This is not a candidate diary, in part because I'm not allowed to write a candidate diary (being an employee of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania) and in part because I don't have a favorite candidate yet (which is academic in any case, as I'm registered Independent and thus can't vote in either primary in Pennsylvania). So, this is not a candidate diary. You can breathe easy now.
This is, however, an issue diary. The issue is one that I've been struggling with for a while now. The issue is Progressivism vs. Winning Elections. I am an unabashed progressive. I'm for universal single-payer health care. I'm for public financing of elections. I'm for a return of the Fairness Doctrine. I'm for rolling back the deregulation of media ownership. I'm for a more progressive tax scheme. I'm for reproductive choice, equality for all human beings, and amnesty and a citizenship fast-track for all current illegal immigrants. I'm for same-sex marriage and for the legalization and government commercial regulation of drugs and prostitution. I'm for the elimination of religious pressure on government to mouth placative words in favor of this or that faith. I'm for more direct citizen involvement in politics and government.
At various times, and in various degrees, the party that most agrees with my views on all of the above is the Democratic Party. I cheer on progressive Democratic candidates when they're up for election or re-election. I can't work for any of them (see the first paragraph) but I cheer them on. But the party has disappointed me with its craven cession to the Congressional minority Republicans and lame duck Republican President. It's disappointed me with its refusal to do the right thing because the right thing may be electorally dangerous. It's disappointed me with its refutation of its own majority, by not fighting for the things the party feels it needs to do for its constituency.
And it seems like every time I turn around, there's an apologist standing there. "We won't win if we don't play down the progressivism." "People won't vote for a true progressive, we need to win this election." "Don't rock the boat, dammit! Play along so we can keep our majority."
My problem with this is, what good is having a majority if that majority isn't going to do anything that the party faithful want done? What good is holding 350 seats in Congress if 120 of those seats are crypto-Republicans (Blue Dogs)? If we sell our soul for a mess of seatage, what good is it?
I have no problem with true centrists. Centrism can be the best of all compromises...I'm not a purity troll. Centrist was actually what I called myself back in the early 90s, when Bill Clinton had just become President. The "center" has passed right under me and left me standing on the Left. The problem with what we term 'centrist' today is that the Republicans have pulled the center so far to the Right that the whole platform is teetering off-balance. We can't just scope out where the media and public opinion place the center at this point. The Republicans have captured that center and have it caged right on the edge of their territory. If we go centrist now, we're all but delivering ourselves up to be obliterated, because why would anyone vote for Republican-lite if they've got a real Republican right there to vote for?
The dilemma for me is best invoked in the idea that we have to become something we're not in order to win. "We can't win as progressives. We have to win. Therefore we can't be progressives." It's a meme that I heard last night watching the numbers change for OH-05 and VA-01. It's a meme I hear at least three times a week here on DK, usually in candidate diaries. It's a meme I can't stand, but one that I can't refute effectively, either.
My struggle lies in deciding whether it's better to be a fake Democrat with a seat in Congress and a dirty soul, or a real Democrat with no Congressional power at all but a clean conscience.