Make the Bush Record the Issue

Um, news flash: Bush isn't running in 2008.

The real issue is the direction of the country. The Dems want to (and probably will) turn us into a Western European-style socialist democracy. The Republicans want to continue their naive "us against them" approach to foreign policy. Neither direction is attractive to me.

Mac The Blogger
coloradomac.blogspot.com

Why is there no mention of the approval rating of congress? I think this bears mentioning. As for the SCHIP veto? Maybe we should make that to include only children, not freeloading adults who are able to get state coverage (of course paid for by me...who can take care of my own family, and don't expect the government to "bail me out") WAKE UP!! Cheap shots at the president are not the answer. When America is hit again by terrorists that are training to kill us in our own country, then will you think maybe this as issue that needs to be addressed? What happened to United We Stand? Too much socialism will be our demise.

Markos, as always you put forth a good argument. However, as a democrat, during the primaries I have to agree with Barack Obama in questioning the white house papers of hillary. She is the one making the charge of inexperienced vs. her great experience. That can only be verified by the disclosures of the white house papers. Then with an informed choice, we can then address the many failures of Bush

the democrats will only be fine if they get their message more focused. the collossal wreckage that the Bush Administration has left will not, alone, produce a victory next year. i, for one, am not at all convinced that this thing is a done deal.

There is a side of America that really believes in honor and courage. In reality we as Americans love our country deeply. Unfortunatly some of us feel that this honor and courage is being expelled under false information. The culprit encourages both sides to fight so that his false agenda can stay alive.

Now THAT's the "fightin' Dem" I was hoping to see MarKOS! Thanks for the birthday present.

Great article, Markos. You hit it right on. These past 7 years of Republican Administration have opened the eyes of people regarding what conservatism and GOP is all about.

For years, people have been bombarded unilaterally by caricature of Democratic Party by radio talk shows and cable news media. Thanks to people like you, and blogs, people are now getting to see the truth.
And hopefully people who traditionally vote Republican against their economic interest will see the light.

Right on! I absolutely agree! The Democrats will be fine in '08!

Great Column, Markos! Indeed there is a big difference between Republicans and Democrats and you have hit it right on. Many voters who vote Republican are voting against their interest because they have only heard and listened to Caricatures of Democrats painted by Republicans. These past 7 years hopefully opened the eyes of people what conservatism and being Republican is all about.

He tried to make the speech about opening restricted airspace into a speech about "Freedom," ease, and comfort. So yes, the speech maintains an emotional appeal to the audience in terms of the aspiration for Feedom that Americans, by and large, share. This kind of appeal is the consistent focus of Bush's speeches. The policies are often muddled...as for his suit...well, that's just another indicator that his adminstration has more problems than a tailor or a personal trainer can fix.

No, I think you're right that many people don't feel a connection to Bush because his rhetoric can no longer contend with the magnitude of his policy's failures. But I'm still amazed at how much his rhetoric has had to overcome to help him win two elections. Yes, Bush has been terrible for America, but there's something powerful in his illogical, yet emotionally-tuned rhetoric that Americans have somehow connected to (at least during the first term, and enough to get him re-elected). I would like to throw the baby out with this administration's bathwater as well, but I truly believe emotionally-appealing rhetoric works for Americans (beyond anger at conservatives, of course).

The other night Bush announced in person that he was going to break the nightmare of canceled flights during the up coming holiday season. Is this meant to win the hearts and minds of his fellow Americans? And, hey, is his face bloated and are there another thirty or forty pounds hidden beneathe his ill fitted suit?
or is that just water retention?

Okay, but at some point, democratic presidential nominees will have to move beyond defining themselves in relationship to the shortcomings of conservative social and political ideology. In fact, I would say, it is much more important for Democrats to begin constructing a narrative and identity independent of what Republicans do and believe, because the key to attracting voters is putting forth a message imbued with positive emotional appeal, not simply a well-crafted argument that Americans are somehow eager to unpack, compare, and contrast. This skillful appeal to the hearts and emotions of the American populous is EXACTLY how Bush won two elections. Where is the logic in his policies, initiatives, and his SPEECHES? In regards to the emotional content of his speeches, Bush and his speech writers are experts at tuning into what the American audience wants to hear. And it doesn't go too far beyond crafting speeches that communicates a feeling or feelings that the audience is quick to want to feel. Look at the Katrina speeches. Democrats need to take a cue from Bush's campaign handbook of appealing to the voter's emotions. Appealing to emotions in this way is a compelling method to gain support; it is certainly more compelling than repeating a narrative in which you constantly remind American's of how terrible something or someone else (Republicans) is. If the democratic strategy stops at reminding Americans of how terrible they should feel about the current administration without then articulating a strong, emotionally-charged narrative of their own, the coming democratic take-over of the whitehouse will be short-lived.

Okay, but at some point, democratic presidential nominees will have to move beyond defining themselves in relationship to the shortcomings of conservative social and political ideology. In fact, I would say, it is much more important for Democrats to begin constructing a narrative and identity independent of what Republicans do and believe, because the key to attracting voters is putting forth a message imbued with positive emotional appeal, not simply a well-crafted argument that Americans are somehow eager to unpack, compare, and contrast. This skillful appeal to the hearts and emotions of the American populous is EXACTLY how Bush won two elections. Where is the logic in his policies, initiatives, and his SPEECHES? In regards to the emotional content of his speeches, Bush and his speech writers are experts at tuning into what the American audience wants to hear. And it doesn't go too far beyond crafting speeches that communicates a feeling or feelings that the audience is quick to want to feel. Look at the Katrina speeches. Democrats need to take a cue from Bush's campaign handbook of appealing to the voter's emotions. Appealing to emotions in this way is a compelling method to gain support; it is certainly more compelling than repeating a narrative in which you constantly remind American's of how terrible something or someone else (Republicans) is. If the democratic strategy stops at reminding Americans of how terrible they should feel about the current administration without then articulating a strong, emotionally-charged narrative of their own, the coming democratic take-over of the whitehouse will be short-lived.

You hit the nail on the head, Markos.