Democrats Need to Get a (And On) Message

Newsday ^ | November 18, 2002 | Sheryl Mccarthy

[DKNY]

It was hard not to like Terry McAuliffe when I- along with a contingent of black newspaper columnists - met him last week.

Youthful, down-to-earth and wisecreacking, he met us at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in Washington in his shirtsleeves. Democrats were still reeling from their election embarrassment, and McAuliffe - who's borne a lot of the blame for their losses - tried to explain to us what happened.

[Cicero]

It's the message, stupid.

This must be the 999th article I have read this past week complaining that the Democrats failed to present their message, except that some reporters prefer to talk about a lack of "ideas" rather than "message." Same difference.

The ironic thing about this article, however, is that this young black (self-identified) reporter didn't get the message herself. Namely, that the Democrat party has nothing of substance to offer blacks, whereas the Republicans do (such as a better education). So instead of beating a dead horse to find the Democrat message, why doesn't she just switch parties?

Someone who would find a sleazebag like Terry McAuliffe "hard not to like," however, is still confusing the medium with the message.

[pabianice]

They HAVE a message. Voters heard it, threw up, and voted Republican.

[DKNY]

It's the mentality, not necessarily the message or lack of one.

Agreed there have probably been hundreds of articles on the topic, I found the article interesting in that the author herself seemed confused and her message contradictory, glad to see it wasn't just me.

[TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!]

bump for later reading

[wayoverontheright]

Meanwhile, aside from a vague sense of Democrats being the party of working folks, poor folks and minorities, does anyone know what the Democratic Party is about anymore?

I've always felt that if the sheeple figured out what the democrats really stood for, they would not vote for them. The dims, and this author in particular HAVEN'T FIGURED IT OUT! They telegraphed loud and clear that they stand for SOCIALISM.

[TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!]

The progressive caucus... i e... democratic socialists of America lean hard left to communisim.

[alloysteel]

Perhaps, if the crew who have taken the Democratic party hostage are condemned to wander in the wilderness for forty years or so, they may have a clue by then why they have lost so much credibility with the majority of the voting public. They have made promise after promise, few of which they have ever kept, and most of those in a negative sense. The have no viable alternatives for solutions to problems which have plagued the nation for years, they can only deny anybody else from taking proactive steps to end or head off the crises as they arise.

You can't stay on message if you have no mesage.

[TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!]