"I'm Right."
"No - I'm right."
"No - I AM. [Insert candidate name here]'s vote on [insert highly important single issue here] makes me question whether s/he is really qualified to lead. If [Insert candidate name here] can't even vote [yea or nay] on [insert highly important single issue here], I may have to vote for [insert either candidate with NO chance or candidate who stands for virtually everything you oppose here]."
RIIIIGHT.
I feel like I've finally fully morphed into my mother. I remember, as a younger person, when she would extol on this subject or that, giving me perspective that could only be gained through life and its living. I would listen dutifully (the downside consequences of even a miniscule eye-roll was well worth even feigned attentiveness) and then charge forward with my own opinions and impressions. Sometimes that worked for me, and sometimes it didn't.
In my life here at Daily Kos, my KosLife, I've been around since shortly after the 2004 Presidential election. I would see diaries, in the dark days that followed the knowledge of a Bush second term, that alluded to much turmoil and strife in the ranks and diaries at Daily Kos. This was ephemeral to me, since I hadn't experienced it first-hand.
Then the 2006 midterms rolled around. What I saw up close was the battle of the pragmatists vs. the purists. Pragmatists, by my political definition, pretty much support the Democrat running in whichever race regardless. For example, a pragmatist would support Harry Reid despite the fact that he is anti-choice AND a Democrat. Pragmatists stood behind Bob Casey, Jr (D-PA) despite his anti-choice stance because they fundamentally believed that this was their best chance to unseat the disgusting asshattery of Rick Santorum (and thankfully, they were right). Pragmatists defended Harold Ford, Jr. on a variety of fronts - that he was a DINO. That he sucked. That he was a closet Republican. For a sample, see this pre-election day 2006 tag page. ((h/t to blueteam for calling me on using the Republican-framed "pro-life" label))
The flipside of this coin are the purists. Purists basically believe that there are one or two or three areas and principles in the Democratic party that are sacrosanct - Choice, of course, is one of them. Universal healthcare has emerged as another. Current events specific items include FISA, telecom immunity, and war funding. You get what I mean - the true purists in the crowd don't really believe a pro-life Democrat IS a Democrat. Purists believe that any Democrat who voted to go to cloture on the Roberts or Alito nomination are not really Democrats. Purists believe that any Democrat who allowed immunity for the telcos to slip through aren't really Democrats.
I want to be clear - I'm not arguing the merits of pragmatism v. purity. I'm not endorsing "Democrat or Die" or any other dogmatic stance on ANY side. The purpose of the diary is not to debate a purist's view over a pragmatist's view.
The purpose of the diary is to remind those who have been here through an election cycle as well as those who are newer and will go through an election cycle for the first time in their KosLife that the purity v. pragmatic arguments are going to be part of life here through November. Both purists and pragmatists have a point - often valid points that wind up being contradictory and really have no satisfactory resolution.
I'll get a little personal here, and I'll do so by looking at the 2006 midterms. I live in Virginia - I spent a LOT of time volunteering for Jim Webb's Senate campaign. I canvassed every available weekend in two separate Congressional districts. I manned phones. I raised money online from those of you here who were fortunate enough to have "safe" Congressional Democratic candidates. I attended fundraisers and wrote about them here to spread the word.
The whole time, though, I have to say - Jim Webb was NEVER my idea of an "ideal" Democrat. He's borderline too conservative for me. I don't like his stance on guns and gun control, frankly. During the campaign, I was disappointed that he wasn't more vocal with respect to his pro-choice views and his views on same-sex marriage.
But I live in Virginia, folks. And I know that my "perfect", purist candidate had not a snowball's chance in hell of winning against the odious fucktard Allen. I adopted the pragmatist's point of view despite my purist leanings on certain issues. I did so because I looked at things kind of like this: Politics exist on a metaphorical pendulum. In 2006, after 6 years of the Bush Administration and Republican Congressional control and all the damage that that had inflicted, that pendulum was at the apex of its rightward arc. My preferred state of political existence is to be at the apex of the leftward arc, of course. But given how far we were, at that time, from even being in the center, I knew it was unrealistic to stamp my feet and dig in demand a dramatic left-apex shift. My heart may have wanted it, but it would be impossible to skip all the points in between the right and left apices. That necessitated, for the sake of my sanity, a recognition that some candidates, for me, would be imperfect.
But more important than my sanity was always the future and direction of the country I love and believe in. Even a 1/4 arc movement to the left on the path of that pendulum represented progress to me. It still does. We have endured nearly eight years of far-right arcedness. Slowly, inexorably, that pendulum is sweeping back towards the left. Maybe not fast enough for some (even for me) - but it IS happening.
I guess what I would like any reader to take away from this diary is the fact that being pragmatic and being pure are NOT mutually exclusive. Because I may counsel pragmatism in th future does NOT make me a Bad Democrat. Because you (yes, you) or someone else believes that purity is the only means to real change does not make you a defeatist. We DO intersect on that pendulum's path and that intersection will require us to compromise - not on our principles, but with each other.
Regardless of any recent disillusionment, we are living in historical times and witnessing an historical race. There will be ups and downs - but I can personally say, without a shadow of a doubt, that we HAVE made progress. From 2004 to 2006 to today - we have made progress.
Let's try to remember that.
Carry on. :)