The Right Way to Go South

New Democrats Online ^ | 7-nov-2003 | ed

[stainlessbanner]

The Right Way to Go South

Not so long ago, the South looked like one of the great comeback stories for Democrats. After Republicans swept the region in 1984 and 1988, Bill Clinton and Al Gore carried five southern states in 1992 and 1996. And even though Bush ran the table in the South in 2000, Democrats until recently were within striking distance of holding every southern governorship from Richmond to Baton Rouge.

Democrats can still find some bright spots -- in Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Oklahoma, and with luck later this month in Louisiana. But this week's losses in Kentucky and Mississippi, coming on the heels of last year's losses in South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, leave the Democrats' southern comeback in limbo. Next year, Southern Democrats will also have to defend at least four open Senate seats in the Carolinas, Georgia, and Florida. The Democratic presidential nominee will need to be competitive in the South to win, and must do so against a Republican ticket headed by a southerner and guided by a White House that showed in 2002 it would stop at nothing to drive any wedge through the southern electorate.

Howard Dean has shown exactly the wrong way to restore a Southern Democratic majority, with statements about "guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks" that managed to offend everybody, from millions of Americans of every race and region who view the Confederate flag as a symbol of racial oppression to southerners who resent being inaccurately and condescendingly stereotyped. The modern South is not The Dukes of Hazzard.

As dozens of DLC elected officials have shown, the right way for Democrats to win a majority in the South is build a durable biracial majority. No doubt the GOP is still willing to play the race card whenever it can get away with it. But most Southern voters are repulsed by those tactics.

Many are suburban families with children; business people; union members -- indeed, a broad cross-section of the population. And they have repeatedly shown they are willing to support Democrats who can succeed in connecting with them on matters of values as well as bread-and-butter economic concerns. Indeed, in Georgia, supposedly ground zero for the Republican drive to dominate the South, two centrist African-American politicians, Labor Commissioner Mike Thurmond and Attorney General Thurbert Baker, have twice won statewide elections, running far ahead of the national ticket among white voters. They show southern Democrats it's possible to create a two-way biracial coalition (white voters supporting black candidates, not just the other way around) based on a broad centrist message.

We've been arguing for years now that a big part of the problem Democrats have in the South and in other regions and sub-regions with "red state" characteristics is the difficulty they so often have in talking about cultural issues, ranging from guns and abortion, to religion and the struggles of families to raise kids, to the responsibilities of individuals and civil society, not just government.

The recent conference in Atlanta we cosponsored with Americans for Gun Safety concentrated on that problem, and offered a variety of ways that Democrats can reach out to gun owners, people of faith, parents, and white males, without in any way compromising their progressive principles. Sen. Mark Pryor of Arkansas, the only Democratic challenger to unseat a Senate incumbent in 2002, spoke eloquently about the need for Democrats to capture the political center on cultural issues instead of falling silent and letting the opposition promote inaccurate and negative stereotypes. And as speaker after speaker at the conference made clear, "values centrism" appeals just as strongly to African-Americans, in the South and elsewhere, as it does to any other element of the population.

So far there's not a lot about the Dean campaign that shows any understanding of the need for values centrism as a way to make sure people are willing to listen to Democrats' arguments about everything else. That's unfortunate, because no candidate for president is likely to win the nomination, much less beat George W. Bush, if his support is limited to a golden ghetto of white, upscale, culturally liberal, antiwar voters.

There's a right way to "go South" and build the kind of biracial coalitions that have long been the key to Democratic success in the region, while broadening the base of the Democratic Party in other parts of the country as well. We urge all Democrats to remember that lesson if they hope for better luck next year.

[Blueflag]

"There's a right way to "go South" and build the kind of biracial coalitions that have long been the key to Democratic success in the region, "

The Dems just can't bring themselves to stnad on their principles. They always seek "coalitions" -- loose aggregations of special interests. Why can't they just run on their real values? ( um ... rhetorical question)

[Livy]

so, let me get this right, "going south" means lying to Southerners about cultural and social issues so they don't, as Howard Dean put it, "stop voting on God, guns, race and abortion" because, what the real message here is, you people are too stupid to understand politics- it's about more than those trite little issues that you seemingly care so much for. How about the Democrats recognize that their special interests are inimical to the interests of the South. How about "going south" means you don't think all babies should die, taxes shouldn't be astronomical, guns should be a protected right and God is something we can talk about even in public places. Is that really so controversial? Is that so complicated? Look at Zell Miller and tell me if he could win any Democrat primary anywhere other than in the South.

[Between the Lines]

The recent conference in Atlanta we cosponsored with Americans for Gun Safety Control concentrated on that problem, and offered a variety of ways that Democrats can reach out to dupe gun owners, people of faith, parents, and white males, without in any way compromising our progressive principles leftist agenda.

[Grammy]

The dems can't be too happy about Tennessee either. The only reason they won was because we had a republican governor for 8 years who was SOOOOO bad that he made the dem look good!

[Between the Lines]

And as speaker after speaker at the conference made clear, "values centrism" appeals just as strongly to African-Americans, in the South and elsewhere, as it does to any other element of the population.

I am not sure what he is trying to say here.
Is it that people are people reguardless of race?
Is it that the black vote can be ignored for they will follow the Dem whites?
Or is it that the Dems are to far left of what all Americans value?

[ken5050]

The question the author carefuls omits/avoids is the fact that nmot ONE of the nine Dem presidential ccandidates could have gone to Miss or KY to campign witht he gubernatorial candidate..heck...ya didn't even know that Musgrove was a Democrat from his literature..

[John O]

No doubt the GOP is still willing to play the race card whenever it can get away with it. But most Southern voters are repulsed by those tactics.

As far as I can tell (not being in the south) Southern voters like the republicans because the republicans do not play the race card. Racism is a leftist characteristic

The recent conference in Atlanta we cosponsored with Americans for Gun Safety concentrated on that problem, and offered a variety of ways that Democrats can reach out to gun owners, people of faith, parents, and white males, without in any way compromising their progressive principles

The problem is that the democrats 'progressive principles' are exactly what disgusts the gun owners, people of faith, parents and white males (along with a growing percentage of other peoples)

As a Christian it is my firm belief that voting for a democrat is a sin. (I have scriptural arguments to support this belief if any are interested)

[billbears]

As a Christian it is my firm belief that voting for a democrat is a sin. (I have scriptural arguments to support this belief if any are interested)

No offense but I would like to see this. As a Southerner and life long North Carolinian, I can show you Democrats that are more conservative than some of their Republican counterparts. Granted most are on the local level, but I vote for who is the most conservative not what letter they have by their name

[RiflemanSharpe]

The rats do not get it, it is not how they package their message. It is the message we do not like in the south.

[John O]

Granted most are on the local level, but I vote for who is the most conservative not what letter they have by their name

I understand that but look at it this way. A person with a d after their name gives prestige and power to the rest of the rats. Even if their personal leanings are more conservative they support rampant liberalism by associating with the liberals.

Look at a pro-life democrat (assuming such a mythical creature exists). They may be individually pro-life but they give voting power to the pro-death party. So, are they really pro-life or are they just stealth pro-death. Someone who claims to be pro-life and democrat is either lying about being pro-life (because the rats are the party of death) or lying about being democrat. But since either way they are lying they are democrats (the party of the lie) and are therefore not pro-life.

How can a person of principle ally themselves with the party of anti-Americanism, abortion, homosexual advancement, socialism and anti-Christianity? They can't. They are evil by their association with evil. If they were not evil they wouldn't be democrats.

Now some years ago it may have been ok to be a rat but now the party has moved so far left and so far away from God and all that is good that anyone who calls themselves a rat is automatically considered evil in my book. Anyone who associates with such evil cannot be trusted.

[John O]

Romans 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Talks about evil people taking pleasure in people doing evil (sounds like the democrats to me) vs 19-21 defines these people as unbelievers in God

2 Cor 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

Note that nowhere in context does the bible limit verse 14 just to marriage. We are not to form long term binding relationships (contracts, marriages, party memberships, long term close friendships etc) with unbelievers. Are democrats believers? Not as far as I can see. Look at the witness of their lives. The official party platform reads like the last half of Romans 1.

vs 15-17 reinforce this. God tells us not to be part of the democrats. If we vote for a democrat for an elected office we are entering a contract with him to reperesent us and our values for the term of office. This is expressly forbidden.

On the flip side it is much easier to find believing republicans (all the ones I know are Christian). Even a democrat who confesses to be Christian cannot be trusted because if he really was Christian why would he be yoking himself to the party of evil?

Not much time to answer this today but those are the main two.

[billbears]

Sorry John but I could spend a day pointing out Republicans that are just as in the wrong as Democrats. It's not the man, it's their belief. There are many Southern Democrats that remain Democrat for other reasons than agreeing with the party platform. Every election year they go in the booths and vote for the conservative candidate. Reagan won before on some of these folks. There are just places you could talk until you're blue in the face and they won't change party affiliation because it's just not done. This affects not only the voters but the candidates. If you want to run for local office in some areas, you better run Democrat if you want to get a vote.

[billbears]

I have to wonder why this is the case! Is it so firmly ingrained in people's imaginations that “Democrats = US, Republicans = THEM”?

All I can say is long, long, long memories ;) And yes I have met families like that. My father in law is very conservative but he wouldn't switch to the Republican party for any reason

[John O]

Sorry John but I could spend a day pointing out Republicans that are just as in the wrong as Democrats. It's not the man, it's their belief. There are many Southern Democrats that remain Democrat for other reasons than agreeing with the party platform.

I agree with what you are saying to a point. The point is reached at having to vote for a democrat. I just can't do it on biblical reasons until the democrat party drops its anti-Christian agenda. Because Every democrat, whether they say they support the party's platform or not, supports the party's platform by being democrat.

I've also run into the "I'm a democrat because my father was a democrat and his father was a democrat" types. I consider them the blindest of the blind. And not only blind but totally disinterested in seeing the truth. There are no so blind as those who will not see. Some of these actually vote republican. They are borderline ok. The ones who vote straight democrat for this reason are as evil as hillary herself. They are attacking this country through their own ignorance and refusal to acknowledge truth.

Unfortunately for most of them all we can do is pray that God will save and change them or remove them and then wait for them to change or die.

[John O]

I'd never even thought about it that way!!

Pray about it and pray for our country.

see my last reply to billbears also.