Update [2009-12-30 15:4:53 by clammyc]: How embarrassing to write a diary about framing and use a title that talks about a GOP landslide. Oops....
*****
How about something constructive – a discussion on things that I would hope that most people around here (gasp) have in common – NOT to see a republican Party landslide in Congress next year. Sure, many people differ on their views regarding the health care legislation, the various bailouts, foreign policy and a good number of other things that have been put forth over the past year. And I’m certainly not one who likes to defend things that I find distasteful or disagreeable.
Sure, I’ve written a lot about framing and have even read some stuff by (the eeeeevil) Frank Luntz, which has been pretty instructive in some areas, actually. Come next year, there are two things that I think most progressives will agree on: (1) republicans need to be attacked and (2) Democrats (and the sometimes flawed policies) need to be defended. But I’ll add a third: it isn’t enough just to do these two things – a contrast between the very basic governing philosophies needs to be drawn – and repeated early as well as often.
One very good and important lesson from the Obama campaign (first in the primaries and then in the general election) is that you don’t have to go negative in order to win. It certainly helps if you have a vision, a charismatic candidate or a political climate that benefits your candidate. But I’ll assume here that at best, these three things may exist in some form and at worst, all three will be against many Democrats come next year.
Now, I’ve been a (at times harsh) critic of the actions of many elected Democrats, but in nearly all instances, the specific alternative is worse. Sure, there are bad Blue Dogs and Lieberman or Nelson is a colossal pain in the ass, but short of those up for reelection, there is little that can be done over the next year on those levels. Similarly, while there will be a lot to be desired when it comes to much of the legislation, there is also a lot of good in other legislation passed (biggest middle class tax cut ever, extension of unemployment benefits, COBRA subsidies just to name a few).
So when it comes to defending Democrats, there are 2 things that can be done: (1) highlight the good, whether it is good within a flawed bill (even if you don’t like the overall bill, I bet a republican version would have been much worse) or if it is an entirely different bill (and here is the kicker) in a way that would apply specifically/personally to the person you are talking to and (2) contrast with the obstructionist/do-nothing republicans who have offered up nothing in return for their complete obstruction.
I like this for a couple of reasons – a pure attack without contrast tunes people out or turns them off – especially if they know it is coming from a partisan in the first place. As I learned here in the NJ Governor race, people want to know why they should vote for someone and not merely against the other candidate (this could be said for Kerry as well in 2004). Corzine was never able to break through with a simple articulation of what he did and how he would be better for New Jerseyans than his opponent, and therefore he lost (ditto for Kerry).
It also gives a good and easy pivot to defending how the Democratic Party is trying to help struggling American families but are faced with a republican Party whose only interest is to block, obstruct and do nothing but hope for the Democrats to fail at every turn. The simultaneous attack on the lack of republican Party vision and plan and how the Democratic Party is trying to solve (and will continue to solve) the vast and complex problems facing American families is even better because it shows contrast and gives a reason why one party is working for Americans and one party is working only for their own power.
The most obvious – keeping it as simple as possible. Most people don’t know or care about filibusters or 60 votes in the Senate or reconciliation. They want to know who is working for them and who is working for their own selfish interests. Sure, the health care legislation leaves a LOT to be desired, but wouldn’t it have been better if there was even the smallest bit of help by ANY republican in either House of Congress? Sure, Lieberman and Nelson and Stupak held these bills hostage but they wouldn’t have had to if supposed "reasonable moderates" like Snowe weren’t putting themselves ahead of the American public?
I’m well aware (since some around here will be quick to tell me I am a Karl Rove shill if I point out the obvious) that there is a lot more that the Democratic Party and this Administration could have done in a large number of areas. And while I am all for purity and calling bullshit, there comes a time where finding and highlighting the good (and there IS good) is necessary. There comes a time to show why electing (or re-electing) Democrats is a far better option than republicans. And that takes discipline – especially when so many progressives feel betrayed on so many levels.
But the truth is, the republican Party will try to repeal whatever gets passed as soon as they get the majority again and while it is baffling why the republican Party got so much done (and caused so much damage) with far less of a Congressional majority, these steps (sometimes baby steps) will be reversed in a big way unless progressives, liberals, Democrats figure this out and start to shape or change perception.
And at a time where we know that stemming the losses or taking two steps forward and one step (sometimes a big step) back is a bad option, the alternative is a worse option. That’s not to say that anyone should actively work for or volunteer for someone who they don’t trust or like, but to look at the particular race and the particular people you talk to and ask what the alternative will look like.
It is never too early to start, because Congressional Democrats (and this administration) sure haven’t made it easy for themselves.