Shrill or sedate?

Excellent piece discussing democrat strategy from a grassroots/netroots perspective from Digby, which ends with:

That, I think, is the real question here. Will our "shrillness" help or hurt the party? I think the netroots believes it's time to try a message that has a little more heat than lukewarm water. The establishment, still smarting from their seminal loss in 1972, is scared to death of anything that resembles real passion. Far more than a serious division in the party over specific policy, that, I think is the real fault line. What kind of politics --- not policies --- do the Democrats think will win?

It should be very obvious to everyone that the Republican Lite, sedate if you will, strategy of the national democrats in the elections of 2000, 2002 & 2004 did not work. It also seems obvious to me that such a strategy will never work. It also seems to me that the republicans jumping in against the so-called shrill strategy, as with the "national, read beltway democrats" doing the same is simply a case of their fear of such sentiments of the grassroots/netroots and what it will do to their objectives.In the case of republicans it is quite simply that they fear that such a basic strategy of confrontation, high on emotion, strong on facts and full of thoughtful, logical, opposing positions regarding the problems that beset America from the economy to Iraq, etc. will strike a chord with the American people and turn them against those who have squandered the good name, reputation and fiscal strength of our nation.

In the case of the national democrats they see the distinct possiblity of the people tiring of their "go along to get along" strategy, which thus far has only resulted in the further deterioration of our standing in the community of nations and the declining fortunes of a declining middle class. In other words, their ultimate fear is that they too will be turned out of power by the tsunami created by the people.

That the grassroots/netroots appeal could well cause a siesmic shift the leadership both the national government as well as the national Democratic Party is what is driving the commentary against being "shrill" in response to the Bush Regime and its policies that are turning America into a larger version of the banana republics to our south.

So in answer to the question put forth by Digby, "What kind of politics --- not policies --- do the Democrats think will win?" The politics of not being republicans is a good place to start, using as much emotion, energy, passion to convet thoughtful alternatives to what republican politics have done to our country.