It's hard to answer this objectively without falling back on campaign sloganeering from my (conservative) side.
I take it you want to know how liberalism could be more attractive to the average American. That being the case, I'd have to say that the average American is much closer to the middle, than to the far left and far right. So liberals need to demonstrate some willingness to have a "bigger tent" and accept diversity within the party. Some examples that come to mind:
Joe Leiberman. I've often said that he was the only self-described liberal I'd ever consider voting for. They effectively booted him from the Democratic party.
Parental Notification and Partial - birth abortion. Why hold onto the old "slippery-slope" rationale and fight anything that might restrict unfettered access to abortions? This is out-of-step with America.
Scandal and corruption in government. I'd apply the same criticisms to both parties.
Evangelical Christians are not bad people because they believe in Jesus Christ with all their heart. Liberals demonized them.
Polarization. Rich vs. Poor, Men vs. Women, Black and Hispanic vs. White, Secular vs. Christian...I could go on. Trouble is, many Americans don't want to choose up sides and have a fight. They want an adult conversation. They want compromise. And they want solutions.
Polarization and name calling stiffens the opposition and causes gridlock.
Today, the Democrats are in full "olive-branch mode". Let's see how long that lasts once the investigations begin and we gear up for the '08 run for the White House.
The political consultants and insiders will tell you that while most Americans will beg for moderate political discourse, when it's time to get elected, personal attacks, strident criticism and opposition to sitting power works best.
It just did.
2006-11-08 04:40:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
I'm sure this isn't really the answer that you want but...
As a Democrat/Liberal my biggest mistake is allowing others (media, Republicans & my own party leaders) to place me in this generic black & white box.
I do not believe in same sex marriage, but think there does have to be some compromise. Civil unions
I am not "pro-abortion", I don't like anything about it. But I also don't feel like calling others "baby killers" without knowing their situation or walking in their shoes. And I feel no need to bomb abortion clinics in the name of God. Its insane.
I do believe in tighter borders. My ancestors from Germany & Ireland years ago had to follow immigration laws so everyone else should too. Sneaking in was not an option for them.
I think both parties go to opposite extremes on issues & its only gotten worse.
2006-11-07 20:10:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by nobodyuknow 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
The biggest one: John Kerry. He needs to just step back and lay low.
I sort of agree with you with the Gay Marriage Issue. But here is my issue: I believe that Gay partners should be given the legal and financial benefits that are afforded to the heterosexual community, but I also understand that gay relationships offend a lot of individuals for religious or personal reasons. Straight couples who are against gay marriage do not want to be classified in the same category as a same sex couple-it is offensive to them. The solution should be let Gays and Lesbians have "Civil Unions" which gives them all the benefits, but lets straight couples keep the sanction of marriage.
England has set a terrific example of how this could work.
It is NOT right to deny anyone the legal freedoms that other couples enjoy, simply because of sexual preference.
2006-11-07 17:47:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Both sides try to paint the other side as the devil. Micheal J. Fox tried to make the republicans sound like they don't care about Parkinson's decease & Rush convience people Fox was "faking it."
They are also too likely to support anyone on "their side" as if they can do no wrong.
The one biggest exception is Lieberman. I am so thrilled Lieberman won because this makes a statement to the Democrats that the people want more moderates. I wouldn't mind that the Republicans lost the house except that that means Pelosi is now speaker of the house. She is very divisive for the nation.
2006-11-07 18:12:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by leopardlady 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
i assume an apt assessment could be people who've supported Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Mao and so forth. until eventually the bitter end. Marxist is Marxist does. All interior the call of "sturdy intentions" of direction! Intentional lack of awareness of the certainty = liberal insanity.
2016-10-15 12:35:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
1. Not clarifying their position on abortion, nobody is FOR abortion, but the Democrats keep letting republicans get away with calling them baby-killers!
2. Not supporting Air America when they had the chance, furthermore, being too short-sighted to realize how much they desperately need SOMETHING to counterbalance the republican gasbag gang!
3. Not pulling together to UNIFY a single, cohesive plan for moving forward.
4. Not taping John Kerry's freaking mouth shut!!
2006-11-07 17:33:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
I agree with your #1, but think it can be stated more broadly.
The liberals seem to live in their own bubble, unaware of or indifferent to what the common person feels. Whether the subject is gay marriage or legalized prostitution, or legalized drugs.
#2 is kind of spin-off from #1.The look down on those who think differently from them.
They think "I am against abortion" means "I want all women barefoot & pregnant & under a man's control at all times!"
They think "I am against illegal immigration" means "I hate all people of a different skin color than me & don't want them in this country."
They think "I am against raising minimum wage" means " I want all the poor to stay poor while I stay rich."
They think "I am against affirmative action" means "I want things to go back to the good ol' days when n*gg*rs stayed in their place!"
Don't seem to care to know where someone is coming from. You can't change a person's mind if you don't understand why they think like they do.
2006-11-08 11:38:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by Hi! I'm Steve! 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Both parties have made the mistake of giving too much power to the radical factions in their party in order to win elections. The liberals gave into the people you spoke of and the Reps have given to much power to the religious right which cost them votes this time with their stance on stem cell research
2006-11-07 17:27:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by Carlos D 4
·
5⤊
1⤋
Being too liberal is what costs liberals. Some of the goofy inner city liberals don't seem to understand that they can't say anything that pops in their head.
2006-11-07 18:18:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
1) 'liberals' believe people have a choice to marry so if you consider that wrong to care about other people's rights, then you are very unamerican.
2) 'liberals' give small minded bigots too much space to express their views.
3) 'liberals' make a major mistake in trusting conservative republican bigots.
4) 'liberals' give all people a chance, they don't have to be 'christian' to belong.
5) 'liberals' are the ones that evoke change to be more inclusive while the other bigoted party seems to take pride in their own lack of changing with the times, granting other's rights, and 'liberals' are being proactive rather than 'conservative' reactive.
2006-11-07 17:27:20
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋