Battle lines are being drawn. Finally. The Obama tax cut deal was a betrayal too far. And now Dump Obama has become part of the national dialogue big time. First there were a few squeaks. Then columns by Michael Lerner Save Obama’s presidency by challenging him on the left, and Clarence Jones Time to Think the Unthinkable: A Democratic Primary Challenge To Obama’s Reelection, among others. On the New York Times front page, Matt Bai of the Times wrote a skeptical piece Murmurs of Primary Challenge to Obama (demoted from its original title Talk on the Left of a Primary Challenge), in which he tellingly concludes:
should the president’s progressive critics warm to the idea, it might not take a particularly credible primary challenge to weaken Mr. Obama’s chances for re-election. It might only take a challenge designed to do exactly that.
This was followed by the inevitable counter-attack, from the likes of Ed Kilgore and David Broder, plus any number of lesser lights, touting three points:
(1) The tax cut deal was a masterful stroke — stimulating the economy and ensuring Obama’s re-election in 2012; and
(2) No “serious” challenger would dare risk their credibility and prestige by entering the primaries, the ultimate proof being that they haven’t done so yet.
(3) A primary challenge would only serve to harm the very Democratic Party that we all hold so dear.
Party operatives are showing up on the progressive blogs. [Here are a few giveaways when you meet them. They point out that Obama is Black (a guilt-tripping that was quite effective circa 1968, less so today). They refer to “our president.” And they love the phrase “get with the program.”]
Time for a fresh look
First let me make one thing absolutely clear so nobody has to waste excess keyboard energy. Nothing I do, think, infer, plan, gesticulate or condone is predicated on actually unseating Obama as the 2012 Democratic nominee or having a progressive defeat him in the general election. Got that? Nice if it happens, but not a precondition.
Okay. Now that Dump Obama has moved from the musings of a few of us fringe lefties to the mainstream, it’s beginning to take some shape. There are two main levels of division.
(1) ideology
We’ve been fixating on this one for a while. Dem primary vs. 3rd party. Hard left programmatics vs. populist liberal. Electoral politics vs. overthrowing the system. Perfecting the welfare state vs. socialism. It’s been fun, and at times illuminating. With Dump Obama being little more than a gleam in some of our eyes, what else ya gonna talk about? But that has run its course. The arguments are out there, repeated endlessly, my fingers grow tired. At this point, I don’t think a lot of minds are going to be changed on the merits of our ideological arguments. We move onto the terrain of …
(2) organizational forces
Allow me to digress here.
I’ve been spared a lot of work by other diarists on FireDogLake, actually. Both Bill Eignor (You Want Better Choices? Better Start Working Now) and Rayne (The Angry Left: Rougher Roads, Steeper Challenges to Get Here have written excellent and truly challenging pieces on the mechanics of gaining power within the Democratic Party. I consider both important because — while I have some differences — they show the kind of disciplined, hard work traditionally necessary to have even a little bit of influence within the party.
For my purposes, they also illustrate how — in the absence of an independent anchor — principled radicals get absorbed into the Democratic Party machinery. You pay your dues, do the committee work, make the calls, knock on the doors, build personal relationships, become trusted as a loyal worker, become chair of this or delegate to that. The premise is that — as a committed progressive — you rise in the party and begin to have some influence, toughen up this resolution, lobby that legislation. Ultimately, if enough do this, you and others like you will transform the party.
Today, we see the agony of that path
Democrats at every level are aghast at this tax deal. They complain. They amend. They pass resolutions and sign petitions, and mutter vague threats. A few are beginning to talk primary — in the abstract — only to shudder and step back.
Good. They are to be applauded. But in the aggregate they are not to be trusted (which doesn’t mean there aren’t trustworthy individuals among them). If the big name doesn’t step forward, they will curse their fate but stand helpless before the Obama center-right juggernaut. Their positions, their friendships, their deals, all work to hold them in line. If there were a serious surge to primary Obama, they would — I believe — tentatively, perhaps even joyfully join it. But they will not lead it.
Who will lead it? The rabble, we who do not have power within the party, we who do not fear being shunned because we are not dependent on party approval. We who are foolish enough to believe you should do something simply because it is right.
But there is a problem here. The party old guard is better organized than we are. They are more disciplined. They have more money. They have the media. They have the comfort of official validation. Having more to lose, they fight with a fierce determination. They are organizationally smarter, oh yes they are! It’s like the imperial British redcoats standing in solid ranks cutting down masses of spear-throwing natives. Yes, we natives get restless from time to time, but a few well-aimed volleys settle the matter quickly.
We’ll go independent? Good. Gets us out of their hair. We’ll stay home? Makes it easier to say the electorate has turned right.
They have one big problem.
History is on our side
This isn’t some comforting cosmic abstraction. After Obama was elected, some talked about political realignment, all excited. A long-lasting progressive majority, his election was only the beginning. We’ve got realignment, all right, but not realignment we can believe in. It’s an alliance of the Democratic Party centrists with the right and far right. The liberal majority of the Democratic Party are now labeled “fringe,” and are being cut loose. The tax deal fully embodies this. Some form of it will likely pass through an alliance of Obama, Blue Dogs, and Republicans.
The only alternatives are radical alternatives! WPA-style jobs program isn’t just some far-left scheme — it’s the only way this country will return to decent levels of unemployment. With the PERMANENT changes in the U.S. and world economy, only a full-scale recreation of a full-scale safety net will prevent millions and millions of Americans from being ground into the dirt, sick, homeless and starved. They talk about structural unemployment as though the answer were job-training programs. But the structural unemployment we face is one where millions and millions of jobs are just plain gone. NEVER to return, far beyond any conceivable re-training.
These millions of people are not the fringe. They are masses of the American people, and their plight casts a pall over every working American, every family considering their future, hoping to educate their kids, hoping against hope that they don’t get sick, hoping against hope that someday they’ll be able to live in a dignified retirement. The enormity of this is only beginning to strike home.
They are on the edge of having nothing to lose.
Yet they are cut adrift politically. Once the Democratic Party represented them, even if badly, even when it was in the minority. Now it makes no such pretense. Their needs are poison.
We the rabble, our disorganized hodge-podge of lefties and liberals and progressives and revolutionaries and ne’er-do-wells are their hope. We have to let that sink in.
What’s to be done?
The pundits are telling us that Dump Obama is irrational. Can’t win. Counter-productive. And by their rules, their boxes, their manipulations of outcomes, they are absolutely right and expect that they will always be absolutely right! I don’t give a flying fuck! Dump Obama sends the message that we are going to fight. And that establishes a new rationality. New rules. Our own.
So Dump Obama is beginning to go mainstream. There is a good likelihood now that there will be a primary campaign. Will a big name jump in, hoping to capitalize on our desperation and the political opening and the threat to those comfortable with the current state of affairs who are smart enough to see that Obama is bringing the entire party down? Maybe. Maybe not. Will a lesser figure jump in, someone with less to lose, maybe a Kucinich, maybe someone we’ve not heard of? I’d say there’s a good chance.
And what of our puny efforts here at FDL? Events are lurching out of control. If a major Democratic figure enters the race, they will hire established party operatives, the types whose greatest fear is that the left may do something embarrassing. Or that the left may gain an independent organizational foothold in the party, something they fear worse than losing, as they’ve proven many a time. If a minor Democratic figure enters, we’ll face the same problems on a lesser scale.
In any event, whoever primaries Obama will likely sell us out. I go into this with eyes wide open, you don’t have to warn me about being sold out. It comes with the territory.
But this is why our efforts are more important than ever. When that moment or moments arrive, we have to be there, ready to say no. Lose the primaries? Dig in organizationally. Learn how to play the game, as Rayne and Bill Eignor point out, but better. And why will we end up any better than generation after generation of idealists turned sellout? Because we can set up an independent anchor that liberals haven’t had since the trade union movement of the 30’s. And because the middle-of-the-road liberal options are no longer available.
It’s one thing for the system to buy people off when it has money. It gets harder when the system is broke. Progressives are still stunned that Obama isn’t making the customary gestures to mollify us, throw us a few bones and we’ll be good puppies. Instead, Obama and the punditocracy and the party regulars are telling us to get fucked. If there’s a double-dip recession, it will be our fault. We are being demonized. And I don’t just mean us fringies. I mean loyal Democrats who’ve believed in America all our lives.
So we lose the primaries? Go independent. Go independent and take our base, such as it is, with us. Independent politics is a larger force than in past days. It is an option. A Democratic Party breakaway leads to a different dynamic than the usual ideologically driven 3rd party. It can become a genuinely populist party, it can embody the needs of the abandoned American people. It can be big. And even a whiff of this is a powerful force. It gives us real leverage.
Some might not have the stomach for this kind of organizational infighting, been burned too many times, too many things they can’t swallow. No problem. We can’t take the Democratic base independent if there’s no independent anchor. There has to be a significant independent candidate. The opportunity is greater than ever, but I see remarkably little on that front. Get the independent track in motion.
The Democratic Party is in flux. It is right now in a state of shock. Can’t believe what Obama’s done to them. Can’t believe the dreams of 2008 were shattered so quickly. Progressives can fight or be destroyed. Established Democrats are riding the fence, threatened but still temporarily comfortable. We want them, but we can’t count on them.
So the leadership will have to come from we who have nothing to lose.
Battle lines are being drawn. Finally. The Obama tax cut deal was a betrayal too far. And now Dump Obama has become part of the national dialogue big time. First there were a few squeaks. Then columns by Michael Lerner <a href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/03/AR2010120304148.html?hpid=opinionsbox1>Save Obama’s presidency by challenging him on the left</a>, and Clarence Jones <a href=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/clarence-b-jones/time-to-think-to-unthinka_b_792237.html>Time to Think the Unthinkable: A Democratic Primary Challenge To Obama’s Reelection</a>, among others. On the New York Times front page, Matt Bai of the Times wrote a skeptical piece <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/08/us/politics/08bai.html?hp>Murmurs of Primary Challenge to Obama</a> (demoted from its original title Talk on the Left of a Primary Challenge), in which he tellingly concludes:
<blockquote>should the president’s progressive critics warm to the idea, it might not take a particularly credible primary challenge to weaken Mr. Obama’s chances for re-election. It might only take a challenge designed to do exactly that.</blockquote>
This was followed by the inevitable counter-attack, from the likes of Ed Kilgore and David Broder, plus any number of lesser lights, touting three points:
(1) The tax cut deal was a masterful stroke — stimulating the economy and ensuring Obama’s re-election in 2012; and
(2) No “serious” challenger would dare risk their credibility and prestige by entering the primaries, the ultimate proof being that they haven’t done so yet.
(3) A primary challenge would only serve to harm the very Democratic Party that we all hold so dear.
Party operatives are showing up on the progressive blogs. [Here are a few giveaways when you meet them. They point out that Obama is Black (a guilt-tripping that was quite effective circa 1968, less so today). They refer to “our president.” And they love the phrase “get with the program.”]
<b>Time for a fresh look</b>
First let me make one thing absolutely clear so nobody has to waste excess keyboard energy. Nothing I do, think, infer, plan, gesticulate or condone is predicated on actually unseating Obama as the 2012 Democratic nominee or having a progressive defeat him in the general election. Got that? Nice if it happens, but not a precondition.
Okay. Now that Dump Obama has moved from the musings of a few of us fringe lefties to the mainstream, it’s beginning to take some shape. There are two main levels of division.
<b>(1) ideology</b>
We’ve been fixating on this one for a while. Dem primary vs. 3rd party. Hard left programmatics vs. populist liberal. Electoral politics vs. overthrowing the system. Perfecting the welfare state vs. socialism. It’s been fun, and at times illuminating. With Dump Obama being little more than a gleam in some of our eyes, what else ya gonna talk about? But that has run its course. The arguments are out there, repeated endlessly, my fingers grow tired. At this point, I don’t think a lot of minds are going to be changed on the merits of our ideological arguments. We move onto the terrain of …
<b>(2) organizational forces</b>
Allow me to digress here.
I’ve been spared a lot of work by other diarists on FireDogLake, actually. Both Bill Eignor (<a href=http://my.firedoglake.com/somethingthedogsaid/2010/09/27/you-want-better-choices-better-start-working-now/>You Want Better Choices? Better Start Working Now</a>) and Rayne (<a href=http://my.firedoglake.com/rayne/2010/09/19/the-angry-left-rougher-roads-steeper-challenges-to-get-here/>The Angry Left: Rougher Roads, Steeper Challenges to Get Here</a> have written excellent and truly challenging pieces on the mechanics of gaining power within the Democratic Party. I consider both important because — while I have some differences — they show the kind of disciplined, hard work traditionally necessary to have even a little bit of influence within the party.
For my purposes, they also illustrate how — in the absence of an independent anchor — principled radicals get absorbed into the Democratic Party machinery. You pay your dues, do the committee work, make the calls, knock on the doors, build personal relationships, become trusted as a loyal worker, become chair of this or delegate to that. The premise is that — as a committed progressive — you rise in the party and begin to have some influence, toughen up this resolution, lobby that legislation. Ultimately, if enough do this, you and others like you will transform the party.
<b>Today, we see the agony of that path</b>
Democrats at every level are aghast at this tax deal. They complain. They amend. They pass resolutions and sign petitions, and mutter vague threats. A few are beginning to talk primary.
Good. They are to be applauded. But in the aggregate they are not to be trusted (which doesn’t mean there aren’t trustworthy individuals among them). If the big name doesn’t step forward, they will curse their fate but stand helpless before the Obama center-right juggernaut. Their positions, their friendships, their deals, all work to hold them in line. If there were a serious surge to primary Obama, they would — I believe — tentatively, perhaps even joyfully join it. But they will not lead it.
Who will lead it? The rabble, we who do not have power within the party, we who do not fear being shunned because we are not dependent on party approval, who are foolish enough to believe you should do something simply because it is right.
But there is a problem here. The party old guard is better organized than we are. They are more disciplined. They have more money. They have the media. They have the comfort of official validation. Having more to lose, they fight with a fierce determination. They are organizationally smarter, oh yes they are! It’s like the imperial British redcoats standing in solid ranks cutting down masses of spear-throwing natives. Yes, we natives get restless from time to time, but a few well-aimed volleys settle the matter quickly.
We’ll go independent? Good. Gets us out of their hair. We’ll stay home? Makes it easier to say the electorate has turned right.
They have one big problem.
<b>History is on our side</b>
This isn’t some comforting cosmic abstraction. After Obama was elected, some talked about political realignment, all excited. A long-lasting progressive majority, his election was only the beginning. We’ve got realignment, all right, but not realignment we can believe in. It’s an alliance of the Democratic Party centrists with the right and far right. The liberal majority of the Democratic Party are now labeled “fringe,” and are being cut loose. The tax deal fully embodies this. Some form of it will likely pass through an alliance of Obama, Blue Dogs, and Republicans.
The only alternatives are radical alternatives! WPA-style jobs program isn’t just some far-left scheme — it’s the only way this country will return to decent levels of unemployment. With the PERMANENT changes in the U.S. and world economy, only a full-scale recreation of a full-scale safety net will prevent millions and millions of Americans from being ground into the dirt, sick, homeless and starved. They talk about structural unemployment as though the answer were job-training programs. But the structural unemployment we face is one where millions and millions of jobs are just plain gone. NEVER to return.
These millions of people are not the fringe. They are masses of the American people, and their plight casts a pall over every working American, every family considering their future, hoping to educate their kids, hoping against hope that they don’t get sick, hoping against hope that someday they’ll be able to live in a dignified retirement. The enormity of this is only beginning to strike home.
They are on the edge of having nothing to lose.
Yet they are cut adrift politically. Once the Democratic Party represented them, even if badly, even when it was in the minority. Now it makes no such pretense. Their needs are poison.
We the rabble, our disorganized hodge-podge of lefties and liberals and progressives and revolutionaries and ne’er-do-wells are their hope. We have to let that sink in. What have we got to lose?
<b>What’s to be done?</b>
The pundits are telling us that Dump Obama is irrational. Can’t win. Counter-productive. And by their rules, their boxes, their manipulations of outcomes, they are absolutely right and expect that they will always be absolutely right! I don’t give a flying fuck! Dump Obama sends the message that we are going to fight. And that establishes a new rationality. New rules. Our own.
So Dump Obama is beginning to go mainstream. There is a good likelihood now that there will be a primary campaign. Will a big name jump in, hoping to capitalize on our desperation and the political opening and the threat to those comfortable with the current state of affairs, because THEY’RE making it? Maybe. Maybe not. Will a lesser figure jump in, someone with less to lose, maybe a Kucinich, maybe someone we’ve not heard of? I’d say there’s a good chance.
And what of our puny efforts here at FDL? Events are lurching out of control. If a major Democratic figure enters the race, they will hire established party operatives, the types whose greatest fear is that the left may do something embarrassing. Or that the left may gain an independent organizational foothold in the party, something they fear worse than losing, as they’ve proven many a time. If a minor Democratic figure enters, we’ll face the same problems on a lesser scale.
In any event, whoever primaries Obama will likely sell us out. I go into this with eyes wide open, you don’t have to warn me about being sold out. It comes with the territory.
But this is why our efforts are more important than ever. When that moment or moments arrive, we have to be there, ready to say no. Lose the primaries? Dig in organizationally. Learn how to play the game, as Rayne and Bill Eignor point out, but better. And why will we end up any better than generation after generation of idealists turned sellout? Because we can set up an independent anchor that liberals haven’t had since the trade union movement of the 30’s. And because the middle-of-the-road liberal options are no longer available.
It’s one thing for the system to buy people off when it has money. It gets harder when the system is broke. Progressives are still stunned that Obama isn’t making the customary gestures to mollify us, throw us a few bones and we’ll be good puppies. Instead, Obama and the punditocracy and the party regulars are telling us to get fucked. If there’s a double-dip recession, it will be our fault. We are being demonized. And I don’t just mean us fringies. I mean loyal Democrats who’ve believed in America all our lives.
So we lose the primaries? Go independent. Go independent and take our base, such as it is, with us. Independent politics is a larger force than in past days. It is an option. A Democratic Party breakaway leads to a different dynamic than the usual ideologically driven 3rd party. It can become a genuinely populist party, it can embody the needs of the abandoned American people. It can be big. And even a whiff of this is a powerful force. It gives us real leverage.
Some might not have the stomach for this kind of organizational infighting, been burned too many times, too many things they can’t swallow. No problem. We can’t take the Democratic base independent if there’s no independent anchor. There has to be a significant independent candidate. The opportunity is greater than ever, but I see remarkably little on that front. Get the independent track in motion.
The Democratic Party is in flux. It is right now in a state of shock. Can’t believe what Obama’s done to them. Can’t believe the dreams of 2008 were shattered so quickly. Progressives can fight or be destroyed. Established Democrats are riding the fence, threatened but still temporarily comfortable. We want them, but we can’t count on them.
So the leadership will have to come from we who have nothing to lose.
Tweet
62 Comments
Editor’s note: Diaries and comments expressed by each of MyFDL’s community members are the opinions of the individual community member author and do not reflect the opinions of MyFDL or Firedoglake and its affiliate sites. See About Us.
Rayne… you either need to put that “Editor’s Note” of yours on every single post, or on no posts at all.
You need to stop putting that note on that “Editor’s Note” post on just on posts you personally disapprove of.
It’s gotten a little obvious.
It’s not funny watching both party regulars teaming up in a smoke filled room to take the unemployed hostage and then have the nerve to send Obama out to do a kabuki theater show as the “good” in a good guy bad guy ( the GOP) routine. Do they really think were all that stupid? That we don’t know what they’re doing here? Plus, using all of this to go after SSI as well with the unprecedented attack on the SSI – Medicare pay check deduction. This was another example of how dishonest and how slick this guy is. His own hand picked aptly called “Cat food Commission” didn’t get what he wanted so he had plan B in his back pocket with this attack on SSI in this so called “compromise.” What did the GOP compromise is the big ?
I agree Jeff it’s time to get serious about dumping this guy he’s obviously a “Manchurian Candidate” from the right.
Adam503 — let me know when you get offered the editor’s gig, m’kay?
jeffroby knows why the editor’s note is required, and frankly by now, you should, too. No community member speaks for FDL or MyFDL and it needs to be clear to all other readers that this is the case, particularly when community members have clouded this distinction.
Yes. At one point an enthusiastic supporter started a Dump Obama Facebook page and gave FDL as the address. Upon being notified that this was a problem, I immediately had that person remove the link, and it remains removed, and in fact, that Facebook page seems to have been inactive for some time.
But clarity is important.
Rayne — you let us know when you intend to let anybody else get a chance to do the editor’s gig, m’kay?
jeffroby can see like we all can see that the editor note is NOT required, and only appears on those post you disagree with, rayne. Everybody can see that note only appears when you decide it’s going to appear.
You’ve been acting pretty high school about it, too.
Adam, I appreciate the sentiment, but Rayne helps burnish my “outlaw” image which I so desperately crave. She missed one a while back, and I felt so abandoned. I’d rather know what you think about the diary.
Adam503, apparently you need a reminder about the rules.
You have a beef with editing or moderation, you can email me; you’ve proven you know how to contact me.
In the mean time, you’re done here with this line of commentary which is derailing conversation about jeffroby’s post. You can either comment about the “Dump Obama” effort or you can find something else to do.
Recommended.
It’s good.
I’m thinking long term… 20 year plan.
There’s all the money we’ll need out there to pay off this mess but you got to look long term. Nano-tech is coming. Space mining of near-Earth objects and asteroids is coming in the next 20 years.
We need to start now and get a New left third party built so that when those tech breakthroughs happen, the party-building is done, and we’re in position to move the far right out of power for good.
You haven’t solved your problem, Rayne
You need to decide whether your “Editor’s notes” are going on EVERY POST…
…or they are going on NO POSTS.
The current system of “Rayne’s personal editor’s note of disapproval” that only appear on posts and authors Rayne doesn’t like is clearly BROKE.
that goes double for me :)
“So we lose the primaries? Go independent. Go independent and take our base, such as it is, with us. Independent politics is a larger force than in past days. It is an option. A Democratic Party breakaway leads to a different dynamic than the usual ideologically driven 3rd party. It can become a genuinely populist party, it can embody the needs of the abandoned American people. It can be big. And even a whiff of this is a powerful force. It gives us real leverage.”
Yes… and no.
Jeff and I have had some public debate about this (and my fingers are tired too). But the one flaw in thinking a third party can “break away” from the Democratic Party AFTER losing the primaries is in the history/tradition of what happens after a primary loss: The challenger “throws their support” to the incumbent. And in the case of this incumbent, that – in my opinion – is NOT an option.
I am of the firm belief that whatever candidate we recruit as the primary challenger must agree – upon their recruitment – that they will (a) fully support the platform we write and (b) run as the candidate of the thrid party in the general. No “throwing support,” no “rallying ’round the victor.” These erstwhile “unification tactics” no longer hold water when, in our current “two party” system, we are really talking about two wings of the SAME party: the Fascist Party.
To me, the point of primarying Obama is not to dump him, but to give the Left a real voice at the national level in this country again; to bring together Greens, Socialists, Independents, disaffected Dems, Working Families Party members – and all others who see what our UniParty is doing to the middle class, the poor, and PEACE. They are destroying all of these, and without strong, organized, and unremitting pushback from an organization that outlives the electoral calendar and thrives with the spirit of real progressive values, they will succeed in doing so.
We chose 10 prospecitve candidates here about a month ago. Looking at that list, I cannot imagine one who agreeing to the above demands. But we need to approach each and ask, if only to prove the degree to which displaced party loyality continues to trump genuine interest in the welfare of everyday American citizens and world peace.
“These erstwhile “unification tactics” no longer hold water when, in our current “two party” system, we are really talking about two wings of the SAME party: the Fascist Party.” Exactly! Were all being played by the “thing” in the middle of both parties the CORPORATIST elite. Obama wasn’t really negotiating against anyone he was merely having a meeting with his Corporatist allies in the GOP and then coming out to play a phony good cop bad cop game with us. He’s a real piece of work. He thinks he’s so clever.
I agree with Adam, Rayne. I’ve never seen this “warning note” on any other myFDL diary, and i read a LOT of them.
This is an excellent diary, jeffroby. Thank you.
What you outline would be ideal. But if we ran a complete unknown who brought no resources to the table, what would be our ballot access capacity? A condition for your preferred option is to have a candidate in the primaries who could actually end up with a base of support. Otherwise there’s nothing to swing over.
A likely scenario might be that a candidate or several enters the primaries for reasons of their own, so to speak. If we could not generate a significant run under our own steam, it would behoove us to back the best primary candidate in the race.
In that scenario, the swing-over vote would depend on our own organizational strength, not the blessings of the candidate. As far as bringing together Greens, Socialists, etc., that would again depend on our own organizational strength. There would have to be a certain critical mass before these forces could overcome their perhaps parochial interests.
I do not think we could form a new party through a breakaway. Rather, there would have to be such a party in place, and we could then strive to break away SUPPORT for that party.
At the same time, I think it important that we also use the campaign to build an independent organization WITHIN the Democratic Party. Not everyone is going to be eager to abandon the Democratic Party, and I am not eager to abandon those people.
Ditto!
Hey Mr. Seaglass. You are right on again.
What a sad state it is, that bastards from outer space can rule us here… !
Hey are you sure that is impossible?
Or is it possible that we… [ the humans ] are full of baloney
Yes, Jeff this diary was indeed masterful. Your arguments are sharpening and the message is gaining force.
I recently watched the multi-episode series “John Adams” with Paul Giamatti playing the role of Adams. Couldn’t help but sense the parallels to our challenges in these times. So many of those who are now the revered “Founders” were detested and labeled traitors not just by England, but by many colonial Americans as well. Many early patriots were considered “hotheads” and rash activists. There was a place for outrage, unlike today where politicians are immediately marginalized if they dare drop the “smiley faced” crap.
Finally, I just want to say, again, that most of those polled nowadays identify themselves as Independents rather than D’s or R’s. One issue that cuts across ALL ideological lines is outrage over the banks and their collaborators on Wall Street. A forceful position against these criminals would go a long way toward attracting Independents to the cause. In fact, as an issue, it is a gift to any fledgling movement. To NOT take advantage of it would be a colossal mistake.
Thanks again for a fabulous diary.
Thank you for the Adams reminder. History is indeed on our side.
This is not a new idea. I want to vote in 2012. I just don’t want to vote for a Republican who claims he is Democratic. The only people he deals with is the Republicans, and they don’t deal. They demand and he capitulates. He just doesn’t get it.
I have had enough of Obama. He has no backbone and he needs a tour in a war zone to find one.
Whether anyone runs against him is immaterial unless some miracle happens. If my choice is between Obama and not voting, I WILL NOT VOTE! And I worked for Obama in NH the last election! Never again. He’s a wimp who back-stabs his base on a consistent basis and I am going to that proverbial window and I am going to shout that I am not going to take it anymore. When your own person you elected is a bigger enemy than the Republicans, it is time to start over! He has yet to produce anything of significance for his base.
Then, to add insult to injury, he blames his base. This man has got to go! He’s a multi-millionaire. I am sure he can afford to get laid off!
Me too.
It looks like some kind of petty personal issue that is really far beneath what I expect to find at FDL and makes me worry and feel unwelcome.
But what do I know?
I know this is the wrong thread for it, but this morning I thought of a new name for it, The Mule Party.
I was inspired by one of my favorite tunes from one of my favorite bands,
Gov’t Mule – “Get Behind The Mule” 11/2/2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEuH2N7FRoE&feature=related
What I like about the Mule Party is it kicks ass. It is a second generation from the donkey used by the Democrats, it implies it is bigger, tougher, smarter and has a lot of history behind it of being blended from disparate parts. Plus it is pulled from a completely awesome band who do NOT have a patent on the name.
In fact, if they like our politics … it will be nothing but good for us.
I want to thank you for doing this work. I think it is really, really important.
I also want to know what the back up plan is for including my ideas and input if I get blocked from this site for expressing my actual opinion because the moderator decides I am a person with too many ‘issues’ to be allowed to speak here any longer.
The Tea Party was in fact my idea. Not only did I think it up, I talked the people doing it into doing it. It took me years to do it too. I’m not always PC.
I am completely brilliant when it comes to thinking up new ideas, I have always been like that, and I am a trained leader. One thing that comes along with my outstanding ideation-ability is the (bad) habit of not being as sensitive to the prejudice and small minded comfort zones of others, as is required by polite discourse. Especially when I’m discussing politics, where at times I think it is necessary to discuss things like race disparities and class privilege.
I try to discuss those issues civilly, but if site managers don’t like my view of a certain religious or political group, zip, my ‘voice’ is eliminated.
Funny how only one religion we can’t mention out loud can be so sacrosanct as to be off limits to criticism entirely, while another (my own) is so completely verboten it is actually illegal.
So if I get deleted for my un-approved of religious and political perspectives, where can I meet you to talk politics? AlterNet?
Even the opinions trumpeted by GOPer-paid bloggers ? Still, there’s a silver lining to this crap:
JOBS, JOBS, JOBS for GOPer-99er boiler room bloggers !!
fullcourtprez at comcast dot net
Thanks. I’m kindgsl at gmail dot com
Hopefully it won’t be necessary. Hopefully my ideas won’t be banned.
Funny.
With notes sounded that continue GOPer attempts to induce the External Locus of Control mental disfunction.
Them nasty external forces do control your lives, your future, how oyu part yer hair.
Phony.
“At the same time, I think it important that we also use the campaign to build an independent organization WITHIN the Democratic Party. Not everyone is going to be eager to abandon the Democratic Party, and I am not eager to abandon those people.”
There already is one, the PCCC. On top of which, I think the terms “independent” and “within” are mutually exclusive, no?
As far as I’m concerned, those who are not eager to abandon the Democratic party are the problem – not the solution. It is eagerness of corporations to abandon their employees that is largely responsible for the mess we’re now in, and the Democratic Party is just one more corporation that has abandoned its people, IMO. Until we show equal willingness to abandon it, they have no incentive to change.
The Democratic Party is dead at the national level, and is a false enticement to would-be involved citizens at the local and state levels, for as they rise in the org, as you note, Jeff, they are co-opted and coerced into cooperation – or they are abandoned.
I keep talking about organizing and mobilizing the working class. But I will settle for rabble rousing. I am a long time member of the rabble and I can tell you that many are already ripe for rousing and many more are ripening. The main street economy just keeps getting worse. Witness the explosion in food stamp use.
Congrats on this post jeffroby. For the first time I feel like I understand what you are talking about. A break away Democrat would have certain advantages over a third party candidate. And I agree that dump Obama is the right rallying call to get a movement moving.
I would like to see Jane, Trumka, Ron Paul, Kucinich and some experienced outsiders like Nader and Ventura have a sit down to discuss the problem of Fascism. The opposition must focus on the restoration of freedom, democracy and the rule of law. Citizens must be assured that single issues such as health care, immigration, black, gay and woman’s rights will be settled by the people once democracy is restored.
The rabble rousing rhetoric must be focused on justice. Justice for the criminals who have stolen our livelihood and our government and our future. And Americans must be reintroduced to the concept of government by consent of the governed.
“For the first time I feel like I understand what you are talking about. A break away Democrat would have certain advantages over a third party candidate.”
Thank you. There had to be actual developments in the world before I could move from a more abstract approach to dealing with concrete motion.
“For the first time I feel like I understand what you are talking about. A break away Democrat would have certain advantages over a third party candidate.”
Thank you. There had to be actual developments in the world before I could move from a more abstract approach to dealing with concrete motion.
“As far as I’m concerned, those who are not eager to abandon the Democratic party are the problem – not the solution”.
Agreed. Partisan Democrats should be courted and encouraged to bolt the party. They should NOT be encouraged to remain. The Democratic and Republican parties stand between the people and the restoration of freedom, democracy and the rule of law.
Actually, the Mule Party “get behind the mule” is an excellent idea. I believe it would resonate with the people. Educated middle class liberals? Not so much.
Great post Jeff and Adam I totally agree with a 20 plus year plan.
to mal and workingclass both:
“the terms “independent” and “within” are mutually exclusive, no?”
No. The difference between having a piece of bread in your stomach, or a stone. I don’t want to play little word games here. The diary addressed this at some length. The issue is, what does it take to MAINTAIN independence. Ever hear of DSOC (later DSA)? An attempt that failed because it strove mightily to pull would-be independents INTO the Democratic Party. I propose no such thing.
As for the PCCC, they are a classic “target the worst” group, which I’ve addressed at some length elsewhere:
http://www.docudharma.com/diary/18367/we-deal-in-change
Evidence of their shortcomings: not a peep about primarying Obama. Rather, they are a competitor to the DCCC. But like the DCCC and ActBlue, they fetishize winning, and that starts them down the slippery slope.
But you seriously go astray with “As far as I’m concerned, those who are not eager to abandon the Democratic party are the problem – not the solution.” First of all, we have to deal with the fact that a majority of Democrats aren’t about to leave the party in the immediate future.
Secondly, as soon as you start blaming the people, you are in trouble. There is always a case to make in the realm of logic, if only this, if only that. One can make just about any argument, and justify your rightness with something like, “people are just too stupid to understand how right I am.” You may sleep better for it, but it doesn’t change anything.
We have to deal with people as they are. Please note that I am trying to move the discussion from the realm of ideology to the realm of organization. That requires grasping the realities of people in motion, or not in motion, assessment of real possibilities. It’s much harder.
This is why I state above, “They are organizationally smarter, oh yes they are!” This is why they think they can so smugly have radicals for breakfast.
Yes, building something independent within the Democratic Party is a tough and nasty business. This is why I admire Bill Eignor and Rayne, despite our serious disagreements. We have to learn from them, and then go one better.
I haven’t heard anyone trumpet the possibility of Bill Richardson/NM. Two other thoughts… It would be very news worthy, if it’s possible to do, to vote as early as possible in the Demo Primary and then have a mass exodus to the independent party, perhaps a “leaving the democrats” day. And before this primary idea is going to get off of the ground there has to be some money involved. Perhaps someone with Soros ear could ask him how a fund could be set up to put money in the alternate party before the candidate with the correct qualifications is chosen.
“I am completely brilliant when it comes to thinking up new ideas, I have always been like that, and I am a trained leader. One thing that comes along with my outstanding ideation-ability is the (bad) habit of not being as sensitive to the prejudice and small minded comfort zones of others, as is required by polite discourse.” Yes, and your also extremely modest as well. ;)
I think it’s past time that we all realize that we essentially live in a one-party state ( the $$$ party as Ralph nader has accurately called it) it has two wings or teams the blue ( Dems.) team and the red ( Gopers) team but at the end of the day they both belong to the same group in our society “rich people”. It’s always been this way to an extant, but the difference today is both wings are hell-bent on bankrupting the rest of us. Neither party leadership seems to any longer have a civic ethic which puts the greater good ahead of individual greed and we all see the results.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Obama run as a Republican. If the Republicans hadn’t been so busy falsely trashing him as a liberal and a Socialist, they could have co-opted him saying see he wants everything we want. He knows we’re right and he works for us… well, yeah except for the GBLT-DADT thingie
The emphasis on justice is critical. No movement or political party can bring real change we can really believe in without having a plan to establish social and economic justice. Yes, it may be hard or even impossible to accurately define, but every human being feels the concept in his or her gut.
It’s possible. Not likely, IMO, from where I sit, but possible. The only historical example I can think of, however, is Teddy Roosevelt challenging Taft for the Republican nomination in 1912, and then running as the Bull Moose Progressive candidate and actually getting more popular and electoral votes than Taft did.
However, the Democrat won the general, and the Republican Party moved even further into the Big Business camp. Ironically, it can be argued that Teddy’s brave, independent run actually moved his old rival the Democratic Party further to the left instead of his own.
Right you are, Rayne. Dump Obama is exactly what needs to happen in 2012, starting now. Obama is a con man, an ineptitude with no principles, and no concern whatsoever for this country and its people. He is a disaster. Both the Democrat and Republican parties need to disappear in favor of parties that do represent the people.
You’ve got to admit it’s better than Jason’s usual stamp of disapproval was though:
(which is not my personal opinion.)
Not to mention tiresome in its abuse of the site’s rules and Rayne’s moderator powers.
Indeed.
Ya know, when pretty much everyone else agrees that Rayne is abusing her moderator status, I think it’s a sign that it’s Rayne, and not Adam or anyone else, who needs to stop derailing the thread.
I don’t think that your use of the phrase “pretty much everyone else” is indicative of anything more than the handful or people who have chosen to comment above.
The blogosphere has millions of other sites that are just waiting for your insights.
Yet I, the one who is supposedly the victim of this abuse, really don’t give a shit. I’d prefer that people be discussing the issues I’m trying to raise. I didn’t write this to become your poster child.
I’m for anything that gets that corrupt carpetbagger Richardson out of my fair state.
What we need is a two phase plan.
Bernie could run – do a Bernie’s kids like McCarthy and weaken Obama making way for a Democrat to come in like RFK to make the real challenge. Might even need a 3rd phase to run a 3rd party candidate if that fails.
Point is — we need to stop conceding the game. Make them fight us all the time. Make it cost them to oppose us always.
Perhaps Mr. Z best describes what I think about all of this kerfuffle.
Are you threatening me?
Exactly.
Even then, the shift in the political dynamic was significant. Progressives found a home in the Democratic Party and took it over to a large extent, and their hold on it lasted for decades. So even if a third party challenge fails to unseat Obama, the resulting shift in the political makeup of at least one of the two major parties would work to our advantage. Sadly, I don’t see any Democrats today willing and able to mount such a challenge.
So, define “going one better” Jeff. If everything we’ve tried to reform the Democratic Party hasn’t worked – and we’ve tried everythign short of what I’m proposing – what would call the next step?
And before you answer, consider how disappointed you’ll be when IT FAILS.
“before you answer, consider how disappointed you’ll be when IT FAILS.”
Funny how you and Kwiatkowski sometimes sound alike.
“define “going one better” Jeff. If everything we’ve tried to reform the Democratic Party hasn’t worked – and we’ve tried everythign short of what I’m proposing – what would call the next step?”
We haven’t tried everything (or even everythign). What’s different from, for instance, DSOC or DSA? They did not have a large independent movement to work with, and for such independent motion that did exist, their goal was to suck independents INTO the Democratic Party.
Their has been a large parsing of the independent electorate, somehow claiming that many of them were in fact Democrat-leaners, or Republican-leaners. As though this somehow negated the fact that their refusal to register with Dems or Republicans meant something.
A second mode of categorizing independents as insignificant is to plug them into the numbers game. What percentage of the electorate do the non-leaner independents with a left left politic add up to? I think that evaluating things primarily as percentages of the electorate is a losing game. While not disregarding percents, you also have to look at raw numbers, what constitutes critical mass if organized and mobilized? The Tea Party folks are very good at this, and have moved the country despite the sneers of official liberalism. And no, it’s not just because they have corporate money.
What these independents do is allow progressives within the Democratic Party to operate outside the rules of the Democratic Party.
As for “going one better,” I’m surprised that you’re so mystified by this. What I’m trying to impress upon people is that the left is a disorganized rabble (see what coordinated work you can get out of the Primary Obama people here in the short run), up against hardened professionals. We have to learn some serious organizational skills. Once we learn them, we can use them all sorts of ways other than trying to pick off the most reactionary Dems.
There are all sorts of things that can be done with an inside/outside strategy. But you seem to think the inside track is some unfortunate short-term tactic to be abandoned as quickly as possible.
I think not.
And oh yeah, there’s this situation where the empire is in decline and the system lacks the means to do the cheap payoffs that have held progressives in line for 80 years.
Things like that actually make a difference.
reply to themalcontent:
who said “and we’ve tried everythign short of what I’m proposing”.
No way is this true. Not even close. See, e.g., my own diary Recommended Short and Long Term Voting Strategies for the Dump Obama Movement, wherein progressives selectively, strategically, and collectively would vote for Democrats, Greens, or Republicans (but mostly Democrats at the federal level), as a way of exerting their political muscle.
Under this strategy, most progressives who are registered Democrats would maintain their membership in the Democratic Party. What they wouldn’t do is practice the failed and stupid strategy of lesser evilism, by which they set themselves up to be saps of the Democratic Party ‘pros’.
Also, so far there has been no organization to facilitate a nation-wide, progressive-coordinated implementation of Rayne’s roadmap. (Maybe FDL has a plan, which is secret, I don’t know.) I suppose this roadmap overlaps with the PDA’s activities, but the PDA is not so explicit, and neither the PDA, nor FDL, nor Rayne has come up with numerical estimates of man-hours per year, much less a facility for tracking how well man-hour targets are being met.
While not everybody could relate to that idea, to a person like myself, I’d like some sort of reasonably precise feedback mechanism to know how close to hitting a milestone, progressives really are. In any event, I’ll guess that civic participation of a Rayne-like roadmap is only 10% of what it should be, by progressives, absolute max. If this is correct, then you are 90% wrong, even in just this area.
IMO, the key things that defines independence, even within the Democratic Party, are
a) lines in the sand, and
b) exceptions being allowed only by bottom up votes of the progressive vote blocs which are involved. In a democracy, nobody gets everything they want, and compromise is a feature, not a bug. A rule, not the exception. However, the compromises should be acceptable to the voters who gave a particular legislator his/her job. We’re not seeing that with our current cast of losers. (Think “public option”, e.g.)
Right now, there’s not a well-developed infrastructure for even minimalist voting blocs which can effectively carry out b). Thus, all progressives – or any other potential voting bloc – can manifest, right now, are lines in the sand.
The “dump all Democrats in favor of Greens at the state level” part of my voting strategy suggestions can also be carried out without developing any new democratic infrastructure, at all.
We can’t make the Democratic Party processes transparent anytime soon. All that investment bank money has corrupted the process inside the Democratic Party.
The only way we can be sure to have fully transparent party process now is by doing it from the start of a new 3rd party. We’ve got to be transparent even if the GOP and Dems aren’t. It’s going to be one of the main ways we gain the trust of voters.
Richardson is a Clinton loyalist.
Clinton’s bank deregulation law caused the whole damn sub-prime mortgage global derivatives meltdown!