A recent MyDD post made a big deal out of the fact that 33% of the electorate self-identifies as "conservative" while only 21% self-identifies as "liberal", and that therefore liberals start 12 points down on any issue. While I don't think it's quite as simple as that (liberals may be less willing than conservatives to slap a label on themselves), I've been thinking about ways to reduce the gap. Just enumerating the possibilities, there are four ways to reduce the conservative-liberal lead in the electorate:
- Turn conservatives into moderates
- Turn conservatives into liberals
- Turn moderates into liberals
- Add liberal voters from those currently outside the electorate
I think that all four approaches yield viable strategies, and I'm certain I've missed some possibilities.
The first can be accomplished partially by making "conservative" a dirty word much in the same way that conservatives have made "liberal" a dirty word (the MyDD post touched on this) - and although it may already be so on many college campuses, it needs to be a dirty word among people who actually exercise their franchise regularly. I'm not actually sure how to do that, and I find the practice somewhat distasteful, but perhaps someone can go find out how conservatives did that to "liberal".
The second may seem impossible, but I've been toying with an idea of a Republican group called "Republicans Against Mammon". Starting from the sincere Christian arguments put forth earlier this year for tax reform in Alabama, this group would push social conservatives to vote their economic conscience. I don't actually know how to make an internal Republican group appear - wishing does not, alas, make it so - but perhaps Democrats could adopt some of the talking points a group like this would produce. (HWRSI - "How would RAM say it?")
One of the ways that conservatives have increased their numbers is by telling the public which issues are important - e.g. that it is more important to decide whether or not two men can get married legally than it is to decide whether every person in your state can get at least one decent meal a day. Especially in those states which now have state amendments banning gay marriage, what now can conservatives say is important enough to ignore Christ's call to clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, and feed the hungry? (This assumes, of course, that Roe v. Wade isn't overturned - if that happens, conservatives get to replay their "get out the vote with state constitutional amendments" game) Turning conservatives into liberals is primarily a matter of changing which issues are important.
The third point, turning moderates into liberals, can rely on some of the same strategies, though an important part of this conversion is going to be making "liberal" an acceptable word, and cleaning off some of the dirt that conservatives have heaped on it over the years. To that extent, having prominent tv-photogenic self-declared liberals in the media helps. Beyond that, pushing health care - and especially an understanding of where health care costs come from - should be a winning strategy. I am a bit afraid here that liberals could get stuck on the unpopular side of malpractice damage caps if no one stops to explain to the public what it is that determines malpractice insurance rates. (As an offside, why when state legislatures hold hearings on this do they hear from doctors and from patients rights organizations, but not from actuaries or insurance company executives? Can they not find them?)
As for the last point, everyone knows what needs to happen here. The voter turnout rate for this election hovered right around 50%. While the under-30 vote had a higher turnout than ever before, said turnout only looks good next to the miserable historical levels.