[Ed. Note: If you haven’t already, read the previous entry before this one.

In the last entry, I said that the Democrats need to figure out what our vision of the country and the future actually is. This is perhaps the biggest problem the Democratic Party has: what do we stand for, and what will we do if we’re elected? What are our core beliefs?

Continue Reading…

I’d like to finish my ruminations on this long dark midnight of the liberal soul with my thoughts about what I believe the Democratic Party needs to do in order to regain some influence over our country’s trajectory. Not that my lone voice is going to make any difference, of course. The odds that anyone in a position to actually accomplish anything will ever see this little blog, let alone adopt the ideas expressed herein, are approximately equal to the chances of Ozzy Osbourne being invited to speak at the next LDS General Conference. Nevertheless, there is a whole galaxy of liberal blogs and message boards out there that have been buzzing on this same topic for the last six weeks, so perhaps our collective din will somehow become loud enough for the DNC to hear.

The most important thing, I think, is that all Democrats, from the most liberal whack-job hippies to the “Republican Lite” Clintonian centrists, need to make a major attitude adjustment. Several, in fact, starting with the way we on the left handle defeat. I disagree with Republicans on damn near every matter of policy and a whole lot of philosophical points, too, and I certainly despise their contemptuous attitude toward their defeated opponents. But they’re absolutely correct about one thing: we lost, and we need to get over it. That motto should be printed on giant banners and prominently displayed at every Democratic meeting until we get the point and start acting differently.

Continue Reading…

Trying to disprove the old adage that there are no second acts in American life, former Vermont governor/presidential candidate Howard Dean is now apparently pursuing the chair of the Democratic National Committee, which, as I understand it, is essentially the core of the Democratic Party itself (somebody correct me if I’ve got that wrong). I was fairly dubious about the idea of Dean as President, but I think the idea of Dean as Chairman of the Party is pretty intriguing, especially after reading the transcript of a speech he delivered this afternoon at George Washington University. It’s a good speech, if you’re interested in such things, and a compelling vision of what the Democrats ought to be all about. (As it so happens, Governor Dean’s ideas about what the party needs to do correspond pretty heavily with my own. Make of that what you will.)

What really caught my eye, however, was a brief section in which Dean addresses the moral values issue I’ve been discussing here on Simple Tricks:

The pundits have said that this election was decided on the issue of moral values. I don’t believe that. It is a moral value to provide health care. It is a moral value to educate our young people. The sense of community that comes from full participation in our Democracy is a moral value. Honesty is a moral value.

 

If this election had been decided on moral values, Democrats would have won.

 

It is time for the Democratic Party to start framing the debate.

I don’t have anything more to add; I believe those ideas speak for themselves.

I’ve run across an interesting addendum to my previous entry, an article from the Washington Post called “The Anatomy of a Myth”. To view the article, you’ll need to register with the WaPo — which is free and painless — or you could try a generic login courtesy of bugmenot.com. If you’re at all interested in this “moral values” angle on the election, it’s well worth a look. The author, Dick Meyer, is the editorial director of CBSNews.com, and he provides an insider’s perspective into how this story evolved from a simple question into accepted fact, even though, in his opinion, it’s total bunk.

Continue Reading…

[Ed. Note: Hiya, kids! Sorry it’s taken so long to get the rest of my election analysis up for public consumption, but Real Life sometimes pulls even me away from the keyboard, and besides, it’s taken me a while to figure out exactly what I want to say about all this “moral values” stuff. If you missed Part I of this post or you just want to refresh your memory, click here. As always, I invite you to skip this one if you’re tired of reading about politics or don’t have time for a lengthy rant.]

[Ed. Note 2: the language in this post is a little rough in spots, so consider yourself warned.]

The post-election discussion has focused mainly on John Kerry’s loss, which makes sense since the presidential race always gets the most media attention. However, Democrats also lost seats in both houses of Congress this year as well as in many state governments. (From what I understand, we apparently did fairly well at the local, grass-roots level. Go figure.) While I personally believe there are a number of reasons for these defeats, the pundits and bloggers have been looking for a one-size-fits-all explanation. The one they seem to have fixed upon is exit-poll data which suggest that “moral values” were the deciding factor for a significant number of people.

Continue Reading…