Oh, yeah, this is a really smart platform for Indiana Democrats in the fall election:
"You've seen the devil," he said of Daniels, after delegates had laughed at a 2004 Daniels campaign commercial that promised to stop the outsourcing of Indiana jobs. "To date, he's already signed $775 million in state contracts to out-of-state companies."Referring to Vice President Dick Cheney's infamous hunting accident, which wounded another hunter, Thurman said: "It should have been Mitch Daniels hunting with Dick Cheney."
On the other hand, some Democrats are urging that the party move beyond a "Ditch Mitch" theme, which makes sense, since the governor isn't, you know, actually running. There is this, for example:
Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson, who many Democrats hope will run for governor in 2008, said polls that show Daniels' and President Bush's approval ratings are down have left some Democrats with the illusion that "we will waltz to victory" this November."I don't believe that for a second," he said.Voters, Peterson said, want change and will support whomever they believe will make things better in their lives. That support is won, he said, by presenting a positive agenda with superior ideas, not negative campaigning.
A positive agenda with superior ideas? What the heck's he thinking? The man has no future in politics.
Comments
The DNC does have an agenda for the 2006 elections - it's posted on their site.
Also, are gay marriage amendments, flag burning amendments and gay adoption superior ideas that make up a positive agenda? No, it's the same ol' Rove smokescreen that the Republicans continue to trot out - this time it won't be enough...
Jeff- You and I have had this discussion. the point on the Dems and message is, you have to lead us to a link on a website to get to the agenda, but when Dems actually speak on the stage, they don't talk about the agenda. They speak in terms of comparing Daniels to the devil, and Bush as stupid. It ain't enough, either.
I agree that the GOP agenda isn't positive either, but being that it is an agenda, and on the three issues you listed, unfortunately, these do resonates with the majority of Americans.
I do think that is mere grandstanding and not anything that will become law, but grandstanding works.
Jeff, I have read the Democratic Agenda that you have been touting all over the Blogosphere...and yet all of the Donkey talking points are still oriented toward what a wholesale crummy job they think the GOP is doing.
What good is an agenda if you're not going to promote it with your actions AND your words? Right now, the only thing Dems are promoting is "Hate Bush" and "Ditch Mitch." Hell, that seems to be the only message that Robert Rouse walked away from the Democratic Convention with! Check out his convention coverage posts at http://leftofcentrist.blogspot.com and tell me otherwise! I want to hear about the Democrats' ideas and solutions. Simply saying that "we'll do everything the opposite of Bush/Daniels" isn't gonna cut it.
What does the DNC have to do with anything? Shouldn't the state party's "positive agenda of superior ideas" be state specific? Can't even address the need to have something more than "Ditch Mitch" without throwing in a little bit of gratuitous Rove-bashing?
The democrats speak about their agenda all the time - wesley clark, howard dean, harry reid, etc are on the talk shows every week touting this agenda.
Also, I think the agenda does label how they would do things different than the GOP but that doesn't mean that it's just saying "we'll do everything the opposite of Bush". It clearly lays out several specific points that would be at the forefront of their legislative agenda.
Leo,
The DNC sets the stage for the entire party and there was a reference in the piece about Bush's poor polling numbers leading to an easy victory.
I don't believe that the entire party is focused on "Ditch Mitch". I think if you could look at nearly any convention and you'd find quotes bashing the other party but that doesn't mean that is their agenda - in fact it's a little disingenuous to suggest so.
And since Rove is now focused on broad strategy and politics I believe he is fair game for criticim. In fact you also criticized the upcoming discussion/vote on the gay marriage amendment. Do you honestly believe Rove has nothing to do with this given his title and focus within the administration?
I'm sure if I were to do some research, Leo, I would find similar opinions expressed by you in the not-so-distant past when Republicans' only message was "Impeach Clinton" and O'Bannon's "Legacy of Neglect" in which the Indiana Republican Party blamed Frank and Joe for everything under the sun, including the West Nile Virus.
The fact of the matter is that while this governor ignores (at best) public education, Democrats are talking about making investments. While Democrats are trying to provide Hoosiers with affordable health care by allowing small businesses to pool their resources, Republicans voted down their bill on a party line vote. And while Democrats want to focus on bringing good paying jobs to Indiana, our governor is out there telling us that "most Hoosiers would consider $9an hour an excellent job (see Delphi)."
There is nothing wrong with contrasting this view with Mitch's view. And if you think that gay marriage, selling our state, and praying at the State House is a more progressive platform for Indiana, then I would have to say that you are an irresponsible journalist at best.
This post makes me want to puke. Mitch Daniels' entire argument in 2004 was "Ditch Joe" and this "16 years of neglect."
Leo, do you have a problem with holding this guy accountable to his promises? Do you remember him spending millions of dollars telling Hoosier that Joe Kernan bought rock salt from Michigan? Well, Mitch Daniels just spent over a million bucks on rock salt from Kansas City.
It seems like you are giving Daniels a free pass on his attacks on his predecessors (which, by the way, continue today) but question his opponents for holding him to his own record.
Maybe you should call on Daniels to stop attacking honorable men like Frank O'Bannon and Joe Kernan. He won this job a year and a half ago, but not a week goes by that he doesn't attack them in one way or another.
He needs to take ownership over his job. Attacking his predecessors won't do a darned thing for bringing new jobs, improving education, or addressing our property tax situation.
What, in your opinion, is Daniels' message?
Oh, and one last question: since you are so positive that State Democrats offered no message at their convention, I assume you went there and listened to all of the speakers.
Because I was there. And I introduced myself to everyone at the press table.
I didn't meetcha.
Do voters care about platforms? I don't think they do. Name the voter you knows more than two planks and you can bet the voter will be voting a straight ticket. Some (contractors?) might say that the largest plank in the Indiana Republican platform should be "Get rich with Mitch."
Leo. What a fake.
Wow, change can be a difficult thing for some folks. When it comes to the democratic party of today, I can't decide which I find more annoying:
that incessant whining
or
that unbelievably arrogant tone
Tim, get some therapy, man. You're spending waaaay too much time telling people who disagree with you in the slightest how much you hate them.
No Name,
Sorry it came across as "hate". I honestly don't hate anyone. I just become exasperated when people seem to make it their lifes' goal to denigrate, badmouth, and generally disparage people whom I believe are really TRYING to do something right. (at least their doing something)
I was one of the first ones to stand up for Bill Clinton, hell I voted for him twice!(in retrospect a poor choice due to character issues)and I voted for Evan Bayh, thought he was a hell of a good governor. I'm just blasting the really virulent nutjobs in the democratic party because they've become so numerous of late.
I don't agree with everything Mitch Daniels or George Bush does, but I like them both, not because their republicans, but because they have the ability to see the big picture, they look farther ahead than the next election or the latest poll.
All I ask is you give me better ideas than they have. Why can't anyone do that except the occasional libertarian?