It may not be possible.
Democrats may be doomed to be the party of frustration, not the party of progress and change.
There is a split within the American left. There is frustration over unresolved problems in America ignored by the comfortable elites of both parties. Matthew Taibbi wrote about it. Click Here. It is real. I saw it during my political travel last cycle, when I predicted a Trump victory. Trump channelled populism.
I recommend people stop here and read the Taibbi article.
Gallup and other polls show deep dissatisfaction with the direction of the country, which persisted during Bush, Obama, and continues. It is bi-partisan, which is why there is opportunity for both left populism and right populism--and centrism as well. Hillary Clinton represented left centrism and she won slightly over half the votes.
That is why there is a split in the Democratic voter base.
 |
| Wrong Track: Dissatisfied America. |
There may not be a route to what the Democratic activist base wants: a progressive Democratic president and a robust Democratic majority to carry out a progressive agenda.
Democrats on the left think Bernie Sanders should have won and would have won had he been nominated. They won't be pushovers this time. They want a populist left nominee who embraces populist economics--tax the rich, Medicare for All, $15 minimum wage--and one who recognizes the identity elements of the party and who embraces the resentments of the frustrated activist constituencies: The MeToo feminists, Black Lives Matter blacks, Latino immigration activists,The LGBTQ community.
Such a candidate may emerge. Possibly it will be Sanders, but he is old and male and white, and many think shopworn. There is such a candidate, an unavailable one: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She gets media attention in part because she pulls together that mix. AOC is the telegenic, sassy template and avatar.
An AOC-compliant candidate might win the Democratic nomination general election, given the potential of Trump-fatigue and his unique strengths and weaknesses. Trump has a unique set of enemies. But an AOC-compliant Democratic Party will likely not lead to House and Senate wins in Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Missouri, Florida, Colorado, Georgia and Texas. Democrats can and have won senate races in those states, and recently.
Democrats who say well, "we cannot actually expect to win Texas," are identifying the problem and conceding defeat. Beto is young and exciting. Many Democrats who donated to him expected something like AOC, and instead they got a moderate, and he doesn't actually hate the fossil fuel industry.
Well of course, which is why he nearly won in Texas.
Democrats who say well, "we cannot actually expect to win Texas," are identifying the problem and conceding defeat. Beto is young and exciting. Many Democrats who donated to him expected something like AOC, and instead they got a moderate, and he doesn't actually hate the fossil fuel industry.
Well of course, which is why he nearly won in Texas.
 |
| Senator Jon Tester, Montana |
Choose one.
Democrats can win in those states: Bob Kerrey, Tom Dashiell, Heidi Heidkamp, Claire McCaskill, Ben Nelson, Gary Hart, Sam Zell, Lloyd Benston.
Democrats who win in places like Montana sometimes look and sound like Jon Tester. Tester would likely have a hard time winning a congressional seat in Queens. He farms. He drives a tractor. He slaughters his own beef. He is OK with sounding like a moderate, a centrist. Indeed, it is an essential element of his brand.
A robust majority for Democrats in the House and Senate does not happen by electing 55 or 60 US senators who look and sound like Bernie Sanders and AOC. Vermont and Queens are wonderful, special places, but what is possible in Burlington and Queens is not necessarily possible in Des Moines. A robust Democratic majority will happen when voters in Montana and Missouri and Florida and other red and purple states turn out for a Democrat.
Voters on the progressive left can scorn and define such people as Democrats in Name Only, and they are doing so, but it dooms the presidential candidate either to losing the general election, or winning it and discovering he or she has a deeply hostile Congress.
Such a Senate refuses to take action on the president's Supreme Court nominations. Frustration. And then voters turn off, because, after all, they elected Obama and all they got was Obamacare and a conservative Supreme Court.
A Democratic president needs a robust majority to carry out the mission that progressives want. Democrats may want AOC, but they need Joe Manchin, too.
Democrats who win in places like Montana sometimes look and sound like Jon Tester. Tester would likely have a hard time winning a congressional seat in Queens. He farms. He drives a tractor. He slaughters his own beef. He is OK with sounding like a moderate, a centrist. Indeed, it is an essential element of his brand.
A robust majority for Democrats in the House and Senate does not happen by electing 55 or 60 US senators who look and sound like Bernie Sanders and AOC. Vermont and Queens are wonderful, special places, but what is possible in Burlington and Queens is not necessarily possible in Des Moines. A robust Democratic majority will happen when voters in Montana and Missouri and Florida and other red and purple states turn out for a Democrat.
 |
| Joe Manchin, Democrat of West Virginia |
Such a Senate refuses to take action on the president's Supreme Court nominations. Frustration. And then voters turn off, because, after all, they elected Obama and all they got was Obamacare and a conservative Supreme Court.
A Democratic president needs a robust majority to carry out the mission that progressives want. Democrats may want AOC, but they need Joe Manchin, too.
1 comment:
I don't subscribe to the "right/left" descriptors, but I do see one thing...
Extremists on either end of the spectrum will cancel each other's vote, but I would guess that the majority would be leaning Progressive, sans a Trump with his pandering and lies.
A recent CNN poll had immigration as the most concerning issue (20%) which reflects the Regressive propaganda and fear mongering of the last two years. Clearly Progressives are not effecting in making the case that this is a straw man designed to distract voters from issues that actually effect them directly, i.e., healthcare, civil rights, economics, environment, etc. This should be a priority, coupled with a recognizance of the humanitarian aspect of the current migration which is effectively a refugee crisis in Central and South America, something we have never experienced on this kind of scale previously and are unprepared for.
Democrats will need to accept their failure to recognize the impending crisis during the Obama administration, which would have blunted Trumpism and possibly prevented the current situation.
Post a Comment