the limits of outrage
Like all hardened life-long Democrats, I'm hoping for a sea-change in American politics in the 2006 election year. (Hence my work with Joshua Grossman on that gargantuan overview of House targeting.)
I'd like to make a simple point about "sea changes" that is not always apparent on the blogs.
#1: Peer pressure is a significant component in American political life. It's what's kept Bush and the GOP in office.
#2: The people who change their votes aren't necessarily the ones talking about politics, but they are the ones who are listening.
Peer pressure happens at exactly the point where people who are open to change their vote LISTEN to what's going on in the political environment and decide: "time to give the other side a shot." This is a rational and social process...but not so much an ideological one. (In my mind "loyalty to party" in the US comes out of coalition victories that acheive results...not out of "ideological conviction.")
I think 2004 represents the limits of traditional ideological push...ie. outrage driven politics...for both parties.
There is a real danger of "outrage fatigue." Democrats in 2006 need to understand the power of the water cooler, of the "quiet conversations." Corruption, competence and good government count for much more than outrage in the current environment.
Blogs are great tools for outrage, but outrage has limits.
My message to Democrats: build the 2006 campaign around the concept of good government and reform of corruption. We need to be the party that's fired up to "set things right, and do right by the public."
Eagerness for good government and reform, not outrage, will carry the day.
I'd like to make a simple point about "sea changes" that is not always apparent on the blogs.
#1: Peer pressure is a significant component in American political life. It's what's kept Bush and the GOP in office.
#2: The people who change their votes aren't necessarily the ones talking about politics, but they are the ones who are listening.
Peer pressure happens at exactly the point where people who are open to change their vote LISTEN to what's going on in the political environment and decide: "time to give the other side a shot." This is a rational and social process...but not so much an ideological one. (In my mind "loyalty to party" in the US comes out of coalition victories that acheive results...not out of "ideological conviction.")
I think 2004 represents the limits of traditional ideological push...ie. outrage driven politics...for both parties.
There is a real danger of "outrage fatigue." Democrats in 2006 need to understand the power of the water cooler, of the "quiet conversations." Corruption, competence and good government count for much more than outrage in the current environment.
Blogs are great tools for outrage, but outrage has limits.
My message to Democrats: build the 2006 campaign around the concept of good government and reform of corruption. We need to be the party that's fired up to "set things right, and do right by the public."
Eagerness for good government and reform, not outrage, will carry the day.
Comments
With this in mind, the reform of corruption frame can help them. They never would have voted for corruption, so the Republicans aren't their fault.