If you seek a five forces analysis of Wal-Mart, please try this page.

Two days ago, in a post entitled "The Wal-Marti Code" I remarked on the strafing of Wal-Mart by several 2008 presidential hopefuls. I noted, in so many words, that life was imitating art. In particular, I observed that several senators among the hopefuls were behaving exactly as the fictional Senator Sedgwick Sexton, a character in a novel by Dan Brown entitled Deception Point. (Brown is also the author of the blockbuster The Da Vinci Code.) Though I didn't express it in exactly these words, I concluded that the senators' strategy concerning Wal-Mart is ill-advised, wrong-headed, and politically tone-deaf.

Today, to my utter and pleasant surprise, I found support for my point of view coming from a most unlikely quarter: The LA Times editorial page. In a piece entitled "Democrats' Shameful Wal-Mart Demonization" the Times concludes that "Presidential hopefuls only hurt themselves when pandering to unions by bashing the country's largest employer."

WITH ONE EYE ON 2008 and one on their labor union base, Democratic luminaries are canvassing Iowa and other states this summer to campaign against the nation's incumbent … retailer. They obviously see Wal-Mart as this season's Enron, the one corporation that represents all that is wrong with America.

But the editors don't just attack the politicians' strategy, they also take issue with its underlying assumptions and unstated motivations. And here they hit the bullseye like a laser-guided bomb:

The candidates are so intent on gaining tactical advantage in the primary season that they risk alienating possible supporters in the general election. ... The gusto with which even moderate Democrats are bashing Wal-Mart is bound to backfire. Not only does it take the party back to the pre-Clinton era, when Democrats were perceived as reflexively anti-business, it manages to make Democrats seem like out-of-touch elitists to the millions of Americans who work and shop at Wal-Mart.

One reason the Democrats may have a tin ear on this subject is demographic. Certainly most of the party's urban liberal activists are far removed from the Wal-Mart phenomenon. The retailer has thrived mainly in small towns and exurbs, which is one reason a Zogby poll found that three-quarters of weekly Wal-Mart shoppers voted for President Bush in 2004, and why 8 out of 10 people who have never shopped at Wal-Mart voted for John Kerry. Denouncing the retailer may make sense if the goal is to woo primary activists, but it's a disastrous way to reach out to the general electorate. Or to govern, for that matter.

I don't know how this will all play out. It is possible that life will continue to imitate art. That is to say, much like their fictional "good friend" the hopefuls will do their funders' bidding up and until the strategy backfires. It's also possible that the target fires back, that The Empire Strikes Back.

File Under: Wal-Mart