We keep losing the elections we hope will be signs of a seismic shift -- Jean Schmidt vs. Paul Hackett last year, Ciro Rodriguez vs. Henry Cuellar in a Democratic primary earlier this year, and now Francine Busby vs. Brian Bilbray. People aren't happy with Bushism, but it sure seems as if there's a glass ceiling for Bush opponents in a lot of districts.

Does anyone else wonder if this "netroots" strategy is perhaps not all it's cracked up to be?

We've all known for years that Republicans dominate American politics in large part because they have an extraordinarily effective, hydra-headed message machine -- yet many in the left blogosphere seem to want to use our blogs not primarily as a foundation for a message machine of our own, not to get ideas and stories out into the world, but first and foremost to get people to the polls. What I keep thinking is: If it were such a great idea to make electioneering the central focus of blogs, wouldn't Republicans be doing it? After all, they're the ones who seem to know how to win elections. Still.

The main narrative of the GOP message machine, as I'm always saying, is: Democrats are dangerous freaks, people who are always doing something neurotic, bizarre, beyond the pale, or contrary to America's national interest -- or all four. I think we won't break the glass ceiling until we make Republicans seem like dangerous freaks and make Republicanism seem beyond the pale. When Jean Schmidt attacks a decorated veteran's patriotism, it's not a deal-breaker because she's a Republican and Republicans are, by definition, not people who go over the line. But when Francine Busby flubs a line and gives an opening to illegal immigration hard-liners, that's quite possibly the deal-breaker for voters in her district -- because she's a Democrat, and Democrats, as we're forever being told, just can't be trusted.

I know it's not either/or; I also know that we don't have large, vital components of the machine (talk radio in every market; we Fox; and so on and so on). Still, it seems to me that getting out a narrative is much more important -- the electioneering is reaching out only to the like-minded, and clearly we're not going to win heretofore safe districts until we flip a few people who until now haven't been like-minded. We're not going to do that until we give them a different way of looking at the candidates they've been in the habit of voting for. We have a bit of power here -- but I'm afraid we may be squandering it.