Dukakis gets it dead-on: Dems “must organize”.

Here’s a terrific link: [link]

Michael Dukakis, the Democratic Presidential candidate in 1988, was recently discussing the electoral situation unfolding for the 2008 elections, and he correctly states that Democrats, while polls are running in their favor, should not be resting on their laurels and trying to cruise into the election resting on a platform of not being Republican.

From the article:

“‘We have to organize every damn precinct in the United States of America—all 185,000,’ Mr. Dukakis said. ‘I’m serious. I’m deadly serious. I didn’t do it after the primary [in 1988]. Don’t ask me why, because that’s the way I got myself elected from the time I was running for town meeting in Brookline to the time I ran for governor.‘”

Dead on. The “Red State-Blue State” phenomenon that the pols have so lately been obsessed with is much more a construct of weak, cronyistic local parties than it is an indicator of true political affiliation. People have learned to associate both major parties with a limited subset of what it takes to provide effective national leadership, and the parties seem to have fallen painfully out of touch with how many Americans are truly dissatisfied with both parties’ special-interest-pandering platforms.

The first party to realize (again) that re-connecting with the needs of individual precincts is the essential first step towards building an effective, nationwide, bipartisan base will steal enough of a march on the other to actually pass an agenda, something that hasn’t even been realistically attempted since early in the Clinton Administration.

Dukakis continues:

“… there are huge numbers of disaffected Republicans out there. Who says they won’t vote for us?”

Once again, dead on.

Firstly, you’ve got a lot of people in the center who voted for Bush in 2004 on a national-security basis, who may not have voted for Bush in 2000, and who may especially receptive to the political sell coming into 2008, given the way the GOP under George Bush have squandered their moral authority on that issue.

You’ve also got the legions of conservatives who are absolutely heartsick over the way Conservatism has been twisted under the GOP hegemony across both the executive and legislative branches: A mandate for governing better by governing less that has fallen by the wayside against the march of a succession of narrow, social-conservative, morality “issues”. These voters would be receptive to giving their party a chance to re-organize, in just the way that the Nixon Republicans gradually gave way to Reagan Republicans. (And Reagan Democrats, too.)

And finally, add to that the Blue Dog Democrats who may have voted Bush in 2004 because “John Kerry is a <fill in the blank>.” With the right approach, these faithless partisans can easily be brought back into the fold, but as with any constituency, they must first be assured that, as in the words of many, “the Party hasn’t left them.”

Yes, the 2008 election is a slam dunk for the Democrats if they run at a National level from both the top-down and the bottom-up. But if they allow themselves to continue along the current path of constantly pandering to small special-interest constituencies, they’ll merely invite the same FUD tactics that served the GOP so well in both 2000 and 2004.

Dukakis continues,

“I’m talking about every precinct,” he said, “with a precinct captain and six block-captains that make personal contact with every single voting household. And I mean starting a year in advance. I’m not talking about parachuting in with two weeks to go. That’s baloney. And these people are people who’ve got to be from the precinct, of the precinct, look like the precinct and talk like the precinct.”

Precisely. And it’s about time that the major parties actually learned the lesson Ross Perot taught: That the only way to effectively tap a wellspring of discontent is to make people feel certain that there actually is an alternative, by making regular, average people a part of the process from the grassroots up.

The Democrats need to realize that their legions of eager young students don’t play well in Peoria. They need somebody who can translate that a liberal agenda can possibly be a conservative one, as well. True conservatives are upset at the way their “revolutions” have been squandered by an Administration responsible for the largest Federal-program increases in generations. They’re receptive, but only so long as they see an alternative that they can live with.

Nobody likes being lectured on policy by a snot-nosed kid on their doorstep, but they can be easily persuaded by their neighbor on the block. That’s the strategy that will carry 2008, 2010, and 2012, if either party has the wits to not only make use of it, but also to hold their end of the bargain, and not forget the lessons and concerns they picked up from regular voters (you and I) along the way.