In-house stuff
Over at Tondee's Tavern, Flack is talking about investigative-reporter-turned-senatorial-candidate Dale Cardwell's 'Sister Soulja moment', and he rightfully so calls him out on it.
However, I do think I differ with Flack regarding this whole notion of 'Republican-lite' candidate running in primaries. Not only do I think such a term is terribly misleading and tossed around as a derisive term for moderates and conservatives in the Democratic Party, but I also think it misreads a much larger challenge facing the party today.
Flack argues that when given the choice between a moderate-to-conservative Democrat and a Republican, the conservative voter will always opt for the Republican. That may or may not be true (I actually think the jury is out on that one quite frankly), but one things is true ... when given a choice between a more liberal Democrat and a Republican, the conservative voter will always opt for the Republican.
And we have to face the political realities of this state. It's overwhelmingly Republican. It's independent and moderate voters tend to support Republican candidates.
The Democratic Party, in my opinion, has struggled over the past 20 years in connecting with rural whites and moderate voters, and it's primarily because its candidates have little to no ability to actually communicate with them on a most basic level.
In addition to the rural gap, the party has struggled to identify young leaders in local communities, which is the key to building a base of candidates for the future. This is changing thanks to the new leadership in place in Atlanta. But the reason that candidates like Jim Marshall or John Barrow have success is not so much because they're a little more moderate than other folks (though that helps), but also because they have considerable name recognition in overwhelmingly conservative districts.
That is the key.
However, I do think I differ with Flack regarding this whole notion of 'Republican-lite' candidate running in primaries. Not only do I think such a term is terribly misleading and tossed around as a derisive term for moderates and conservatives in the Democratic Party, but I also think it misreads a much larger challenge facing the party today.
Flack argues that when given the choice between a moderate-to-conservative Democrat and a Republican, the conservative voter will always opt for the Republican. That may or may not be true (I actually think the jury is out on that one quite frankly), but one things is true ... when given a choice between a more liberal Democrat and a Republican, the conservative voter will always opt for the Republican.
And we have to face the political realities of this state. It's overwhelmingly Republican. It's independent and moderate voters tend to support Republican candidates.
The Democratic Party, in my opinion, has struggled over the past 20 years in connecting with rural whites and moderate voters, and it's primarily because its candidates have little to no ability to actually communicate with them on a most basic level.
In addition to the rural gap, the party has struggled to identify young leaders in local communities, which is the key to building a base of candidates for the future. This is changing thanks to the new leadership in place in Atlanta. But the reason that candidates like Jim Marshall or John Barrow have success is not so much because they're a little more moderate than other folks (though that helps), but also because they have considerable name recognition in overwhelmingly conservative districts.
That is the key.
posted by Jmac at 6:37 AM
1 Comments:
I'm still trying to figure out if Cardwell is a Republican or a Democrat. He sounds like a Republican but he's running under the Democratic party.
Politics is confusing...lol
Post a Comment
<< Home