0.cached.png
By Howard Fineman
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
The political conventions have turned into trade shows, so think of the Democratic Convention in the Staples Center here as the Comdex of Politics: a hive of marketers hawking wares primarily to each other--and only indirectly to the country.
As I raced around the Staples Center (and, a few weeks earlier, the First Union Center in Philadelphia) I got to thinking about the parties as struggling old-line companies. To be blunt, they're in deep doo-doo. They've been losing market share for years with the "independent" bloc, now the most numerous category of voter. All segments of the electorate are increasingly suspicious of the product lines they're hawking. And as they furiously chase declining "sales" (spending vast sums to do it), the parties sound more and more alike. No one seems to know what they do anymore, aside from serving cold shrimp to fat cats.
I think I know what action the parties must take. In the language of marketing, they need to be "rebranded." They need names and corporate logos that better reflect who and what they are--and the new fault lines between them. Some suggestions:
Read More on News
The Plaintiff's Party (DEMOCRATS) vs. The Defendant's Party (GOP)
If the Democrats want a new symbol, they should pick Erin Brockovich. She's the crusading paralegal who figures out how to bring an environmental class-action suit against a huge power company, and wins hundreds of millions of dollars on behalf of her working-class California clients. The movie about her was great PR for the trial lawyers of America--who just happen to be the biggest category of contributors to the Democratic Party during the Bill Clinton presidency.
That makes sense, because the Democrats really have evolved into the Plaintiff's Party. Their leaders tend to be lawyers. More important, they tend to be the kind of lawyers who grew up with faith in the idea that courts can be used as instruments of social change and justice. The idea came into its own in 1954, with the Brown v. Board of Education decision that began the process of ending racial segregation.
The notion of courts as legislatures was nurtured at places such as Yale Law School, which drew people who wanted to change things but work "within the system." Yale Law produced the likes of Jerry Brown, Gary Hart and the late Paul Tsongas--as well as Bill and Hillary Clinton and Al Gore's running mate, Sen. Joe Lieberman.
The high priests of this new legal faith often are state attorneys general--which is an increasingly potent political post in the country. Bill Clinton began his career as AG in Arkansas, and Joe Lieberman got his big break when he won the same job in Connecticut. Banding together, the AGs have become a real force.
Who put the tobacco industry against the wall? It wasn't the Congress. It was the AGs. Who is now pulling down the vast contingent fees that have resulted from the judgments? The trial lawyers. What are the trial lawyers doing with some of their earnings? Putting them into huge contributions to the anti-tobacco Democratic Party.
Until only a few hours before he chose Lieberman, Gore was seriously considering as his running mate Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina--who until two years ago was one of the nation's most successful (and well paid) plaintiff's attorneys. He was a specialist in class-action suits--which is where the big money is and, from Edwards' point of view, the action in the crusade for justice on behalf of working families. "I'm proud of my legal work and would have been proud to defend it." he told me.
The Republicans, by contrast, have made a crusade out of championing the rights of defendants--especially corporate and business defendants in the kinds of suits Edwards designed and won for 15 years. The hatred of the plaintiffs bar is a bred-in-the-bone attitude among Republicans, in the boardroom and on Main Street.
It's no accident that when he first ran for governor in 1994, George W. Bush (who went to Harvard Business School) made "tort reform" one of his few and oft-repeated goals. When he won, he made passing limits on damage awards a top legislative priority, and it soon became one of his proudest accomplishments in Austin. At fundraisers over the last few years, Bush invariably draws cheers on the subject--and now promises to fight for similar legislation on a national level if he wins in November.
The Ocean Beach Party (DEMOCRATS) vs. The Heartland Waterslide Party (The GOP)
As the strategists for both parties look at the electoral map, they see the same thing: Democrats control the coasts; Republicans almost everything else except the Midwest battleground states. The Democratic ticket is ahead or likely to win almost every state that touches an ocean. There must be something about beach access and waves that draws (or makes) a Democrat. Gore and Lieberman are a lock in New England and New York and, probably, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland. They can skip Virginia and South Carolina, but the Democrats will make a fight of it in North Carolina, Georgia and Florida. On the West Coast, they are ahead (though not comfortably) in California, and will concentrate on must-win (and usually safe) Oregon and Washington.
The GOP controls pretty much everything else--the land of rivers and lakes and waterslides (and, to be fair, the Gulf of Mexico).
The Digital Party (Democrats) vs. The Hydrocarbon Party (GOP)
Big Labor complained loudly about the Gore-Lieberman ticket in LA, but they had better face the downloaded music: the Democrats are determined to capture the hearts, minds and money of Silicon Valley. Gore--semi-father of the Internet--truly understands technology, and loves to dabble in it. Both he and Lieberman LOVE to raise money in the tech world, and both shares roots in the pro-business Democratic Leadership Council, which has made a crusade out of establishing ties with the buccaneers of the digital world. Lieberman spent his first full days in LA stopping by the black and Hispanic caucuses by day--and the high-tech big-donor parties in Beverly Hills by night. Every convention delegation was fitted out with Apple computer stations--a naked bid for the populist techie anti-Gates vote.
By choosing Dick Cheney as his running mate, George W. Bush solidified the GOP ticket's hold on the world of carbon-based commerce. They are two oil men working the same well, which includes not only the oil patch but most of the rest of Big Business. Bush himself still loves to talk about his oil-patch days. Dick Cheney is a little less eager to talk about his time at Halliburton, the world's largest oil-services company. The Democrats, you can be sure, will spend a lot of time talking about Halliburton--especially after he received a $20 million severance package.
The Mommy Party (Democrats) vs. The Daddy Party (Republicans)
I owe this formulation to my fiend and colleague Chris Matthews, who coined it a few years ago. He was talking as much about the spirit and attitude and agendas of the parties as he was about the gender gap. But it's still there, and could even grow this year.
As of now, Al Gore is running even or in some polls slightly ahead of George W. Bush among women--but trails Bush by a whopping 15-20 points among men. The gender gap is even wider among white voters. Gore trails only slightly among women but is an astounding 25-30 points behind the governor of Texas among white men.
And if the Gore campaign's strategy is correct, the overall gender gap could grow even larger. Campaign insiders have few illusions about raising Gore's appeal among men; their only real hope is to bring more women "home" to the ticket. "We've got to get more women voters back," says one Democratic official. Maybe one way to do it is to get Eric Brockovich to endorse the ticket, or maybe campaign for it on the beaches of North Carolina.
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines