I want a TRUE BLUE LIBERAL CANDIDATE!

[polichick]

One who isn't gonna sell out to corporate interests or the gun lobby ~ or in any other way suck up to the right. Where oh where is she/he???

[poverlay]

1. I think Kucinich is as close as you're going to get...n/t

[dmallind]

2. Yep

and I think about 5% support is all he's likely to get.

True blue liberal candidates are a great thing and I encourage them. But right now true blue liberal nominees are neither possible, nor saleable in a general election.

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. See, that's why it is driving me crazy...

...that Wes Clark has not yet joined the race. If ever we had a chance to run a stealth Liberal candidate with a real chance to win over moderates, independents, and even many conservatives, Wes Clark is that guy.

[dmallind]

6. Really?

I ask from ignorance not as a debate tactic - since I haven't checked out Wes Clark much at all, but I never got the impression he was on the most progressive side of the party.

Maybe I should dig around of course, but some pointers on what makes him the most possible true blue Liberal would help me out with where to start.

[Tom Rinaldo]

31. Thanks for honestly asking

If you poke around into our backgrounds, you will find that a disproportionally high percentage of Clark's strongest grassroots supporters are heavily oriented to the liberal/progressive/left radical side of the political spectrum. We all have our own stories about how surprised and almost unnerved we were at finding ourselves feeling so strongly positive about a Four Star General who wanted to be President. Lot's of internal double and triple takes, going back and researching him more, going to see him in person, back to doing more researching etc. went into our choices to support Wes Clark. Even then most of us held onto some skepticism for awhile, but Clark kept coming through for us on matters of importance, not only on the issues but also on his openess with us and his support for our initiatives. The man truly values what we do and makes that clear to us in person.

Keep in mind that Wes Clark was asked to run for President by Jimmy Carter, and was endorsed for President by George McGovern in 2004. More telling perhaps was the endorsement Michael Moore gave Clark in 2004, one which he sent out to everyone on his mailing list. Michael spent many hours with Clark in person before deciding to endorse him. I am not saying that Clark is the most liberal/progressive Democrat who can win an election in America. But I do think he probably is the most liberal/progressive Democrat who can win a Presidential election in America. I realize of course that not everyone will reach that same conclusion, but the evidence that Clark is in fact liberal is strong and compelling. He has stated that to solve the health care crisis in America we need to move toward a single payer insurance system for example.

When you have time you should visit the archived web site that still contains the issue specific platform that Clark ran on in 2004. Here is the link:

http://www.clark04.com/index.html

The stance Clark took on taxes was strongly progressive. Clark had no hesitation at all stating that those who had the ability to pay more in taxes should pay more in taxes. In other words he didn't weasal around, he defended the basic concept of progressive taxation. When he announced his full tax plan, which many observers thought was among the most progressive if not the most progressive plan offered in 2004. This is how one media story covered his press conference call out of Karl Rove when it was unveiled in public:

"If Karl Rove is watching today, Karl, I want you to hear me loud and clear: I am going to provide tax cuts to ease the burdens for 31 million American families -- and lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty -- by raising the taxes on 0.1 percent of families -- those who make more than $1,000,000 a year. You don't have to read my lips, I'm saying it," Clark said.

"And if that makes me an 'old-style' Democrat, then I accept that label with pride and I dare you to come after me for it."

I always loved that quote, and when I went looking for it to post here for you I came across a few more to share:

"But you don't have a chance if you can't find a job. I don't think it penetrates the minds of this Administration what it must be like for a factory worker to arrive home to his family with the news that he's been laid off. What it must be like not to know what the future holds for your children, because you don't know what the future holds for you. What it must be like to see the government take hundreds of billions of dollars that could be used to fund job training, unemployment benefits, or jobs programs — and instead to send that money off to people who have such staggering wealth that the new money won't make the tiniest improvement in their lifestyle. What it must be like to be told that tax cuts for the rich are necessary to create jobs for working people, and then to see jobs fall month after month for more than 30 months. If that doesn't break your heart, you don't have a heart."

"Well, last I checked, there was no 'if' in the 15th Amendment. One person one vote isn't just a slogan — it's the highest law of this land. As president, I will not rest until every single American can cast their vote, and every single one of those votes is counted. We shouldn't have to wait for another Florida to fully fund election reform."

"Maybe it's because I've never been in politics, but I don't believe that America is run by politicians in Washington. I believe it's run by people like us, in places like this."

All of the above are sourced at the Wesley Clark Wikiquote site:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wesley_Clark

But what absolutely sold it for me was when I heard Wes Clark say this during an interview on National Public Radio in New Hampshire:

"I think we're at a time in American history that's probably analogous to, maybe, Rome before the first emperors, when the Republic started to fall... I think if you look at the pattern of events, if you look at the disputed election of 2000, can you imagine? In America, people are trying to recount ballots and a partisan mob is pounding on the glass and threatening the counters? Can you imagine that? Can you imagine a political party which does its best to keep any representatives from another party — who've even been affiliated with another party — from getting a business job in the nation's capital? Can you imagine a political party that wants to redistrict so that its opponents can be driven out entirely?...it's a different time in America and the Republic is — this election is about a lot more than jobs. I'm not sure everybody in America sees it right now. But I see it, I feel it."

You can listen to that interview archived here:
http://www.nhpr.org/node/5339

[dmallind]

35. Intriguing

I'm not exactly a progressive liberal type by DU standards but not a lot here that would cause me concern. Should he ever declare I will take a serious look at him. From what little I have heard that's not too likely, but neither was Bill Clinton in 91. Thanks for the info!

[CarolNYC]

46. Wes Clark as liberal

This discussion made me think of this excerpt from a much longer article called 'Looking for Wesley Clark' from Intervention Magazine during his run for President last time around. It's about a speech he gave in South Carolina. I'd provide a link but it seems to be dead now....

“The education you get,” Clark says, “depends on where you live.” He explains that in our country the quality of the education one receives is determined by the tax base of the town one lives in, meaning poorer children get a worse education than children in more wealthy neighborhoods. “This country cannot afford to leave students behind,” Clark emphasizes, “education is the key to the American Dream!”

The speech is delivered with strength and with passion; the general gives the impression that what he says is what he believes."

(snip)

"“We are in this together,” a theme Clark would return to several times, as he attacks Bush’s tax cut. “I’m going to put our children at the top of the list. They are going to be my first priority.” What education is really about is money, funding education programs, funding teachers, funding the repair of school buildings. Clark is not discussing tax cuts for individuals, not the American Dream as a new SUV. For him all Americans must sacrifice for the good of this country, a good that cannot happen without our sacrifice. “There is plenty of money; it’s just not in the right places. The wealthy need to be patriotic and to give some money back!” For Wesley Clark, then, redistribution of income is not a dirty idea, not unpatriotic as it is for George Bush, and even for some of the skittish other Democratic candidates. For Clark it is the essence of patriotism.

Although Clark’s speech was on education in rural areas, it was also about his overall views. The candidate kept returning to the venerable liberal theme that we are a community of people and as a community all of us must contribute to the solution of our problems. The military is not an individualist institution, regardless of the "Army of One" ads, nor one that emphasizes materialism. Clark’s three decades in this institution does not have him today singing the glories of individualism and the dream of financial enrichment, he is more comfortable with sacrifice for the common good.

While the national media carries the Republican message that Howard Dean is a liberal, Wesley Clark, under the media’s radar screen, speaks like a Kennedy-Johnson -- dare I say the word? -- liberal. Dean, being slammed hard, would never talk straightforward about taxing the rich to pay for programs for the poor. Wesley Clark is doing exactly that.

It took a Cold War politician, Richard Nixon, to go to communist China. Will it take a retired military general to rehabilitate liberalism?"

[Capn Sunshine]

7. Tom, I just can't see Clark as "liberal"

Progressive, yes. Totally.

Too bad he isn't in this.

[abburdlen]

21. Clark calls himself a liberal

And does so with pride.

From http://www.billmaher.com/?page_id=190">Real Time with Bill Maher

MAHER: Okay. I’m just – I’m just wondering, of all the people who has the credentials to say, “liberal” is not a bad word, I’m wondering if I could get you to say that.

CLARK: Well, I’ll say it right now.

MAHER: Good for you.

CLARK: We live in a liberal democracy.

MAHER: Right.

CLARK: That’s what we created in this country. (applause) That’s our—

MAHER: That’s right. Thank you.

CLARK: That’s in our Constitution. (applause continue) Let me follow on this, okay? I think we should be very clear on this. You know, this country was founded on the principals of the Enlightenment.

MAHER: Right.

CLARK: It was the idea that people could talk, reason, have dialogue, discuss the issues. It wasn’t founded on the idea that someone would get stuck by a divine inspiration and know everything right from wrong. I mean, people who founded this country had religion, they had strong beliefs, but they believed in reason, in dialogue, in civil discourse. We can’t lose that in this country. We’ve got to get it back. (applause)

[Tom Rinaldo]

27. Some of his beliefs about society are classic liberal I think

The responsibility of government to care for the needs of our citizens when it is beyond one's ability to do so on their own, but also the reverse; Clark believes in the responsibility of citizens in a democracy to be informed, to be involved, and to contribute to the betterment of society when and how they can. Clark believes in the best aspects of America's form of government, he likes our system when it lives up to it's full potential. He has no intrinsic problem with Business functioning with capitalist motivations, but he appreciates the need for checks and balances including the responsibility of Government to regulate business to ensure that the public good is not endangered by it's practices. Clark is a very strong advocate for full public discourse on all issues of importance, which is classic liberal, and for the maximum degree of transparency possible regarding public sharing of important information , so that the public can be informed decision makers (with obvious exceptions like not publishing plans for troop movements where our enemies can read them in time of war etc.)

It is too bad Clark isn't in this, though until he says he no longer is thinking about running I have hope that he still may. Regardless of whether one feels Clark would be the best choice for President or not, there is much that he has to offer to the public debate.

[polichick]

4. Clearly, Kucinich isn't the one who can pull it off...

But I don't agree that a True Blue Liberal can't win in the GE ~ when people are offered Republican and Republican Lite, it's no surprise when they choose the real thing.

We have our own version of the real thing ~ we're just too timid to go for it. I think the country is dying for it, maybe even literally.

[Capn Sunshine]

14. Well Hillary's advisors were responsible for that the last time

Now they are running Hillary's campaign. See where we're going with this? Hillary will be triangulated and watered down because they believe the swing voter will win this for them, instead of clearly defining the Democratic Party's differences from the republicans, which is what the electorate is asking for.

[polichick]

16. Yep, that is what's happening...

But there's still time ~ people would fill the ocean jumping off these ships if the real thing came along!

[dmallind]

19. Probably the wrong one to get into this ....

....since I'm much more of a centrist myself, but then again maybe that's who you DO need in this conversation, because it really is the persuadable middle that determines elections. 35-40% would never vote Rep, about the same would never vote Dem (probably fewer now of course!). No candidate - however true blue - will increase lefty turnout so much that there is no need to persuade the center to support that candidate. Even on the far left there is too much variety of opinion for completely unanimous enthusiasm, let alone the whole party.

To be honest I think the best the far left can hope for is a solid pro-choice, good anti-poverty capitalist who will be willing to push to make taxes a bit more progressive and corporate ethics abuses a bit less easy and ubiquitous. A fire-breathing anti-gun candidate would create turnout amongst the gunowners like has never been seen, and will lose the blue collar hunting and sportsman demographic. Anyone too antithetical to free trade and regulated capitalism will never find a slot on the airwaves or a column in the paper to get their message out, and if they did would be soundly rejected by the vast majority of the workforce who are not self-employed or union labor and who rely on corporate profitability for their livelihood. Now maybe this is just MY rose tinted glasses here bacause I am a gunowner and a fan of regulated free trade capitalism, but even on issue where I am more solidly in line with DUs non-centrist majority such as gay rights or church/state separation I would say the same thing. Anyone going in saying they will not only force the military to accept openly gay soldiers but also allow them (and other gays of course) to marry and live in married servicemen's quarters together has, right now, the same chance somebody in say 1910 would have had saying that blacks should be equal, integrated and free to marry and live with and mix with whomever they pleased.

[polichick]

28. Yours is definitely the thinking of DC Dems...

I'm just not sure they're really in touch with people in the states. Just read BLUE GRIT by Laura Flanders and she makes the case that, even in red states, there are vibrant movements of grassroots Dems who are making huge strides on classic liberal issues. We've seen that the people have been way ahead of leaders when it comes to the war and global warming ~ and I agree with Flanders that we're in a battle with DC for the party. I hope the people win.

[dmallind]

34. possibly

But then again I really AM a centrist - especially by DU standards, so I'm probably just projecting what I prefer. Even so though, I doubt you could add much to my list of "best you can hope for" and still get elected today other than maybe a bit of a push for greater unionization and trade regulation. Even there though it's tricky - protectionism sells well to even centrists and some isolationist right wingers, but it is awfully hard to deliver as we have seen recently.

There is a trouble inherent in sites like DU (thought far from unique to it) and similar committed grassroots communities that we see a great deal of enthusiasm and unanimity and persuade ourselves that that carries forward into the non-committed greater population. We are after all a bit of an echo chamber despite the spread on some issues. In an arena where I often seem on the far right, it's sobering perhaps to consider that on many general (not right-wing dedicated - I don't waste my time there of course) discussion sites I am often accused of being a pinko commie socialist subversive.

It's a strange thing to hope for (and I don't personally) but the best chance you ahve of electing a true blue liberal is if we see another serious depression and enough people who are willing to be politically involved get to see friends and families and selves in positions of real need. Of course ther are millions of people who already are, but not enough who are politically active or driven enough to tip an election.

[redqueen]

36. "we're just too timid to go for it"

AMEN!

[jody]

5. I assume you oppose our Dem platform that says, "We will protect Americans' Second Amendment right

to own firearms, and we will keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists by fighting gun crime, reauthorizing the assault weapons ban, and closing the gun show loophole, as President Bush proposed and failed to do."

See http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf

[polichick]

8. I oppose Dem candidates sucking up to the gun lobby...

...by hemming and hawing and dodging the issue when asked about reauthorizing the assault weapons ban.

[jody]

9. I take your answer as a "yes". Sorry the Dem party does not meet your requirements. n/t

[polichick]

11. That wasn't my answer, of course.

This crop of "new" Democrats doesn't meet my requirements ~ nor does it meet the requirements of the platform you quote.

[Heath Hatcher]

12. Well get over it

Your not gonna get your "true liberal candidate" because there not electable(like DK). A centrist candidate would show better in the general election and thats all whats counts. And quite frankly I don't appreciate your comments regarding guns. I believe that if you want one and if you meet the backround check you should have one, I don't appreciate it when people try to take my guns away.

[polichick]

13. You've bought into the Rep scare story...

Liberals in the Democratic party aren't interested in taking your guns away ~ that's silly.

[Heath Hatcher]

17. I'm sorry I worded that wrong polichick

Your right there not trying to take your guns away but I take a stand when they try to put more restrictions on guns. And I get angry when people like you get angry at the Democrats because they support 2nd admendment rights.

[polichick]

18. I'm not angry at all and I support 2nd Amendment rights...

I support them as they were originally intended ~ and I think it's a mistake for Dems to act as Rep Lite on this or any other issue.

[Heath Hatcher]

26. I don't see the Dems being "Rep lite" on the issue

In my opinion there supporting an issue that has support for tons of americans on both sides of the political spectrum. And I don't get where your coming from, what issuehave the Democrats being Repub lite on, Immigration what?

[polichick]

30. imo the most obvious attempt to be Rep Lite...

...comes with the centrist embrace of corporate interests over the traditional grassroots of the party. For instance, the support of NAFTA over labor; watered down environmental and conservation positions; selling out healthcare in favor of ins. and pharm. companies, etc.

[tigereye]

20. every now and then I listen to crazy radio (my term for RW screeds)

just to keep alert ( and because the baseball games here are now sadly broadcast on a RW station - yuk), but the RW commentator was ranting about OSHA's "take away our guns and ammo" thing, as if OSHA had no real purpose - like keeping people from dying at their workplace, for instance... :sarcasm:

That seems to be their latest fun topic, and their latest way to blame we "liberals." I can't believe anyone takes that guy seriously. I can't believe he even has a show, actually, given all the vitriol he and his ilk produce.



The odd thing was that he spends more time talking about Dem. candidates than about Rep. ones... :rofl:

[polichick]

23. It's probably the most successful of Rep scare tactics...

And liberals also want to hug trees, ya know! All my life I've wondered what could possibly be scary about hugging trees. :shrug:

[benEzra]

47. ...unless the repubs at the Brady Campaign label my guns "assault weapons," you mean...

Liberals in the Democratic party aren't interested in taking your guns away ~ that's silly.

...unless the repubs at the Brady Campaign label my guns "assault weapons," you mean.

You yourself endorsed a ban on "assault weapons" (i.e., the most popular civilian target rifles in America, rarely used in homicides) upthread. The Bradyites use that term to refer to half the guns in our family's gun safe.




---------------------
Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What? (written in '04, largely vindicated in '06, IMO)

The Conservative Roots of U.S. Gun Control

[Perry Logan]

10. It's analagous to athletes using drugs and steroids.

The athlete has the choice: take the drugs--or don't compete.

In today's system, a politician has a similar choice: take the money--or don't run.

The only exception to this are ditzy billionaires, who can run for President by virtue of pure money. Any way you look at it, it's a messed-up system.

[polichick]

15. That's the DLC position, but how true is it really?

Now that huge amounts of money can be collected from small online donors, a smart charismatic liberal could do it. People are hungry for real leadership and the people-based values this country used to be famous for.

[Perry Logan]

22. If you were right, you wouldn't be whistling for your "true-blue liberal."

[polichick]

24. Well, Obama is proving the point about raising funds...

...building on the leadership of Dean. Now we just need the right true blue leader!

[Perry Logan]

25. It's an improvement, no doubt about it, short of true election reform.

And by the way, I think we've got excellent candidates, albeit not up to your Olympian standards.

[polichick]

29. LOL

Actually I admire all the candidates, each for his or her special talents ~ just don't consider the top tier true liberals. I want a liberal who'd push for radical election reform ~ haha! :)

[EndElectoral]

32. Kuccinich is about it this time...Clark isn't even running. Feingold or Boxer could've ran

[Heath Hatcher]

33. You know I almost shed a tear when I found out Feingold declined to run

I did, I know that kinda sounds gay but it happened. Feingold is a terrific Senator that could of brought this country good honest leadership to the WH and to this great country something this country is acheing for in the WH. Don't get me wrong I like Obama, Edwards, Richardson but Russ could of eaten anyone of those characters for breakfast on the campaign trail and during the debates and I know everyone will back me up on that one.

[redqueen]

37. Dennis Kucinich

He's the best we have, hands down.

[Heath Hatcher]

38. No, Al Gore is the best we have

Next to Obama Hands down, too bad he's too timid to actually run. Wouldn't that be great if he ran, christ would he mopped the floors of Giuliani and Romney.

[polichick]

40. I like to think Gore's already running...

The Ultimate Campaign ~ all positive media coverage! heh heh

[Heath Hatcher]

44. I like to think so too

But seriously I give my left nut to see Gore run for President, I mean dosen't he know that if he runs he would basically have the full and upmost support of the party. I mean I know people here are backing Hillary, Edwards, Obama but don't think for a second they wouldn't drop them all like a hot potato if Gore ran.

[democrat2thecore]

42. Was he a big liberal in the Senate? NOPE

As Vice-President? NOPE.
We can only hope the new and improved Al Gore might be.
But wouldn't it be nice to see someone with real, true-blue convictions? Like Bernie Sanders!

[redqueen]

43. Thank you. People's memories are SHORT.

*sigh*

I'd vote for Bernie!

Alas, he's not running. Dennis is, though. And that being the case, I stand by my opinion that he's the best.

[Heath Hatcher]

45. Well techinally I don't agree with what you said about DK

But I love to see Bernie run for President, that guy is man of integrity and good liberal convictions. Unfortuently I don't know how far he would get since techinally he's a Independent and not a Democrat.

[illinoisprogressive]

39. You need a more realistic view of life and politics. sorry.

you have to deal in everyday life. Fact is you need money to run and small time donors only won't get you enough.
You have to work with the opposition to get things passed and to accomplish things.
You cannot have it only one way.
You need to have a more realistic view of things.

[polichick]

41. Can't be True Blue without being idealistic...

That's how this country became great ~ and that's how it will become great again.

[hot_for_hillary]

49. I'm surprised, but I agree with you.

[abburdlen]

48. I don't know what it means

But based on facebook profiles,
Wes Clark is willing to called himself a liberal.
Dennis Kucinich lists his political views as other.

[polichick]

50. Don't know what Kucinich is thinking...

But it's great that Clark isn't afraid of the word liberal ~ it was crazy to let Reps slime us out of our own identity.

When I started this thread I didn't know there was a website called trueblueliberal. I found this there:

LIBERAL (adj)
free from bigotry...favoring reform, open to new ideas, tolerant of the ideas and behaviors of others; broad minded.