Commentary: Winning rural voters -- A new Democratic strategy

The Democratic Party cannot win in rural areas without clarifying—not changing—its position on the cultural issues that are so important in rural areas across the country.

The reason why people in these areas consistently vote Republican and thus against their best economic interests is that these cultural issues are more important to them. Thus, Democrats' focusing on how their finances, health care, and the education of their children have deteriorated under Trump and Republican leadership in general will not have the desired impact.

Note: I am not proposing that Democrats change their policies on these cultural issues, just that they do a better job at communicating what their policies are.

Guns

Gun control is not about taking away the rights of gun owners to hunt or defend their family; it in no way infringes on their legitimate rights to own guns and use them. What this is solely about is trying to stop the epidemic of gun violence against innocent people that is plaguing our nation, causing untold grief to tens of thousands of families each year.

Gun violence is not limited to the mass shootings that get national attention. A far greater problem is the tens of thousands of innocent Americans who are killed every year by gun violence—more than 48,000 deaths in 2022. The enormity of that number can be seen by comparing it with the 58,000 American soldiers who died in the entire Vietnam War.

The NRA’s main argument against gun control boils down to this: No measure reducing access to guns is acceptable because any such measure is a first step by the government and gun opponents to ultimately removing all guns from private possession.

This is patently nonsense, a scare tactic; it has no basis in fact. There isn’t a politician alive who wants to do anything more than control access to guns for the reasons I’ve stated, without disturbing legitimate ownership and use for hunting and self-defense.

If this is the case, then why, someone may ask, does the NRA, an organization they trust, take such a broad position? The answer is that the NRA has morphed into a lobbyist for the gun industry, which provides much of the NRA's funding.

That is why the NRA is against a ban on assault weapons or magazines holding large numbers (100) of bullets. These types of equipment are a major revenue source for the gun industry, but are not used by hunters or in self-defense. Improved background checks wouldn't hamper your right to buy a gun, but by keeping guns out of the hands of those who are not mentally fit or have a criminal past, they would impact industry profits.

It's true that guns don't kill people; people kill people. But if certain people didn't have guns, they couldn't kill.

Abortion

First, it must be absolutely clear that Democrats are not pro-abortion. It is a sad event for probably most, if not all, women.

That brings up the second point: the Democratic focus needs to be on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies through education efforts by the government and organizations. The fewer unwanted pregnancies, the fewer abortions. One statistic: Among young (18-29) women who became pregnant in 2008, 57% were unintended pregnancies.

How to reduce unwanted pregnancies: improved sex education of young adults and easy access to contraception; there is no question that teaching abstinence doesn’t work. Where that is not possible because such efforts are controversial for moral/religious reasons, Democrats have to respect those concerns.

In such cases, Democrats should agree that related education is necessary: Teach youth to question requests for or desires for sex, to ask, “Is this something I really want to do?” Both young women and men need to ask whether sex is just fun or whether it should have a deeper meaning. And young men need to stop thinking of sex as conquest, of proving their masculinity.

Even with all these efforts, however, there will still be unwanted pregnancies. And in those cases, abortion needs to be a legal option from both a societal and a moral perspective.

There are few things more destructive to a child’s well-being and emotional health than to feel unloved or be neglected. This also has negative societal consequences because of the life choices such children are more likely to make. And morally, it is not right to place children—who after all have no say in whether they are born or who their parents are—in such a damaging situation.

Lastly, I would suggest dropping the motto: "A woman's right to choose." The issue isn't really choice—which in this context sounds callous—it is what is in the best interest of both the fetus and the mother.

Yes, the bottom line is support for Roe v Wade. But nothing I’ve suggested takes away from those principles.

American identity

I have often written of the past error of Democrats ceding to the Republicans being the Party of patriotism and American values. It is the Democrats who are truly patriotic and true to our founding principles. Trump and his MAGA allies have perverted our founding principles.

The Party must explain to the people what the founding principles really are and then wrap itself in the flag.

Religion

Find common ground on which to walk. The simplest common ground regarding almost all questions of national policy on social issues is, "What would Jesus do?"

Whether one is speaking about gun control, equality, religious freedom, or gay rights—the question of what would Jesus do is both highly relevant and helpful. And there is no question in my mind that if one looks at the gospel with an open mind, a person finds that on all of these subjects, Jesus would come down on the liberal, Democratic side. I cannot quote chapter and verse, but I have heard those who can provide ample support for this conclusion. Democrats must be prepared to quote chapter and verse.

Then there's the question of abortion—what would Jesus say about abortion prior to fetal viability? Clearly, abortion is killing a fetus. But the Bible is unclear whether causing the death of a fetus is murder; there is language that suggests that the fetus is not a person. So the Bible gives some wiggle room, which allows the focus to shift to what happens to an unwanted child. I believe the compassionate Jesus would say that no child deserves to feel unwanted and unloved, so that if a child is truly unwanted, the compassionate answer is to abort before it becomes a person.

To present themselves in this new light, the Democratic Party must undertake an extensive media and town hall blitz, focusing on rural areas. And they should use gun owners, women, blue collar workers, and Evangelicals, as well as Party leaders, to make these points.

The future of the Party and the future of our democracy depend on Democrats winning back the hearts and minds of rural America.

_____

Ronald L. Hirsch is a teacher, legal aid lawyer, survey researcher, nonprofit executive, consultant, composer, author, and volunteer. He is a graduate of Brown University and the University of Chicago Law School and the author of We Still Hold These Truths. Read more of his writing at www.PreservingAmericanValues.com

_____