Washington Post Advises Democrats. Thanks, But No Thanks
by RonChusidMichael Grunwald has some advice for Democrats on How to Reconnect With Voters and Realize Your Dreams of Victory in today’s Washington Post. I don’t have much confidence in his advice. Late in the article it looked like Grunwald had something meaningful to say, and then went off in the wrong direction:
So here’s a radical thought: Maybe there’s nothing wrong with the Democrats, politically speaking.
They’ve won the popular vote in three of the past four presidential elections. Their one outright loser was Sen. John F. Kerry [standard Kerry bashing to complete paragraph] . . .
So how did Kerry become the party’s standard-bearer? Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire, liberal and moderate, thought a military veteran had the best chance to beat Bush. They analyzed the political landscape, tried to imagine what the American people wanted in a president and voted accordingly. Their analysis just happened to be wrong.
I think it is Grunwald’s analysis which happens to be wrong, which is no surprise considering he has never been very fond of Kerry, having engaged in similar Kerry bashing for Slate back in 2004.
Grunwald did start out good here. “They’ve won the popular vote in three of the past four presidential elections…”
Now that was a good start. I’d take it from there to say that even the one who lost came awfully close for running against an incumbent during war–closer than anyone else in memory has under this situation.
Then I’d note that more people have voted for Democrats for the Senate than Republicans. Republicans have more seats only because of the fact that smaller states get as many Senators as Republicans.
Next I’d note that the Republicans would have a much narrower margin in the House if not for the shady Texas redistricting.
In other words, the country is very closely divided.
It could have been a good article if Grunwald took it in this direction rather than using it as an excuse to demonstrate his long-standing dislike of John Kerry. There are many weak attacks an Kerry going around. One of them is to deny him credit for winning the nomination so decisively by claiming people didn’t really support Kerry. They just voted for the one they thought others would vote for. Everybody thought everybody else would vote for Kerry so they voted for him for the nomination.
Strange argument. Personally I think they voted for Kerry because they found him to be the best candidate.
Filed under: Democrats, John Kerry, OP/ED's | Get Permalink or trackback |
I have to agree with Sogut at i’m the “party base”, in his post today The LA Times, delivering on Sunday “Grunwald’s eminantly forgettable quote-repository is 10 minutes of your life that you’ll never have back.”
For a 23 year old, who uses his astrological sign and birth year for a lot of his description, the post is actually better than many I’ve read.
Especially the link to the LA Times article.
Democrats’ loser linguistics
Although I have problems with a lot of criticisms that are made against the Dems, the story telling aspect is important.
It’s the right brain hook that gets the individual to identify with the speaker, and turn the left brain up enough to pay attention to ‘the rest of the story’.
Democrats, if you want to win I have a easy method to follow: Listen to nothing the Washington Post says.
Folks who supported John Kerry (even one iota): Where you see the concepts of John Kerry and Washington Post together… Be Afraid, BE VERY AFRAID.
I live in the DC metro area: This town is chock full of folks who are economically conservative (perhaps elitist is the better word) but won’t admit it.
John Kerry is a pro-union economic progressive (who also watches the budget without making budget balancing the holy grail of politics)
DC is socially liberal (except on death penalty, which John Kerry opposes). OF course, DC upper income folks have swallowed the death penalty=tough on crime neo-Willie Horton BS hook, line and sinker. Oh yeah, DC upper income foks like at WaPo will live among middle class or poor blacks-when dogs get wings!
Metro DC is full of folks who fall into one of two camps: anti-war table pounders (think Tom Hayden or Dkos) and-especially- chicken hawks. Kerry is a real life soldier who does not rule out force nor advocate “shoot first ask questions later” baloney.
In short, pundits have about as much in common with John Kerry as Trent Lott has with the NAACP. So if it’s in the post-write it off.