"Nobody is on our side"

by: Mike Lux

Wed May 19, 2010 at 12:00


Being back home in the Midwest is always grounding. The most classic moment was a conversation in a restaurant with someone who was expressing anger at all incumbents and both parties who said to me "nobody is on our side."

That was the theme of yesterday's big day of political news. Three more establishment candidates in both parties were either beaten outright or forced into a runoff. More incumbents going down. Insurgents on the rise everywhere.

And speaking of being everywhere, the irony patrol must be utterly exhausted. While incumbents and establishment politicians are being slaughtered in every region and both parties, in conventions and primaries, politicians continue to make fools of themselves. What was Richard Blumenthal thinking? What was Mark Souder thinking? Oh, wait, thinking wasn't involved. Having an affair with a staffer who works with you on promoting abstinence-only videos is like something out of an Elmore Leonard novel, except funnier. But the irony award for the day doesn't even go to Souder, as tempting as that is: it goes to Mitch McConnell. As his hand-picked protégé was going down in flames to anti-establishment, anti-TARP bailout tea partier Rand Paul, McConnell was leading the Republicans in a desperate attempt to keep the financial reform bill from doing anything worse to his poor pathetic friends on Wall Street, all the while crying a river about how Elena Kagan wanted to hurt the free speech rights of big corporations. Politics doesn't get any better than this.

The tea partiers are wreaking their revenge at McConnell because he has deserted them in order to help Wall Street and other big corporations, just as Democratic primary voters are showing their disdain at incumbents at the same time. The bottom line is that voters are asking the age-old question "which side are you on" and finding that to their outrage, none of the politicians seem like they are on the side of angry voters. In order to have a prayer this fall, Democrats have to show the voters- both their base voters in the Rising American Electorate, and the swing voters in the working class who still don't have good jobs- that they are fighting for regular people, not the elite. When the Wall Street bailouts did not produce jobs as promised, voters' attitudes got set at the outrage level, and they still haven't been reset. It is time for Democrats to show which side they are on.

One friend of mine said to me this morning that "it's like most of our Democrats can't seem to read a poll." The New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial elections. The Massachusetts special election. The Utah Republican party conventions. The Mollohan party upset in West Virginia. Yesterday's results. How many wake-up calls do politicians need?

Mike Lux :: "Nobody is on our side"

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Probably about 470 .. (0.00 / 0)
How many wake-up calls do politicians need?

because we want to keep Sanders .. Feingold .. Anthony Weiner .. Alan Grayson .. and I am sure there are others .. I just don't have time right now to figure out who exactly are worth keeping


Perhaps Wake Up Call is the Wrong Term? (4.00 / 5)
Most of the Democratic leadership (think Obama, Emmanuel, Reid, Lincoln, Specter, Bayh, even Dodd and a few others) push policies that benefit traditional Republican constituencies and that, a few decades ago, would have been pushed by moderate Republicans. Yet they call themselves Democrats. And they're allowed by the Democratic party and the media to call themselves Democrats with little challenge. It's odd, to say the least. And calling them ConservaDems or conservative Democrats only makes the problem worse: it hides the core problem that these "Democratic" politicians are really moderate to conservative Republicans.

I don't see these putative Democrats changing much, if at all, because of the election of traditional Democrats in primaries or general elections. It's not a case of politicians who usually push policies that help traditional Democratic constituencies going off the reservation here or there. It's Democratic politicians who, on the policy level, are moderate to conservative Republicans. Period.

If you buy this argument, wake up calls are pointless. We simply need to take back the Democratic party by electing politicians who push policies that mostly benefit our traditional constituencies: working people, small businesses, and anyone who is not extremely wealthy and/or a giant corporation. One hundred percent purity is not required. It would be great if Obama shifted his policies to benefit Democratic groups but I don't see it happening beyond rhetoric. And we saw, for example, how well Obama's Democratic rhetoric helped Blanche Lincoln, didn't we?

Last night was not a great victory for Democrats and progressives. It was a great night for traditional Democrats who want to take back their party and restore its traditional focus. I'd like to think progressives are the heart and soul of the traditional Democratic party because our focus is on working people and building a just society. Perhaps we should stop pretending we are somehow "left" of traditional Democrats and acknowledge, instead, that our goals and values are what Democrats have pushed for over decades and generations.

It's great to win some times, even if these are primaries and mere steps in the road. It shows it is possible to take back the Democratic party, one politician at a time, even if it will take many years and elections.


Yeah, "which side are you on?" (4.00 / 2)


It is apparent whose side they are on. (4.00 / 3)
They prattle out of both sides of their mouths like people are too stupid to notice.  Obama is a prime example of that.  I am pissed at the oil execs so pardon me while I go push the pablum in the Lieberman/Kerry bill.  Same is true from him on health care, trade, and WS reform.  Obama and the so called Democrats are pure bull sh^t; and people are sick of all of them and their money grubbing ways.  

I am elated at the results of the primaries; and if it isn't a beginning it will be the end.  

They're asking for another four years -- in a just world, they'd get 10 to 20. ~~ Dennis Kucinich  


Hint: You can't wake up people who are paid to stay asleep. (4.00 / 1)
Thinking in terms of "wake-up calls" assumes these people are remotely capable of changing their feathers. They can't. They're paid to be the way they are and they will go down that way as well.

So put me in with the other commenters here thus far.

Once the current leadership has been sent home to spend more time with all their ill-gotten gains, then they'll have all the time they need to "wake up."

"Bad jokes and gay marriage are destroying this country. But torture can save it." -- Jon Stewart


Wake up call? (4.00 / 2)
Eviction notice!

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


I suspect they won't wake up (4.00 / 3)
until we do.

Progressive defeatism, the belief that politicians have to run right because voters demand right-wing issue positions because American is a right wing nation, is rampant. It has long been the agenda of the Republican Party to convince the country of this, because it pulls the country towards them ideologically. It has also long been the agenda of one wing of the Democratic Party, because that wing wants to control the party without the interference of the left. And the media treats the Republicans and the DLC / New Dem segment of the Democrats as the bounds of serious discourse.  

What should be clear at this point is that the elites have no monopoly on figuring out what works in winning elections, and that their own notions of who is electable are heavily influenced by their own ideological and institutional interests.

This isn't to suggest that electoral considerations are irrelevant or that the most left wing position or candidate will always have the best shot. It simply means we need activists to have more confidence in the political viability of progressive ideas (not just policies) and in independent assessments of what is possible.  

Support the Youth PROMISE Act


I think many have jobs waiting for them on kstreet (0.00 / 0)
and in corporate America irrespective of whether they lose so they don't care.  

I am more pessimistic than the typical American because I believe alot of this new crop that won the primaries will sell out too, like Obummer did.  I think the  problem is the mainstream parties themselves.  My only hope at this point is for a green resurgence and it looks like Jessie Ventura is running.  He has promised to break up the banks, dispense with the parties and force everyone to run independent, punish the torturers in the Bush administration, give Americans the same health insurance as our Veterans, and immediately commence a complete pullout of Iraq and Afghanistan.

He will run as  neither party and is way more progressive than Obummer or any of the dems.


They read the wrong polls (0.00 / 0)
It's not that they don't know how to read polls.  They are just reading the wrong polls.  The corporate polls measured in dollar bills instead of votes.

If they lose the election they will continue their career as a corporate shill as a lobbyist.  Getting elected isn't what they are concerned about.  They just want the money train to continue.


Is There A Plan? (0.00 / 0)
At times in the past Democrats (and Republicans) have tried to rally the base in off-year elections via broad messages aimed at a national audience such as "Families First", tactics like a national telethon, pledges, ten point programs, etc.  Such appeals are almost by definition rather watered down and bland yet still I wonder if there will be any sort of attempt at a unified message in 2010.  Democrats  had such a message in 2008: "change" and it worked.


USER MENU


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you

Donate to Open Left






QUICK HITS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search