Down in a Deep Blue Hole – Part 2: Climbing Out

What is the goal? My nagging fear is that the Democratic Party (like its rival) is driven primarily by the desire to raise money, win elections, and gain power. Democrats clearly want to win majorities in the U.S. House and Senate in 2026, and then to retake the White House in 2028. But note to candidates and party leaders: strident partisans notwithstanding, the bulk of the voting public does not care about any of your power goals. They also are unimpressed by how good you are at fundraising.

The vast majority of general election voters care instead about principles like freedom, respect, equality, dignity, and honesty. Even more, ordinary voters care about their personal outcomes, such as affordable prices and loan rates, good employment, low taxes, stable retirement account balances, living in peace, and their family’s health and well-being. Voters want to believe that if they vote for you, your policies, integrity, and competence will make their lives better in ways that matter most to them.

Therefore, I will proceed here on faith that the Democratic Party ultimately will convert any selfish lusts into a goal that is public-serving. When one thinks about it, desiring first to do what is best for the people of our country is not a revolutionary concept, is it?

Why is the main goal the main goal?  The why of a political campaign really matters. If the Democratic Party and its candidates are driven by enhancing their own power, they will fare worse than if their deepest wish is to meet the public’s needs. Similarly, if the party’s true desire is revenge on MAGA or payback against Donald Trump, the Democrats will be less successful than with a selfless goal of service. Voters can sense motive, so benefiting the public must be the party’s sincere reason why.

Now I will stop being so esoteric and idealistic and move forward with my essay – relying, as I did above, on the presumption that the national Democratic goal will be the product of true and proper motives.

Which strategy should they follow to reach their goal of service?  The first three components of campaign strategy should be to articulate the goal (i.e., to meet voters’ needs), convince voters of the genuineness of that goal, and lay out how the party will reach the goal. The legitimate desires of the public must come first and must predominate. Only after clearly establishing this strategy can Democratic leaders and candidates begin to ask for votes or money. The latter type of “campaigning” can be limited to stating the basic fact that the party must obtain broad support and filled-in ballot ovals to be in any position to help the people.

A secondary strategic question is whether to sever or preserve ties to the past. For example, Bill Clinton ran as a “new Democrat” in 1992, after his party had lost badly in 1980 and 1984 to Ronald Reagan, and in 1988 to George H.W. Bush. Governor Clinton soon moved into the White House, defeating the elder Bush’s reelection attempt. Barack Obama also ran and won on a promise of abrupt “change” from the past—even the past of his own party (in the person of Hilary Clinton). Change, indeed, is needed again.

I believe the Democratic Party should singularly emphasize its “new” focus on what all citizens (which absolutely must include working people) need from their federal government. Avoiding the temptations to castigate the opposition – plus President Trump, who won’t be running – is a necessity. So is avoiding extreme positions designed to appease special-interest groups.

Democrats also should demonstrate sincere willingness to work with Republicans in Congress, to maintain any Republican/Trump initiatives that have helped people, and to admit past mistakes.

No doubt, candidates who follow this strategy will be labeled “sell outs” by the extreme factions within the party. Republican opponents and even some Democrats will distrust this new approach, especially at first. (As enumerated last week in this blog, the party’s good will with voters is at an all-time low, provoking skepticism.) Naysaying partisans can be reminded that moderate candidates in 2024 outperformed more extreme candidates, and wise Democrats know they need to be the party of the working class and “center” of the electorate in order to serve (and receive votes from) the most people.

Ken Martin, who this year became chair of the Democratic National Committee, has yet to show that he understands the demand for a better approach. Taking the helm, Mr. Martin claimed that “anyone saying we need to start over again with a new message is wrong.” We shall see, said the blind man.