2016 Realities for Democrats

by Deacon Blues

While I was in the midst of penning something on a winning Democratic strategy for the White House in 2016, and particularly what Hillary should be focusing on, the terrible news came out of Paris today about the purported terrorist slaughter of journalists at the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. It is assumed that the killers had ties to ISIL or Al Qaeda of Yemen, or were inspired by the same to mount such an atrocity, yet no suspects have been identified or caught by French law enforcement and intelligence services to know anything for certain. Of course that won’t stop either the media or the usual nuts in the GOP to spew nonsense, and we can now wait for the first stupid remark from a (now-governing) GOP member of Congress to politicize today’s attack somehow into a smear or attack against Obama or Democrats.

While we wait for that inevitable stupid remark from a Republican, it nonetheless needs to be said that in order to win the White House in 2016, a successful Democrat must be “left” on economic issues, and “right’ on security issues. You can argue with my point of view all you want, and I will respect your right to do so but I will continue to think this. Democrats have lost a good deal of the white male vote and for that matter the white vote, in my mind largely because the party and White House spend too little time focusing on the kitchen table and Main Street, and too much time on identity politics. Those on the left who think that a Hillary candidacy would somehow automatically entitle the party to the women’s vote in 2016 are wrong, if Hillary and the Democrats focus on “women’s issues” rather than security, dollars, and jobs.

In my view, Hillary’s candidacy should be anchored on the left in economics and on the right in security, placing her squarely in the company of Harry Truman and JFK. Progressives who want a robust argument from Democrats in 2016 against incursions upon civil liberties, specifically by the Democratic candidate against the NSA and data-gathering efforts by the federal government should be told by Hillary in a “Sister Souljah” moment that vigilance in support of security for all Americans, whether they be men, women, whites, blacks, red, or blue is not anti-democratic. She should tell those on the left that the reason for her candidacy can be summed in in three words: fairness, opportunity, and security. And she should tell Democrats, particularly progressives that if such sentiments aren’t liberal enough to gain their support and votes, then they should vote for someone else.

Update: French authorities have now identified the 3 suspects, one of whom has already served time in France for aiding the Iraqi insurgency against the American occupation. Thank you Dick Cheney.