Sunday’s Book Review had two excellent articles that you should check out before the links dissolve on Sunday.
The first was a conversation with three liberal journalists about the future of liberalism and the Democratic Party. Peter Beinart, the editor of the New Republic, was one of the discussants. Peter is one of the best political minds today and why I decided to read this article.
The discussants tackle the issue of why Liberals have become estranged from the rest of America. Beinart points out the bad move that Democrats made by excluding the pro-life Bob Casey from speaking at the 1992 convention. Democrats also demonized Tipper Gore for her critiques of the music industry, which were pretty mild. Demonizing Gore and sidelining Casey helped form an image of Liberals as intolerant and excessively tolerant at the same time (my point). Liberals have an opportunity in foreign affairs to push the issue of democracy and human rights, where the conservatives are vulnerable. He says that perhaps that unseating Hussein was significant. He doesn’t discount market-oriented solutions to social security. And the Democratic party has to hit the streets and talk to real people to determine its direction for the future.
Here. Here.
I have a post brewing on privatization vs. government-based solutions to providing services, so I’m going to wait on that one. I’m going to tackle women instead.
In the last election, there was no gender gap. For the first time in years, Democrats lost their edge with women. The press pointed out that many women switched camp and voted Republican because of the security issue. The Security Moms.
I have a lot of sympathy for the Security Moms, though I voted for Kerry. I think they showed both parties that women are able to think about international affairs. Woman are about more than the abortion issue. You can’t just say “pro-choice” and expect the women’s vote. It’s time to think more closely about what women want.
Abortion issues might sway the under 30 crowd, but the post 30 crowd is too busy trying to get pregnant to make it their key issue. How about expanding and strengthening the Family Medical Leave Act? Women in the 30-50 aged demographic are busy dealing with their kid’s education and paying medical bills. Childcare. Preschools. Community centers. Women want more creative ideas on those fronts.
And security is an issue. Hell, I’m nervous about my husband commuting into NYC everyday. He’s nervous about it, too. I’m not sure that either party will be able to stave off the next surprise attack, but there must be efforts made just the same. The Democrats need to be able to talk tough. They could be going after Republicans on their refusal to stop terrorists suspects from buying guns.
There is also a snobbery in certain quarters about a woman’s role at home. Stop it, now. The old feminists have lost touch with modern women, and there needs to be new spokespeople for women on the stage.
There are a few issues, like education and work-life matters, that women do think about more closely then men. If you want to appeal to women, then hit those hard. But the Security Moms also showed us that women are more complicated than that. If you want our vote, then you must do a good job across the board.
I’m a liberal because I believe that government can play a positive role in removing obstacles that prevent individuals from reaching their true potential. However, I think the Democratic party has lost touch with that message and instead wasted effort by supporting a teetering coalition with old ideas.
The other good article was by Franklin Foer on the Joys of Federalism. Maybe I’ll write about that tomorrow.
Since this blog seems to attract a lot of women from both sides of the spectrum, let me throw it to you. What do women want?
Apt. 11d 
An excellent question! 🙂
Well, _this_ woman wants a greater commitment to the environment, a greater commitment to global cooperation and international humanitarian issues, a higher minimum wage, a national universal health plan, real movement in the direction towards sustainable energy, transparency in government, and a national board to establish consistency in voting. For a start. *wink*
I guess it boils down to this: I want government to step in to promote the common good, and to curtail private, selfish, corporate attacks on individual well-being and on the social commonwealth.
I want ordinary people and the environment in which we live to be our concern, globally and locally, not corporations and the Almighty Dollar, and I want to be able to watch our government doing its job, to make sure it isn’t talking the talk without walking the walk.
I’m not asking for much…
LikeLike
I want to preserve individual choice as much as possible. I want a fallback welfare state, especially for children (because they don’t get to choose whether to be poor, their parents do it for them). I don’t want the US to be the world’s cop, but I do want an aggressive intelligence presence and a big enough military so that we know things far enough in advance to be able to take small actions to change potentially dangerous situations.
I want to make our balloting and voting process more reliable and accountable while preserving the anonymity of the individual voter. We have a great process in this country when it works, and when people allow the process to operate on the necessary time schedule rather than pushing a particular outcome.
LikeLike
I’ll probably have a substantive comment later, after I’ve had a chance to look at the articles, but it sounds like you haven’t found the NYTimes link generator yet:
http://nytimes.blogspace.com/genlink.html
If you plug in any live NYTimes URL, it gives you back a really long version of it that doesn’t expire. Check it out.
I went to college with Peter, although I haven’t been in touch with him in years. He was both a nice guy and extremely smart. I admit, though, that I always feel a pang of jealousy when I hear about his accomplishments.
LikeLike
Abortion issues might sway the under 30 crowd,
My wife, who has been active in the Pro-Choice community and several college feminist organizations, thinks that abortion is not really a key issue for younger women either, who seem to take Roe for granted. This is the California Bay Area, though.
LikeLike
Great post. Since we’re speaking of Beinart anyway, I seem to remember TNR had an article debunking the existence of “Security Moms.” (Didn’t have time to read it.)
I did think it was very telling, on the security issue, that the areas that were hit directly on Sept. 11 (New York, D.C./Northern Virginia–even Pennsylvania, though it wasn’t a target) voted overwhelmingly for Kerry.
LikeLike
Thoughts:
Casey was left out because he didn’t support Clinton, not because he was pro-life. That was explicitly stated by the Clinton camp.
Tipper Gore should have been attacked for her ceonsorship blitz. It should not be within the province of the government to censor music for children. Parents should either be engaged enough with their kids to know what they’re listening to or they should be willing to accept that they’re children will listen to whatever. Tipper’s little group was obnoxiously pro-censorship, which is something liberals should oppose. Leftists favor censorship.
LikeLike
Chaucer said sovreignty, iirc. Rana’s list works for me, but I think a lot of what I want isn’t in the purview of the federal government. I want schools that recognize that many, many families are two-income families who work 9-5 and through the summer. They need creative after-school programs and summer programs that are reasonably priced so parents aren’t scrambling to cover that time. I’d actually also really like to see movement on energy conservation. I’m pretty lazy when it comes to that, but make it easy for me–require higher gas mileage for example and I’ll be on board with that. Campaign finance reform, big time. Get the corporations and the lobbying groups out of elections. I realize that’s a big thing to ask, but after 2004, I want to see some more fair campaigning. That’s a pretty random list, but a list nonetheless. BTW, Casey is supposedly running against Santorum. We’ll see how that goes. I guess we have a pro-choice republican in office; we may as well have a pro-life democrat.
LikeLike
I honestly don’t think it was “security moms”. Most of the red states haven’t had acts of terrorism, so I don’t think it’s foremost in their minds. I think women that voted for Bush got swayed by the whole “family values” thing. They don’t want gay marriage, witness the passage of anti-gay marriage amendments that go hand in hand with Bush winning in red states. I think many of these women (and men) are scared of “the other” whether that other is gays, Arabs, etc. I think they see “the traditional life” crumbling around them and they are trying to hold onto an ideal that never was.
As a mom with kids in school I would really like to see some realistic funding of education. No more unfunded mandates like No Child Left Behind. I want educators setting the standards for where children should be, not legislators. I want people to be allowed to live their lives and form families how they see fit. I want to be told the truth (okay that one is not realistic) about our roles in other countries. I still want to keep abortion safe and legal, even though I am personally conflicted about it at times. I want a presidency that works in community with the rest of the world, not in opposition to it.
LikeLike
Education, health care costs, unemployment.
I feel like a security mom myself, but to me security is about knowing my children won’t fall from the middle class the moment I get sick.
LikeLike
I want someone who is going to be open and honest with me, a taxpayer and voter. I can’t stand having a President who doesn’t feel the need to be transparent and accountable for actions and decisions. I want someone who’s going to talk to me, to the media, to people with whom he disagrees.
I want someone who is going to put my tax dollars to work helping the people who need help. I don’t mind paying taxes when the money goes to those who are struggling…the people I see everyday who are trapped in low-wage dead-end jobs, the children who live in homeless shelters, the elderly who can’t keep up with property taxes but can’t afford to move anywhere else.
I want someone who is going to welcome people into American society, not exclude them from it by passing constitutional amendments narrowly defining marriage or by offending the world with arrogant unilateral action.
LikeLike
I think the conversation Laura linked in NYT is worth reading – and note that Beinart is the one who has gotten a $600000 advance to write a book about how the Dems can come back from the wilderness, not van den Heuvel or Tomasky.
I voted for Bush over both Gore and Kerry, mostly because of what I think is wrong with Gore and Kerry (different things, but both were very bad candidates in my view). Socially, I would rather vote Dem. All my friends think these votes were really eccentric choices on my part (or, well, evil?). I favor abortion on demand, and think justice really demands civil unions for gays. But I see the Dems in pawn to the Moore-ist left, both on defense policy and on dividing the nation into specific groups and trying to figure out how to pander to each, and I think they won’t take the steps necessary to defend the country. Until they convince me that they will, I will likely continue voting Dem at the state level and Reep at the Federal.
Beinart is the one with some idea how to win me back for the Dems at the national level. Now, whether the numbers are there if the Dems move towards me and all the other lapsed-on-the-center voters, or whether they lose too much to some Nader-Moore-Sharpton figure on the left if they do – I don’t know.
LikeLike
I don’t feel like I have much more to say about what I want, as my comments would echo everyone else’s. You all are speaking very well for me. 🙂
I did want to respond to Lisa V’s comment, though. My sister lives in an extremely red county in a red state (my hometown), and I know she voted for Bush. She doesn’t hate or fear gays–she really could care less about same-sex marriage, in all honesty. The main issue for her was “feeling safe.” Even though she lives someplace where terrorists are highly unlikely to strike, she is scared, and Bush makes her feel safer. Don’t ask me why, because God knows he scares the crap out of me. But not her.
And I know MANY women like her in that area. They work, so they’re not these extremely traditional, “a woman’s place is in the home” types. These women I know think abortion should remain legal, but that’s not one of the issues that gets them fired up; I think they take it for granted that it will always be there, and they don’t really belive Roe will be overturned. And most of these women I know could honestly care less about the whole gay marriage issue, one way or the other. They don’t see it affecting them, so they don’t care if it’s legal or illegal. While I disagree with that apathy, I truly believe that’s what it is–apathy, not fear or hatred.
But what do they care about? Feeling “safe.” Making sure their kids grow up “safe.” Again, I don’t understand how they get that feeling from Bush, especially my sis; she has two boys, for God’s sake. I’m terrified the older one (high shool age) will end up being drafted thanks to the way Bush’s foreign policy has completely f’ed things up. But, of the women I know, these impulse for safty is *very* strong, and I think we need to take that for what it is instead of ascribing other motives that may or may not be there. If we don’t do that, I think the Democrats are going to continue to lose elections.
LikeLike
How to find some commonalties amongst all these great comments? I’m not sure I can, because my question was rather broad. Maybe I’ll pick up some of the issues that came up and write individual posts on the topics: regulating the music industry, federal involvement in education, safety, gay marriage, environment, abortion.
I’m really interested in what issues are most salient to voters and how the Democratic party can start acting like a proper party and become an umbrella to different (but compatible) points of view.
LikeLike
Laura — you might find one of digby’s latest posts an interesting counterpoint to this question. He’s posing the question of how should Democrats challenge the Republicans in rhetorical terms, and it is interesting (and discouraging) how gendered the debate has become (and how much people are talking past each other) in the comments.
Here’s the link.
LikeLike