So it's official: Democrats have learned the lesson of 2014 and 2010 and are seeking a return to the 50 State Strategy. Article is here.
The Democratic National Committee on Saturday released the interim findings of a review intended to examine problems in the midterm election. The report said Democrats lack a "cohesive narrative" and recommended that the party find ways to help it explain bedrock values such as fairness, equality and opportunity.
[...]
The report recommends a multiyear effort to prepare for the next round of congressional redistricting after the 2020 elections, wary of Republican clout in statehouses that will determine the new boundaries for members of Congress following the next census.
It calls for more financial support and training for state parties in a return to the principles behind the "50-state strategy" promoted by former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who led the DNC from 2005 to 2009. That approach aimed to compete in state and local elections throughout the country, even in states dominated by Republicans.
At last! Democrats being Democrats, not Republicans! We have finally discovered our problem. Republicans have a cohesive narrative, which is common to conservatives everywhere: Stop progress at all costs, and revert what progress has been made. That's the fundamental aim of conservatives, and it's easy to articulate because lack of change can be applied to
literally every single proposal we make.
But our narrative ... what is our narrative? Do we have one? No. We have a collection of interest groups each fighting for their own share of "change". That, in fact, was the glory behind Obama's "change" message: It was generic enough that it spoke to everyone's need for some kind of change. It was a political rorschach test - you saw what you wanted to see. Small wonder progressives were disappointed when Obama did not specifically solve their interest group's problems. But this isn't going to hold up for long until we unite all progressives under one banner.
And that means we need to stop having "pet causes". For black people, obviously race relations is supremely important. For poor people, economic issues are paramount. For the techies among us, internet security and the NSA are often the things we worry about. But we can't let our pet issues, the ones that matter most to us, become the thing we worry about to the exclusion of everything else.
We need to be the Coalition of the Dispossessed. We are the groups who are marginalized by sexist men, by racist whites, by homophobic straight cis people, by the uncaring rich, by the supremely powerful, by the untouchable military industrial complex, and by companies whose only purpose is profit over people. We are those who need to be helped, who have been wronged by society, and who haven't gotten a fair shake. That above all should be our rallying cry. And we should show solidarity to everyone under our banner. Feminists should look into union issues. Gay rights activists should care about disastrous free-trade agreements. Our race leaders need to look into fair taxation policies. In short, we must be as ideologically diverse as our coalition. We must be united.
But what about the 50 State Strategy? I see a lot of misconceptions on this blog about what the 50 State Strategy actually meant, or what it accomplished. More on this below the fold, but I think it's important we clarify what it actually was.
Raise your hand if you think this: The 50 State Strategy is a strategy developed by Howard Dean in 2006 and was instrumental in our historic gains that cycle and the one after. The 50 State Strategy worked by placing solid progressives in deep-red districts and states.
If you raised your hand, you have a misconception about the 50 State Strategy.
The 50 State Strategy was never intended to install progressives in deep-red districts and states. This simply isn't going to happen. There's no reason for these states to vote for a local progressive if they won't vote for a non-local progressive (i.e., our president). Sure, there are exceptions. I can see why West Virginians, dependent on the extraction industry as they are, would not vote for someone who was a staunch supporter of the EPA, but would vote for a local Democrat who was progressive to the core except on environmental issues.
At the same time, the 50 State Strategy failed when we stopped being moderate Democrats and started being moderate Republicans. Name for me a single Republican we've challenged by citing their vote for John Boehner as speaker of the house. Now name for me ten Democrats who were challenged in 2010 and 2014 for their vote for Pelosi as speaker. And then name for me the Democrats who decided to run screaming from Pelosi by voting for someone else for speaker (cough cough Brad Ashford, Gwen Graham).
We're scared of our own shadows, and that's pathetic. Yes, I get it, the Democratic Party label is difficult to bear in states/districts that went for Romney by quite a few points. But these people aren't going to vote against you just because you're a Democrat. They'll vote against you if you don't stand for something. This is the lesson of the 50 State Strategy: Stop being moderate Republicans in red districts/states and start being moderate Democrats. Disagree with us if you have to in order to represent your constituents, but don't diss the president, don't run away from him, don't pretend you don't have the D next to your name, because you do. And no amount of hand-wringing will change that. So long as you're talking about your vote against Pelosi, you're not talking about restoring voting rights to seniors and college students and minorities, and you're not talking about how awesome it would be to raise the minimum wage, and you're not talking about the importance of Net Neutrality. In short, you're letting Republicans set the narrative.
Here's an example. Jon Tester is a moderate Democrat. He was elected in 2006 against incumbent Republican Conrad Burns. Jon Tester is a good Democrat, even if he runs from us on guns and extraction issues. He represents a state heavily dependent on mining and which is also very rural (in other words, gun-loving). These are good differences to have in Montana, and they're not radical departures from Democratic orthodoxy. He's still a reliable vote on basically everything else. He doesn't get on TV and diss our party, and he recognizes that, yes, he's a Democrat. Unsurprisingly, he was reelected against a pretty strong challenger in 2012. It was a tough election, but our recruitment of Tester in 2006 under the 50 State Strategy was a good move.
2006 also saw us compete in something of a longshot: Virginia. Now, it's important to note that Virginia was a red state at the time. It was still very much a former confederate state, not unlike where Georgia is now, dominated by rural whites who were increasingly hostile to our party. Jim Webb, our candidate at the time, decided to be ... a Democrat. He ran as a Democrat. He was pro-choice. He was ardently against Iraq. He was against the Bush tax cuts. These were difficult positions to take in a red conservative state, but in the end, he won (in no small part to the wave and to Bush being a drag on incumbent senator George Allen, and Allen's racist remarks).
The point I'm trying to make is this. The 50 State Strategy is good. It entails us competing in districts we probably shouldn't be competing in. But these cries of apostasy have to stop, unless they're truly deserved (McCaskill, Manchin.. I'm looking at you). We will not compete in every state and district with the hope of winning them, or with the hope of "party building" or what-have-you. We won't be electing progressives to many of these positions.
But we'll be electing Democrats. And that's a good thing. Let's pick our battles carefully. Let's win the midterm of 2018, which is going to be the most important election we'll ever see. Let's win seats at the table for redistricting by electing governors, secretaries of state, legislators, and so forth. And then, when we have better maps in place, and when states like Arizona and Texas have moved further towards us, then let's try to elect progressives.