Help me prove this wrong.........

There is a story in the NY Times - also featured in Latest Breaking News that says, "For Democrats, Many Verses, but No Chorus"

http://nytimes.com/2006/03/06/politics/06cong.html?hp&ex=1141707600&en=790e7f23b923bdba&ei=5094&partner=homepage

LET'S TRY TO PROVE THIS WRONG AND SHOW THAT DEMOCRATS/LIBERALS DO HAVE THEIR MESSAGE TOGETHER.

For the sake of argument let's say you only get to pick three things that Democrats/Liberals should focus on as a message. Keep in mind these three things have to cover enough ground to do the most good for one and all.

My three choices would be:

1) Forbid private/corporate money in elections by publicly financing all elections
2) A federal requirement for paper ballets throughout the country
3) Secured borders

Now go to work everyone...............

on the same page...is the rule just 3 things that are the most pressing?

1. end war
2.impeach and prosecute the criminal elements of the bush administration
3. restore the constitution and the bill of rights

This is what I want from our party:
1) end the racist drug war.
2) socialize medicine.
3) education (including college) for all.


If you are looking for consensus: Elected Democrat officials - Please be less evil and more empathetic then your republican counterparts. <-this is all I can expect my party to deliver

....ranks - nothing more nothing less. :wtf: Hope I'm taking this wrong because otherwise maybe the article is right.:toast: Hope not!!!!

If you want consensus, let it be that the dem party won't sell out the American people for the interest of corporations that finance the democratic (and republican) party.
Since it is obvious that the democratic party will always do the bidding of its corporate masters, I WISH that the dem party will be a little less evil, a little more for the working class, then its GOP counterparts.

I want the dem party to run on the green platform. Since THAT won't happen,
I want our party to look a little better then the republican party. <-that is all I can expect from our party.

but I would like to remind all on DU that issues play a small part of a campaign. There is a lot of psychology going into how a voter cast a vote. It is much more then a list of campaign planks.

.....a "compaign plank" as you put it?:shrug: There is a large group of undecided voters out there waiting for an alternative choice. Remember, no election (local or federal) has ever been won without attracting the undecided voter who rides the fence until they get to the voting booth.:eyes:

I just hope there are some who are as truly interested in taking back our country from the neocons as I am. I'm NOT into the infighting, I'm into getting neocons out of office once and for all. So yes my goal can be narrowed down to just two words - neocons gone. :bounce:

to offer a true alternative (anti-war, pro environment, anti-drug war, anti-death penalty, socialized medicine and education, alternative fuels, fair trade + pro union) progressive vision for America.

or

Be less evil then the republicans, (support the war, fight for the environment only when it is popular to do so, pro drug war, continued profits over health care, alternative fuels on Detroit's timetable, anti-union / pro-profit free trade) govern by opinion polls - keep on keepin on - triangulate.

Both options have merits. Unfortunately, perhaps the later is more effective in getting rid of the neo-cons. Of course, you know what my choice is.

.....attract THE UNDECIDED VOTER - who wants common sense in their government - not extremism of any kind. In one's own community, being far left or far right is just fine, but that simply WON'T have much success on the national level.

and it may be a far more effective platform then the progressive platform.

I see the Dem problems as this -
Half of all adults fail to register to vote. Half of those registered to vote, don't. Of those that vote, 40% are dems, 40% are gop, 20% are swing or other voters.

Anything that increases turnout, improves our chances. Voting reform helps (if diebold is a problem, middle dems, dlc dems refuse to accept that diebold is a problem), inspiring voters helps.

So what wins on the national level? Charisma. Run on focus group novelty issues instead of a position based campaign, and find some charming candidates (Ray-gun, Clinton).

Why is a voter undecided? Usually undecided voters are content people. They want the status quo. There already is a party for the status quo. I would prefer to leave the content, status quo voter, the undecided voter, and focus on the non voter. I think that the non voter is where the neo cons defeat lies.:kick:

1) Impeachment
2) Impeachment
3) Impeachment

All good will flow from there.

--
www.january6th.org

that could boast of a single, unified message. This is NOT what inclusive politics are all about.

If you want a single, unified message, vote Republican - they have ALWAYS only had ONE BASIC MESSAGE:

Part A: War is a business, and BUSINESS is GOOD.

Part B: Governments are UNPROFITABLE, thus EVIL.

It is precisely BECAUSE OF the DECIDED LACK of a "unified statement" that Liberals are as successful as they have been in the past - you DON'T have to follow a predetermined "party line" or drink a gallon of kool-aid to be a Liberal - all you have to be is COMPASSIONATE.

Oh, yeah - a little OUTRAGE often helps, too.

Is that what we are about?

..... and security only.:wtf:

Again, it is not always the position. Sometimes is is something else. In NYS, we like open immigration (cause in NYS, no one is willing to work for minimum wage, except the illegals). In New Mexico, open immigration is a very unpopular position.

Now, are we better to have an official position regarding immigration?

.....was the reason behind the 3 choices. I was hoping a consensus of sorts could be reached so we could prove the original idea behind this thread wrong.:argh: Well, so much for that.

I will NEVER quit ranting on the need for some coming together of Democrats/Liberals though if we hope to get rid of the neocon strangle hold on our government. I'm beginning to wonder though if that neocon donation during the 2000 Presidential race was just a momentary lapse of judgment.

look at my three choices. Do you oppose any of them? Immigration does not need to be "controlled" in NYS (which is bigger then NYC). There is democratic concensus in my three choices, imho.

I think that most Americans (neo-con, gop, dem, green) can agree on about 75% of everything. The neocons help the Dems fight over the 25% that is contested.

.....I disagree whole heartedly with # 1.:think: Drug dealers are nothing but another type of terrorist inmho living and operating in our own neighborhoods.:wtf: They kill slowly but surely and sometimes not so slowly. Plus, if we take out the dealers we might have less users. I'm the first to admit there's no guarantees but it's certainly got more potential for success than what we've been doing for the last 50 years.

I'm not claiming to disagree with the other two choices you listed. I'm simply saying I think the 3 choices I originally listed would go the farthest toward correcting many evils for the most people. I'm one that is willing to compromise to help the most people in our country. I realize the word "compromise" is a dirty word to some people around here but in most cases it's the only way something gets done over and above simply talking change.

Now, that's enough typing for me for awhile.:eyes:

I agree.

Medicine and education would be great places to build unity. There are a lot of unionized workers in these fields as well.

the last one may be useful in pulling in swing voters, may cause so in the base to be alienated.