Three recent diaries by prominent bloggers serve to highlight how profoundly Obama and his administration fail to understand their problems with their own base. First, Melissa McEwan explains the principle of being principled. Second, Greg Sargent provides a scorecard to help Obama & Co tell apart the different players. And third, Jane Hamsher explains how Obama's struggling in a newly democratized mediaverse that empowers citizens vs. government in powerful new ways.
1. When I wrote passionate criticisms of a Republican administration and Republican Congressional majority who failed to champion LGBTQI equality, assailed women's bodily autonomy, treated Roe as a suggestion, refused to disclose lobbyist visits to the White House, invoked the separation of powers to protect themselves, called for spending freezes on social programs, legitimized rightwing extremists, advocated for offshore drilling, pushed HSAs, escalated a war, thumbed their nose at due process, engaged in black ops, treated scientists with contempt, expanded the executive's extrajudicial powers, demeaned liberal activists, and invoked state's-secrets privilege for bullshit reasons, I was a principled progressive.
2. When I write passionate criticisms of a Democratic administration and Democratic Congressional majority who fail to champion LGBTQI equality, assail women's bodily autonomy, treat Roe as a suggestion, refuse to disclose lobbyist visits to the White House, invoke the separation of powers to protect themselves, call for spending freezes on social programs, legitimize rightwing extremists, advocate for offshore drilling, push HSAs, escalate a war, thumb their nose at due process, engage in black ops, treat scientists with contempt, expand the executive's extrajudicial powers, demean liberal activists, and invoke state's-secrets privilege for bullshit reasons, I am a stupid ingrate who doesn't understand how politics works.
She is simply pointing out worm's-eye-view of the obvious consequences for a would-be "pragmatist" President who foolishly runs as a once-in-a-lifetime transformative idealist and then is "Shocked! Shocked!" that anyone actually believed him then.
This is further compounded by the fact that the would-be "pragmatist" President who foolishly ran as a once-in-a-lifetime idealist and is now "Shocked! Shocked!" that tens of millions no longer actually believe him anymore.
Roadmaps For The Souless
But that's only one aspect of Obama's problem. Greg Sargent provides an overview, and perhaps what's most telling is mere fact that he actually has to spell out to Obama that you can't tell the players without a program:
Coming off the disturbing news on Afghanistan, the relationship between the President and his progressive base is in a very tenuous place. Not to be overly dramatic, but I think we're at a crucial moment. The deal on health care is about to get done: will progressives come out of it feeling like we got the first major progressive policy since the 1960s passed, or feeling like they got sold down the river? Congress is beginning to move on a jobs package, but the White House is giving signals to put on the breaks: will legislation go through that does something real about more jobs, or will the Congressional Black, Hispanic, and Progressive Caucuses come away feel ignored again? Banking reform is starting to move, with a classic mix of good and disappointing policies as part of the package: will the progressive ideas like the Fed accountability, language to make it easier to break up the big banks, and Elizabeth Warren's Financial Products Safety Commission be so traded away and watered down in the final legislation to leave a terrible taste in progressives' mouths? Obama has promised to move early next year on immigration reform: will he lead with a clarion call around the importance of getting it done, or will the legislation be delayed again and again until time runs out? Obama has promised to do what needs to be done on dealing with the urgent problem of climate change: will progressives come out of the battle excited that we have finally moved forward, or in despair that nothing got done?
How these issues play out will go a long way toward determining whether base voter turnout in 2010 and 2012 is as low as it was in 1994, how good the volunteer field operations that powered so much of the Obama campaign's success last year are in 2010/2012, how much online fundraising success the Democratic party has, and even whether there will be a serious primary challenge to Obama that emerges in 2011. This is not the first time I have written this, nor will it probably be the last, but I hope both the White House and the progressive movement understand the dangers here. As someone who has at times been quite critical of this administration's stands on banking, jobs, and Afghanistan policy, of some of their tactics/compromises on health care, and of their general positioning toward and treatment of the progressive community, I say again: open civil war between progressives and Obama is a disaster for both sides. It will mean nothing good gets done policywise in the next 3 years, and it means dangerously extreme Republicans will gain power in Congress in 2010 and be running the country after the 2012 elections. Progressives who believe that we can separate ourselves from Obama, give the country a true alternative vision showing Americans what real progressivism is, and have sweeping success sometime in the future as a result are fooling themselves: I have lived through that theory in the Jimmy Carter years (civil war between the left and Carter, a primary challenge, followed by 12 years of conservative Republican presidents running against that liberal Carter), and it didn't work out so well. At the same time, the Democratic strategists in the White House who think its all gravy to "stand up to the left" because it makes Obama look moderate are living in a destructive fantasyland, too- the last 4 presidents who didn't have a good relationship with their base were George HW Bush, Jimmy Carter, Jerry Ford, and LBJ. What those four very different presidents had in common was that they didn't get re-elected. And good luck passing legislation if the Progressive Caucus, Black Caucus, and Hispanic Caucus are all in a constant state of anger, or if the blogs and other progressive forces are whipping the members from liberal districts against the president's policies.
What is needed from the White House right now is constructive engagement, serious dialogue with progressive leaders on both the substance of important issues and the political strategy around getting things done. It is on them to reach out in a real and consistent way, to work with us in finding policy solutions that we can live with; and it is on us progressives to engage constructively back, to recognize the complicated politics of getting progressive things done in this Congress and to help them figure out the strategy for getting good policy.
(Glenn managed Ann Richards' first campaign for governor, so he knows his stuff. - promoted by Matt Stoller)
For three decades the DLC and other "centrist" advocates used their money to monopolize the Democratic message. And leave the progressive base out in the cold, not spoken to.
They could do this because the Democratic message was delivered almost exclusively via paid ads in the last eight weeks of election cycles. The centrists, fronting for their business backers -- financial, oil and gas, insurance -- paid their money and took no chances.
Their campaign model intentionally inverted the logical plan, in which you would maximize your base vote and get just enough votes from outside the base to win. The centrists want to win with just enough base voters and the largest possible number of votes from outside the base. I talked about this briefly in comments to Chris Bower's post on 2006 as a Dem base victory.
STATE BLOGS
