Misunderstandings and the moderate American electorate.

[RBInMaine]

First, no, I do not contribute to the DLC nor am I a member thereof. With that out of the way, I see so many posts here displaying anger and bewilderment over why Congress's policies are not more "progressive" given the Democratic majorities. The answer is stark and simple: Democrats have always been a diverse party in this very regional nation with huge ideological differences region to region. We have expanded the map, but to do that, moderate Democrats have won in purple to red districts, districts that would NEVER elect Kucinich types. Look at any piece of data you want.
Independents are the plurality in America. Neither far right TeaPartiers nor far left "progressives" are the majority. To be a viable national party, the party must have a large tent. That is the American reality for better or worse. America has always been a regional and politically diverse nation founded on compromise. And this is a good thing. The RePUKES are now having a civil war between their Rush/Beck-loving TeaPartiers which their party chair has just endorsed, and their remaining moderates, many of whom have left that party to become Dems or Indys. The plain reality is that Dems on balance would be very, very unwise to turn hard left away from middle America. And on balance,
progressives still have much more of a friend with the Dems than the TeaPartying RePUKES. There is strength in numbers and coalitions, and try as they might, progressives alone could never win the presidency nor large congressional majorities. So sure, progressives can find some disappointments in Washington these days. But how much more disappointed would they be with President McCain and Vice President Palin? No Lilly Leadbetter law, No stem cell expansion, No green technologies initiatives, No expanded SCHIP, No real stimulus, No healthcare effort at all, and on and on and on. Imagine this future: House Speaker Boehner, Majority Leader McConnell, President Palin... Want something like that? There are indeed vast differences between the RePUKES and the Dems, and I'm with the Dems, even if they don't walk in the kind of lockstep the RePUKES do and even if they are not all as progressive as I might prefer. But that is America. And America is home.

[Richardo]

1. Nicely said.

k&r :kick: :patriot:

[Hello_Kitty]

2. The problem is that Dems are turning away from things the public supports

60% support the public option. 60% oppose the excise tax and 60% support the surtax on the wealthy instead. Yet we're getting no public option and an excise tax. That has nothing to do with middle America. Corporations and lobbyists are not middle America.

[RBInMaine]

3. Would that 60% please get louder. Next, the other hard reality is Senate rules which give small

numbers of Senators large pull. And regardless you would not get reconciliation on something as big as healthcare. More than 10 Dem caucusers wouldn't support that, and it sets tough precedents in other ways. I think in conference you are going to see some modification of the provisions you mention. They are well aware of the issues. But there MUST be a health bill after 100 years of trying. It is just a START, and we must FINALLY start somewhere. I would prefer single payer. I would prefer a public option. But if a non-profit exchange approach and other insurance reforms are what we can muster right now (and those ARE VERY popular in the polls too), then so be it. It is just a start. It deserves a chance. There is far more doom and glooming than is warranted.

[BrklynLiberal]

4. A very rational and coherent statement. Kudos

:thumbsup:

[Clio the Leo]

5. Thank you. NT

[boppers]

6. Interesting perspective.

Nice to see some moderation in thought.

[iamjoy]

7. Yep....

Sure I'm disappointed in President Obama and the Democrats in Congress. But I know there's a very clear difference between what Obama has (or hasn't) done and what a McCain Presidency would be like. You named several, I will also remind people just how McCain would have filled a Supreme Court vacancy - with another Scalia/Thomas/Alito.

[TheKentuckian]

8. As you observe it, what does the moderate actually believe in and desire?

When the broad moderate expanse thinks health care reform, what is it they have in mind?

It is my belief that actual moderates (not assholes like Nelson and Baucus who are CONSERVATIVES and/or hard core corporatist, maybe not rabid teabaggers but establishment Republicans) aren't any happier with this piece of skunk puke than anyone else. The bill is left, it isn't moderate, its not market based reform, its not even conservative reform, it is corporatist reform and there isn't some mass audience that wants this crap.

You can't paint the bad picture of the Republicans all you please, and the picture is disturbingly and unacceptably bad, but in the end we still end up fucked because this current dynamic is incapable of taking on big issues and coming up with anything resembling effective solutions. We've got a health care debacle that threatens to swallow the entire economy and we have a non-solution that might well make things even worse. We can't address climate. We can't get labor on the table. We can't deal with trade inequities, we can't even slow down the military waste, we can't do anything substantive enough on energy to even give ourselves a fighting chance in the global competition.

I do appreciate the efforts and little headway we are able to carve out but we can't seriously address issues only selected symptoms. This dynamic must be shaken up even at the cost of real agony because it is self destructive, short0sighted, and weapons grade stupid to keep going on like this even if it ruffles the moderates whoever the fuck they are.

We can't play keep away forever, eventually the Republicans will get in by luck, hook, or crook and all the dry powder in the world won't help an iota. We haven't put an actual liberal proposal up at all. There is nothing out there that is scaring moderates with any hard leftishness, the OP is a cop out that is trying to build cover for worthless, corrupt, lying pols from a false premise.

None of the problems with this bill are the result of any moderate backlash nor an effort to keep from scaring the middle. The real problems are much more closely associated with selling out to corporate interests and believing in voodoo economics.

[RBInMaine]

9. Deleted

[RBInMaine]

10. Your analysis is flawed, and you don't address my main point.

First, try as some might, Bayh, Lincoln, Baucus, Nelson, Lieberman etc. are simply not on the same par as Inhofe, Coburn, Demint, McConnell, and the very hard right coalition dominating the Republican Party today. You need to look at the larger picture. In the broad American political landscape and across all policy areas, they are relatively moderate in a mainly moderate nation. What is "moderate" American voter you and others often ask? What do they stand for? They are the plurality in America, as "wishy washy" as some may want to brand them. They are usually well educated and in the middle class. They want adequate and pragmatic government, but not excessive government. They value corporate responsibility but also personal responsibility. They value common sense, compromise, and fiscal responsibility. They value innovation, new ideas, and solutions to problems. They tend to respect and value many traditional American institutions (sports, holidays, the flag, religion, hunting, fishing, etc.), but not in extremes. On the hot button social issues they tend not to favor gay marriage, but are usually ok with civil unions and expanded civil rights. On abortion they tend to favor choice but with a number of limitations and restrictions. They tend to be unenrolled Independents, and those enrolled in a party will tend to cross over depending on the candidates in particular elections and the particular dynamics going on. They will often vote mixed ballots, not straight ballots. My wife is an Independent moderate, and she takes each issue and candidate one at a time (although she tracks a bit left of center, usually. Depends.) They look carefully at candidates and issues, and take some time make up their minds. I am fine saying that even as a very partisan Democrat, I too can identify with moderate positions and values and share some, while I am more progressive on others. Most of us are not ideological purists.

You have your policy gripes, but in the forseeable future "progressives" do not and will not have the ability to place Kucinich type progressives into executive or legislative majorities in the national government given our size and political diversity. You, and too many others who are enveloped in a kind of ideological purity, are looking at the current situation through too narrow a lens. One must always consider the big picture and political and historical realities. America is founded on compromise. Change always happens slowly. Some progress IS being made on a number of issues, and we are in a better place today than with Bush and Cheney. Again, where would you be with a President McCain and Vice President Palin right now? Any happier?
Count your blessings my friend. It could be much worse. They are working on the health bill in conference. Let's give them a chance. At least they are doing something, and yes, that IS better than nothing. It seems the basis of your concern is what you consider still too much corporate influence in American governance. Agreed. Are you a member of an organizaion lobbying for more campaign finance reform such as Common Cause? Not happy about a matter, then ORGANIZE and try to DO something about it. In the meantime, we do the best we can with what we have to work with, and the Dems, even Baucus, beat the RePUKES/TeaPartiers any day hands down.

[RBInMaine]

14. And also, what is your plan to place the kind of vast Kucinich type large majorities that

would be required to achieve the many reforms you desire? What is the plan to flip the red and purple districts to become Kucinich type voters? You have articulated what you consider the problem. Fine. What solutions do you have given our diverse regional and political realities?

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RBInMaine]

12. Hyperbole. Despite the bad behavior of some, our financial system could not be allowed to fail.

That would have resulted in the second great depression. Some new regulations are already there, with a full bill on the way and in Congress now. Money is being repaid now. Some are ahead of the curve. You are small picturing here, a very common thought process trap. My main point goes to the broad American electoral realities. Not happy about financial policy and corporate influence, then join Common Cause and lobby against it. Go out and see if you an flip purple and red districts to vote for Kucinich type progressives. When you can do that you will have the revolution you desire. Meantime, we stay grounded in reality, work to make SOME progress, and do the best we can with what we have, which is far better than McCain/Palin in the BIG picture. What are your electoral SOLUTIONS? What are your ACTIONS? Or will you just yell and complain and bash Obama and Democrats forever? Do the Republicans not give you enough to complain about? The world doesn't completely change overnight. Keep your eye on the larger picture and the longer view.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bluenorthwest]

17. Election solution number one involves forgetting the last election

McCain/Palin already lost. Done. Defeated. And yet you bring them up as if we had to face that again. We will be facing others, not them. In the Big Picture. In Reality. The past is past in reality. And yet you wave Palin at people and speak of a 'Kucinich type' as if there was not an entire Progressive Caucus on the Hill. How about a Bernie Sanders type? Of course, with Bernie, you miss out on a chance to slam an actual Democrat, and if you are not slamming Democrats, you are not being a good 'moderate centrist Indy' or whatever you claim to be.
And yes, you bet, I'd take 'Kucinich types' over Olympia Snowe types all the live long day. I'm a Democrat. As is Dennis. Funny how you hold him in contempt, while your own elected representatives have been such utter twits for so many months. If those women are what you call 'the best' then Maine has no room to criticize anyone, what you have is work to do, elect some Democrats, if you can manage to find one you do not see as 'other'. As a 'type'. Or keep whining and electing your Republicans. You elect Republicans, and criticize those who support Democrats. Really amazing hubris. Also, whiny, selfish and downright dumb as a block of ice.

[RBInMaine]

21. Do you need some prozac?

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jpak]

27. TARP was and emergency measure to prevent economic collapse - and it worked

Without TARP and the Stimulus we would be in a Great Depression with no hope at all.

jusy sayin'

[Bluenorthwest]

15. Here's the deal. If your premise is correct, then there is no

point in the post other than breathing on irrelevant liberals. If Indy voters are the plurality, then what is the reason for posting this at all? You have the plurality. So what's the point of posting this?
I'd much rather read what you think a 'moderate' or 'centrist' really is, and if that position simply changes as the left and right move?
I think that is the problem. The center is defined by the circumference, so if we on the actual Democratic liberal, non bigoted end of things take that circumference more to the left, those who hold that center find themselves more to the left. And this is a threat to your Conservative desires.
So you are the center, you are the plurality, liberals don't matter, but you are posting all manner of tripe against them. We don't matter, but we are the focus of your rantings. So funny. So why I don't live back East.
I read this week that Maine was refusing to pay to bus National Guard people home for Christmas from down South, so the ultra liberal, pro equality lefties Steve and Tabitha King paid for it out of they own non moderate pockets. So you do have liberals there to occasionally see that the right thing gets done toward your own volunteer offspring. That is the take away story from this. The liberals get things done, while your 'moderate' plurality would have left your own volunteers stranded over a few thousand dollars. Not that Mainers are known skinflints or anything, hell no. But better the libs should pay out of pocket that you should care for your own damn kids.
The Kings made you all look good for once. I'll do your State the favor of thinking of Steve and Tab instead of you and Olympia and the State's anti civil rights bigotry when I think of Maine. Well, I'll try, as the Bigot Boycott is essential.

[RBInMaine]

23. It seems your intellect has given way to your ranting as you drown in misunderstanding or any

desire to understand what I have written. It is not about me. It is about the larger American electoral realities, governing realities, and what is possible given this complex of circumstances.
If you can't fathom my points and would rather rant and rave, then rant away.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RBInMaine]

22. First, I was heading off the common "You must be a DLCer" accusation. Next,

you miss the point. I am most likely for most of the more liberal economic policies that you no doubt favor. i.e. I am for single payer healthcare let alone a public option. I am talking less about what I am personally for and speaking to the broader issue of national electoral and ideological conditions at this point in time in our country which we must always recognize regardless of personal preferences. Despite policy preferences, we must do what can pass given the electoral and governing rule circumstances. Nice to talk about the ideal, but we must talk more about what can pass.
On specific policy, it makes sense to talk about what is moderate to liberal and what HAS been or IS being done or attempted under Obama and these Dems you seem to too quickly liken to R's: new financial system regulations; a stimulus that invests in green technologies and is used to save public safety and education jobs; regulations that stop insurance companies from throwing people off for getting sick or for having a pre-existing condition; non-profit healthcare exchanges; limiting insurance co. CEO compensation; directing tax credits to green technology development; the Lilly Leadbetter law; expanded SCHIP; more stem cells; better choice rules; and closing GITMO while ending Bush torture policies. Yes, we had to save the financial system, and I'm all for making them pay it back with interest and for curbing bonuses bigtime as well as the kind of speculation and paper-moving that caused so much of that mess, BUT too many individuals also got themselves into those crappy loans and never should have. Many darn well knew better or should have. As to Bernie Sanders, I would love to see him be President. I think he's great and agree with him in large measure, tough cetainly not on everything. I also love his frank style. I'd even be fine with Kucinich. But it will not happen in this nation, at least not anytime soon. If you can lay out such a scenario and tell me how it could happen I'm all ears. And thanks for mentioning Bernie (and I'll also toss in Sherrod, Barabara, Debbie, Anthony, Al, and others) who is FOR the health bill.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RBInMaine]

25. Sorry, I did mix up posts at least on that point. I'll rectify it.

[Bluenorthwest]

18. Maine Democrats favor discrimination

So what they have to say is nothing but the words of a bigoted State that elects Republicans to the Senate as if it were an act of great love. Maine contributes this to the picture: Olympia Snowe. So what is it that Maine Democrats do to keep failing so badly? Perhaps lecturing when they should be correcting their own garden, electing some Democrats, that sort of thing?
It is just hard for me to think that Democrats who can not elect Democrats have much to tell those of us who do in fact elect Democrats. That reality thing, you know? The results in the 'real world' thing. When you fail to win, you do not get to lecture the winners on how they could win even more. Go elect some Democrats and stop all the whining that others are not like you. Can you? Elect Democrats? Or can you only divide and whine and criticize Democrats for being Democrats?

[RBInMaine]

20. What you don't know about my state is a lot. Please read on.

First, Maine, which was once deeply Republican, has now voted blue in every Prez election since 1992.
Obama won Maine with 58%. The Maine House of Reps is appx. 90-60 Dem. The Maine Senate is very close, but majority Dem. We have a Dem gov. and haven't elected an R gov. in 20 years. Two of our four federal legislators are Dem, and Collins and Snowe are simply popular institutions in Maine (Snowe has been around for decades - Collins used to work for Bill Cohen) who continue to win with crossover appeal and are able to bill themselves as moderates, which to some degree they are when compared to the Inhofe/DeMint brand (i.e. pro choice, voted for the stimulus, etc.), although, yes, they do vote with their R majority about 80% of the time. As to the gay marriage law (which I supported), it has lost in every state that has put it to a popular vote, and some states have passed popular vote referendums outlawing it by constitutional amendment. Still, it came relatively close to passing in Maine winning 47% of the vote. In 2005 there was an effort to overturn a law which placed orientation into protected civil rights status, and that passed 55-45, a campaign I headed up for my town. Had our vote this time, as in Washington state, been for civil union and not marriage it probably would have passed. Mainers didn't vote down gay marriage because they are bigots. They voted it down because a majority of Mainers and Americans simply are not ready to make that leap. Sorry if that bothers you, but again, the cold hard facts speak for themselves. Check any study you would like. A majority of our nation opposes gay marriage. Civil union is more possible in many areas though, and that's the way it goes at this point in time, like it or not. (And even in "liberal" Washington THAT only passed 51-49.) Sorry you don't like my observations and commentaries. Facts can sometimes hurt. Show me a plan that can flip purple and red districts to Kucinich-like (better?) "progressives" and I'll listen intently. In the meantime, I am in fact interested in making some "progress" even in small steps. So yes, do consider American reality. And thanks for raising the gay marriage example. It illustrates my point well as to where the broad American electorate is as compared to where many "progressives" are on a host of issues.

[RBInMaine]

26. And as to Bernie Sanders...

I would love to see him be President. I think he's great and agree with him in large measure, though not on everything. I also love his frank style. I'd even be fine with Kucinich. But it will not happen in this nation, at least not anytime soon. If you can lay out such a scenario and tell me how it could happen I'm all ears. And thanks for mentioning Bernie (and I'll also toss in Sherrod, Barabara, Debbie, Anthony, Al, and others) who is FOR the health bill.

[jpak]

28. Bullshit - neither Snowe or Collins nor Maine Democrats are bigots and Maine went for Obama

and who are YOUR Senators????