Thursday, March 29th, 2007...2:47 pm
Prime Chuck
I’ve been meaning to make mention of Chuck Blanchard’s new blog ever since Espresso Pundit plugged it a few days back.
Blanchard was a State Senator back in the early 1990’s after a law career that started with clerking for Sandra Day O’Connor. He made what can charitably called a kamikaze run at a central Phoenix congressional seat in 1994. Come to think of it, all of our runs in 1994 could have been called “kamikaze.” 1994 was a sort of Democratic Illiad, and many folks like Blanchard who by any right would have been rising stars at that time had their electoral careers cut short. After that, he’d been counsel to the Department of the Army, and, I believe, at one point was talked up as Army Seceretary in a possible Al Gore administration.
He’s been back for a few years now, and has a blog that covers religion. It is sort of an opposite of this one, since his covers religion with an occasional political post, and this one covers politics with the occasional post on religion. He was raised as a Lutheran, but now celebrates mass with a Episcopal congregation.
He has a post up about Evangelicals and the Democratic party. He’s got a point. Too many times, it seems that our candidates are too afraid to engage these voters. Most of them are much more nuanced in their political opinions than the stridency of their leadership would suggest. The post is worth a read, check it out.
4 Comments
March 30th, 2007 at 2:56 pm
I am tired of being lectured to by DLC-types who have losing records in politics telling me to court and respect people who would never vote for a “D” anyway. I am sorry, but I am not going to “respect” the values of those who think I am not an equal American being gay. Though, I am not talking about all religious people here.
Try getting your true voters out for a change. If we did that, we’d win more seats. Never court a constituency that you can never attain. All that does is alienate your base and that’s a bigger risk: that your natural voters stay home.
March 30th, 2007 at 9:27 pm
Netrootsdemocrat:
Sorry if I came off as lecturing. It was certainly not intentional. Did you notice the many of the posts I made on my site dealt with defending the correct (in my view) decision of the Episcopal Church to include gay and lesbians as full members of the church?
Let me be clear. I do not, and did not advocate, compromising on social issues to gain Evangelical votes. Indeed, Granhold and Strickland, the two examples I gave in my post were pro-choice and pro-gay rights, and they still won significant number od Evangelical votes. This is because the Evangelical vote is not monolethic (any more than the labor vote is monolethic). For many of these voters, as long as you treat them with some degree of respect and attention, they will vote for Democrats because health care, jobs and the war in Iraq are more important to them than other issues.
And sorry–I can’t help myself. I don’t have a losing record in politcs. I won two races for the State Senate–the first time in a Republican district–and no non-incumbent Democrat won anywhere in 1994.
March 30th, 2007 at 11:24 pm
You know what, Chuck, you have completely gained my respect by actually responding to the post. That is rare indeed, especially when you don’t even know who I am. It put a smile on my face that you took the time to put forward your clarification.
Point taken on the clarification of the “not compromising on the social issues” thing. I am so glad to read that. Sorry for being a little snippy about the “losing campaigns.” But, hey, that’s the nature of blogs, eh? Like all loyal Dems, I was devastated by the wipe-out we endured in 1994 - and have largely endured ever since, until 2006, thank God. And, of course, 1994 was impossible for our side. Sucks that you only had a short time to affect change.
Glad you also see health care as a “family value.” Why can’t most Dems portray that issue as essential in having a successful family? For if someone’s kid is sick, and the family goes bankrupt because of it, how does that preserve the sanctity of the family unit? Isn’t that a little more damaging than me being able to get married? Also, what’s more family-friendly than the ability to afford to send your kids to college? But you don’t see the Right talking about anything but fetuses and me (being gay and partnered).
You’re a stand-up guy and I apologize for the snide remark about the losing campaigns. And I agree with you vis-a-vis the messaging. And please keep in mind: when you stand-up for the GLBT community and remember us, most of us will remember you. I put my money where my mouth is and always appreciate a steadfast supporter of gay rights (as well as the other bedrock social issues) and I stay loyal.
I seriously hope you run again for something. And soon. You can on me for support. You’ve showed your integrity by honestly responding to my post. It’s truly appreciated. We need more folks like you on our side, especially because Arizona’s Democratic bench isn’t that deep.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:11 pm
netrootsdemocrat:
Given what you have had to put up worth, you are entitled to be snide now and again. And your comment allowed me to clarify what I was trying to say. In any event, thanks for the kind words. You are always welcome on my blog–and feel free to pepper it with snide comments now and again.
Chuck
Leave a Reply