I had coffee with Pat Williams, the Retired Democratic Congressman from Montana, last Spring to talk to him about a couple ideas percolating through my head. He told me about the `93-'94 Congress, the period right before the Gingrich revolution, but the period where it is emerging. It is notable, I think, that Pat was not retired by that revolution, despite being an at-large Democrat in Montana. He chose to retire two years later.
That said, Pat told me a story about a friend of his in the Republican caucus telling him about a caucus meeting where they were going over some communication strategy. No Republican was to refer to the Democrats as Democrats. Unfortunately for the Republicans, people liked Democrats. They were to be called incumbents or liberals, but never Democrats.
I've been wandering the blogosphere and reading people's various thoughts about a similar label for the state of the modern Republican Party. I saw one person propose Theocrats. That struck me as a bit rough, because, y'know, most of them are not proposing rule of the Priests. Some of them may believe in government by the devout, but that's different. Beyond that, I think that would probably just make people think Democrats are Godless and the reason they're criticizing religion in government is because we don't like religion in people. Theocrat is a non-starter, as well, because it assumes that people know what theocracies are. I'm not sure they do.
Ideologue is the term that came to my mind. People who are always willing to stick the course no matter what facts may come along. It also seems to me that we can make this one work and play it up a bit with women audiences.
The President is a bit like the guy who won't ask for directions. And I'll admit it, I've been there myself. But you all know what I'm talking about. You've been driving for three hours. You're lost. You can't even figure out where you are on the map. And you say, "How about we stop and ask for directions?" That's an easy request, but all you hear back is, "I know exactly where we are."
Right.
I think, with a lot of female audiences in the same way that the "Of course I support women. I'm surrounded by women. I'd be in trouble with my wife if I didn't like women" (wink and nod) or the "I know what the problem is. It's time. We all need more hours in the day, especially busy mothers, with jobs, and their kids, and their errands. You just need a little more time in the day."
Now, please note that I am not raising this point to say that women are morons. Every demographic gets pandered to in bizarre ways. Kerry did not go goose-hunting to impress the geese. Bill Clinton talking about boxers and pot was pandering. And, yeah, the idea that people make their decisions for President based on these factors amazes me, but they do, so let's work with it.
Plus, it makes a damn good point.
So, are you gonna vote for the Democrats or the ideologues?
[Cross-posted from Left in the West.]