Winning isn't everything as we have seen the last few years [View all]

[Harmony Blue]

I believe the root of this divide in the Democratic party is about those that believe winning is everything vs those that believe expressing and supporting ideas is everything. And as a result the clashes have taken place over the years because of this different mindset has slowly drifted the two sides apart. The Democratic party keeps winning on the national level and yet the Republicans, despite being the losers, control the narrative and tone of the nation. They make right hand turns for a nation that is for the most part liberal on a variety of topics. Republicans are winning at the local and state level, but they do so because they don't believe winning is everything but that supporting a conservative brand and ideas is what it is all about. Winning though simply allows them an easier time to propagate (and steam roll) their ideas, and their world view on their local and state populaces. The argument that President Obama and the the rest of the Democratic party needs more victories in the Senate and House to do anything simply doesn't resonate with voters. Why? They see a Republican party doing more with less as an opposition party (not much of anything else though), so most voters are nearly convinced that a majority in the house in favor of Dems still will not be enough. To further complicate this, even assuming if more Dems win in the House and gain seats, if they are blue dogs has the Democratic party really won votes? If blue dog Dems vote the same in the end as a Tea Party Republican snobby upstart, the end result is the same.

This fixation that winning is everything simply doesn't resonate with many of the people in the United States given the cultural history. This is why the under dog is so popular in the American psyche. There is a low chance of winning but the ideas are so bold, and swell so much passion, that the zeal to support these ideas overwhelms the logical reasoning that there is a low chance of winning. The American Revolution all the way to Rocky shows this is true and is an undercurrent that has always been prevalent in the American fabric. The detractors for the Occupy movement argued that there was no end goal, winning strategy or a singular, main leader that could lead the movement towards victory. But that misses the point of the Occupy movement as it changed the narrative of austerity at the time towards the disparity between the 1% vs the 99%. So, when that video surfaced of Romeny talking so disparagingly of a proportion of the American population it resonated with the American populace as the seed was planted by the Occupy movement.

Civil rights activists, whistle blowers, leakers, protestors, environmentalists, etc often are doing some activity or action that more than likely they will have a low chance of winning. But that doesn't slow down their resolve of what compels them to do what they believe and think is right. Rather it reinforces that they must forge forward and put those ideas out there to inspire others. That is how you win ultimately IMVHO.