It seems that liberals deserve better than a "Not As Bad Party"

[Armstead]

One of the constant tactics used to generate support for the Democratic Party from liberals and progressive voters is the mantra -- You have to support Democrats and (insert politician's name). You have no choice unless you want to see the awful Republicans in charge.

While that may be true, after 30 years of that crap, and the results, it seems to me that strategy is getting real stale....And as 2000 showed, it is often counterproductive.

Okay the GOP are horrible...But it does seem like the Democrats would be a lot more effective at both winning and governing, if it actually started offering a more pro-active and positive liberal and progressive populist agenda.

Instead of the Not As Bad Party, how about taking a cue from some of the gutsy liberal and progressive Democrats, and build some enthusiasm as the Real Party for the Real People?

Just my opinion

[ProSense]

1. GOP votes down measure to prevent Social Security, Medicare privatization

GOP votes down measure to prevent Social Security, Medicare privatization

You're right, but in the above case "Not As Bad Party" isn't applicable. Stark contrast.

When the GOP is mounting an assault, the goal isn't to claim "Dems do it too."

[Armstead]

3. Not as Bad can include some good things

It's a matter of degree and extent...

[ClassWarrior]

6. That's what makes it Not as Bad.

NGU.

[ProSense]

15. "It's a matter of degree and extent..."

Yes, to the extent that "Not as Bad" is often BS.

[pscot]

2. Working people too

It's been a while since





It's been a while since since any politician, of either party, has been looking out for my intersts.

[liberal N proud]

4. Divide the Democratic Party

and play right into the GOP's hand

[ClassWarrior]

11. That's why we need to unite under a strong progressive banner and avoid the trap...

7. The Centrist Trap

There is a common belief that there is an ideological "center"--a large group of voters either with a consistent ideology of their own or lined up left to right on the issues or forming a "mainstream," all with the same positions on issues. In fact, the so-called center is actually made up of biconceptuals, people who are conservative in some aspects of life and progressive in others. Voters who self-identify as "conservative" often have significant progressive values in important areas of life. We should address these "partial progressive" biconceptuals through their progressive identities, which are often systematic and extensive.

A common mistaken ideology has convinced many progressives that they must "move to the right" to get more votes. In reality, this is counterproductive. By moving to the right, progressives actually help activate the right's values and give up on their own. In the process, they also alienate their base.

One of "12 Traps to Avoid," from George Lakoff's seminal book, Thinking Points.

NGU.

[Armstead]

16. That's a variation of the theme

God forbid anyone should talk about how Democrats could change and improve....That would be "playing into the Republican's hands."

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

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

[jenmito]

7. We don't have that. We have a very good Dem. party. n/t

[Armstead]

17. A matter of opinion I guess

NAFTA and Corporate Globalization, Shrinking Middle Class while the rich get richer, Clinton's Telecommunications Deform of 1996, Repeal of financial regulation....etc.

the mere fact that anyone takes the far right GOP seriously because of the lack of a real competing message.....

[uponit7771]

56. +1, they haven't been perfect but they can be worked with

[lob1]

8. The problem with a lot of dems is they're taking money

from the same corps that republicans do.

[paulk]

9. the problem is that today's Democratic Party is not a liberal

party. They are basically the Republican party of 30 years ago - and will remain so unless there is some fundamental change in the way our campaigns are financed.

A progressive/liberal agenda is going to have to start at the top, imho, rather than as a grassroots movement and it's going to take leadership, something that's pretty much lacking in the party hierarchy these days...

I don't have much hope anymore for any sort of change in the direction of our country's slide into a corporatocracy . Obama was our last best hope.

[Armstead]

20. You are right...Except I still hold out some hope for change from top and grassroots

But it won't happen as long as we continue to enable the steady slide to corporate conservatism

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

10. Ralph Nader's got a trash can all prepped and ready for your vote, if you're into that

[ClassWarrior]

12. Wow, is that all you got? That was what, 12 years ago?

:rofl:

NGU.

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

18. that trash can still exists.

[Armstead]

21. Maybe it is worth asking WHY that trash can still exists

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

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

[QC]

14. To answer your question,

no.

[Armstead]

19. Thank you for proving my point

Ralph Nader should have not even been a factor in 2000....But instead he filled a void for basic liberalism ignored by the centrist Democrats.

[ProSense]

22. "Ralph Nader should have not even been a factor in 2000....But instead he filled a void "

So your point is vote third party because Dems are "not as bad" as Republicans?

[Armstead]

27. No, my point is the Democratic Party should be better than "not as bad"

It is possible for the Democratic to open some windows and let in some fresh air, and reinvigorate itself with a real orientation to clear liberal principles and progressive populist policies.

[ProSense]

29. They are better than "not as bad," and

everytime someone tests that theory, the difference becomes quite clear.

Democrats (and not all of them are from the same mold) sometimes screw up, but most can acknowledge when they have (just ask Clinton).

The problem with the "not as bad" broadbrush is that it keeps justifying apathy, and this is not a good time for such nonsense.

I mean, 2012 could be a Democratic resurgence or people could again test the "not as bad" theory.

[Armstead]

30. There are some clear differences...But not enough on things that matter

I am not advocating or trying to justify apathy. Just the opposite.

I have Lived through too many repeats of the patterns where Democrats move to the right on issues -- they either actively echo the corporate conservatism of Republicans, or only put up a meek challenge.

Then they tell liberals and progressives You have to support us -- you have nowhere else to go.

There are some fundamental issues and ways of looking at things that MUST be challenged sooner rather than later...I Am not talking about some socialist utopia -- But we need to get away from some of the right wing crap, polarization of the economy and GIlded Age values that would have seemed totally unacceptable when I was a young 'un.

Unless we want to continue to slip backward, the Democratic Party must again advocate for unvarnished mainstream populist liberalism.

That would both be much better for society, and actually makes elections more invigorated.

[ProSense]

31. Again

I don't agree

Consider what's going on in WI and other states with Republican Governors, there are clear differences on things that matter, from child labor laws to Medicaid to unions.

[Armstead]

33. Again...I said they are better than GOP -- But that's a low bar

I still contend that, for example, regarding Wisconsin, the Democratic Party as a whole should be very aggressively bringing out and publicly challenging the whole GOP plan to shrink and privatize government and destroy unions.

And they should be aggressively supporting the retention of union rights.

A few tepidly supportive remarks in passing about what "seems to be" is not what is needed.

[ProSense]

34. "And they should be aggressively supporting the retention of union rights."

The Democrats in WI are. They're Democrats. Still, they would likely have had a larger majority had people recognized the difference between them and the party voted into power in November.

That's the problem with convincing people that it doesn't matter which party one votes for: they always find out that there's a difference when it's too late.

[ClassWarrior]

35. They're the exception.

Walker was hoping that the WI Dems would follow the national Dems pattern of chasing the RW insanity down the crazy hole, thus shifting the discussion even further to the right.

But they didn't. They're the exception. So don't even attempt to invoke them to prove your specious point.

NGU.

[jefferson_dem]

40. Nader apologists unite!

That'll sure help your argument.

[Armstead]

46. Please tell me why Nader did not get more than a few thousand scattered votes

I'm not being a Nader apologist. I wished he hadn't run in 2000.

But his message was far better than the centrist corporatist bullshit of the DLC Democratic Party

Rather than complaining about a symptom, it would be more useful to look at WHY Nader's campaign became such a factor in 2000.

Why did a measurable number of people who should have been Democrats by default feel so alienated from the party that they could not simply take the easy way and support and work for Gore?

And it would be unhelpful to simply blame it on the "far left purists." Nader was hardly a socialist utopian. His message and policies were simply the kind of mainstream Liberal/Progressive Populism that should be represented by the Democratic Party.

[slipslidingaway]

23. knr nt

[treestar]

24. That's life, that's the way the real world is

The real world contains Republicans.

They have to be dealt with. Just pretending they aren't there does nothing but let them win.

Real life is not all roses and ideals. It's about reality. A world of reality where Republicans exist and are a major party.

[Armstead]

28. In the "real world" the Democratic Party should be the active opposition to the GOP

There have been so many lost opportunities for Democrats to actually challenge the GOP in meaningful ways that would clearly be in the interests of the working majority and encouraging a more broadly based economy.

If the Democratic Party would stop kowtowing to the same corporate oligarchs as the GOP, it would reinvigorated both in actual governing and in terms of political strength.

[ClassWarrior]

32. Thanks for proving the OP's point. "Live with it, Dems. All you get is crumbs."

NGU.

[Exilednight]

87. Let me know when Obama bothers to deal with the Republicans in any other manner than

in the "spirit of bipartisanship".

I knock Bush for a lot of things, I disagreed with him on 99.9999% of his policy, but I give him credit for standing his ground. Now allow me to clarify this remark.

Congressional Democrats sent Bush a war funding bill that had a draw down date attached to it. I agreed with the bill, and wholeheartedly disagreed with Bush. But Bush vetoed the bill and sent it back to Congress and told them to send him a "clean bill". Eventually, Dems caved and Bush got his way. I'm still pissed that Bush got his way, but I admire the way he did it. I just wish Obama would do the same when dealing with Republicans.

[xchrom]

25. Very true. Nt

[27inCali]

26. there's a difference between Deserve and NEED

if we spend too long worrying about what we deserve, we might just find ourself empowering the very forces we definitely NEED to stop.

I'm pretty disappointed too, but the answer is to kick some ass in the primaries. 2012 will be a landslide for Dems, which means we can afford to nominate some real fire-breathing Liberals, just like the last cycle when the Rs took advantage of their landslide to get a lot of over-the-top nutjobs into office.

[Exilednight]

88. There's not going to be a landslide victory for Ds in 2012. Odds are that

Republicans will play the "we need more Republicans in the Senate to make real change" card.

Anyone who thinks that Obama has the election in the bag in 2012 is fooling themselves. The only way he will win by a landslide is if the tea-party runs a third party candidate, or the libertarian party runs someone who widely appeals to the tea-party and far right Republican base.

[TriMera]

36. k&r. n/t

[ClarkUSA]

37. Are you advocating for a third party?

[Armstead]

48. Nope -- I'm advocating for a Democratic Party that actually represents something

When i say "something" I mean much more than "Not Republican."

It isn't just the GOP who have caused so many problems. Historically, over the last 30 years or so, most of the truly rotten policies, practices and "political messaging" that have gotten us into this mess have been aided and abetted by the Centrist Democratic Party.

The GOP and their Corporate CONservative scam could not have become so strong if the Democratic Party had actually challenged that crap. Instead they went along, either because of timidity, corruption or both.

There are a lot of Great Democrats in Congress and elsewhere who are clearly Progressive -- and who also WIN elections. I believe that the Democratic Party as an institution and its leadership ought to following their lead instead of constantly
reverting to conventional wisdom of the Wall St. Oligarchs.

[old mark]

38. K&R-...nt

[Mimosa]

39. "Good Cop or Bad Cop"..choose. This strategery WORKS! n/t

[ReggieVeggie]

41. suck it up, Army!

You're given what they want to give and you'd just better like it! :sarcasm:

[Armstead]

50. Been sucking it up for 30 years

It tastes pretty bad by now.

[great white snark]

42. Not as bad, repub-lite, lesser of two evils etc. All BS memes that only enable Republicans.

Or enable a 3rd party. Is that your goal?

[Armstead]

51. Nope. Those memes don;t "enable" Republicans as much as...

a Democratic Party that has abandoned liberalism to chase the same corporate dollars as the Re;publicans does.

[lunatica]

43. It's called being on 'the horns of a dilemma'

Sometimes all you have is a choice between worst and least worst.

How nice if it weren't so.

[Vinca]

44. The Dems need to can that logo of the D in a circle and put

a testicle in a circle. Stand for real Democratic principles and not Republican-lite.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

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

[JoePhilly]

47. Start another party.

[kenny blankenship]

49. That's the first sensible idea I've heard yet.

[JoePhilly]

52. I scanned the thread twice looking to see if anyone else said it.

But I didn't see it.

Seems obvious to me. If you hate the GOP, and you don't like voting for Dems, you need to start (or find) a new party.

Continuing to complain about the party you freely chose to be part of makes no sense.

[kenny blankenship]

53. Oh I agree. Expecting the Democratic Party to not be corporate whores

is like trying to get blood from stone. Comes a time you have to acknowledge REALITY.

[Armstead]

54. No I'd rather see a version of what Hubert Humphrey did on civil rights

That is to see the Democratic Party get pushed to a more clearly liberal position on the ciore issues of wealth and power.


The Democratic Party was once the party of racism. In 1948, Humphrey and other liberals challenged that and even went against the wishes of incumbent President Truman. The racist Dixiecrats left and formed a third party, but Truman won.

I would prefer to see liberal/progressive Democrats force the issue of economic democracy and progressive populism this time around in a similar way, so that the Democratic Party is not just running as the "kinder and gentler" party of Wall St. and Corporatist Oligarchs.

[kenny blankenship]

58. They had a once in a CENTURY chance to lead us away from the rule by the rich advocated by the GOP

but it turned out that they didn't believe in anything fundamentally different.

[Armstead]

59. I said do a similar thing on the issue of Corporate Power and the Oligarchs

These things are never clearcut unfortunately.

In 1948 the time was ripe for the Democrats to move away from the position of institutionalized racism.

My point is that we could be at a similar turning point in terms of economic issues. The Democratic Party can make a break from the excesses of Corporate CONservatism now.

[uponit7771]

55. Back in adult reality, the adequate shouldn't be decimated for the sake of perfect or good.

[Armstead]

57. Could you possdibly fit more cliches into one sentence?

If you ever want to have a meaningful discussion about specific things I'd be happy to oblige.

Otherwise, maybe you could at least go to your thesaurus and look up some new ways to say the same old nonsense.

[ClassWarrior]

60. There's a campaign slogan: "WE'RE ADEQUATE!!"

:rofl:

And then folks wonder why there's an enthusiasm gap.

By the way, back in intelligent adult reality, this is the take of a distinguished professor at a major university:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=630400&mesg_id=630400

NGU.

[mkultra]

74. im fine with "WE ARE NOT REPUBLICANS"

democracy has always been about voting for the lesser of two evils. If you want to feel totally connected to your candidates, become a conservative.

[Armstead]

83. That's a pretty lame view of democracy. All we can get is an evil?

I prefer to think that somethi9ng better is possible. Not perfection, but better.

[Ignis]

80. !

:spray:

[ClassWarrior]

61. BTW, talk about lowering the bar. The expression is, "Perfect shouldn't be the enemy of..."

"...good." Though now it seems you'd have us throw "good" to the wolves along with "perfect," and settle for merely "adequate."

Thanks for proving the OP's point. "Crumbs, Dems! Settle for crumbs!!"

NGU.

[Armstead]

62. Oh you're just a purist upopian socialist

...kidding.

[ClassWarrior]

63. Kidding? Awww.

I was going to take that as a compliment, Arm.

:fistbump:

NGU.

[Armstead]

64. Purist utopian communist?

[ClassWarrior]

66. Okay, them's fighting words!

Let's take this outside...

NGU.

[cliffordu]

65. Easy to say, almost impossible to achieve, or we'd

fucking well HAVE it, RIGHT????

What I don't get is the fact that what, 80% of the LIBERAL Democrats think he's doing a fine job, and the harshest critics, lets say RIGHT HERE< for instance, are seen by that 80% as outliers and leftist weirdoes.

I mean really. we get the government we deserve. Really.

[Armstead]

67. Oh he is doing a fine job, I suppose -- Problem is when it gots down to specific issues

Let's just take the tax breaks for the rich.

The Democrats put that one off til the last minute -- AFTER the election -- and thus allowed themselves to be backed into a corner that gave the GOP the power position. Thus the Democrats "had to" cave into the GOP demands and hostage-taking of the middle class cuts.

The fact that the tax breaks for millionaires went through without the GOP getting their hands dirty was either due to ineptitude or lack of a will to take on this by the Democrats.

And yet the polls indicate that a majority of Americans FAVOR raising taxes on tyhe wealthy to helkp get the budget unbder control.

If this was an isolated incident it would be understandable and forgivable. But it happens on issue after issue, year after year (decade after decade).

But it wouldn't have typo be this way with some alterations...It is not an impossible task.

[ClassWarrior]

70. We gotta try it before we can {expletive} well have it, RIGHT??

:shrug:

Can't say it's "almost impossible to achieve" if we haven't tried it.

NGU.

[mkultra]

68. "While that may be true" is the key here

If you don't like the candidates, run yourself or get better people elected in the primaries. If not enough people agree with you to elect the people you want, tough shit. make a better case.

Welcome to democracy.

[Armstead]

76. I find it hard to believe you are so cavalier with Noam as yoiur avatar

You actually think it's that simple?

(P.S. We do what we can based on our own strengths and weaknesses. I would be a terrible political candidate. You want to elect a Republican? Nominate me as the opponent.)

[polichick]

69. I really think it'll take a new party - too many Dems are corporate sell-outs...

With his mandate and the enthusiasm of 2008, Obama could have turned things around - he chose otherwise.

That said, a tough primary challenger could STILL turn things around.

[killbotfactory]

71. No large, diverse, group of people will ever meet up to your expectations

Or mine, or anyone elses.

If you want a powerful voting block for progressive causes you are going to have to compromise on a lot of issues, because everyone has different priorities.

The only way this will ever change is with a complete overhaul of our political system, which will probably never happen in our lifetimes.

[ClassWarrior]

72. We're not talking about Arm's expectations. We're talking about Democratic values.

Those are unchanging, right? So why won't our side forcefully articulate them?

NGU.

[killbotfactory]

79. People have different ideas on how best to pursue democratic values

And democratic values have changed quite a bit over the years.

[Armstead]

82. They sure have changed -- but not for the better and the chickens have come home to roost

Yes, people do have different ideas on how to pursue democratic values. I stated mine, just as everyone else is free to state theirs.

I have seen over 30 years in which true economic democracy has been subverted by policies supported by both Republicans and centrist Democrats...And now the chickens have come home to roost on many levels -- largely because of bad things the Democrats either supported, ignored or chose not to fight against.

Something has to change if things are ever gong to get any better. If we keep repeating the same patterns we'll conmtinue to get the same results.

That's my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

[Armstead]

77. There's compromise and then there's capitulation

I'm basically a moderate liberal by temperament. And I sort of have the Obama philosophy about the importance of reasonableness, compromise, etc.

I'd settle for 45 percent of what I'd really like to see, as long as there is a positive basic direction.

But over the years I have seen the Democrats either capitulate or sell out some very basic principles far too many times -- to the point where it's about 20 percent. And what I want to see is NOT all that "radical."

[treestar]

86. Amen! There is no way to work in any group and not have it

be doing things we disagree with, and if we focus on the negatives/disagreements, it won't do a damn bit of good!

[JI7]

73. Is anyone stopping you ?

the biggest problem seems to be from those who do support the democratic party being critical and saying it will result in republican victory.

but if you are serious about it why not do something to try to make what you want happen ?

if i wanted to start a different party i would start at the lower levels where it's easier with fewer voters to reach out to which allows for a better chance of reaching a higher percentage of voters for that race.

but when i see posts like yours i don't think people like you want to do the above but rather just complain .

i go out trying to get voters all the time and most of them don't want to listen and of those who do many who are even democrats are not liberal on many issues.

if a democrat had won governor's race in wisconin what the governor is now doing would never be an issue.

being in power often means preventing the other side from doing things as much as what you can get done.

[Armstead]

81. This is so tiresome -- One can't complain and do anything, eh?

Anyone who criticizes the Holy Democratic Church is automatically not doing anything else in their life, according to the defenders of the True Faith of the Conventional Wisdom.

Why can't you disagree or critique a post like mine on its substance, without falling back on such moronic know-nothing personal insults and stereotypes?

First of all, I have never run for office and I never intend to. Why? Because I would be a lousy politician, and would guarantee the election of any Republican who I might run against. I have however, helped out on campaigns, given money etc.

I also have a job that, without going into details, is largely based on increasing awareness of issues in a way that does matter.

Finally -- and you are certainly free to disagree -- I believe the best way the democrats CAN win is to stand for principles and proactively take action that challenges the GOP on core economic values.

[JI7]

84. because i haven't seen any evidence of anything being done

and i'm not saying you have to run for office.

how about support a candidate for some lower office ? but instead i usually hear the same things like your OP.

[Armstead]

89. What are people supposed to report all they do to you?

You can say my or anyone's ideas are full of shit, and that's fine.

But what is tiresome is this cliche that people often use against people who post anything critical of the Democratic Party that "Oh you people just post on DU and never do anything."

I don't intend to justify myself to you, but I will say that my career has been based on doing what I can with the personal tools I have to contribute to knowledge about issues. And I have done things to support candidates and causes on my own time. I know a lot of other people who do the same thing in varioius spoheres, including politics, and/or are active in their spare time.

As I said you are welcome to think anyone's ideas are full of shit. But can the high-handed assumptions about your fellow posters who you know nothing about.

[Unvanguard]

75. What's "deserve" got to do with it? n/t

[Little Star]

78. Would be nice huh? The "Not As Bad Party" sucks! .....

Should be the "better than any party"!

[treestar]

85. What do we "deserve?"

We live in a society. There is simply no way to get all we want. The Republicans on the far right probably think they "deserve" a party farther to the right of the Republicans and are tired of hearing about how not supporting them could result in Democrats in office.

We can only get what we can get, and will get no sympathy saying we "deserve" to have people agree with us more.

It's merely reality that if you "deserve" a more liberal Democratic party, you don't "deserve" a Republican government. But that's all you'll get. No amount of foot stomping messes with that reality.