Why Democrats Should Tell The South To Suck It (with All Due Respect To Maltese)!

[james1200]

well, let's see. bush is from texas, his values are southern christian values, his base, what's left of it, is all southern...why shouldn't the south be blamed for him? it's values shaped him...and he's despised everywhere else (i think it was on salon.com that i read that bush's approval ratings are 31% nationwide and his disapprovals are 65%...but in the south, his approval ratings are 45%...if you left the south out of it, his approval ratings would be in the low 20's...that's a pretty hard stat to ignore).

 

[Homoaffectional]

I most *definitely* diverge from James here. I think that Dems should push for popular AG Mike Moore, or whatever his name is, to see if they can score another Senate seat from Mississippi.

Although I agree that no one should bother *counting* on Georgia, South Carolina, or Alabama, or even Texas for US Senate seats, and if Mary Landrieu loses in Louisiana in 2008 due to the *ahem*... 'demographic changes', it's clear we can add it to that list as well. I don't want or need a Dem that is any more to the right of Ms. Mary Oil Company "I-voted-for-ANWR-drilling" Landrieu.

Having said that, we wouldn't have a majority in the House if it weren't for the various seats we have taken by Reps. elected from those states & MS.

So no, the Dems shouldn't 'tell the south to suck it'.

I'm sure Maltese would like them to, so that the GOP can dominate there. But obviously the Dems should and will continue to compete vigorously in states like Arkansas, Virginia, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Tennessee, and now even Missouri. And rightfully so.

But the south most definitely needs to be reprimanded for Bush. That's all them.

 

[james1200]

great...waste money in states where you have no chance. you think the RNC is ever gonna waste money on the northeast again? every single republican in new england went down except for one...this is the dems power base like the south is the repub power base. how about spending resources, which are finite especially for democrats who always get outspent, in ways that make sense. we can win over the libertarian west because of our stance on social issues...we will never again win over white southerners. give it up.

 

[Homoaffectional]

great...waste money in states where you have no chance.

Tell that to Jim Webb...

 

[Kulindahr]

Well, you may have noted that the party some while back dumped all images of the greatest president ever elected from their party, Mr Lincoln.....

nooo...i didn't know that. but not much surprises me about them anymore. god forbid you remind the good ol' boys that lincoln freed the slaves i guess...

I missed something -- aren't we talking about the Democrats? Lincoln was a Republican, who stood fast against a Democrat-led peace movement that would have made peace with the South and let them keep slavery.

 

[Kulindahr]

Please note that every successful Democratic presidential candidate in the last 43 years has been from the South.

The Democrats don't need the South - - but they don't need to win elections, either.

That's an interesting observation.

I'm afraid it may perplex my mind for some time.

Hmmm.....

 

[Kulindahr]

Question: is there a correlation between effort spent in campaigns for president and how well congressional candidates of that party do?

If so, there's a very good reason right there to continue the all-state campaign strategy Dean went with -- for any party.

 

[provenlogic]

Since i'm a gay far left wing liberal, living in louisiana, i'll just ignore this thread.

 

[iman]

well, let's see. bush is from texas, his values are southern christian values, his base, what's left of it, is all southern...why shouldn't the south be blamed for him?

Bush is a product of Andover, Yale, and Harvard. His "values" are of a privileged, arrogant, spoiled human being.

The South has a long Democratic/Populist tradition. The poorer people in the south still vote Democratic, it is the new southern middle class that has gone Republican.

The Northeast has a long tradition of electing Republican patricians and, until the 60's, was heavily Republican.

Nothing could be more shortsighted than for either major party to abandon a particular section of the country.

 

[TierraSimms]

Interestingly enough, I doubt that in the near future any future presidential Democratic candidate will ever totally win over the entire South. Some states including my home state (Alabama), Mississippi, and South Carolina will remain whole-hearted, overall Republican states. However, the more progressive minded states like Georgia (due to Metro Atlanta hold over half the state's population), North Carolina, Florida, Louisiana (due to it large Catholic population), and Tennessee will be the Democratic candidates only real hope. The latters seem to have a larger faction than the formers to see their the neo-con bullshit by informing themselves.