Democrats in the US need to avoid the 3 Cherniak Laws of Party Unity
Sigh…
The American blogosphere has become ever more explosive since Barack Obama clinched the nomination. There is a lot of resentment, and both sides seem to have some behaving well, and some behaving really badly.
Firstly, there are some Clintonistas saying they want to vote for a moderate with experience. One must admit in the “moderate with experience” category, McCain has Obama beat, considering Obama isn’t moderate, nor really that experienced.
However, there are reasons people vote for President. Some want the cooler person, the one who they feel is more like them. Barack Obama wins a lot of support there. George W. Bush won many votes against Al Gore because Gore (who is hilarious btw) did appear like Al Gore the android…
Barack Obama is above blue states and red states. He wants to be a uniter, not a divider. I have heard this before as well. Not to mention the whole “im gonna change Washington bit.” This isn’t new. Bush the outsider vs. Gore the insider…
There will be voters from all over the place who will be voting for either McCain or Obama for all kinds of different reasons. They are drastically different. Nobody will be able to argue that they are the same candidate, like that Futurama episode with Jack Johnson and John Jackson.
However, the Democrats I have seen on the blogosphere are making me chuckle a little.
Being a great advocate of "party unity" myself…I have a little bit of advice.
If Clinton supporters are thinking of voting for McCain because he is a moderate and experienced, other Democrats should remind them McCain’s record of siding with Bush makes him rather right-wing. McCain’s maverick image is as solid as Bill Clinton’s popularity with Black people. As we have seen, no image is unchangeable.
Democrats can also argue that bad experience is not better than no experience. I remember a few people making that argument. It isn’t the best one, but one that can sway a few McCain Democrats to vote for Obama.
So here they are, the 3 Cherniak Laws of Party Unity
1) Do not call your opposition stupid. Do not call the supporters of the opposition stupid. This will make them angry, and probably vote against you out of spite. Do not say things like “I don’t understand how people do not see it my way”.
2) When half the party voted for somebody else, you need the other half. Include your opposition in the decision making process, and don’t call them out when they don’t blindly follow along. Having people like Bill Richardson saying things like, “Obama will remember you if you support before June 3rd,” is not helping anybody at this point. 300 superdelegates supported the other candidate. Are these people completely screwed? If Richardson becomes the VP, a lot of Clinton supporters will probably see it in a very negative way.
3) Do not question the “loyalty” of people who are skeptical of your party’s candidate. Calling Hillary supporters who want to vote for McCain things like “disloyal” and “not real Democrats” is not hurting anyone but the Democratic Party. Do not forget that if there is a term called “Reagan Democrats”, it means there are Democrats who have voted Republican in the past. Don’t antagonize people. I was a Liberal for 10 years. Saying I am not a Liberal because I did not support a bumbling disaster, who was not making any effort to stop bumbling or stop being a disaster, is insulting my intelligence and the intelligence of many others. If some Clinton supporters think Obama is a disaster, make them think otherwise, or at least try to. You won’t get them all, but you will get more than just calling all the Clintonistas “not real Democrats.”
The American blogosphere has become ever more explosive since Barack Obama clinched the nomination. There is a lot of resentment, and both sides seem to have some behaving well, and some behaving really badly.
Firstly, there are some Clintonistas saying they want to vote for a moderate with experience. One must admit in the “moderate with experience” category, McCain has Obama beat, considering Obama isn’t moderate, nor really that experienced.
However, there are reasons people vote for President. Some want the cooler person, the one who they feel is more like them. Barack Obama wins a lot of support there. George W. Bush won many votes against Al Gore because Gore (who is hilarious btw) did appear like Al Gore the android…
Barack Obama is above blue states and red states. He wants to be a uniter, not a divider. I have heard this before as well. Not to mention the whole “im gonna change Washington bit.” This isn’t new. Bush the outsider vs. Gore the insider…
There will be voters from all over the place who will be voting for either McCain or Obama for all kinds of different reasons. They are drastically different. Nobody will be able to argue that they are the same candidate, like that Futurama episode with Jack Johnson and John Jackson.
However, the Democrats I have seen on the blogosphere are making me chuckle a little.
Being a great advocate of "party unity" myself…I have a little bit of advice.
If Clinton supporters are thinking of voting for McCain because he is a moderate and experienced, other Democrats should remind them McCain’s record of siding with Bush makes him rather right-wing. McCain’s maverick image is as solid as Bill Clinton’s popularity with Black people. As we have seen, no image is unchangeable.
Democrats can also argue that bad experience is not better than no experience. I remember a few people making that argument. It isn’t the best one, but one that can sway a few McCain Democrats to vote for Obama.
So here they are, the 3 Cherniak Laws of Party Unity
1) Do not call your opposition stupid. Do not call the supporters of the opposition stupid. This will make them angry, and probably vote against you out of spite. Do not say things like “I don’t understand how people do not see it my way”.
2) When half the party voted for somebody else, you need the other half. Include your opposition in the decision making process, and don’t call them out when they don’t blindly follow along. Having people like Bill Richardson saying things like, “Obama will remember you if you support before June 3rd,” is not helping anybody at this point. 300 superdelegates supported the other candidate. Are these people completely screwed? If Richardson becomes the VP, a lot of Clinton supporters will probably see it in a very negative way.
3) Do not question the “loyalty” of people who are skeptical of your party’s candidate. Calling Hillary supporters who want to vote for McCain things like “disloyal” and “not real Democrats” is not hurting anyone but the Democratic Party. Do not forget that if there is a term called “Reagan Democrats”, it means there are Democrats who have voted Republican in the past. Don’t antagonize people. I was a Liberal for 10 years. Saying I am not a Liberal because I did not support a bumbling disaster, who was not making any effort to stop bumbling or stop being a disaster, is insulting my intelligence and the intelligence of many others. If some Clinton supporters think Obama is a disaster, make them think otherwise, or at least try to. You won’t get them all, but you will get more than just calling all the Clintonistas “not real Democrats.”
Labels: Admit you laughed when I called myself an expert on party unity...
par / by Anthony à / at 8:50 a.m.
6 Commentaires:
Many folks (a lot of em in Quebec) thought picking Chretien as Liberal leader was a disaster as well when he didnt distinguish himself as Opposition leader. Once the election came, and 3 more terms as PM later, that obviously was an incorrect view.
Until there is an election Antonio, and until we see the results, your not-so-subtle shot at Dion being picked and describing it as a bumbling disaster is a tad premature.
"However, there are reasons people vote for President. Some want the cooler person, the one who they feel is more like them. Barack Obama wins a lot of support there."
Good start with your laws of party unity, accusing Barack Obama supporters of superficiality.
sorry for thinking personal popularity is an issue to voters lol
I suppose the corollary to those laws would be something along the lines of "don't threaten to vote for the other party when your first choice doesn't win."
leny
it is always, and I repeat always, the responsibility of the winner to heal the wounds of the previous race, because he/she has the most to lose
It is the responsibility of the party to come together. It isn't a unilateral activity.
Post a Comment
<< Home