Democratic Progressive Populism --- R.I.P. or not?

[Armstead]

It was nice to see Obama and Clinton getting along so well last night. It felt good to see a united front against the GOP. And it was good to see a substantive debate, rather than "he said, she said" squabbles.

But I have to admit last night brought a depressing sense of deja vu. Something was missing.

Sure Obama and Clinton said the right things. But it was what they DIDN'T say that was discouraging.

Passion. Populism. Clear demarcations about the real divide in this country between the haves and the have-nots. A fighting commitment to challenge Corporate Power and to restore the balance between economic and social values.

It wasn't only the absence of Edwards or Kucinich. Okay, they're out and I can accept that. This is bigger than that. This is bigger than any specific candidate.

It just felt like a replay of so many non-debates and non-campaigns of recent decades. Basically the message was "Everything will be fine if we just replace the Republicans with ourselves."

No we need more than that to fix this country. The Democrats need more than that to both win and govern effectively.

Edwards may be gone, but the Democratic Party ought not to just assume that it's okay to throw progressive populism overboard now.

[More Than A Feeling]

1. We shan't let them,

Or they will find a steady diet of primaries singularly unappetizing.

[Armstead]

4. I read your other post and you make a good point...however

my point is that their feet should be held to the fire now, so that they actually go into office knowing that they owe the liberal/progressive movement.

[More Than A Feeling]

5. What do you suggest?

The best indicator of progressive support I know of is money, and I think we are taking care of that area pretty well.

The second best indicator I know of is the ability of the blogs to fight back against smears of our candidate, and I expect our progressive blogs will demonstrate that power come the general election.

Anything I haven't thought of?

[Armstead]

7. All of the above plus....Keep reminding everyone that it's a long way to November

To be perfectly honest, I'm personally torn between a desire for Democratic Unity to beat the GOP and a desire for a continuing fight for the Heart and Soul of the Democrats in THIS campaign.

My frustration last night was a sense of deja vu. Sure it feels good to see the smiling happy face of Democratic Unity poised to challenge the nasty ol' GOP.

But unity at what cost? Unity on whose terms?

Do we agree to let them limit the campaign to the "safe" issues, while ignoring the underlying ones?

So we settle for "inspiration" while forgetting what we are supposed to be inspired about?

I don't want to settle for happy talk about addressing the problem of poverty, while ignoring and empowering the real causes of both poverty and the struggle of the middle class.

Somehow, we have to keep their feet to the fire NOW -- and not wait until they get in and hope for the best.

[More Than A Feeling]

8. Getting our people into as many town halls as possible

to ask them about the fundamental issues. Sending notes listing what we expect alongside our donations, or emails to give them notice we've donated. Getting our local parties to unite on this issues to send collective messages (this is something that can be done throughout the campaign and after too).

I agree with you, they should not be allowed to restrict their talk to the issues that play only to non-progressive crowds.

[Armstead]

9. You're so practical....(That's a compliment)

[More Than A Feeling]

10. Thank you.

Our true work as citizens is always beginning, and never ending.

[bunkerbuster1]

2. Did either say "Healthcare is a right, not a priviledge?"

I didn't hear the whole thing, but I was disappointed not to hear that.

I'd better hear it from the nominee against the GOP's designated pig.

[Armstead]

3. They said similar things but in the narrow context

They differed over "mandates" not the general construct.

I think Obama is closer to the reality on that, but he did not have the cajones to say the real truth, which is that ANY mandates without single payer is a scam.

Perhaps it's because I've seen the pain that Massachusetts's mandates are causing for many people.

But IMO, the real truth is that you either have a single-payer universal plan that is not dominated by private insurance (a la medicare and Social Security) or you make it voluntary and don;t call it universal coverage.

[zalinda]

6. Nothing will get fixed for me or people like me

The only people who will "get better" are those who make $100,000 a year or more. Maybe some will trickle down to the "little people", you know those making between $50,000 and $100,000. But, nothing will change for the working poor. Now that Edwards is gone, it will not be mentioned again. Remember, we have no money to give to their campaigns, so we don't count.

zalinda