Coalition Politics: Building Blocs

People vote a certain way for one of two reasons:

1) As an individual
2) As a member of a voting block.

Voting blocs are not ways of looking at voters. This isn't analysis, this is purely factual.
People don't go in and vote thinking "This is for Mississippi" in a national election; they might do it for "The South," or even "New Orleans." But they are likelier to do it as a participant in a bloc.

It's not about states; the 50 State Strategy is great but it isn't everything.
What is everything?
Getting voting blocs to move over to our side.
And getting individuals firmly into voting blocs that are on our side.

Healthcare is not a voting bloc. If it were, it would be important to look at the relative weight applied on a voter by healthcare issues if, say, the person worked in the existing healthcare, pharmaceutical, or insurance industries and depended on that for their entire livelihood, versus people fearing accidents and illness.

Issues do not constitute voting blocs. What it takes is organizational structure, from ground troops on up through local captains to central power. Issues are personal matters. We can and should talk about building up new voting blocs around them, however small, but should not confuse a strong issue with a voting block.

Labor is a voting bloc that the Democratic Party has been holding onto by a thread but that is unraveling, from both ends. Too little examined around here, some of the people in labor are finding their personal "issues" so much to the Republican side they vote against even mighty labor. Meanwhile it gets less numerous and more and more undermined in popular perception, with Democratic politicians often silent support not helping that.

Anti-War can be a voting bloc, but aside from the world socialists no one is considering it such.

Anti-Abortion is a voting bloc but pro-choice groups meanwhile, along with the lighter-weight environmental groups, is trying to be less of one with Republican endorsements. These groups do less than you might imagine politically in any case.

One could continue. The military? Police? NRA? I think you get the point. A voting bloc is a group that can exert determinative influence over the votes of many of its members, and moreover has members who know they are members and are organized.

That's what we have in this country: A lot of voting blocs, instead of a lot of little European style parties. Unlike Europe we don't have a forum for squabbles prior to forming coalitions after elections. That's a lack, because it doesn't give Teamsters, for example, a chance to say they hate gays (or just love them less) before voting (for "Labor") and then having their bosses participate in a coalition somewhat outside of their concern or personal identification.

We need to get serious about that. Politics is one thing. Progress can be advanced at the ballot box, on small issues even without majority consent, if you have a strong set of coalitions and the appeal of the issue to pull from the other side is more than compensatory for any loss. However, that's not really the place to do it. Progress needs to happen in hearts and minds. Politics is sausage making. If you don't have the taste to participate... Don't leave the kitchen, no no, come back, that's the exit into the alleyway. Instead, have a seat in the front of the restaurant. Be served; convey your wishes to the chefs. That option needs to exist for people, and moreover those that stay need to be less purist about the contents of coalitions.

Your assignment, should you choose to accept it, is to help reel in existing blocs and identify needs for new ones, however small. And while about that business, think about the need for a functioning coalition here at DailyKos that does not concern itself overmuch with how people arrive at their broad agreement, or what their isolated disagreements may be. And talk about blocs. Comment and diary about it. Realize its an arena where we can fight smaller battles, more principled battles as they are focused battles, and win... All the while having it count toward a larger victory.

Bear in mind that when I talk about your maybe not liking the contents of coaltions... I'm not talking about making sausage out of good issues. All I'm talking about is getting those issues advanced with comfortable electoral leads. Face it, if you wnat substantially more than half of voters in your camp, and happily there, it isn't going to look like a group you see yourself fitting in snugly with.

That's right, it won't look like anything much. That's because the identity politics will be focused on the blocs themselves and by extention the Democratic Party. That seems risky but that's the way to get commanding majorities and lasting cooperation. And no, I'm not going to compare this to the Republicans because they aren't the masters at it, just lately slightly better. One could argue that their policies are so contrary to what's good, that they must be much better at coalition building, but we need to think less about them and more about what we can take from them (other than crummy, losing policy and sloganeering).