Is it that simple? That the Republican platform and Republican “ideas” (especially as pertains to domestic policy) are simply popular? Polling numbers (and, indeed, Republican message management behavior) suggest that that’s not really the case.

In other words; wonk away, it won’t make a bit of difference until after the palace revolution.

I pretty much agree, but this particular criticism of the democrats is pretty old and sclerotic itself.

In other words; wonk away, it won’t make a bit of difference until after the palace revolution.

This can’t be emphasized enough. This is the main reason Lieberman drives people up walls, for example. He isn’t bothered by characterizations of Democrats as liberal amoral godless wusses who hate America and wish to undermine our security, and just takes this framework as an opportunity to say, “Look at me, I’m the Democrat who defies your expectations.” He’ll never challenge that mindset.

Republican strategists see this clearly. That is why they continuously try to create doubts in the minds of the Swing Voters about the character of the Democratic candidate. They know that it doesn’t really matter if they can’t find any real flaws in their Democratic opponents. Accusations, insinuations, & innuendo will work just fine. They hope to encourage voters to question the motivation and dependability of The Democrats. They try to create the perception that Democrats are “defective” in a disturbing way.

The most important reason why negative campaigning has worked so well for the Republicans is because their negative attacks on the Democrats create a positive impression of Republican candidates, who appear—in contrast—to be individuals who do not possess the defects that they have accused others of having. They define themselves [positively] by defining their Democratic opponents [negatively]. On a visceral level, what the Republicans actually “stand for” in the minds of Swing Voters on election day is that they are not Democrats—those defective people who seem to have been born to ruin everything.

Yes, it’s a good thing that Democrats and Progressives and Liberals have their think tanks. It’s great to have facts when you need them. But there is nothing that these think tanks are generating that can help Democrats to win elections. Kos is right. We’ve got to master the emotional side of political strategy or we’re going to continue to get our butts kicked.

The voting public doesn’t really care
(at the core; which excludes one-issue voters)
about policy. They aren’t that interested
in the ‘nuts-and-bolts’ of government.

That’s why they hire congressmen. They don’t want to be bothered by the details. If dems can
manage to herd their own cats and develop
a sense of decisiveness that is consistent,
they’ll get the vote.

As long as they don’t define themselves,
the republicans will be glad to do it for
them, and will continue to control
the environment.

Left wonkism is a necessary condition, but it is missing the point since most Democrats are Rockefeller Republicans (Hillary, Nelsons, Feinstein; Lieberman is a Neocon.)

Just to add to the earlier discussion, it wasn’t all that long ago that Left Blogistan was dominated by boring boring repetitive wonky wonkery of the most wonkish kind – during the Social Security Bamboozlepalooza tour. The president was lying, the Trustees’ various reports were based on contradictory internal assumptions, and journamalists didn’t know what the hell was going. We came, we wonk’d, and we kicked some ass.

He then praised Max Sawicky, and ended:

But even the social security debate was basically a defensive one. Such wonkery is necessary when those moments arise, but there’s little point in having public debates about detailed policies which can’t possibly pass, etc…

For my part, I think that we liberal Americans ought to be hammering out a platform for the next election, and the one after that, an agressive economic agenda of the sort that Thomas Frank is calling for.

Why do you believe this? I would say the two conincide less than half the time.

Also, Kos has a point about the Dems not really needing new ideas. Stuff like Social Security is if anything more relevant to the modern economy than it was a couple of decades ago, when the employer-provided pension system was stronger. Single payer health care is more needed now than ever, as private health insurance frays at the edges. In general the Dems need to communicate their good ideas better, not come up with new ones.

Usually.

Regards, Cernig @ Newshog