The Cannon Fodder Wing of the Democratic Party
While DL has hosted its fair share of intraparty pie, knife and bomb throwing events, we’ve never dug into the real dynamics of those arguments.
This Digby post nails it.
Connect
Connect with us on the following social media platforms.
Hmm, does that mean it is time to challenge Tom Carper?
Be careful, Jason. You might get labelled a “purist” and, therefore, be summarily dismissed.
I’ve been on more sides of the liberal purity debate than Arnold’s been on sides of his housekeeper.
What is really fun about “not digging into the really dynamics” or warnings about being a “purist” is that Digby is largely making an argument that I have made here on multiple occasions. Multiple occasions. Meaning that the so-called “progressives” here aren’t even especially interested in any conversation that doesn’t reinforce their own biases or doesn’t reinforce their own grievances.
But then, I’ve been way more interested in a solutions-oriented discussion — that would be the POLITICS part of the deal — than just whinging about how your hearts are broken again.
The Teajadis are falling apart everywhere, they don’t even provide much media fodder (except to point and laugh — the teabag event in SC where only 30 of the showed up), they aren’t even particularly numerous AND YET you can hear daily about how they continue to drive the wing nut part of the conversation. Wonder why that is? Seriously work through that and you may have some idea on how to not be so vulnerable to being negotiated away.
But hey, what am I doing? It isn’t as though you’re paying any attention to any of this.
Wow. That was constructive.
And you would be the expert, I’m thinking.
I just thought that this was interesting:
That’s all.
I’m independent…what do I have to read?
Being tied to one party seems to be a bigger part of the problem in my opinion.
I may be reading too much between the lines here cass, and if so I apologize, but, don’t get discouraged. Your voice is the voice of reason around here so much of the time. Your voice is needed. You don’t bog down in single issues but take the larger view.
Jason, this is great stuff, both the Digby and the Kos articles, about POLITICS, as cassandra says. It is the critical part of the deal. Every day isn’t victory day, but every day should be loyalty day until it’s our turn. Of course, our turn must come or there’s no point to it all. I think the current session of Delaware’s General Assembly has given us a lot of turns. I certainly feel that it has been worth all the work and I’m going to hang around for the next challenge. Maybe we won’t win that one, but, eventually we’ll get our turn again.
Here’s what I took from the article:
Conservatives play long-ball and don’t expect to lose ground on any of their pet issues. When a Republican President doesn’t make any progress on gay marriage or anti-abortion, it’s OK, they will wait and accept incremental progress.
Liberals expect to gain ground on every issue.
When a Democratic President trades no progress on taxation (I am sure someone will make a case that keeping the Bush tax cuts are anything but status quo) in order to get a repeal of DADT, START, Food Safety and 9-11 healthcare, he is a traitor to his party and awful for party unity.
When a Democratic President builds a foundation for implementing a healthcare system that accomplishes some of the goals of his supporters, failure to get universal healthcare for all will be considered capitulation.
Good points, all.
call me crazy, but it seems like what Digby is applying his logic too are social issues.
You know, the ones that mean jack shit when it comes to unemployment and causing people’s retirements to vanish.
The social agenda is hoisted up and given to these feces slinging monkeys b/c they think that if abortions stop and gays don’t marry the country will fix itself. Meanwhile, the GOP and Dems are busy fucking over the entire country by doing nothing to the real issues that have gotten us here.
(I’m still waiting on Elizabeth Warren to be confirmed and my health care costs to actually come down)
So, while it’s all great to theorize that the libs and progressives need to take small itty bitty wins to get what they want…
it’s bullshit
B/c what have conservatives gotten that has helped and rectified what they consider the problems?
One could argue that the issue you are talking about isn’t conservative/liberal, but rather corporatist. There is something there, DV. And I suspect that this is a much harder nut to crack.
I’m really sick of the Dem v. Rep Meme…
If someone would actually take a look at what these aholes vote for together, maybe people would wake the fuck up.
I’m really sick of the Progressives vs. Dems meme. Since when did making the rich pay their fair share become a leftist pony, rather than a cause shared by all Democrats?
I’ll go one better, since when did the democrats our Governor included, start buying the trickle down meme or better yet, the meme that Rich create jobs and without the wealthy there would be no jobs.
How about, you know, the people that do the work. You know, the other side of the equation that “allows” the wealthy, to actually get wealthy. When did this turn around happen that the ahole with millions and millions deservers more and more while the guy actually doing the work get’s paid the same after adjusting for inflation.
It’s such bullshit to think this is D v. R and not see where the problem is.
thank god Markell and people like him recognize the value in giving more tax breaks to the rich and the corporations of this country and state. Without making them more wealthy, god knows how much trouble this country and state could be in.
Political questions in this country are settled through Republicans and Democrats contending in state houses and the Congress. It is idiotic and a poor use of the word to say that “D’s v R’s” is a “meme.”
It is a simple fact that we have two major political parties. That one of those parties is undisciplined, unfocused, internally undermined and conflicted is not a meme.
Since when did making the rich pay their fair share become a leftist pony, rather than a cause shared by all Democrats?
The point is that it isn’t a pony, but it also isn’t the only thing that matters. In the Dem coalition, it is a plank in the platform. There are a lot of planks in that platform, some of which have been accomplished.
That one of those parties is undisciplined, unfocused, internally undermined and conflicted is not a meme.
One could state that this is the case for both parties (see Tea Party v. RINO’s)
That one of those parties is undisciplined, unfocused, internally undermined and conflicted is not a meme.
I disagree. And, I hoist our Governor up as proof. I’ll throw Carper up their too.
Hell, I’ll throw all the fucking Blue Dogs up there for you…
shit…let’s say we toss in the Dem from West. Virginny for giggles.
You know what…I’ll go down south and grab the wife beating drunk Atkins for you too.
Maybe I’ll head south and Pick up Joe Lieberman…before I do, I’ll grab ol what’s his name that Obama was more than happy to support when he jumped the aisle. What’s his name? Darn it…you know the senator from Pa.
I could go on, but why bother, you’re right. It’s D v. R for sure.
Remember that liberal Senator we had in Delaware before he became the VP. All the wonderful progressive things he did for MBNA? golly, I’m so naive
Remember that D in Minnesota that held up the healthcare bill over abortion?
What about Mary Landrieu not voting against the oil companies or all that money she took from the health co’s
That’s a fair point. If I said that one party is “more undisciplined, unfocused, internally undermined and conflicted” than the other, you’d know which party I was talking about.
In the Dem coalition, it is a plank in the platform. There are a lot of planks in that platform
See, right there is the “pony” attitude. Progressive taxation is not a plank; it is a joist, and right now it is not bearing the weight.
It is a mistake to assign equal weight to every issue. That is how Democrats come unglued and start to accuse fellow Dems of wanting ponies. Some issues are foundational.
Disagree all you want. It does not change the fact that Political questions in this country are settled through Republicans and Democrats contending in state houses and the Congress.
Shorter DV: But there bad Democrats.
ME: No shit Sherlock.
If it was a pony attitude, there would be no discussion about changing the tax rate any more.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Obama+pitches+hike+rich/4610353/story.html
I could find no stories about Obama pushing for universal healthcare recently. That’s a pony.
Feel free to let me know all the lovely progressive and liberal ideas that were passed when the Dems controlled the House, Senate and White House when they had their chance….
hell, let me know any that have passed. And not gay marriage laws either please…things with real impact
my examples were meant to show that are bad democrats, it’s meant to show you, that they as a collective are hardly of one party. Local or national.
I must have missed the day Obama flew in on his helicopter and signed into law Single payer or let the clock expire on those tax cuts he said were so bad for the country
Shorter DV: There are bad Democrats.
ME: No shit Sherlock.
Obama on tax cuts for rich: “I refuse to renew them again.”
I think that says it all.
“It’s such bullshit to think this is D v. R and not see where the problem is.”
If you’re progressive, the problem is that you’re in a smaller wing of your party (D) than Tea Partiers are in theirs. While many of the groups in the D coalition are progressive in going for their particular goals, they appear unwilling to spend any political capital on goals of others in the coalition, and are actively against some of them. That’s the point of the linked articles.
FWIW, the Republicans are finally fracturing from the stress of conservatives constantly giving the more centrist wing what it wants, but having the centrists stiff them when the rubber meets the road. When 52% of your party’s members wish there was a third party, that ain’t good.
The truth is simple, The D’s are thieving liars who stand for nothing. The R’s are incompetent fools who stand for themselves.
Anyone who stands for reality gets skewered by the parties and has no chance.
I may be reading too much between the lines here cass, and if so I apologize, but, don’t get discouraged.
I’m not discouraged, because there are progressives are working for progressive ideals and not just lazily indulging in the emo. And I’m not discouraged, because I know that when it gets time to try for more progressive ideas in Delaware, I know I can count on the women of DL to *get it* and get to work.
Jason, after the next election, there’ll be even less democrats to blame for this mess. Which, should be good for you. You won’t have to worry about defending them adnauseum.
Apology accepted.
I real man always will
You know that old mythology line “the devil’s greatest trick was to make people believe he didn’t exist”?
Yes, it’s a confidence man’s line, but it works in politics too, both parties. GOP – making you believe that they give a fuck about anyone making under 300k; and the Dems for makng people think they could come together for the average, and poor, American.
So the consensus here is the GOP doesn’t care anyone but the monied interests, and is effective; while the Dems care about everything and everyone, but are woefully ineffective.
I’d say they both care about getting reelected by both I mean the people with the money and the politicians enjoying the power. It just so happens to do so, you need money.
Last time I checked, less and less of that comes from the middle class and the poor.
In the venn diagram, “monied interests” is the circle in the middle and the circles for both Republicans and Democrats overlap that one a lot.
Pretty much spot on, DD. Another way to put it is: whipping the Dem caucus is like hearding cats.
At least the GOP keeps it in line, meaning a rep or senator may not agree with the party position, but she/he will vote for the home team 95% of the time (remember that Castle was a RINO because he had the audacity to break from the home team 10% of the time). The Dem percentage always is expected to be less than any subservient GOP critter.
Oh and the Jedi mind trick of making a 50 year old white dude in kentucky believe that he too will be very wealthy some day doesn’t hurt conservatives at the ballot box either.
That may be the biggest issue of all. Break that spell and the cries of Soshalizum, along with most of the GOP’s middle class vote goes bye-bye. All that’s left are the 27%ers who’d jump off a bridge if Rush told them to, and the anti-choice single issue rubes.
Agreed too, J.
Though the reasoning for alligence to the monied interests may differ between the parties (generally speaking)…
Much of that alligence is due to constant campaign mode, but some pols look at it as if they were soldiers looking to take the spoils of war. It’s their right to get wealthier as a public servant!
Another way to put it is: whipping the Dem caucus is like hearding cats.
yawn….here we go with another tired meme.
Perhaps it’s because more of the Dems are really conservatives that take union money to get elected. see Blue Dogs or Conservadems or any variation of some tired verbiage for why a Democrat isn’t a democrat
meow
Bullshit, dude. Tired meme? It’s not true? Your reasoning just confirmed my position!
You are projecting, DV. You want anyone with a D to be as you are and vote accordingly. Well that may happen if you’re a republican.
Btw I’m not defending anyone here, just calling it as i see it.
Your quip of “tired” carried about as much weight as when some pundit mouthfarts the words “serious” and “adult”. Come up with a better argument, please.
Well, if the herding cats line isn’t a tired meme, I guess I don’t know my meme’s.
Tell you what, I’ll use the Blue Dogs and ConservaDems as my argument that the herding cats is a bullshit meme, if you send me proof of the cats in the Dem party 🙂
It’s not fair to say that It’s all about me and that I’m crying b/c they don’t vote in line with what I want.
They fucking recruited and pandered to me. In case you don’t remember, some black guy sold me some pretty fucking awesome campaign promises.
Who are the Dems Senators that are the cats?
Ben nelson?
Mary Landrieu?
Harry Ried?
Max Baucus?
Kent Conrad?
Tom Harkin?
Pat Leahy?
John Rockefeller?
come on man…..that’s just the senate leadership…You mean to tell me that the young guys don’t get in fucking line if they say to vote a certain way?
In case you don’t remember, some black guy sold me some pretty fucking awesome campaign promises.
Seriously? That’s what you bring to the table? You really aren’t as “cool” as you think you are. Stop blaming everyone else for your naivete, and, while you’re at it… stop acting like you have street cred. It’s insulting.
No, I am cool and quite honestly pretty sure Obama is black. Did I come close to upsetting the DL political correctnessometer? Where I come from, it’s still ok to call black people black.
If I offended you though, I’ll add another notch to my I don’t give a shit belt.
Did the store have a sale on Wild Turkey today?
herding cats makes people punchy I guess.
It must be hard being a hall monitor for a website though. I understand why she might drink.
I’m still waiting for folks to tell me who the “cats” are in the Dem party that can’t be herded.
You’re working the extremes, dv. The people you listed proves my point.
In 1980, those you mentioned would be GOPers, not today. Unfortunately, they’re Dems and caucus with others labeled Dems. You want it some sort of other way, but that’s not reality and you know it.
So just don’t be dismissive of my point because you don’t like the analogy I used. In fact, it appropriate, you know it and cannot offer an alternative. Would caging water be a better one in your mind? It still conjures up the idea of one doing its own thing….be it sucking off oil companies or wall street.
But if you’re trying to tell me they Ben fucking Nelson is the same as Harry Reid is the same as Chris Coons, then you’re trying to play me as a fool. What may be true is the dislikes you may have against them may be somewhat the same, but that’s a significant difference than sayin they’re all the same.
The GOP, otoh, has a well established Borg complex. It’s like they come off a Mopar assembly line. Plug and play. 🙂
“it is a plank in the platform. There are a lot of planks in that platform, some of which have been accomplish”
Just a mere plank, eh? 1/3 of the nation lives either in or near poverty because the economic structure of the nation is geared to further enriching the rich and this is merely a negotiable “plank.” Give me purity, then. At least there is no question that the purists understand what is at stake.
I’m dismissive of your point b/c, it’s a weak throw away analogy that everyone uses with little example to back it up. Or when used can’t also be used to describe the GOP
I’m sorry if my examples don’t fit your analogy, but that was my point. I listed 8 folks that make up the leadership of the Dems. Who of them are the cats? They are leaders and the rest of the cats fall in line when they say so.
You can’t tell me that McCain is the same as Olympia Snowe is the same as Collins.
We can play this game to with the GOP too you know, but yet, no one says they are cats that can’t be herded.
What about Graham? what is he? How about Coburn? What about Scott Brown?
Caged water is a good band name though 🙂
Then way I see it is that there are two parties, and that’s pretty much how politics works in most places. Those who wish for a 3rd party should really think hard – just look at the example of the last Canadian elections. Non-conservative parties got the majority of votes, but not the majority of seats. To me it looks like 3rd parties hurt progressive causes.
So, what to do about it? I think the answer is to sway the center-left party in a more progressive direction. The way to do that is to vote, participate and give money. Why do you think the teabaggers have been successful? It’s because they have taken over the Republican party.
The disheatening thing about progressives is that every victory is a defeat. Health care reform is a defeat because no public option, never mind 30M new people covered by insurance. The tax deal was a defeat even though we got DADT, unemployment extension and START out of it.
In my opinion, progressives are impatient and lazy. Many seem to think that voting for Obama was enough and don’t seem to be doing the work to pass progressive legislation. Regarding tax cuts, where were the protests, the phone banks to influence Congress? I never saw anything. Why not? Can you blame Dems for thinking this wasn’t a huge priority for the base?
When Cass says look to Wisconsin, she’s right. Here is where self-organizing energy occurs. Instead of waiting for Obama or the Senate or the House to act, we must push them to act. Why aren’t we?
UI,
I here you but when you say, When Cass says look to Wisconsin, she’s right. Here is where self-organizing energy occurs
what do you do when the guy in our own state models the Wisconsin guy and he is a democrat?
You’re screwed really right? Now, we’ve put someone in power that we have no way of running someone against from within, or from the “other” party which supposedly is more corporate friendly
“The way to do that is to vote, participate and give money.” Fascinating that in this list of things to do there is no explicit mentioning of strenuously advocating for progressive positions. Vote, (the vague) participate, give money–anything else is consigned to silence. I’m sure that there isn’t a blue dog Dem who wouldn’t disagree that progressive Dems should “participate” in precisely that way.
Fascinating that in this list of things to do there is no explicit mentioning of strenuously advocating for progressive positions.
Fascinating that in UI’s list of actions that *participation* wouldn’t cover your *strenuous argument*. Especially since her use of the word *participate* didn’t come with any restrictions or even examples. I mean, you could organize a rally or a phone bank or get people to boycott enabling businesses — *all* of that counts as participation. So that perhaps now we get the hint that the so-called progressives real problem is a lack of imagination. And, of course, such *strenuous argument* or any other form of participation doesn’t mean much unless it produces some political costs or pressures. Which is the fundamental disconnect here. Because if you are just strenuously arguing with people here and not using that to change the political incentives, you are just having a wank.
I’ll tell you what wanking is. It’s finessing an amorphous word like “participate” to compel it to mean “strenuously arguing for” just to blow a little smoke to cover what was a glaring and telling omission in a short list of things progressives can do to bring about real helpful change.
Apology accepted.
Just because she didn’t put up a “short list” you didn’t approve of still doesn’t mean that *strenuous argument* isn’t on it.
But what we did catch you at was arguing for the thing that you (and most of the boys here) think is the worthwhile pursuit — telling everyone who will listen that “they’re doing it all wrong”. Which isn’t the approach the people in Wisconsin have taken. And the petitioners in MI to recall their governor aren’t just relying on *strenuous argument*. Groups pressuring major TN companies to disapprove of that State’s Chamber and Governor trying to institutionalize bigotry aren’t just *strenuously arguing*. They are working at a whole range of participation that actually tries to redo the political incentives. None of those bits of participation made UI’s short list, but they count as participation.
But here is the predictable wank —
A point I make repeatedly, and is always bypassed for some bit of indignation always designed to dance away from that point. So congrats for being predictable.
Dig how you start your point by confirming my last, but my handle is still linked to your site, dv! that’s love 😉
Dana – seriously?
1/3 of the nation lives either in or near poverty because the economic structure of the nation is geared to further enriching the rich and this is merely a negotiable “plank.”
One could use the same formulation to describe every plank in the platform.
20% of the nation is unemployed and the wealthiest 5% have increased their wealth X% and this is merely a “plank.”
Or on the other side of the aisle:
X number of babies are murdered each year because of Roe v. Wade
and this is merely a “plank.”
Yes, these are planks. Planks are aspects of an ideology that require action to make real. Some require incremental changes, some require brute force, some require political timing and some will come to pass under certain circumstances. We can all weigh in on which planks are most important to us. Please do! But at the end of the day, we took a bunch of steps forward with the Dems that we had.
We didn’t make any progress on restoring taxation to sustainable levels, but we did get a few other issues resolved. And yet here we are, a scant 6 months later, discussing fixing the tax rate for the wealthy. It is now in-play again, after the Republicans hopped and skipped around about their victory they are faced with their own rhetoric.
“Fix the deficit!” they scream and when they are presented with their options, they start to realize that in order to meet one promise, they may have to give up some of their December victory. And now we can turn our machine on and start telling people the truth that the choice is Medicare and Social Security or tax cuts for the wealthy. We are starting to see some of that (ironically, at a Paul Ryan town hall in … wait for it… WISCONSIN!).
But the bigger point is that the people that are pushing for better taxation didn’t lose anything, they have just been delayed. But to those progressives, failure to win feels like a loss. On the other side of the aisle, the same is seen as a temporary lull.
I guess I already think “strenuous argument” is done by the base. It seems to be not so effective. Personally I don’t see how argument works without action. This is why I say progressives are lazy. Many argue as if the point is obvious, so of course every Dem agrees. If we on the left want more progressive legislation, we have to convince Dems as well.
In my opinion, nothing counts as a strenuous argument without some form of action. It starts with cling/writing your representatives and moves up from there.
Here’s my problem with the planks model: It depicts Democrats as a collection of special interests all selfishly seeking to extract benefits from the system for themselves. That is exactly how Republicans want to portray Democrats. The more closely we resemble that narrative, the more Republicans win.
Democrats should not accept the Republican frame that we are acting out an adversarial system of competing interests within the party. And we certainly shouldn’t be promoting that Republican frame by accusing other Democrats of being out for their own ponies.
Instead Democrats should be advocating organic policy for the nation. You cannot build a house out of planks alone. You need supporting beams and joists, and you need a plan. We are supposed to be the smart ones who understand such things, remember?
Democrats succeed when we have an organizing principle like the New Deal or the Great Society, articulated and promoted by leadership.
It depicts Democrats as a collection of special interests all selfishly seeking to extract benefits from the system for themselves.
They are. And so are the members of every other political party. Maybe it is too far to say they are looking for something for *themselves*, but certainly for the interests they represent. It is exactly why Democrats are so difficult to herd in one direction — and why Democrats are a Big Tent Party.
Ignoring the revisionist gloss on *organizing principles*, democratic governments are supposed to be about organizing multiple, sometimes competing interests in some rational governing fashion. Wishful thinking that we should somehow all be the same — like we were for the Great Society! — isn’t useful to finding either organizing principles or (gasp!) compromise.