Pelosi: Define Dems Agenda Or Republicans Will genre: Polispeak & Six Degrees of Speculation

Recent remarks by Nancy Pelosi indicate she understands the dangers of allowing Republicans to define the Democratic agenda. In a statement of clarity and candor, Pelosi stated, "“What we have to do is define ourselves so that Republicans do not define us. This is a define-or-be-defined business that we’re in, so you can’t leave it out in the open." Read the full article in The Hill here.

With Republicans seeking to define Democrats by their votes on such hot-button issues as gay marriage, the estate tax and flag burning, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is arguing that Democrats need to tell voters about themselves before Republicans succeed in doing it for them.

The time to criticize the Republicans’ “culture of corruption," a Democratic refrain for nearly a year, is at an end, Pelosi said; Democrats need to begin promoting their own vision of America.

“Now it’s time to talk about us. Enough of the Republicans. It’s time for us to talk about what are the priorities we’d like to see addressed, if we have the opportunity," Pelosi said in an interview with The Hill on Wednesday.

Pelosi has been seen as favoring an early message, while Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who head up the campaign committees for House and Senate Democrats, have argued for focusing on Republican misdeeds.

While I haven't been a big fan of Pelosi, I am inclined to agree with her on this particular issue. Certainly the Republicans have provided ample evidence of misdeeds but they have proven time and again an ability to spin the mistakes into salable messages. They were able to get Americans to link Iraq to 9/11 and they successfully changed the goal of removing Sadaam's WMD's to one of fighting terrorists overseas so we don't have to fight them at home and bringing democracy to the middle east.

Republicans, under the guidance of Karl Rove, have also been successful in undoing the positive messages offered by Democrats. They took John Kerry's convention focal point of a candidate with a decorated military background and turned it into his campaign's most notable liability. In my opinion, this not only points out the risk of a strategy that simply seeks to point out Republican failures, it also argues that the positive Democratic message will need to be reiterated and defended if it is to be effective.

Despite Pelosi having a good understanding of the risks associated with allowing Republicans to define the Democratic agenda, it still appears that a clear and strong message has not been crafted and adopted by the Party.

She outlined three areas where Democrats would seek to differentiate themselves from Republicans: integrity, civility and accountability. If Democrats were to take control of the House in November, their first actions would focus on promoting those values, she said.

“These are not full-blown initiatives," she cautioned, “[but] they are a beginning to differentiate from the Republicans’ misguided priorities of taking us deeply into debt, bringing up divisive social issues instead and raising those issues instead of raising the minimum wage."

The problem with a message that seeks to point out a difference in integrity, civility, and accountability is that it doesn't go far enough because it isn't defined by anything concrete. Polls indicate the cynicism about politicians isn't simply a Republican problem. While the Democrats have a good lead in potential voter preferences for 2006, they receive low marks for performance that are similar to the Republicans. In my opinion, relying on voter sentiment to take power away from the Republicans and give it to the Democrats is a risky proposition. It just isn't enough to bring the kind of shift the Democrats are seeking. Voters are looking for tangible change...rhetoric isn't going to be sufficient.

Some Democrats are concerned that when they do finalize their message and it comes time to broadcast it to voters they may not have the requisite money at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to counter the growing war chest of the Republican National Committee (RNC).

The DNC had $9.4 million at the end of April, while the RNC had $44.7 million.

This cash advantage means that Republicans will have more money to offer their message as well as money to define the Democratic message in negative terms. If the Democratic message is vague and poorly delivered, it will be easy for Republicans to better deliver their own impression of the Democratic message...one that will be clearly unfavorable.

“I’m even hard put to say what our agenda will be when we win, so I’m certainly not going into the politics of the caucus," she said. “That is as unimportant an issue to me right now as it could be."

Pelosi also responded to critics who have called her a poor spokeswoman for the party and lambasted her recent appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press."

“I have a big job to do here," she argued, noting that her critics did not have the day-to-day duties of a leadership post to contend with. “What do [the critics] do all day but get ready for their appearances? I don’t have time for that. But when I do, that will be fine. I’m the leader for a reason, and my colleagues have confidence in me to do the job."

I understand Pelosi's argument but the issue is one of comparison. Democrats who have criticized Pelosi's spokesperson abilities are doing so because the Republicans consistently do a better job of delivering a coherent and consistent message. The criticism isn't meant to say she isn't a hard worker; it's meant to make Democrats evaluate the results by the only meaningful measure...the winning of elections. If Pelosi is a strong leader in the House, but a less than effective spokesperson, then the Democrats need to find others to deliver the Party message.

The recent announcement by Congressman Murtha that he would seek the majority leader role if Democrats won control of the House have to be interpreted to mean that a cohesive plan isn't in place and doubts exist that one can be crafted and delivered by the current structure. Until the Democrats do some difficult self-examination and commit to making leadership and spokesperson decisions that are mindful of the necessary comparison to the opposition, they will continue to be seen as ineffective in offering a plan that voters can understand and embrace.

Daniel DiRito | June 13, 2006 | 9:19 AM
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Post a comment


Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry


© Copyright 2024

Casting

Read about the Director and Cast

Send us an email

Select a theme:

Critic's Corner

 Subscribe in a reader

Encores

http://DeeperLeft.com

Powered by:
Movable Type 4.2-en

© Copyright 2024

site by Eagle River Partners & Carlson Design