Reply #46: That's the first reasonable complaint I've seen on this thread.

[clear eye]

Your post is the only negative one that doesn't falsely accuse the bloggers of being happy about the situation and wanting Republican victory just because they analyzed public opinion correctly and tried to warn DC Dems. BTW, wouldn't a group that wanted a Dem defeat and saw a serious problem emerging KEEP IT QUIET AND TRY TO LET IT HAPPEN RATHER THAN SHOUT "DANGER!" FROM THE ROOFTOPS AND TRY TO GET THE GOV'T TO CORRECT THE ERROR?

It is riskier for progressives to organize street demonstrations than it is for rw teabaggers to do the same. For one thing, if they get out 25 people at a shot like most of the teabagger demos do, instead of the MSM saying how upset the American people are (like they do after every tiny teabagger demo), they will either disparage the small turnout and say it shows a lack of support, or not report it at all. Being blacked out of the media discourages the participants. For another, the corporatist-oriented gov't tends to refuse progressive groups permits, threatens to arrest progressive planners of unpermitted demos as "terrorists", and brings out scary maiming "non-lethal" weaponry if the demo is even moderately large.

All of the above doesn't mean progressives shouldn't "lead" as you put it, by daring to organize, set clear proposals, and mobilize. It just means it's harder for them than for teabaggers.

edited to add: Single payer activists have been regularly demonstrating in many places around the country in greater numbers than the teabaggers w/o getting a single line in the MSM.