Saving The Democrats, From Themselves
The guys at Edelman, Wal-Mart's PR firm have been sending me a lot of links to media articles on the Democrats attacking Wal-Mart. For most of the past eight months those links have usually been to articles supportive of the position that Wal-Mart is a bad thing, and Wal-Mart's response to them.
But over the last few weeks, there's been some change, a great deal of them have been to major city newspapers Op/Ed pages, that have been blasting the Democrats for their position.
I hadn't posted anything on it, just read the op/ed pieces in amazement, wondering why the sudden shift at places like the Washington Post and LA Times and Newsweek. Then, it finally hit me, they are trying to save the Democrats, from themselves.
The common theme, from Sebastian Mallaby's "Shopping for Support Down the Wrong Aisle" to Robert Samuelson's "Wal-Mart Is A Diversion", is that the Democratic Party is, by attacking Wal-Mart, attacking the very voters it needs to win the mid-term elections this year.
Mallaby and Samuelson both point to studies that show Wal-Mart saves lower income American's over 200 Billion dollars a year, more of that on food savings than the 33 billion the feds spend on food stamps.
So, while the Wake Up Wal-Mart folks at the United Food and Commerical Workers are happy to have the Democrats on their side, they are basically pandering to a vote (union workers) they already have. But at the same time, by demonizing a place that well over half of non-union low income workers shop, are they alienating them?
Keep in mind, this is a demographic the DNC needs to court, not alienate. While 85 percent of Americans will shop at Wal-Mart at least once a year, polls show that of people who shop Wal-Mart more than twice a month, about 75% vote Republican, and much of it is in conservative, rural areas. Those are voters the Democrats need to win in 2006, and beyond. The people they are drawing rave reviews from, those who never or seldom shop at Wal-Mart, already vote for their party by a 4-1 margin.
What Mallaby, Samuelson, the LA Times, and NY Sun have been doing; in my never so humble opinion; is trying to wake up the Democratic party to the fact that while the far left and their donors there might love this tactic, the very voters they need to attract may be turned off by it.
My guess is more such opinion pieces will be written in the next month, as we move into the meat of the mid-term election season, hoping to shut up some of the Democratic party that is working on shooting itself in the foot, yet again.
Technorati Tags: Wal Mart, Democrats, Politics, Washington Post, Newsweek
But over the last few weeks, there's been some change, a great deal of them have been to major city newspapers Op/Ed pages, that have been blasting the Democrats for their position.
I hadn't posted anything on it, just read the op/ed pieces in amazement, wondering why the sudden shift at places like the Washington Post and LA Times and Newsweek. Then, it finally hit me, they are trying to save the Democrats, from themselves.
The common theme, from Sebastian Mallaby's "Shopping for Support Down the Wrong Aisle" to Robert Samuelson's "Wal-Mart Is A Diversion", is that the Democratic Party is, by attacking Wal-Mart, attacking the very voters it needs to win the mid-term elections this year.
Mallaby and Samuelson both point to studies that show Wal-Mart saves lower income American's over 200 Billion dollars a year, more of that on food savings than the 33 billion the feds spend on food stamps.
So, while the Wake Up Wal-Mart folks at the United Food and Commerical Workers are happy to have the Democrats on their side, they are basically pandering to a vote (union workers) they already have. But at the same time, by demonizing a place that well over half of non-union low income workers shop, are they alienating them?
Keep in mind, this is a demographic the DNC needs to court, not alienate. While 85 percent of Americans will shop at Wal-Mart at least once a year, polls show that of people who shop Wal-Mart more than twice a month, about 75% vote Republican, and much of it is in conservative, rural areas. Those are voters the Democrats need to win in 2006, and beyond. The people they are drawing rave reviews from, those who never or seldom shop at Wal-Mart, already vote for their party by a 4-1 margin.
What Mallaby, Samuelson, the LA Times, and NY Sun have been doing; in my never so humble opinion; is trying to wake up the Democratic party to the fact that while the far left and their donors there might love this tactic, the very voters they need to attract may be turned off by it.
My guess is more such opinion pieces will be written in the next month, as we move into the meat of the mid-term election season, hoping to shut up some of the Democratic party that is working on shooting itself in the foot, yet again.
Technorati Tags: Wal Mart, Democrats, Politics, Washington Post, Newsweek
posted by Crazy Politico at 4:47 AM
5Comments:
Someone needs to save the Democrats because two good parties and instead we have the barely tolerable GOP and the worse than useless DEMs. It's a tough time in history and we need tough parties.
With the constant fall from grace of the two main parties, could now be the time for a third party to make a move? Active parties I hear often about are Green, Constitution and Libertarian. None of them seem to be organized to meet the opportunity that lays before them.
What say you?
Off subject but considering your location this story http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_244064730.html
is just begging for CP's opinion.
I would think that the Democrats would be totally pro Wal-Mart after this: http://www.afa.net/Petitions/IssueDetail.asp?id=210
Mark, it's posted.
Post a Comment
<< Home