Recently, I’ve begun to wonder if there is any point to this at all.
Once, just a few weeks ago, I thought 2008 would be great. The Republican Party was weak, disorganized and about to be consumed by the competing extremes of their party.
We were doing well, great even, raising money for the DNC, DCCC and DSCC.
And our Presidential Primary was generating enthusiasm and excitement and bringing new people into the Party while inviting long-lost friends to return.
I felt pretty good. I was optimistic.
Then came Iowa and I felt fantastic. Sure part of it was that the Candidate I supported did well, but it was more than that: Iowa made me feel that my Party was showing the Nation the best America could be.
We could have a hard fought campaign, focused on the issues and not descend into appeals in the worst in our nature. We could leave behind the "dog-whistles" appeals to racism, sexism, fear and the wedge issues crafted to divide us.
It seemed that every Democrat was putting victory and unity in November first and foremost.
I was proud of every Democrat running.
Then—in the last few weeks it changed.
I’m not proud anymore.
I’m disgusted.
Look, I’ve made no secret that I think Senator Clinton is our weakest candidate, but I’ve tried to lay out my reasons why I feel that way and I respect folks who disagree with me.
And I have always made it clear that I would support the Democratic Nominee in November and that if Senator Clinton was the Nominee she would have my support.
I felt that way a few weeks ago, but now I’m not sure anymore.
In the last few weeks, I have found my own rhetoric and feelings getting more and more heated. As the race-baiting, dirty-tricks, voter suppression efforts and outright lies have multiplied, I have found myself getting as angry at some Democrats as I have been at most Republicans—and I have been angry at most Republicans since 1964 when I was eight.
One of those Democrats is Bill Clinton.
I can see the political reasons for why Bill Clinton has reduced his wife’s campaign to the stark parameters of race. It is the best way to elect her. Appeals to fear and racism always work better than appeals to hope—especially with an electorate and news media pre-condition to always embrace stereotypes and fear over logic and hope.
It is smart politics to reduce Obama to the "inexperienced black guy" and Edwards to the "angry white guy". These over-the-top framings of these Candidates are sticking and driving the narrative. If either Edwards or Obama were to win the nomination the damage done by Bill Clinton will follow them into November. If Senator Clinton wins, the damage of her path to "victory" will follow her as well. It is powerful stuff, to unleash super-charged narratives shaped by five-hundred years of American racism. These are framings that will shape the rest of this Election year. They have been released and they can not be stopped.
It is a shame and self-destructive. It has weakened the Democratic Party. Don’t believe me? Then I suggest you spend a few moments reading Daily Kos or anywhere in the Democratic blog-o-sphere.
Now, Bill Clinton is NOT A RACIST and any debate about whether he is or is not a racist completely misses the point. One does not have to be a racist to unleash appeals to racism, one only has to put winning above everything else.
Bill Clinton is not a racist, but he is crafting a message that unleashes the demon of racism into the Democratic primary because it will help him win.
He has unleashed this demon: this base appeal to our fears and divisions. It is done and it can not be put back into the bottle.
It will be a part of the 2008 election regardless of who wins. And it has and will hurt Democrats in 2008.
Bill Clinton’s released meme is dividing the Party and I do not see a way back to unity.
The other night there was a recommended Diary, I think it was called "Bye". The gist was that if you didn’t fully support Senator Clinton after she wins the nomination you had to leave Daily Kos and the progressive movement.
I have seen other Diaries that also embrace the idea of some post-Clinton primary victory purge. It seems that this Stalinist notion is gathering steam and some feel that anybody with doubts about Senator Clinton must be purged from the Party.
We will need some way to unite after this bitter, disgusting Primary ends. This call for a smaller Democratic Party is crazy.
I have major doubts about Senator Clinton, and yet, I am sure that if she is the nominee that I will mark an "X" for her in November. I used to think I could do more, but now just voting for her seems like a moral compromise—a dirty task that tactically must be done.
For me it would be a purely tactical vote. It would be about the thousands of Democrats that any Democratic President would bring into the bureaucracy and appointments any Democrat would make to the Courts. On the basis of these tactical points, I feel that one has an almost moral obligation to vote for the Democrat.
This would be true of Senator Clinton, but it would also be true if our Nominee was Joe Lieberman or even Zell Miller. And to me there is very little difference between them and Senator Clinton right now. All three have placed their own pursuit of power above the needs of unity, the Party and America. All three have consciously chosen division over unity and fear over hope. Yeah, I could tactically vote for such a Democrat, but I do not have to like it.
I look back over the last three weeks and I am amazed.
Tonight, we are a divided Party. And unity in November is not a guarantee.
For the first time I can see a clear path to victory for the Republicans in November, a pathway cleared for them by Bill Clinton.
Over the last few weeks, I’ve had many, many conversations with Democrats—activists, donors, long-time voters and core members of our Party—who are disgusted. For many, even my "tactical" argument that they should at least vote for Clinton in November is a nonstarter. Some will leave it blank, other will consider a third party and many more will tune out the election and stay home.
"But what if the Republicans win" I argue.
"So what" they say. "We’ve survived eight years of Bush, how much worst could it get?" and then they argue that it might even be better for Democrats to loose and fight for a real progressive majority and a candidate who can unite the Party and Nation around that effort in 2012. They argue that so many things will fail in the wake of Bush that the blame should stay with the Republican brand. They argue that given the choice between Senator Clinton and ______ Republican that it might be better in the long run if Democrats loose in 2008.
"But what if the Republicans win" I argue again, but this time I find myself saying it with less passion.
In three weeks I have gone from excitement about our prospects in 2008 to despair.
In 2006, I fought like hell to defeat the Abramoff 65 and we took out more than a third of them. It was hard work and it took many, many hours—but I thought it was worth it. I was prepared to go to the mat again in 2008, but it will be harder this time around.
Part of my trouble is that Senator Clinton has connections to Jack Abramoff through his clients, connections that would put her towards the top of any list of Abramoff-tainted politicians in 2008. If I had a Republican with her exact same connections to the Tan Family of Hong Kong they might top the list. And yet for some, I’m supposed to ignore this evidence because the person in question is a Democrat. Frankly, that is hard for me to do. Others do not care about the story of corruption, sweatshops and human trafficking on Saipan, but I find the issue hard to ignore.
It will be hard to make the Abramoff-links to Republican candidates while covering up the Abramoff-link to my Party’s nominee. It is a dilemma I would like to avoid.
Perhaps the folks who desire a purge have a point. Perhaps a self-destructive urge has seized the Democratic Party. Perhaps only those who can blindly follow their leaders will be allowed in Senator Clinton’s Party.
I can’t do that. I’ve been questioning authority all my life. I’m an old dog and I can not change. I must question power, even (and perhaps especially) those who I would entrust with my vote and my support.
It has been a rough three weeks since Iowa. It seems like an age ago when it looked like a united Democratic Party would show America a new way of politics regardless who won.
Now that was a fairy tale.
Now, it is clear that our unity has been crushed.
Thanks Bill.
Regardless who our Nominee is, it will take extremely hard work to unite our Party—this will be especially true if Senator Clinton rides a divisive campaign to victory.
Now, some believe that "fear" of another four years of Republican rule will force people to unite regardless of the race-based Clinton attack campaign. That is a fear that will sway some, but many more will just drop out of the process. Their disgust will inspire them to tune it out and not vote at all. It is a by-product of the campaign Bill Clinton is running. His wife may win the Nomination, but we may well loose in November unless something changes. And I’m not sure anything will change.
Somehow, the Democrats in 2008 are on the cusp of proving that politics is useless as a solution. Somehow we are about to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory (again).
Three weeks ago we were on a solid path to victory.
Now we are lost in the weeds.
We are a divided party.
Unity is not a guarantee.
Many, including me, are tempted to check out and call it a day.
I want change, but perhaps politics is not the way to get there.
Perhaps there are better ways to focus ones energy.
It is something worth thinking about.
Cheers