Skip to main content

View Diary: Dems, Don't tell me to 'Remember 2010 and GOTV' when 2014 rolls around (82 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Welfare reform in the nineties. The elimination (3+ / 0-)

    of banking regulations. The so called "reform" of the commodities market and the failure to regulate credit derivatives. All happened in the DLC dominated Clinton administration. The seeds of the crash were sown when Clinton worked with Republicans to gut regulation of the finance markets. I never mentioned Bush but I did mention the DLC. Which is the Democratic Leadership Conference. Neoliberalism under Clinton shares a large part of the blame for our economic woes. We need to face up to it and reject those discredited policies;. I want us to act like Democrats, not Republican Lites.

    By moving further to the right in the Clinton years we moved the Overton Window. We ceded ground to the Republicans. Progressivism is about do what is right for the bottom 99% not the Masters of the Universe. Study a little economic history. Then consider the fact that both Clinton's and Obama's economic advisers are Wall Streeters. Hell there are the same people. Watch the PBS Frontline documentary about Brooksley Bourne and her attempt to regulate credit derivatives.

    How about we demand that the finance services industry serve the public. Instead of the other way around. Elizabeth Warren should not be a Senator, she should be Secreatry of the Treasury appointed by Obama in 2009. Thank God she is a senator but we could have used her over the last four years.

    •  TY kmackle (0+ / 0-)

      And bravo! I like cedwyn. I'm impressed with cedwyn. However, I also felt a rebuttal was in order.
      I could NOT have done it as well as you have.
      Thank you.

    •  All of those things happened AFTER (0+ / 0-)

      the dems lost control of congress because jackasses didn't fucking vote, and continued to split the ticket in the next two elections, then voted for Nader in 2000.

      If we're gonna go back to 1992, I think the lesson is that giving up on having a majority because it does some dumb things shows that even worse things happen when you are in the minority.

      We get all the levers of power once every generation and we always fuck it up in a couple years.

      In 1968, it was a schism over the presidency.  I was only 2 years old at the time so I barely know what that was about.  Disunity = no prez.

      In 1980, the Iran hostage situation probably gifted us with Reagan.  But the primary challenge to Carter didn't help.

      In 1994, it was a sad because Clinton botched his early politics with gays and health care

      In 2010, Obama merely saved us from a depression, saved the auto industry, got SOME kind of healthcare and financial regulation done and got us most of the way out of IRAQ.  He also did what he campaigned on in Afghanistan, increased the focus there.   He also did some things that weren't so good, extending national security state, failing to close gitmo, and once again because of congress, didn't have enough votes to get more than centrist legislation done.

      But that's not enough progress, so we shoot it in the foot 2 freaking years later by staying home.

      Christ on a crutch, we only HAD majorities because of the Rahm Emmanuel third way corporate dems.  Those majorities let us DO things.   Not perfect things, not everything but NO MAJORITY = NO PROGRESS.

      And because we had the brilliance to stay home on the fucking redistricting year, we're going to have a structural disadvantage in the house for a decade.

      Now that corporate dems are discredited we're casting about for something else that can get elected in gerrymandered red district.  If we don't find it, we're stuck with at best another decade of divided government where it is all we can do to hold the status quo, and at worst, the Rs have a good election year and get their hands on the levers of power again...as they might well have done this year had Obama been a less capable leader and politician.

      •  I did not stay home in 10. I voted as did (0+ / 0-)

        everyone else in my extended family. I voted a straight Democratic ticket as is my habit. I voted for the Dem candidiate for Governor in Florida even though she opposed marriage equality. I voted for a Dem for Senate who did not even bother to campaign hard because everyone assumed Charlie Crist would get the Dem vote even though he was not the Dem candidate. I respected the official boycott of the Florida Presidential primary because that is what my party asked me to do. I walked precincts and phone banked in a county that was so Republican they did not ever vote for FDR.

        I have earned my stripes. So I get to complain when the big money boys who never walk precincts or phone bank roll over me and my values. My dedication is to the party. I do not shift in the wind like the money boys do.

        Our job is to persuade people that we are right on policy. If there is no difference between us and Republicans then there is no reason to vote for us. And if adopting Republican policies is the right thing to do then why not become Republicans? Rahm Emmanuel and his friends at the DLC help set this economy up for failure. So why do they get to dictate policy now? Wall Street gave up any right to offer policy to this party when they turned against the President. We won without them. We do not need them. And our policy should help those who are powerless. The wealthy already own one political party. They do not need to own one half of the other.

        You totally misunderstand the President. He believes in bipartisanship more than anything else. He wants Republican approval. He rejects the idea of 50% + 1. And that means that he is only as liberal as he can get away with. He sold down the river a lot of progressives. But we rallied around him and worked our hearts out for him. But now we want a seat at the table. And we are going to fight for the policies we believe in. Because we believe that those policies are the right policies. Government should favor working people over the investor class. Every aspect of neoliberalism has been shown to be completely wrong.

        •  I Agree with this (0+ / 0-)

          "Our job is to persuade people that we are right on policy"

          I think the way to do that is to convince VOTERS we are right on policy and have them VOTE a majority so we can VOTE the legislation into being.

          I'll point out that most of those conservadems who were wobbly in 2009-2010 did in fact lose their jobs, whether or not they voted our way.

          Get a movement demanding good policy and we're a lot more likely to get it.

          Complaining that the people we do have are a bunch of spineless wimps who don't even want to do anything useful isn't a way to get more of them voted into office.

          Obama does precisely as much as he has votes for.  It is a hell of a lot less than we want, and is obviously less than he wants too (given the house bills that died in senate in the first 2 years, and the senate bills that died in house the second two years)

          Obama does NOT want to preside over a debt ceiling default.  That is bad for the country and, prior to 2012, would have been suicide for what he'd actually accomplished in the first term as well as for himself politically (and likely result in Dodd Frank and ACA rolled back, 6+ conservative supreme court appointees etc).

          So in many ways he was over a barrel in 2010.  He got a status quo budget passed (the "cuts" were from funds we failed to spend in prior years and stimulus expiration).   Then he tried every angle he could to try to accomplish 2 things.

          1.  Not go into default
          2.  Try to get the Rs to break the Norquist pledge, even a little.

          (I don't agree with how far he went on #2 either, but that seems to be what is going on)

          He's not in that situation this time around.  He can raise revenue through inaction.  He can defend his policy wins and longer term policy aims (eg exit from Afghanistan) from his first term with his veto pen, even if the dems get "shellacked" again in 2014.   We're likely to see enough filibuster reform that he can freaking appoint people without resorting to recess appointments.

          Drum up popular support for good things.  Yes.  If you do, he's more likely to succeed, even with the limited tools at his disposal (executive+senate, with resistance from some of judiciary and all of the house).

          But if you complain that he, as a man, is spineless, is guaranteed to start out with a failing position blah blah blah....you WILL depress the dem vote instead of expanding it.   Look at the convention.  Fired up Dems arguing forcefully for the Dem positions....and we got more voters to the polls because they were fired up..not depressed and angry.

          Winning breeds winning.  Recriminations breed failure.

          Right now the progressive movement is barely on the table as a movement.   Only 25% of the country self-identifies as liberal, compared to 35% conservative.  Progressive POLICIES are popular, but people vote mostly for their tribe, and the progressive caucus is only about 1/3 of dems right now (maybe approaching half in the house given how small the house caucus is at the moment).

          Unless voting for progressive policies won't get our congresscritters fired (as happened in 1992 and 2010) it is going to be hard to get the votes for progressive policies.

          •  I do not believe Obama is "spineless". (0+ / 0-)

            I understand that his core belief is bipartisanship. But he is not going to get it. To paraphrase Groucho Marx "Whatever he is for I'm against it!". We need to balance the budget. If only for the sake of being able to more effectively battle the next economic downturn. I saw this coming during the debate on the first Bush tax cut. I never bought the argument that the economy of 2001 was fundamentally different from other economies. I knew that with every boom there would be a bust. And going into a bust with little or no debt is better than going into a bust with large debt.

            We as Democrats have been too pro Wall Street since 1992. Too pro deregulation since 1977. We have responsibility to take for this collapse. And we must learn the lesson. The DLC types have not learned the lesson. Ben Nelson did not learn the lesson. And that stymied the recovery. Extended unemployment. Caused great anxiety among the poor and elderly. And we did a lousy job of confronting those fears. It is up to politicians to convince me to vote and support them. Not the other way around. They are public servants. They are not entitled to their jobs.

            We progressives must take the long view. We used to be the majority view point. We used to have the solutions that most Americans agreed with. More importantly we have the right solutions. The right policy. And we get to fight for these policy ideas within our party. And if we are not allowed to fight for our policy ideas then we are entitled to leave. What angered many progressives in the health care debate was not that we did not get single payer. it was that we were denied a hearing on single payer.

            So if you do not want to hear our ideas fine. But do not expect to win the next election without us. We progressives made the difference. We did the volunteering. We overcame the money gap through our efforts. But if you do not want us around, well we can take a hint.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site