2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe Revolution HASN'T Been Publicized
~snip~
I turned 18 in time to join the Democratic Party as Bill Clinton and Terry McAuliffe moved the party just right of center. As Republicans were moving even further to the right, abandoning our once shared values of strong labor, strong middle-class and strong infrastructure, it seemed acceptable. Democrats would still fight for reproductive rights, but they would allow the new influx of revenue McAuliffe arranged from Wall Street, arms manufacturers, and big media dictate support of deregulation, military amplification, prisons for profits and monopoly building. Protecting the social safety net, an issue Democrats and Republicans agreed on prior to Reagan, was now an area to be negotiated by both parties. We had just wrapped up the 1980s; we were all a little high on commercialism. There is a reason many progressives call Bill Clinton “the best Republican President we’ve ever had.” Clinton pushed through the very agenda Republicans had looked for just a decade prior. He did away with Glass-Steagall. He gave them the crime bill. He opened the doors for domestic spying and monopoly building. He gave in on welfare reform. And the money poured in. Long story short, quite a few establishment Democrats have become quite fond of that cash flow. They don’t want it to change. In fact, there’s a subset of Democrats called Third Wave who want the party to move even further to the right on these issues. As I type this, establishment Democrats in Congress are trying to gut campaign contribution laws even further as more Wall Street funds come their way. Meanwhile, a great deal of rank-and-file Democrats have grown weary of watching their party shirk on issues like the social safety net and privacy rights. Waking up to the realities of the Clinton administration, disenfranchised by how many Democrats rolled over for George W. Bush on the Patriot Act and his wars in the Middle East, heartbroken about how Obamacare is really Dole/Romney Care instead of single-payer, and genuinely pissed off by the economic meltdown made possible by a Clinton pro-Wall Street decision, many Progressives are not happy with their party. The wonkiest of policy Progressives were recently energized by seeing grassroots movements like Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter take place. The people hadn’t truly given up yet. There’s still a chance to fix the power structure. Polling data on the issues favors a populist push for Warren and Sanders backed policies. The American people favor the Progressive agenda. This is their chance.
The Democratic National Committee has responded poorly to this call for revolution. At the head of the mess, former Hillary Clinton campaign co-chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is now the DNC Chairwoman. Millions of phone calls have poured into the DNC, demanding her removal and demanding more primary debates. The demands have gone ignored, without comment to their base. Even Republicans scratched their heads as the DNC limited the number of debates and scheduled them off prime time. It’s no wonder that there are circulating conspiracy theories that the DNC is rigging the election as best they can for Hillary Clinton. The DNC has done nothing but fan those flames and buckled down further in support of just one of their candidates. When the DNC boxed Harvard Professor Lawrence Lessig out of the discussion, essentially pushing him out of the race, it became clear that campaign finance reform was a policy embraced by the Democratic base, but not at all by the Democratic Party itself. As Bernie Sanders called for a political revolution, one was formed for him. Former Occupy members were staging a support system for either a Warren or Sanders run. Though his campaign only has a few offices throughout the US, in early primary states, regular people started building a nationwide infrastructure for Bernie Sanders 2016. I’ve been involved in party politics and covering politics my entire adult life. I’ve never seen anything like this. Everything an official campaign staff usually delegates to volunteers, like canvasing and phone banks, has been organized solely by regular people. They teach each other how to campaign, how to primary or caucus, and how to lobby their neighbors. There are groups that identify other corporate Democrats with seats coming up in other offices, such as House and Senate races, as well as identify the Progressives who will run against them. This could be a complete overhaul of the party if Progressives get their way.
~snip~
Clinton loyalists will argue that the most divisive figure in modern American politics will somehow push a Progressive agenda she’s never really pushed for before better than any liberal can. She won’t. They buy fully into the branding wars of Coke versus Pepsi or Democrats versus Republicans. They justify themselves falsely as Progressives themselves, because they buy so heartily into the mantra that Republicans are evil, and that Hillary Clinton is the greatest enemy Republicans have ever known. Even though the Clinton and Bush families are close friends now. As close as their policies. Still, unlike the opposite scenario, when polled, a great deal of Hillary supporters say they would support Bernie Sanders if he wins the nomination. Progressive values do beat out branding on some level. With Bernie doing better in polls, fundraising, and crowd turnout than Obama did at this stage against Hillary, the progressive revolution has a real chance.
cont'
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/11/26/1454448/-The-Democratic-Revolution-Hasn-t-Been-Publicized
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Segami
(14,923 posts)My prediction? If Progressives jump ship, it will certainly help the Republicans take the White House as well as keep control of the House, Senate, and many Governor’s mansions. If Progressives win, Progressives will take the White House, the Senate and gain seats in the House and in Governor’s mansions. Quite simply because, if Progressives win, they will dominate with voter turnout...."
Hydra
(14,459 posts)Because if they do lose to a progressive, all of their caterwauling about how non-RW dems cannot win elections suddenly loses all weight.
Expect them to sabotage the party's chances to win in every way possible- that suits their agenda too. "The Professional Left won't vote for us, they're not realists! And we need more Republican votes, so we need to pull right even further!"
Scuba
(53,475 posts)reddread
(6,896 posts)send them back to their own party and constutuency.
people over money.
kath
(10,565 posts)
nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)
jeff47
(26,549 posts)in plenty of lower offices (Hi ex-Senator Lincoln!). The same logic applies to POTUS.
Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)
Divernan
(15,480 posts)
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)This article has it all pegged.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Parking is $10 and you will get your free premium ice cream once you enter. Sir... Sir.... I know your Volvo is top of the line but you have to park with everyone else.
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)The only concrete actions that can be taken are individually. The only change anyone can truly account for is ones own.
We live in the most change, the most honesty, the most reality, shareholders themselves cannot afford to block from the rest of the world. For every action they take, a fair shake is denied for someone else. It is no accident we are where we are. It is only by the efforts and labors of millions who care not who they harm as long as they profit that we are staring fascism in the face.
EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)I actually think that mantle would go to GW and Dick Cheney, but your point is well taken.
Hillary energizes many women, but her poll numbers among men are not so good. I also believe her support among blacks will not nearly approach Obama's numbers. What she will do is energize Republicans to vote. She is polarizing to them. Honestly, I do not know why as she embraces big business, and has very hawkish tendencies in foreign policy. I suppose it is her support of Planned Parenthood and reproductive rights that probably alienate Republicans the most, plus her initial involvement in health care in the early 90's. She's evolved on that issue, and now seems to favor more the plans Republicans were touting back then.
I actually think a lot of RW Hillary Hate comes from the election of Bill Clinton after 12 straight years of Republican Presidency and the expansion of talk radio diatribe. The Clinton's became villains to the right wing, and they were determined to recover the White House with investigation after investigation in the 90's of alleged scandals. Finally, the Monica Lewinsky incident gave them their treasure trove to justify their Clinton attacks. But, something happened to Hillary Clinton in the 2000's. She started turning more to insurance companies and away from a single payer approach, and became very hawkish most notably in the IWR vote, but her rhetoric in the Mideast became even more inflammatory. Her constant evolving has left many Progressives shaking their head wondering who the real candidate is, and even more importantly who she will be after the election.
She is divisive, but more so, she is perplexing, constantly evolving so much that the rest of us are left in a state of confusion with platitudes of just trust us.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)She's a capable woman- the great fear at the time of Bill's presidency is that she would be an equal partner or even be more the president than Bill. While that has mellowed a bit with time, Republicans are not misogynist without purpose. They have always been about disenfranchising women and minorities and blocking them from positions of power unless useful to their cause.
The (D) after her name. It may not be accurate, but RW'ers identify more with "Their Team" than what their team is ultimately offering. In most cases, they don't even know. The Third Way peeps though that should work the same with us, and to a certain extent it does. Hillary has excellent branding...you have to read the ingredients label though.
If she or President Obama ran as Republicans, I don't think you'd see 10% of the hate they are currently spewing.
senz
(11,945 posts)because she hasn't shown herself to be more capable than any other female Senator, Representative, or cabinet member. Nothing that she has done stands out -- except for her poor judgment in voting for the IWR and the general messiness she left in the Middle East. I noticed a definite uptick in our handling of foreign affairs when Kerry took over in 2013.
During the Clinton administration, her refusal to be "the little woman" did annoy Republicans -- maybe that's what you mean by "capable woman?" However, they also disliked her slipperiness in various legal matters -- losing documents and then finding them much later, etc. (I was so angry at Republicans for attacking the Clintons that I didn't pay much attention to the particulars of their charges.)
I do agree with you that Repubs would like her much better if she belonged to the Republican Party. But I've heard that the higher ups do like her for her corporatism and friendliness with Wall St.
