Netroots Nation Day 3
Yesterday was a full day so I didn’t get a chance to post much. Up today is Valerie Jarrett and an economic panel with Jon Corzine, Anna Burger, Kevin Drum and Dean Baker.
Yesterday’s highlights were Howard Dean and the Specter/Sestak forum. Specter did better than I expected. He emphasized areas of agreement: pro-choice, pro-stimulus, voted against Judge Bork, environmental cap & trade and health care legislation. He actually said “I support climate change” which brought a laugh that he didn’t seem to get. I thought the biggest “news” from Specter’s talk was that he said Snowe would vote for the health care reform bill and that he thinks there are already 61 votes for cloture.
When Specter was asked what progressive ideals he would stand for he talked about transparency of the Supreme Court. Specter also demurred on supporting cloture for all Democratic bills but expected to vote for cloture on health care reform, climate change and EFCA (labor – I hope I have this right my brain is fuzzy right now). Specter said he can fight effectively for Obama’s agenda. The other big news was Specter promised to call Chuck Grassley about “death panels” right after he talked. Apparently he did and there is a video of Specter making the phone call.
A lot of people were a little put off by Sestak. They found his speaking style odd and over-practiced. He emphasized his accomplishments since he’s been in Congress: autism legislation, elder abuse legislation and his constituent services. Sestak said he had more bills than either of PA’s senators. He got some good attacks in against Specter, too. Sestak said he took Specter at his word – Specter believes what he says even if he said something different 8 weeks ago (paraphrasing but oooo….burn).
I think the most awkward moment was Sestak defending his FISA vote despite telling his progressive supporters that he would vote against it. Sestak hemmed and hawed basically and said he consults with a lot of different groups and panels. Conspicuously absent – progressive groups, bloggers and scientists.
I thought Sestak really warmed up when talking about the climate change bill. He got in another dig at Specter in the health care reform, saying during Clinton’s 1994 health care initiative Specter traveled around with Bob Dole with a poster that said “Bill Clinton’s Big Government Health Care Plan.”
Sestak got most passionate talking about repealing DADT. He was unabashedly progressive on this issue. He passionately argued about serving with GLBT people and how they deserved the same rights as someone else. I think it’s refreshing to see a sensible centrist argue this issue so unapologetically.
Sestak talked about accountable leadership and standing for principles over politics. I think this should be an interesting race, especially considering this new poll showing Sestak gaining 30 points on Specter.
Specter 48 (56)
Sestak 33 (11)
Undecided 19 (33)
Tags: Arlen Specter, Joe Sestak, Netroots Nation
brain is fuzzy? Just how much did you have to drink last night at the MoveOn party? LOL.
It was the Living Liberally karaoke bar party last night.
They are lobbing a lot of softballs at Jarrett. Awesome FB question though.
“Are you going to line the Blue Dogs up in your office with the amount of Federal Stimulus money on it and tell them to get in line for health care reform or they can ask Jim DeMint for the stimulus money?”
Jarrett: president has right approach – not about punishment. You need to put pressure on your representatives.
Do you think the birthers are a) crazy b) racist or c) crazy and racist.
Jarrett: it’s crazy, of course Obama was born in the U.S. unless you don’t believe Hawai’i is a state. Our system everyone gets a voice even people who are crazy – not that I’m calling them crazy. It was very well done. Kudos.
Q: Is the president prepared to get rid of public option for co-ops? Will he veto a bill without the public option?
Jarrett: the president wants the public option he has made that clear. Public option is for competition. I can’t talk about what he would or would not veto.
“The president wants the public option…because there needs to be competition with the private insurers.” {rough quote}. So she’s not saying that he’ll veto a bill w/o P.O. and leaves wiggle room for co-ops.
Valerie says Obama thinks DADT/DOMA is wrong and should be repealed, but congress needs pressure to get it done.
Why not more change?
Good liveblog here.
Answer: he’s done good things. He’s trying to keep us safe and change the tone (about the pictures). He’s trying to balance and set a new international tone. Audience is upset.
Jarrett: change takes time. I little bit of “just trust us.” Audience clearly not liking some of these answers. Keep up the pressure from the left. pressure = ideas
I’m really seeing this as a battle between progressive and cautious centrists. Progressive wants change, full speed ahead, as soon as possible. Obama is cautious (as a politician must be) and tries to lay groundwork to get the change done. I think both groups need to give a little. Obama could push harder and grassroots progressive could realize that there is a process in politics…which slows things down.
By “cautious centrists” do you mean DLC corporatists like Carper who view Insurance & Drug Companies as their constituents?
Hmmm…I don’t really think as corporatism as centrism. I think corporations go to the centrists and not vice versa. There are centrists who aren’t corporatists, like Joe Sestak. Centrist means not progressive, not conservative. I think it’s different than the mushy middle where the corporatists are.
Perhaps the right term is pragmatists. I saw Valerie Jarrett’s interview (most of it, anyway) and she handled herself and the crowd pretty well from where I sat. It is not a satisfying answer, but they ere never going to get everything done right away. And hanging in with stuff like the wiretapping and state secrets policy and signing statements is not promising. The other thing that I think is in the way is having to deal with the collapse of the economy — how much different would some of this look if the economy had been healthier when Obama took office? And one more item — one thing we know for sure about Obama is that he plays a long game. That doesn’t mean that he is doing everything we’d like for him to do but he doesn’t mind waiting on process to get a win.
I watched Bill Clinton’s speech to the Netroots Nation and one of my take-aways was about how long it takes to shift the nation. He talked about a sixteen-year timeframe. But he also talked about population changes that have occured in the past decade that favor progressive change. It is a really complex equation.
You could argue that President Obama might have waited until next year to take on health care reform, the economy might be better by then. Thing is, health care is going to bankrupt this country and I suspect Obama wanted to take it on while he still had the glow from the election going for him. For example, the Progressive Dems for Delaware posted 92 messages on our listserve last week about Health Care Reform. That’s not astroturf — that’s real grassroots activists who are really riled up. I’m not sure we’d be that engaged next year with the distraction of a mid-term election.
Politics is the art of the possible.