A New Improved Emerging Dem Majority?

I'll be honest. The Democratic Strategist has not been a must read for me in the past. But now it will be as my friend Ed Kilgore, formerly of New Donkey, is the new Managing Editor. And Ed starts out with a bang, with a article discussing John Judis and Ruy Texeira's new the Re-Emerging Democratic Majority. Ed writes:

It's the indies, and to some extent professionals, they suggest, who make the "emerging Democratic majority" a potentially unstable coalition rather than a mass movement. And their article ends on a cautionary note. While enactment of some popular, landmark domestic legislation (e.g., universal health insurance) could solidify the Democratic majority, the dynamics of the Democratic coalition, along with built-in resistance to change in Washington's governing institutions, could make that difficult or even impossible. And without such transformative, "realigning reforms," the Democratic majority may turn out to somewhat fragile, and beset by the kinds of intraparty tensions that tend to divide the Left from the Center. The 2008 election, they suggest, could provide a critical test of Democrats' ability to manage their coalition, particularly since presidential elections inherently make it harder to accomodate the sort of state and regional customization of campaigns that worked well for Democrats in 2006.

I'll write my thoughts on all this in a later post.

< Need a Passport? Stand in Line | Why Bloomberg Ain't Running >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    The problem, as usual, is the south (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:17:49 AM EST
    White southerners refuse to vote for northern Democrats, mostly out of resentment for civil rights. In order to get the realignment we need, Democrats are going to have to get nasty about "Texas Republicans," and mostly write off the south for state-wide races.  

    Whatever, (none / 0) (#2)
    by HeadScratcher on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:35:53 AM EST
    Way too simplistic approach. If that were true then Clinton and Carter wouldn't have been elected since they represent the same values as the Northern Democrats.

    Most Southerners I know (and I live in the South) don't like being stereotyped as ignorant racists, bible bleeding, evolution denying, church going, military loving, inbreeding, gun loving people. That's what Clinton and Carter had going for them - they understood the good parts of Southern culture while making the efforts to progress.


    The Backlash against theSouth (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 11:40:38 AM EST
    is growing. This victim act has grown incredibly tired.

    And let me tell you who accelerated it - George Bush and the Republicans.

    In essence, the South elected him and the GOP and the South is being viewed as responsible for the mess the country is in.

    I am not saying it is fair but I think it is happening.


    2008 another culture war election (none / 0) (#4)
    by fairleft on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:23:25 PM EST
    while issues that really matter and most of the voters sit on the sidelines. That's what 2008 feels like. Not what leftists and progressives should be hoping for, cuz we always lose (in a myriad of ways) this 'low turnout' politics. (As you've said a multitude of times.)