[Mb-civic] For Democrats, a Path Back to Power - David Broder - Washington Post Op-Ed

[William Swiggard]

For Democrats, a Path Back to Power

By David S. Broder
Thursday, October 13, 2005; Page A23

In the welter of dissonant voices raised this year during the unending 
debates about the future of the Democratic Party, few have been as clear 
as those of Elaine Kamarck and Bill Galston.

The two political scientists -- she is at Harvard and he is at the 
University of Maryland -- were colleagues in the Clinton White House and 
collaborators on an earlier analysis, published in 1989, that helped set 
the direction for Bill Clinton's successful 1992 campaign.

Last week, under the auspices of the Third Way organization, they 
released their new compendium of polling data and political advice, "The 
Politics of Polarization." In 64 pages, notably devoid of academic 
jargon, and 24 easy-to-understand tables, they attempt to steer their 
party directly back toward the path to power.

Because that path aims down the political center, it will not be easily 
accepted by many of the activists in the organizations that control the 
Democratic Party at the grass roots and dominate its fundraising, 
whether they be Hollywood millionaires or Internet Deaniacs.

These men and women -- who provide most of the energy in Democratic 
campaigns -- ardently oppose both the domestic and international 
policies of the Bush administration and yearn for candidates who would 
reverse President Bush's direction on Iraq, taxes, gay rights, abortion 
and other issues.

Because of the work they do and the money they raise for the Democratic 
Party, elected officials -- especially in Washington -- heed their 
views. Their influence is reflected in Democratic votes against 
everything from the Central American Free Trade Agreement to the Supreme 
Court nomination of John Roberts.

Kamarck and Galston are making the case -- hard for these folks to 
acknowledge -- that victory for the Democrats requires more than ardent 
anti-Bush rhetoric. It requires, they say, a revision of Democratic 
doctrine on both national security and social and moral issues.

The perception that Democrats are weak on confronting terrorism and 
hostile to the culture of the deeply religious has cost the party 
dearly, especially among married women and Catholics. Galston and 
Kamarck calculate that the odds of a married woman supporting the 
Republican candidate rose from just under 40 percent in 1992 to nearly 
55 percent last year. Clinton, a Baptist, carried the Catholic vote by 
nine points in 1992, while John Kerry, a Catholic, lost among his 
co-religionists by five points.

"Moral values" are particularly important to both groups. Kamarck and 
Galston are quick to point out, however, that this does not require 
Democrats to abandon their support for abortion rights or to condemn 
homosexuality. "Moral values" embrace more than gay marriage and 
abortion; the voters' definition includes "personal integrity, family 
solidarity, and the social compact," particularly concern for those in 
need of help.

This opens the way for Democrats to recoup ground if they find a 
candidate who conveys strength of conviction on national security -- the 
opposite, they say, of Kerry saying, "I actually did vote for the $87 
billion [for Iraq and Afghanistan], before I voted against it." It would 
help if the candidate also had a solid marriage, a churchgoing habit and 
an ability to express sympathetic understanding of those who disagree 
with his or her personal support of abortion and gay rights.

The final table in their report is one of the most intriguing. It traces 
the changing partisan patterns of individual states, noting the 
increasing Democratic strength on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts and 
the rising Republican allegiance of the South and the Rockies. "The net 
result of these developments," they say, "is that the Midwest is far 
more central to presidential campaigns than it was two decades ago."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/12/AR2005101202000.html?nav=hcmodule
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20051013/ea121783/attachment-0001.htm