As people look at what is happening today in the MA Senate race, I hope they will realize what we are seeing is something that others like myself have been warning the party against since early 2009. This situation was wholly predictable by the party's arrogant push for corporate America's interest. We saw this before in the early 1990s.
What we are seeing is a populist revolt against the Democrats. The fact is that Brown should not be this close, and his being this close is not explained by ideological shifts or bad campaigning. There is no way that MA moved hard right in less than year. Nor does campaigning cause people to ignore hard right positions. However, the emotions of populism does. The idea that we can ignore these emotions as "childish" or 'immature" or whatever other description one sees is false. What happens is that these emotions find other outlets if the party in power does not address them.
What is the cause? The cause is ignoring the growing dire plight of the middle class:
"Can you imagine an America without a strong middle class? If you can, would it still be America as we know it?
Today, one in five Americans is unemployed, underemployed or just plain out of work. One in nine families can't make the minimum payment on their credit cards. One in eight mortgages is in default or foreclosure. One in eight Americans is on food stamps. More than 120,000 families are filing for bankruptcy every month. The economic crisis has wiped more than $5 trillion from pensions and savings, has left family balance sheets upside down, and threatens to put ten million homeowners out on the street.
Families have survived the ups and downs of economic booms and busts for a long time, but the fall-behind during the busts has gotten worse while the surge-ahead during the booms has stalled out. In the boom of the 1960s, for example, median family income jumped by 33% (adjusted for inflation). But the boom of the 2000s resulted in an almost-imperceptible 1.6% increase for the typical family. While Wall Street executives and others who owned lots of stock celebrated how good the recovery was for them, middle class families were left empty-handed.
The crisis facing the middle class started more than a generation ago. Even as productivity rose, the wages of the average fully-employed male have been flat since the 1970s."
LINK
Politics is about defining or being defined. If you leave this void in defining these emotions toward progressive economic policies, then men like Brown will fill the vacuum. Voters are not stupid. They simply have limited options for displaying their anger over what is happening in DC.
The lack of reality in DC regarding these issues is stunning to me. I can not think of one point in the last year where people really connected with voters about how they not only understand our problems as voters, but also are enacting policies that get it. Instead, we move along like we are in the boom times of the 1990s that require only slight tweaks of neo-liberal economic policies. No one is talking re-negotiating NAFTA, real reforms that will allow banks to lend, or how to return economic fairness to the average voter.
Before I continue, let me be clear: Brown is a far right corporatist who despite the vote of no-confidence against the Democrats, does not represent the American voter's interest. But, the voters have two choices on the ballot, and for them, despite not wanting choice A or B, they must make a decision with the choices they have. How can they show their displeasure for the Democrats failure to respond to their real economic needs?
What choice will reflect the lack of populist economic policy making coming out of DC? What choice will send a message? I think they are wrong about Brown sending that message. I think he will send the opposite message. The pluotcrats and their enablers amongst centrists in DC will enact policies that are in less favorable to the American middle class. That's been the history of the last year and the last 20.
I expect that to become worse after Brown's possible victory or near victory today. I expect the DLC types and apologists here to use this to rationalize moving right. I once again repeat: I don't believe MA has suddenly moved hard right. Do you buy this argument?
They are already making such arguments from the PPP polling that shows people think that Congress is too liberal. However, the question is, what is too liberal about private mandates on health care? What is liberal about bailing out big banks that are too big to fail? What is liberal about most of the economic policies of the last year?
Not much, but the branding of the two parties is that whatever the Democrats do- that's the liberal policy. Whatever the Republicans do- that's the conservative policy. So, labels do not help us much here.
What does help us understand the vote? Accountability. The voters want to say to the Democrats they need to be doing more to help voters. Now, the voters are wrong to use this imperfect instrument of voting considering we only have 2 choices on the ballot to do so. But, their intent is not enact more conservative policies regardless of the labels.
I doubt they want more bail out of banks. I doubt they want more policies that enable corporate interest.
But, I ask you, what choice have the Democrats offered them in the last year?
You can make all the excuses you wish regarding how what we see in DC is "necessary" or "pragmatic." My response is: It is not pragmatic to the American people who are feeling the effects of this horrible economy.
Who is at fault for them believing that Democrats (the so-called liberals) are a part of the problem rather than the solutions? The "left of the left"? The voters?
Or, the Democrats.
I hope the Democrats pull out against all polling data a victory today. I do not look forward to what comes next which is a further lurch into madness by moving further right to triangulate with DC narrative, and proving yet, again, that we are clueless about why we lose in the long run.
We are losing because of our mindset of failure. Our weakness of character.
That mind set is one of corporate friendly policy making, and offering the voters no perceivable real choice of economic populism at the ballot box.
There are three types of populism as I see it. Right wing populism and left wing populism are already known. A third one is also likely in the form of a middle class populism.
These ideas are shaped by different approaches. The right focuses on using emotions like hate to get people to vote against interest. The left focuses on strictly left leaning ideological believes over class. The middle class populism that is rising in America seeks to shift the power from plutocratic interests to middle class or social capitalism.
This means issues like jobs, industrial policy, a cost effective safety net, regulations that protect their investments and well being, etc.
Ask yourself this question: Did DC Democrat deliver middle class populism to the voters in 2009?
I think the answer to that question is no.
I will end on what Dr. Weston said of the leadership coming out of DC:
"As the president's job performance numbers and ratings on his handling of virtually every domestic issue have fallen below 50 percent, the Democratic base has become demoralized, and Independents have gone from his source of strength to his Achilles Heel, it's time to reflect on why. The conventional wisdom from the White House is those "pesky leftists" -- those bloggers and Vermont Governors and Senators who keep wanting real health reform, real financial reform, immigration reform not preceded by a year or two of raids that leave children without parents, and all the other changes we were supposed to believe in...
The problem with the president's strategic team is that they don't understand the difference between compromising on policy and compromising on core values. When it comes to policies, listen all you want to the Stones: "You can't always get what you want" (although it would be nice if the administration tried sometime). But on issues of principle -- like allowing regressive abortion amendments to be tacked onto a health care reform bill -- get some stones. Make your case to the American people, make it evocatively, and draw the line in the sand. That's how you earn people's respect. That's the only thing that will bring Independents back...
Unfortunately, what Democrats just can't seem to understand is that the politics of the lowest common denominator is always a losing politics. It sends a meta-message that you're weak -- nothing more, nothing less -- and that's the cross the Democrats have had to bear since they "lost China" 60 years ago. And in fact, it is weak."
LINK
If you want to understand today's results, look to the failures of DC not from a left or right perspective, but from a populist economic one. I hope we win today, but I also hope we sober up to the reality that power derives from the American people. Lose their trust, and you lose elections no matter how crazy the other side is.
In a state like MA, there is no reason on an ideological basis for why we should be losing other than economic populism is opening the door for the GOP to get back into the game after their loses in 2006 and 2008.