in a primary election. We're merely recommending candidates for endorsement by DFA. What's the worst that could happen?
* They don't endorse Pennacchio. The same outcome as if we had done nothing.
* They do endorse Pennacchio, which boosts his fundraising and name ID, and makes it more likely that he can win.
As the primary draws near, we can cross the "can he win" bridge as we decide whom to support, both financially and (if we're residents of the state in question) with our votes.
But if you're ever going to support a progressive candidate, there's hardly a better, more cost-free opportunity to do so than this.
So, once again, please consider filling out the DFA form and forwarding it to your friends. If you have a blog, ask your readers to do the same.
http://www.democracyforamerica.com/candidates/recommendation.php
Thanks,
Tim