If DLC Democrats think conservative policies are so popular, then why do conservatives themselves find it so hard to speak about the issues in plain terms?They resort to pithy, misleading catch phrases and outright personal smears to control the debate. Frank Luntz and friends have said outright that the country at large finds conservative policies unpopular if expressed honestly. Although I stood in line to ask the above question, I was unfortunately unable to do so due to time constraints. I hope that by posting it here, this question will reach Mr. Ford or one of his ideological brethren who can provide a legitimate answer.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Question for Harold Ford
Here at Netroots Nation, we were just treated to a very civilized lunch debate between Markos and DLC Chair Harold Ford. In general, Mr. Ford was able to muddle the issues effectively enough to avoid drawing the ire of the (obviously) pro-grassroots crowd. One thing that particularly frustrated me, however, was his claim that he had to take very conservative positions on some issues because the demographics of his district demanded it. He represented Memphis until 2006 when he ran a less-than-spectacular failed senatorial campaign. Memphis is one of the most economically devastated inner cities in the nation, and experienced more foreclosures per capita than almost any other Congressional district. Mr. Ford voted for the anti-debtor bankruptcy bill, blocked lending and housing reforms throughout his congressional tenure, and continually supported free-trade, anti-worker policies. Ford now represents an organization that believes that in order to win, Democrats must take positions on many issues that look much like Republican stances. Now I've always been perplexed about this belief, and the following question occurred to me:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Sorry Jeremy but I have to rise to the occasion to defend Harold Ford, one of my favorite Democrats (not surprisingly, right behind Zell Miller). The evidence you cite after criticizing his statements on what it takes to win in a state like Tennessee has no bearing. Memphis may be economically depressed, but what does that have to do with winning a statewide campaign? I have to tell people on the far-left and far-right all the time that you just have to accept that there are millions of Americans who see things differently than you do. The argument by many right wingers is that if it weren't for the left wing media and demagoguery by Democrats, we'd be totally in control. Sounds a lot like you doesn't it? But you know, people in conservative states in the South are simply mostly conservative. Many believe in conservative values. Many people support less government involvement because they don't trust the efficacy of such programs. Many want a hawkish foreign policy. You may think they're wrong, and that's fine, but that's what lots of people think. And if you don't think liberals demagogue issues, I'd suggest reading into some of the arguments made a little more. Many economic arguments are consistently framed in "the rich thieving fat cats vs. the poor little man." This is occurring right now with the mortgage crisis, when like it or not, there were home owners who could have acted more responsibly when applying for a mortgage. Anyhow, I suggest giving Ford a little slack - it's the only shot you guys have at states like Tennessee, just as conservatives need to go easier on Arnold because if not we lose California.
As usual, Marlowe, you betray your lack of legitimate standing with this incendiary yet thoroughly ignorant comment.
I am not surprised that you have a dear place in your heart for Harold Ford; after all the guy does make a career out of consistently stabbing his professed party in the back. He's different than Schwarzenegger in that his energy is more geared to railing at opposition within his own party than really taking a moderate approach to policymaking. But maybe you should do a little background research on Ford's old district before you claim that liberals aren't viable there. Sure, it's Tennessee, and maybe he couldn't win a statewide race there (too black), but Memphis as I already mentioned is a deeply Democratic, economically progressive city. All you need for evidence is to see who replaced him as the TN-09 congressman: Steve Cohen, an anti-war, netroots-friendly, socially liberal white Jew in a majority black district. So the voters of Harold Ford's district would beg to differ with your unsupported assumption.
Look, you can try to claim your moderate reasonableness and some may believe you, but that dog don't hunt here, Marlowe. Sure, a good chunk of this country supports your worldview over mine and I'll be the first to admit that. But to claim that means yours is inherently superior is downright preposterous. After all, the ascendancy of your ideology in Washington over the past decade has led the country into the mess we face today.
I have to tell people on the far-left and far-right all the time that you just have to accept that there are millions of Americans who see things differently than you do.
Harold Ford has never won a statewide election and would probably have lost his seat by now if he hadn't given it up voluntarily. He's involved politics today because of people with millions of dollars that want to advance a similar agenda to his.
Post a Comment