A tough loss, but an important message

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Jun 08, 2010 at 23:59


First, let me just say that we lost, and there is no covering that up.  Even though it was close, a win would have been almost 100% better than a loss.

Now, with that said

  • Anti-Wall Street messaging works: Blanche Lincoln produced strong language on the derivatives portion of the all Street reform bill.  She went to the left of the White House, the House of Representatives, and the Senate leadership in her language.  Further, it ended up in the bill that passed the Senate because of her primary challenge, and then she proceeded to campaign on it:

    [corrected: had the wrong video up overnight]

    Even if the Chamber of Commerce went to bat for Lincoln, that is a strong, anti-Wall Street message.--and it is the message that voters heard  Democrats should follow suit, keep Lincoln's language in the Wall Street reform bill, and run on it themselves.  Honestly, it might be the only thing to save them in 2010, as it saved Lincoln.

  • Very few incumbents are challenged this hard: Primary challenges rarely come tthis close.  For all the blather about the anti-incumbent mood, as Larry Sabato noted over Twitter:

    So that's 4 incumbents down, 200 renominated. Um, how's that "anti-incumbent wave" going, my dear headline writers?

    Incumbents almost  never lose in primaries.  Even the losses that have occurred this year all come with asteriks.  Arlen Specter and Parker Griffith switched parties.  Alan Mollohan had ethics problems. Bob Bennett faced a caucus, not a primary.  A Halter win would have been the ultra-rare, straight-up defeat of a Senator largely because that Senator angered her base and progressive organizations.  Those defeats happen less than once every two years.  Getting challenged this hard is almost as rare.

  • Low union, netroots denisty: Arkansas is one of the weakest states for the labor and netroots organizations backing Halter.  As Eddie Vale points out, Arkansas is 49th out of 50 in terms of union density. It probably isn't too much higher in terms of netroots density.  If we can come close in this state, then Senators in almost every other state better take notice.
It is a tough night, but there are good reasons to be proud.  We might get some good legislation from this campaign, primary challenges very rarely come this close, and it was this close despite Arkansas being a terrible state for labor and the netroots.  Winning would have been a helluva a lot better, but that ain't nothing.

And, most importantly, we are going to keep running these primary challenges, no matter what,  bad Dems don't get a break because of what happened here.

Chris Bowers :: A tough loss, but an important message

Tags: , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
that last sentence is the kind of thing I like to hear! (4.00 / 2)
so, like, Donna Edwards for the White House in 2012?

Is no one going to explore the thesis (4.00 / 3)
that Obama has fatally wounded his party by getting in to bed with Wall Street?

All this "chin up" stuff misses the decisive variable.


That seems (0.00 / 0)
not to apply here since it was a Democratic primary so both candidates were part of "Obama's Party" and of the two Obama supported the one that was most likely to also get in bed with Wall street and she won.

Or perhaps you are saying that people just stayed home?


[ Parent ]
We don't want to believe we were duped/lied to all along. (0.00 / 0)
But we have to face it - we were.

More importantly though, it was and still is the Wall Street donors to the DSCC who called the shots in the Senate regarding policy decisions- thanks to to the weakest mother of a ML ever - and to those Senators who did their bidding.

We didn't really lose much yesterday. Every time we've tried to prop up one end of the Senate another side flopped..  Just look at Kerry - he can't kiss Lieberman's ass enough,  Feingold agreed to dump the seniors COL fix.  They're principles are falling faster than than we can correct.  But with a President who demands they go even lower the Senate and probably the WH is, unfortunately, permanently doomed for Democrats.


Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.


[ Parent ]
Thanks for putting on a brave face (4.00 / 2)
but I can't help but think that conservative Dems will take this as license to continue their evil ways.  If that's the case this is a tremendous loss for us tonight.

Oh well, the Big Four that killed the public option - Lincoln, Ben Nelson, Lieberman, and Landrieu - will all lose their next reelection efforts anyway.  Too bad that with the exception of Lieberman, all their replacements will likely be Republicans.


They only lose when the base wins .. (4.00 / 2)
if you think Lincoln is really gonna change for the better(or that any Blue Dogs are) .. you are kidding yourself .. things will go back to usual .. just look at Lincoln's message tonight .. saying she can't be bought .. I mean .. who the fuck is she kiddin'?  besides her supporters that is

[ Parent ]
That's the risk of primaries (4.00 / 1)
you either make a big splash and send a message, or you lose and get knocked down a few steps.

I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but I don't care. This was a waste of resources. Had Halter won, he virtually had no chance in November anyway. Labor poured millions into a state where they're virtually powerless and have little public support and a state trending redder faster than any other.

What if that money had been spent on Jennifer Brunner?  


[ Parent ]
I wholeheartedly wish a lot more money had been sent to Jennifer Brunner (4.00 / 3)
I mean, the poor woman couldn't even run a single TV ad, chrissakes.  Though, I'm not sure there was really some kind of choice between her and Halter.  I have a feeling Labor didn't even know Brunner existed.  Hell, it seems like Open Left and Chris Bowers barely even knew she existed.

I disagree that Halter was a waste.  Whether he could've won in the general (and I think he'd have a shot) is almost irrelevant.  The point is to take down a conservative Democrat to show other ConservaDems that crossing the liberal base (not to mention lying and flip-flopping numerous times) has consequences, and that the liberal wing of the Democratic Party has power too.

We lost, and now they're free to go back to ignoring us.


[ Parent ]
it's not that simple of course (4.00 / 2)
We lost, and now they're free to go back to ignoring us.

Being forced into a runoff and then barely winning that runoff by 2% among one of the most conservative Democratic electorates in the nation doesn't exactly scream "Whew, don't have to worry about those loser liberals ever again!"

A strong challenge that falls just short isn't as good as winning, but it will still have a very positive effect on Democrats in the future, and make them think twice about going all corporatist on their constituencies. (It puts something on the scale to weigh against all that tasty, tasty corporate $$$, at least.)


[ Parent ]
I doubt it... (4.00 / 2)
Did you see the arrogant speech Lincoln gave?  If anything, this loss is going to result in even more hippie punching.  It doesn't matter that we lost by 4 or 40 points.  A loss is a loss, and we're going to get beaten up for it.

That's the risk you take...

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


[ Parent ]
The "DFH beatings" will happen no matter what (4.00 / 3)
You pretty much say that in your post.

Thus, it seems that the "beat down" is not really the issue because folks like Lincoln will always do it.

The only way to end this cycle is to depose the hippy-Beaters and pointing to this race as a shot across the bow is, ultimately a good thing on that front. Fight back.



"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
I hope you're right (0.00 / 0)
but I have a feeling you're not.  These people never behave the way we'd want them to, even when they're already getting their way.  At the end of the day they're not gonna remember or care about what the margin of victory was - a win is a win.

[ Parent ]
Er, where did I say otherwise? (4.00 / 2)
Of course I think Lincoln and the other ConservaDems are gonna continue their bullshit as usual because Lincoln survived.  In fact, that was the whole point of my comment.

[ Parent ]
Yes, she will lose anyway (4.00 / 5)
`so Arkansas liberals should throw their support to green party candidate John Gray!

My blog  

[ Parent ]
Normally, I would be opposed to this kind of stuff... (4.00 / 8)
Hate having Republicans win, but she already is a republican and has little chance, anyways.

A 15% or greater showing by the Green Party candidate would send an even bigger message to the establishment dems.

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


[ Parent ]
I can identify the precise moment when I was sure Lincoln would win (4.00 / 2)
And that moment was when the Big Dog started beating the drum in a high profile way for Lincoln a couple of weeks ago. He did so by reinforcing the notion that union and Move-on money supporting Lt. Gov Halter was evidence of carpet bagging but was mute, along with the media, about the massive outside corporate support for Lincoln. Apparently only progressive money can fool Arkansans.

I said nothing here because all I had was my gut, which, to be candid, is little better than a Ouija board.

I'd love it if Pres. Clinton stuck to his foundation work and helping Africa and confined his politicking to the general.

Question: the Tea Baggers can count their coup? What's our count? Sestak? Really?

Did they get you to trade your heroes for ghosts? Hot ashes for trees? Hot air for a cool breeze? And cold comfort for change?


I felt the same way at the time, too... (4.00 / 1)
I figured that Clinton knew what AR voters wanted to hear and tailored his message to them well.

It was a very atypical Bill Clinton speech... which is why I figured it would be very effective.

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


[ Parent ]
yep clinton did it again (4.00 / 3)
i read lincoln saved her ad blitz to the last week. armstrong at mydd says she featured bill clinton 24/7 in these ads. she had clinton robocalls. i live in ar's neighbor state in the south and when i saw clinton stump for lincoln i thought oh crap. clinton is often underestimated but clearly remains a force esp in ar. clinton better be ready to do tons of work for lincoln this fall. she will need him!

[ Parent ]
He should be able to help... (4.00 / 1)
...with many of vulnerable congressional candidates in AR this year, too (and elsewhere).  He may be able to save as many as 10 seats!

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


[ Parent ]
That should have been easily counterable (4.00 / 3)
All Halter would have to do is put up an ad comparing his donations to Lincoln's.  Done.

Halter had some great ads, but I don't know if he did that.


[ Parent ]
California's getting fucked in the ass tonight (4.00 / 6)
Ballot initiatives are killing us. Everything corporate whores could ask for.

* Clean elections: failed
* Private monopoly utility company-backed imposition of 2/3rds local requirement for public power: you betcha
* Lousiana-like top-two primaries: you betcha
* Private insurance company-backed car insurance rate hike: you betcha

http://www.calitics.com/diary/...

I think I'm ready to assume that the rest of my life will consist either of completely tuning out US politics or watching a Shadowrun-like dystopian future slowly unfold. A deep, prolonged slide into the dark ages for all of our children. The Bushies got what they wanted; a permanently poisoned government, and complete corporate autonomy.

And I believe Bloom County prophesied that the first black president would be a conservative. That turned out to be true.

Progressives were right when we said we'd never recover if Bush was reelected in 2004.


What do you expect? (4.00 / 3)
The only action was on the GOP side, so it was mostly conservative voters out there.  That's why these initiatives were on the ballot now instead of november.

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


[ Parent ]
That's what happens when no one has the fucking balls to take on Jerry Brown (4.00 / 2)
For the record, I voted for someone else (Peter Schurman, despite the fact that he himself dropped out and endorsed Brown) in that primary.

[ Parent ]
Fuck... jungle primaries.... (0.00 / 0)
I was hoping to vote Green against Feinstein again in 2012.  Now I'll only have the chance to do that in the primary.

Though Calitics has it at 59 Yes-61 No, which doesn't add up.

Still nervously watching Winograd and Emblem...


[ Parent ]
Prop 16 might not pass. (4.00 / 2)
It's amazing it's as close as it is.

Prop 17 might also not pass.

As for whether the larger question of whether the country will recover, we'll have to see.

I don't think we were ready to pull out of our nosedive in 2004, there were too many angry and fearful people thinking the terrorists were going to attack us again.

We're still not ready. Maybe the Gulf and half the Eastern seaboard being covered in oil will make us think we have to make a change. Maybe.


[ Parent ]
CA-36: Harman 60.8 - Winograd 39.2 with 40.2% reporting (4.00 / 2)
Fuck, it's over.  What a terrible night.

[ Parent ]
All that ... (0.00 / 0)
and Marcy hasn't done much better than '06 ... ugh!!   :-(  .. I can't believe that district likes Harman so much

[ Parent ]
I think it's because the district is dominated by (4.00 / 4)
war machine plants and Harman brings home the bacon.

[ Parent ]
Winograd and Emblem go down to bitter defeats (4.00 / 2)
CA-50: Busby 65.0 - Emblem 35.0 with 44.7% reporting
CA-36: Harman 59.2 - Winograd 40.8 with 82.2% reporting

I think we need to do a serious postmortem of the Winograd campaign.  As far as I know, she put in a serious effort this time, ran her heart out and I think she put up some TV ads too, didn't she?  I really thought she would have a good chance of winning.  And yet she does like 3 points better than she did in 2006.  I'd like to know how high her name rec was this time.

Alright, I'm out.  God what a horrible election night to go to bed to.


[ Parent ]
Look on the bright side... (4.00 / 6)
Props 16 and 17 look poised to fail.

[ Parent ]
Look on the bright side... (4.00 / 1)
Props 16 and 17 look poised to fail.

[ Parent ]
just to provide some hopeful news: (4.00 / 2)
the first county-level carbon tax in America passed a few weeks ago. This is significant because the coal companies turned out the teabaggers to try to block it, only to have their tactics backfire in a big way.

Grassroots democracy is working. You have to look very closely, but there are tiny bits of green sprouting up here and there.  

As I write, No on Prop 17 has taken a very narrow lead, and No on Prop 16 has increased its lead. Fingers crossed.  


[ Parent ]
you don't get to choose (4.00 / 2)
i'm right behind most everything you said, but this

... either of completely tuning out US politics or watching a Shadowrun-like dystopian future slowly unfold

sounds a lot like most of my friends, and the thing is, that's not an OR. tuning out the politics doesn't make them go away. and it's the people who really fully do try to tune out - the ones who don't vote, who "aren't into politics" - that i think are allowing that dystopia to happen. they'll forward around online petitions with cute videos, like that Tell The Tsar To Leave Our Schools Alone! thing, but they don't or won't make the connection beyond that.

and honestly, it's not hard to see why. being a liberal seems to mean mostly losing, even when "we" "win". Jerry Brown, really? that's the best we could do? without opposition? the state party is a joke as far as i can tell.

i don't know. i don't think normal politics can get past the structural obstacles, like the two-thirds rules and term limits. i just hope some people smart enough to figure out abnormal politics get involved.  

not everything worth doing is profitable. not everything profitable is worth doing.


[ Parent ]
the right-wing is more motivated (4.00 / 3)
because their base is crazy, and angry, and fanatical.

Whenever they hear the words "taxes", "abortion", or "government spending", they react with a Pavlovian attack response, start frothing at the mouth, and swarm out to vote or protest or yell at their congressman or whatever.

More moderate, reasonable people have other things to do with their lives besides politics, and don't live in a state of perpetual paranoia, fearing that the government is going to tax them to death, take their guns away, and turn their children gay. They therefore have less reason to swarm out to vote or protest, etc. And you're never going to change that.

Reform never happens until things are really bad and enough reasonable people get interested in the issue. It has always been thus.


[ Parent ]
Tipped for Shadowrun reference nt (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
Run left and govern right.... (4.00 / 4)
Isn't that how they keep getting our votes and money for stabbing us in the back?   The system is hopelessly corrupt.  If the best we can do is make them use up their resources and/or lose to primary challengers or Republicans, why not.  I just want them to hurt them.   Until we can do that, we have nothing.  

Agree (4.00 / 1)
but for reasons repeated here every so often the approach is hamstrung by two party duopoly. Then again, outside agitation has a long history of moving/supplanting/shattering the mainstream parties.

Its a conundrum and like the oil leak in the Gulf, it does not appear to be going away any time soon.

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
still a lotta good news out of AK (4.00 / 4)
Blue Arkansas says everyone they endorsed but Halter won last night.

http://bluearkansasblog.com/?p...

I know you guys are all aching over the big one at the top of the ticket.  But don't go thinking it was all a waste.  Far from it.  We fought the good fight all the way to the end.  We won four major victories tonight and lost a fight against an incumbent U.S. Senator by the skin of our teeth.


Thank you... (0.00 / 0)
Chris and all those associated with the PCCC for investing words and resources in this effort.  Even though it is a tough loss, it was worth it.  

That said, I really really wish we would have beaten her, as that would have sent a very powerful message and encouraged dems to take more progressive stances and then deliver.

Next time...

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. -- Martin Luther King, Jr


Something to vote for and not against. (4.00 / 1)
I have to admit that the message I got from everyone here (and everywhere else) was that Halter was a "progressive" and that he wasn't Blanche Lincoln.  These seemed to be the only things I ever heard about him.

"Go make calls for him because we want to take Lincoln down," the emails said.  "Lets send Washington a message!"  To me that message was simply not coherent as a reason to vote/donate/call FOR Halter but rather AGAINST Lincoln.  Well, it didn't happen, not from me.  I know, I suck, but I just never knew who he was and I read this site (and MyDD and FDL and HuffPost and my state blogs) every other day.  I should have looked at his wiki page or something but it didn't happen.

While I'm sure there are many other reasons Halter lost (Clinton ads, Lincoln's last minute swerve to the left on Wall Street) I think the lack of a positive message to vote for Halter had everything to do with my personal disconnect on getting him elected.  Compare that with how I worked my ass off for Obama who articulated a positive message of what we could expect from him (what a liar!) and I think you'll see what I mean.

I was a big fan of the Elaine Marshall Q and A section that OpenLeft did a few months back and since then I've donated $20 just because I got a since for who she was and what I might expect from her if she got into office.

If we as progressives want to get more done in these primaries we need to spend more time articulating -- particularly to the MSM -- what we would do in the driver's seat and not what we hate about Blue Dog Dems like Lincoln and that begins with actively fielding progressive candidates with vision that we can point to as being more than "progressive" just because they took on the Blue Dog in their district.


For DFA, the next one is Elaine Marshall (4.00 / 2)
Here's our take on what this means, and a link to chip for Elaine. I think she is a progressive champion and it is race worth fighting for.  

[ Parent ]
Reasonable enough perspective (0.00 / 0)
but not one I share. As I said, the Halter part of this situation was irrelevant. Not really but almost I would say even if he was worse that Lincoln I'd still have gone his way, so to speak, as an illustration that we have power and that we can shoot straight when we select a target.

I disagree even more re: your point about the MSM, though I think I understand your point. All we will ever get from the MSM, anomalies aside, is the ad time they are willing to sell us. They will never, never, never reply favorably to our arguments and appeals no matter how well phrased or fervently argued. It is simply not their role in this political economy. They are not information providers. They are propaganda organs wholly invested in the status quo. Fortunately, that does not mean they are all-powerful.

Did they get you to trade your heroes for ghosts? Hot ashes for trees? Hot air for a cool breeze? And cold comfort for change?


[ Parent ]
Agree with T. Jacobsen (4.00 / 1)
Most of the focus was to take down Lincoln and thus scare ConservaDems into relative submission/compliance/just not shitting all over us.  Who and what Halter was was mostly irrelevant so long as the perception was that he was running to Lincoln's left.  That said, FYI Halter was a fairly mainstream Democrat - like what we should have in Arkansas, instead of Lincoln.

[ Parent ]
What's next? (4.00 / 5)
I've been digesting the Lincoln victory/Progressives loss to come to my own view about what should come next.

My view is that the very second we are confident that we will retain the senate - and the Open Left projections and others indicate we are likely to retain 52-53 seats and therefore able to organize the senate next January - progressives of every stripe should consider withdrawing all types of support for Lincoln for the purpose of maximizing the scale of her loss in the general.

For all the bellyaching about Halter this primary fight was about Lincoln and the direction of the party and the power of progressives within the party. Halter was irrelevant. Truly. The point was to send a signal to all the ConservaDems and corporate Dems that we are going to systematically work to take them out and for that threat to be credible we have to follow through.

But I am not generally oblivious to the view that the Lincolns and Nelsons, as bad as they are, are better than GOPers if only because they support our Majority Leader and ensure we control the committees, etc. So under some circumstances I could find myself throwing up in my mouth and passively accepting Lincoln, etc.

But not in this instance, at least as soon as it is clear we will retain control of the Senate. The marginal difference between 52 and 53 or 53 and 54 and between Lincoln and a GOPer (organizing the Senate aside) is such that we gain more by completing the kill and making it bloody as hell as a warning to all the other toadies in the party. That was the purpose of this exercise and Tuesday's outcome is pretty weak in terms of achieving that objective. But shaving 7, 8, 10 or more points off her margins in November and deepening her loss, and cutting off all money and GOTV support and the like, and linking it to her turning on us and lying to everyone, would go much, much further toward realizing that objective.

And the downside cost would be relatively marginal. The object lesson must be 'move toward us or lose.' Whether it is in th primary of the general: 'fuck with us and you are going down'. Still not quite locked in, but this is the direction of my thinking at the moment.

Did they get you to trade your heroes for ghosts? Hot ashes for trees? Hot air for a cool breeze? And cold comfort for change?


How do we know when we've got 52 or more? (0.00 / 0)
We can be confident and all that, but if the polls are close in Sept/Oct in enough races (which they likely will be) then what would you do?  No one can predict the future and that's why we all choked down the HIR Bill without a public option, even as there were those that said kill the bill.  I'm sure it will be the same conversation about "kill the majority," and so far I see that we don't have the spine to do it.  Maybe its time.

[ Parent ]
If there is a lack of spine for this approach (4.00 / 1)
the chances of finding spine enough to truly reign in wall street or fix the HCR bill are pretty much non-existent.

Focus on the chance for success - a Dem majority without Blanche Lincoln. Now that, is a success that the left might build upon.  

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
Losses and gains (0.00 / 0)
As of today, 5 Democrats will be leaving the Senate: Ted Kaufman (DE), Chris Dodd (CT), Arlen Specter (PA), Byron Dorgan (ND), and Evan Bayh (IN).  Both Kaufman and Dodd rank in the top 10 on Progress Punch crucial votes this session; the rest are in the bottom ten for Democrats.  

DE, CT, and PA are important seats.  ND is lost and IN a difficult hold for a so-so gain.

One of the big wins last night was Joyce Elliott in Arkansas.  This is the most liberal district in the state and we really could get a good vote out of Arkansas.  But in the House not the Senate.


[ Parent ]
Also Roland Burris (IL) (0.00 / 0)
The Democratic nominee to succeed him, Alexi Giannoulias, is a step down when it comes to health care.

[ Parent ]
I want Lincoln to die hard (4.00 / 1)
I want all the liberals in Arkansas to vote for the Green Party candidate or some other liberal minor party candidate.  Really stick it to Lincoln and make sure her political career doesn't just die, it explodes spectacularly.

I understand the importance of keeping a majority but I don't think we're gonna lose it at this point, especially as Sharron Angle is the nominee in NV.  Let's roast some marshmallows over the flames of Blanche Lincoln's political career.


[ Parent ]
Root cause (4.00 / 2)
This race is addressing a symptom. The root cause that needs to be addressed is the overwhelming advantage of incumbency. If an incumbent is certain of wining their primary, then they get to play the "who you going to vote for - me or the Republican" card in the general. We are stuck with the government filled with those beholden to corporations and big money with this system.

This is what needs to change.

Keep running these primary challenges. Keep fighting for more AND better Democrats. But also keep pushing for campaign finance reform. Without the latter, the former will rarely happen.

If teaching is so easy, then by all means get your degree, pass your certification test(s), get your license, and see if you can last longer than the five years in the classroom 50% of those who enter the profession never make it to.


The significant and new point here (4.00 / 13)
is the move into EXPLICIT anti-labor rhetoric by Bill Clinton.  From Blanche Lincoln, this is expected.  Not from national Dems.  They have been worthless allies before but not explicit foes.  

The Labor Movement cannot take this lying down and will not. This will make November much tougher.  Clinton knows that and did not care.

sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.


That's what I took from it as well. (4.00 / 3)


[ Parent ]
See also (0.00 / 0)
http://workinprogress.firedoglake.com/2010/06/09/hey-white-house-whos-the-absolute-idiot-now/

sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.

[ Parent ]
shocked me too (0.00 / 0)
I realize that in many respects Clinton governed in ways that hurt labor, but at least he talked the talk, at least to Dems.  This is a major change on his part, one I noticed, and one that has forever tarnished my already fairly low opinion of Pres. Clinton. It will be fascinating to see how labor responds.

Did they get you to trade your heroes for ghosts? Hot ashes for trees? Hot air for a cool breeze? And cold comfort for change?

[ Parent ]
I'm so sick of Bill Clinton (4.00 / 1)
I wish he'd just go away already.  How can anyone even take him seriously?

He'd better help with Sestak or something.  Why doesn't he actually make himself useful instead of wasting his time shilling for a corporate tool?


[ Parent ]
Act 2 (4.00 / 3)
Well, I can't say I haven't been expecting it. Labor is now weak enough that national Democrats no longer feel the need merely to hold it at arm's length -- as Republicans once did the evangelicals and their agenda -- but to express their contempt openly. The message from the Clintons used to be something like We love you, and NAFTA will be good for everybody, you included. Trust us. Now it's more like Fuck you, what have you done for us lately?

I'd say that the battle will soon be well and truly joined. If organized labor is irrelevant, what's approaching in the distance won't be. In my darker moments, I imagine street battles in our major cities between something like fascists and something like communists, with the police, armed by the defense industry, shooting everybody.


Dark, very dark (4.00 / 1)
and far too likely for comfort.

You referenced the Brixton riots elsewhere. It made me reflect on one of my favorite songs from one of my favorite albums from one of my favorite bands, The Clash, and this most recent comment prompted me to act on that earlier emotion.

GUNS OF BRIXTON, LONDON CALLING, 1979
to a ska beat

When they kick out your front door
How you gonna come?
With your hands on your head
Or on the trigger of your gun

When the law break in
How you gonna go?
Shot down on the pavement
Or waiting in death row

You can crush us
You can bruise us
But you'll have to answer to
Oh, Guns of Brixton

The money feels good
And your life you like it well
But surely your time will come
As in heaven, as in hell

You see, he feels like Ivan
BORN under the Brixton sun
His game is called survivin'
At the end of the harder they come

You know it means no mercy
They caught him with a gun
No need for the Black Maria
Goodbye to the Brixton sun

You can crush us
You can bruise us
But you'll have to answer to
Oh-the guns of Brixton

When they kick out your front door
How you gonna come?
With your hands on your head
Or on the trigger of your gun

You can crush us
You can bruise us
And even shoot us
But oh- the guns of Brixton

Shot down on the pavement
Waiting in death row
His game was survivin'
As in heaven as in hell

You can crush us
You can bruise us
But you'll have to answer to
Oh, the guns of Brixton
Oh, the guns of Brixton
Oh, the guns of Brixton
Oh, the guns of Brixton
Oh, the guns of Brixton  

Did they get you to trade your heroes for ghosts? Hot ashes for trees? Hot air for a cool breeze? And cold comfort for change?


[ Parent ]
Club For Growth (4.00 / 2)
The Club For Growth runs lots of primary challenges, wins 2 or 3 a year and has a huge impact pushing the Republicans and the country to the right.

We need  at least three wins this cycle.  And at least three every cycle.Then the remaining ones in the House and Senate will be scared of us rather than the corporate paymasters.


Why don't we have our own Club for Growth? (0.00 / 0)
I mean, I guess we have DFA and PCCC, but we really need to organize one super-umbrella organization dedicated specifically to electing liberal Democrats.

[ Parent ]
One thing that made it possible (4.00 / 4)
I just want to draw attention to something that made even this near-loss possible -- the fact that there was a runoff. I live in Illinois and we do not have runoffs in primaries, which means that if we do try to primary someone all the other side has to do is fill the ballot up with a shill or two and split whatever anti-incumbent vote there might be and the incumbent wins easily. In my short time in politics I have seen numerous races where if over 50% of the vote was required to have a winner we would have had a much better outcome.

I am going to see if I can do some advocacy for that here, but I would suggest that Open Left and PCCC and others look at election rules in different states and see if they can perhaps work on this -- I think it could be a key element in having more non-incumbent primary victories.


The runoff also bought Halter some time (0.00 / 0)
which was important since he got into the race so damn late.  I wonder if having had an extra few months or so would've made any difference.

[ Parent ]
The runoff also bought Halter some time (0.00 / 0)
which was important since he got into the race so damn late.  I wonder if having had an extra few months or so would've made any difference.

[ Parent ]
in California, the trend may be roughly summarized (0.00 / 0)
by saying that the propositions related to political reform went the way of conservatives, but the propositions that were backed by corporations to lock down their markets failed.

Californians may not yet want "good government", but they sure as hell don't want corporatocracy. An encouraging sign.


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox