|
I understand that this may very well, or even likely, be the most decisively important election in a generation (the last one I suppose being the election of Reagan). Obama is a pragmatist in the FDR strain who I at least HOPE will not stab progressive politics and progressives in the back the way that Clinton did.
But after the Powell endorsement, I think that it's a reasonably safe political conclusion that the only way the Repukes could win the prez is by underhanded means. Two of the main ones, that I will discuss here, are (1) the W Administration concocts some kind of "security-and/or-terrorism crisis" as a hail mary game changer AND/or (2) that the ongoing election stealing and vote-suppression efforts succeed in reaching a massive scale (millions of votes in a multiplicity of states). About (1), I posted a DU poll which got 90 respondents in which 52% of the respondents thought such a maneuver likely, although w/only a little over two weeks left, it gets more and more suspect if the W does it, and at least somewhat less likely, as international crises often take a bit of time to manufacture. Interestingly, the POLES of opinion constituted the majority (52% thought it more than likely, while 31% thought it only a 0-10% chance). Only 16% were in the middle, where I was, with a view that the figure would probably be closer to 50% than to 10% likelihood. But it is declining, perhaps even moreso with the Powell endorsement mucking up the chances of such succeeding.
So the chances are not only that Obama will win, but win by at LEAST 5% of the national vote, unless there is TRULY massive voter suppression. The Obama campaign has more money than any in history, and more is piling in from those who are NOT political mavens. Remember that most money given to candidates is as an investment, not for reasons of conscience, and even if that is proportionately less true of Obama, the factor is still huge.
So in terms of voting suppression issues, I would give to groups like Common Cause, who are focused on it, and also not specifically identified with either major political party. I would very much try to earmark such donations FOR THAT PURPOSE in THIS NATIONAL ELECTION.
But both the investment donors and the great mass of those interested enough in politics, LIKE DUers who should be precisely the mavens who would know better are NOT donating nearly enough to the seven or so closest Senate races (MN,NC,OR,GA,KY,Alaska and Mississippi). (I am figuring that NM, CO, and VA are NOT terribly close at all, and NH appears increasingly leaning Dem). The number of these 7 contested races that the Democrats win will determine just how much an Obama Administration would be able to get through Congress, so they are crucial as has rarely been the case before.
It is VERY important to have a "close senate race" thermometer up next to the presidential one, something I would urge on the Administrators. But DUers can donate to these close races ourselves, as I've done with Al Franken so far. I suppose one can also donate to the DSCC, which I've also done.
Finally, there is the issue of prop 8 in CA. I know there are TONS of ballot measures, and many of them, like prop 8, are of top tier importance morally and in national power politics. But this one (vote NO on 8 to stop a Constitutional Amendment in CA banning gay marriage) is important not only for the crucial moral issues underlying it (equal rights, the whole shmear ...), but also because it isn't just ANOTHER measure on this nationally contested issue, but the BIG LUBOWSKY (California). It is also a key national test of importance, both in terms of power politics and in terms of media, for progressive politics especially in ballot measures generally. A victory here will encourage progressives both in the area of gay rights and in pursuing an host of other concerns in ballot measures nation-wide. A defeat would be a significant setback, as I am arguing, both for gay rights in particular and for progressive politics generally, INCLUDING but not limited to gay rights. This is in NO way to understate the importance of gay marriage rights, or the moral and ethical issues here (as on so many other progressive measures). But there is also a CRUCIAL strategic issue that DUers and progressives often don't like to think about, seeing something 'dirty' in thinking about strategy. DUers should FLOCK to donate to Prop 8, which I hear little about in the general area discussion arenae
This is not to undercut Obama efforts or promote complacency, but rather to suggest that the tunnel vision we see in the mainstream as on DU needs to be transcended, and transcended now.
Responders to this comment (plz K & R) could also suggest which groups and URLs are good for donating to these concerns, and WHY
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
