I see an easy platform for the Democrats to run on in 2012.
Use the Republican ‘Jobs’ platform of 2010.
Ok. It’s a little more complicated than that. The Ds and Obama need to spend some quality time explaining why the US is the way it is.
They need to clearly explain that Social Security is funded through 2038, through its own dedicated revenue stream. They need to explain how that process works. They need to explain that SS has been a successful tool in lifting seniors out of poverty. They need to explain the part about how seniors tend to spend their monthly SS checks. And they need to emphasis that they spend those checks at private businesses, both large and small.
They need a style that isn’t simply statistics though. The people who look at those stats are already either Ds or asshole kleptocrats who fully understand the numbers and simply want more. They need to kick this one through the uprights by bringing it home to the voters. Grandparents, uncles, and aunts need to be the poster folk here.
They need to explain why EI is important. They need to drive home the message that this money has been paid in over the working lifetime of employees. They need to explain that people on EI are going to spend that money. Again, at business both large and small.
They need to point out that most people on EI currently are there no by choice, but by necessity. They need to drive it home by tailoring the message to the low end of the income scale that gets hit hardest and squeezed the most these days.
They need to explain why infrastructure is important. This should be simple. Schools, roads, sidewalks, parks, airports, community health centers, electricity, water, etc… These are things that people and business depend on. Explaining the link between building infrastructure and business opportunity should be relatively easy. Advanced infrastructure is why major business locates in developed nations. Hell, it’s why we’re called developed nations. Explaining that and the link between the paycheques of the people who would be building said infrastructure should also be simple.
Education would be a little more complicated. The reason being that most people (or not, maybe I’m just biased) hated school for various reasons. There’s always the ‘think of the children’ angle. Of course, given the budgets of D re-election campaigns and various offices, they ought to be able to find a huge number of famous entrepreneurs, inventors, scientists, politicians, etc… (of the contributing to society kind, not the wealthy extraction type) that attended public schools and universities (who would support the message) that they can point to over and over and over and over again.
They also need to be able to point out how shitty teachers really have it. Simple wage comparisons between nations and quality of internationally tested scores would do it in a regular country, but… I’m thinking that the story here needs to emphasis how teachers spend so much time with children at their important developmental stages. They shouldn’t be paid less that the average babysitter (per child/hour). Teachers can be easily tied to existing job numbers and a chance to put people back to work for the greater good. If they can be tied to the above mentions inventors etc… then homerun.
The flip side of this approach is to highlight how the rightwing policies presented so far as really the ‘job-killers’.
Emphasise all the people thrown out of work. Explain that the reason a lot of the deficit is due to programs that keep people afloat. Explain how the government has actually shed a ton of jobs. Tie that shit to Fukishima, and the London riots, and the Arab Spring.
Basically, drive home the important things that the government does for people. And stress that the only way it gets done is by the government.
I’m sure this has been covered before, but the Ds need to point out that the masses are getting screwed by income tax deductions. People need to see how they personally benefit from government initiatives. See:
this.
If the Republicans want to tie the ideal of America to the ‘50s, then the Ds need to explain why the average white family was better off then. Unions, tax structure, government expenditure etc… What they need to be careful to do is explain that everyone else can, and should, be included in that Pleasantville model as well. Money spends. And that is the key these days.
The part that should bring the approach full circle is to point out that this crisis wasn’t caused by chance. Citizens want to see justice brought to the fat cats that brought this down on everyone’s lives, whether they realize it or not. Ds need to point out that a lot of pension plans are short because they bought AAA rated horseshit. They got ripped off. Nothing would get people together like explaining how they got/are being stolen from and going after it. Of course, actually going after the people that ripped everyone off is the key here. I don’t trust pols to do this on their own, but you get 70-80% of the nation on their ass, and they will do it.
Regulation can be handled to same way. The Ds need to make this shit personal.
How to explain the shift away from the center-right approach they’ve taken so far? Done in the spirit of outreach to the Teahadists and Republicans. “We tried things their way like I promised to do. Clearly they didn’t work. Moving on.”
This isn't a radical platform. This is a platform that 60-65% of the population will vote for. I'd say higher, but I don't want to overestimate the American population.
Disclaimer: I’m not American. I just want you to get your shit together and stop dragging down the rest of the world. For someplace that sells itself as the beacon of hope, justice, and opportunity, you haven’t been that for 50 years. Get back at it and drag the rest of the world up with you.
Is this plan realistic? I think so. You get enough congresscritters worried about their jobs and it will be realistic. The Teahadists managed it. This isn't radicalist bullshit like they sling, this a workable program. But the example is there to be used.
So... Explain to me why I'm wrong.