You and I are on the same page. I think that disconnect has happened over a 35 year period but it is not the Dem base, it is the Dems who left the party and now are voting for Republicans. I believe that these suburban voters can be won back with a focus on pocketbook issues. But that focus also has to be defended against the GOTP/Faux attacks framing it as hurting “job creators”.
As far as the Dem base is concerned they need to wake up and realize that they need to vote in every election.
Republican voters might poll in favor of pragmatic policies, particularly when said policies aren’t labeled Democratic. They also favor a caste system that values perceived pecking order more than lifting all boats.
Ellison and Dean are right, of course. Economic populism nicely suits the pissed off mood of the electorate, and in fact worked for Republicans in the last couple elections (think of that guy who unseated Cantor, and every repub who appealed to anger of the right twing base).
Problem is, most Dem districts that could theoretically elect an economic populist already have a Wall Street/corporatist stooge in place already, and the only real danger they face is from the Republicans, not better dems. Indeed, Dems are in danger of losing their natural constituency to tea baggers who are using populist appeals far more effectively than dems.
If it’s Bush against Clinton, certainly my daughters, ages 34 & 32, will revolt. Until Obama, all they’ve seen with the Presidency is Bushes and Clinton. What shape that revolt would take remains to be seen. Like many in their generation they are totally disillusioned with politics and believe their vote does not matter. They are well educated but underemployed.
But that dynamic has problems, too. Akin and Angle are two examples. They are much more vulnerable to having their party apparatus taken over at the state and local levels than Democratic state parties.
The real quandry for me on this subject is I rarely if ever meet a Democrat who is totally onboard with all the corporate crap that Third Way/Corporate Dems support. Its always more a case of “well, yeah that stuff sucks…but SCOTUS!!”. Republicans played their base for decades (still are, actually) concerning overturning Roe v. Wade, providing lip service and not much else. Dems play the same game to a certain extent…take the corporate Blue Dog crap we are peddling or you can kiss Roe v. Wade good bye.
It just would be nice to have some solid good reasons based on policies to vote for a candidate and be able to toss the SCOTUS argument on as a cherry on top, instead of making it the entire reason for voting Dem.
I can’t argue with that.
I was responding to a post about Jebs vulnerabilities the other day and actually surprised myself by what I quickly pulled up on Hillary that equaled or exceeded Jebs many different demons. Take a look.
DAMN right!!!
And we have to support the Progressive Caucus!
Otherwise, we will see more “leadership” collusion like the recent legislation further weakening pensions, and the long slow demise of every other progressive advance.
Same here. I will vote for the Clinton in the general but only if I absolutely have to, although I will definitely NOT vote for her in the primary.
I sure hope people will run against her to put the pressure on.
The Third Way people NEED to hear our dismay with their boardroom liberalism. They NEED to hear that good intentions are not enough as they “compromise” to sell us down the economic and climate rivers.
Unfortunately, there are a whole lot of clueless liberal voters who will get excited about breaking a gender barrier. BUT maybe they will finally get motivated to vote and ensure more progressives are elected to Congress.
You’re giving the electorate too much credit.
They will go for the Clinton glamour vs. the Bush glamour, and they will nevermind the money behind both curtains.
It’s all an exciting reality TV show which can be used to express their economic interests and identity issues.
That is true, there were a lot of imaginary conversations going in our heads. But his campaign rhetoric didn’t exactly discourage it.
Call it the Post-Bush Syndrome, all that pentup angst.
That is about the size of it and the so called progressives – simply the blindfolded leading the blindfolded. I guess it is the taste of power that does them in to the point of not seeing what is in front of their faces.
Don’t get me wrong, Keith Ellison is a good guy, he just needs some good communication training.
We may look back at PBO as the progressive of lifetimes, because he is inclusive of all points of view. Anyone who is attached to the so called democratic point of view is closing off whole ranges of possibility and is mired in a dialectical nightmare. They just seem to love the fight and to hell with the consequences.
One more point, on Warren. If I read her well, I think she is someone who will not go back on her previous statements. And Sanders, don’t get me started.
We’re not progressive enough? Sounds eerily like we are not conservative enough. In other words, bunk. If you ask me, neither of these extremes has the slightest idea what they are talking about.
Not going to disagree with a thing, but for one caveat. The American voting populace is not progressive, and barely aware that any perspective exists outside corporate media.
That fact changes everything.
You have something there.
The middle class right now has been thoroughly indoctrinated to blame the “takers” for their situation.
What you suggest might go a long way to sabotate the “house divided” strategy that has been used against us for so long.
“Even as the economy gradually improves, voters increasingly place greater trust in Republicans to handle it.”
Most bizarre anti-logic in the universe. Welcome to America!
We will win in the long term because public reaction to the success of far right policies will finally kick in? To God’s ears.
Since you bring it up, that seems obvious, but an uphill climb because the media spews relentless idiocy and campaign funding ensures no candidate can get traction without big money’s blessing.
Then again, personal experience, as things become more visibly slanted against ordinary people, is a powerful antitode to deception.
Oh, they will – with the right trimming and shaping, it’ll fit perfectly into their much-loved “Democrats in Disarray” storyline. And of course, the just-being-crafted “Democrat obstruction” one. (Unfortunately they have no pre-existing “Republican obstruction” template to adjust.)
What candidate would progressives prefer if Senator Warren doesn’t run for president?
The Democrat.
To be the Democratic nominee for president.
Hey, I didn’t say we’d win. I said the centerline of the Democratic Party’s ideology has been moving leftward for six years. We’ve still got to convince a majority of the voters to vote for us.