Democrats trying not to be

I was struck by one passage in this Washington Post article by Shailagh Murray and Dan Balz, Despite Majority, Obama to Be Tested: Diverse Ideology Cuts Democrats' Edge 06/30/09. The Beltway Village press corps worships at the altar of High Broderism. So they think "moderation" and "centrism" are the be-all and end-all of politics. In practice, their adoration of centrism is for a particular kind: the one in which Democrats agree to go along with what Republicans want. So, their version of centrism comes out this way:

At its core, Obama's domestic agenda is a liberal wish list of health care for all, tough new environmental regulations and government solutions to crises ranging from failing schools to faltering auto companies. But as the party's ranks expanded in 2006 and 2008, its center of gravity shifted to the middle. And the key to a durable majority, White House officials and party leaders agree, is adapting old policy goals to new political realities.

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), a member of the Democratic leadership, said the party is coalescing as an amalgam of "activist centrists" who think government has a role in solving problems but are more pragmatic than ideological. "I think that's where the president is, and that's where we are," he said. "When you win red states, strange things happen." [my emphasis]

In other words, coming off elections in 2006 and 2008 where the Democrats have progressively I people voting for them, that increased support is a sign that the Dems should be more like the Republicans.

This is not thinking like winners. Or more precisely, not thinking like a Party that takes its voters' demands nearly seriously enough.

Tags: democratic party, democrats

| +Save/Share | |