From Our Man in Kansas
Andrei Cherny and his fiancee loaded up the contents of their apartment, Andrei's collection of obscure Democratic speeches, and all the Diet Cherry Vanilla Coke they could find and set off on a cross-country trip. Believe it or not, yesterday Andrei found himself in Liberal, Kansas -- perhaps the best place to ponder the question: what's the matter with Kansas?
It's a well-written, well-argued short piece that's worth reading (even it's on Huffington Post aka TPMCafe without the graduate degrees), but if you're in a rush, here's the money 'graph:
We devote ourselves to testing which populistish Democrat can raise the most rabble, throw out the most red meat, and criticize the Republicans in the most vicious manner. We play with different issue “frames” because we all know that it is our lack of language tricks – rather than a dearth of ideas that speak to people and their lives – that have cost us popular support. We devote ourselves to providing the American people with exhaustive itemizations of Republicans’ voluminous missteps and mistakes. And when Americans still don’t hear our “message” we emulate a Bermuda shorts-clad tourist looking for directions to the Champs Elysees: we speak LOUDER and sloooower. [Note: I can't get the damn indent button to work!]
Last week, there was a bit of debate over whether Democrats lacked ideas or not. Time constraints kept me from jumping in, but to dip my toe into the water, let Andrei's post speak for itself -- and for me.
It's a well-written, well-argued short piece that's worth reading (even it's on Huffington Post aka TPMCafe without the graduate degrees), but if you're in a rush, here's the money 'graph:
We devote ourselves to testing which populistish Democrat can raise the most rabble, throw out the most red meat, and criticize the Republicans in the most vicious manner. We play with different issue “frames” because we all know that it is our lack of language tricks – rather than a dearth of ideas that speak to people and their lives – that have cost us popular support. We devote ourselves to providing the American people with exhaustive itemizations of Republicans’ voluminous missteps and mistakes. And when Americans still don’t hear our “message” we emulate a Bermuda shorts-clad tourist looking for directions to the Champs Elysees: we speak LOUDER and sloooower. [Note: I can't get the damn indent button to work!]
Last week, there was a bit of debate over whether Democrats lacked ideas or not. Time constraints kept me from jumping in, but to dip my toe into the water, let Andrei's post speak for itself -- and for me.
Advertisement
Given the really important roles, in both policy and communications, your bio indicates you've played in the Democratic Party, you evidently speak from experience in endorsing the "dearth of ideas/fruitless frustration with frames" view of the matter. I look forward to hearing more.
July 1, 2005 7:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
The reason why Democrats look to rhetoric rather than substantive ideas as the way to win elections is simple: we have good ideas, our opponents have obviously bad ones, yet they've been winning elections recently. The conclusion is obvious: rhetoric, rather than ideas, wins elections.
July 1, 2005 7:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Surely, the fact that Kansans put their concern with the moral direction of the country above their desire for policies that will put more dollars in their wallets is something we should be celebrating, not castigating – even if we might disagree with their assessment of the values debate.
Kansans, like most Americans, are not amoral zombies who believe that the course of the nation should be determined by what most benefits their personal finances. It is folly, not to mention vulgar, not to mention contemptible, to exhort them to vote as if they were.
Elections are not economic choices, but the expression of those values that voters hold dear and have been led to see as at stake.
July 1, 2005 8:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
The real point of the "what's the matter with Kansas" line of thought is not that the Jayhawkers are a bunch of rubes because they vote their values over their pocketbooks. Maybe that's what the "Kansas" folks think, and maybe it's even true, but it's not the point. The real point is that Kansans "vote for their values" and GET NOTHING FOR IT, while getting screwed in the pocketbook along the way. And they keep doing it. That's what makes them a bunch of rubes. The practical political question is how we convince the Kansans, and other voters like them, that we actually have something to offer them and, unlike the Rethugs who play them for rubes, will actually deliver it.
July 1, 2005 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think Kansans vote their Values, to be honest. They vote accoding to rhetoric (yet proclaim that they don't care for rhetoric). The simplest answer is that the Republicans have been (so far) able to define both sides of the argument; when the Demorats attempt to define, the well has already been poisoned.
It's an old saying that cynics make the biggest rubes, and we've become a nation of cynics. There is no greater sin than to not act as if all politicians are equally corrupt: otherwise you're seen as a partisan cheerleader.
July 4, 2005 5:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I enjoyed Whats the Matter With Kansas, but I think that there is a large issue that Frank does not quite get. I think that Cherny has some good ideas in his book, but I don't think that we are quite there yet. Democrats don't loose because of a lack of issues, a lack of framing, or because something is wrong with Kansas. Democrats loose too often because they fail to address the issues that concern red America.
Democrats will act almost dismissive about concerns about abortion when talking to a conservative audience rather than address the issue in a sensible way they will sidestep as quickly as possible. Hillary Clinton recognizes this and she has sought to address these concerns in a common sense way that I think many Americans can appreciate. Hillary came out and talked about the common ground on the issue and the need to work together to reduce the number of abortions that are occurring.
If the people have this concern you as a politician or a political party have to address it. You have to do so on their terms and not your own. We want their votes and if the majority of Democrats continue to act as if these are silly or unimportant issues we will not get these votes.
Also, we have to be authentic when we do it. I watched Howard Dean on Meet the Press and cringed. He tried to use a story from the Bible that ended up coming out forced. It may not have been readily apparent to people who don't attend church regularly but it was painfully obvious. I apprecaite the effort on Dean's part but please get it or right or just don't do it.
Once these issues are addressed then the Democrats can start talking about health care and their other new ides.
July 6, 2005 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink