PDA

View Full Version : Can Progressives Unite, or Will It Be the Same Old Bit-Politics Story?



ggoose25
07-13-2008, 11:03 PM
By Theda Skocpol - July 11, 2008, 6:41PM

Michael Kinsley has an incisive opinion piece at TIME/CNN called "Divided They Fall" -- and I urge everyone to read it. Kinsley points out that Republicans are setting aside their gripes about McCain and uniting to do battle, but progressives and Democrats are up to the same old internal sniping: single issue people bashing Obama for moving to the middle or voting a certain way on FISA, when his vote made no difference at all to the outcome; Clintonites using media sexism in the primary as an excuse to threaten to stay home or vote for McCain; fat cats who backed Clinton complaining to the New York Times, along with the blustering egotists like Carville; Jesse Jackson sniping about the common-sense notion that black people might have to be good parents as well as expect help from government.

This leaves one very sad. The social and redistributive stakes in this election are enormous. McCain can easily win if this summer is wasted, if Democrats do not unite and go on the offensive, if funders withold their efforts, if gripers undermine. But that seems to be what we are all doing.

I look back over an adult lifetime of this, of identity-oriented and single-issue groups undermining any chance for a convincing message relevant to all working middle class people. This lack of discipline and inability to sort out the fundamental from the partial is what has made it so hard for Democrats to win -- and has cost the country terribly in terms of the undermining of middle class wellbeing. Why are we doing it again? Why are we playing along with all the diversions and distractions the media wants to pursue, rather than speaking loudly with one voice for Obama and in drumbeat criticism of McCain? The summer weeks are precious, as we should have learned in 2004 -- mistakes now cannot be fixed later. At a moment when a core, long-term econmic advisor to McCain, Phil Gramm, has revealed the true heartlessness and stupidity behind conservative economic doctrines, we progressives are still talking about Jackson and FISA and Clinton's debts and overwrought claims of sexism. We are not hitting McCain/Gramm/Bush again and again in ways that would force some of the media, at least, to give the Gramm revelations -- they WERE revelations, not a "gaff" -- half the attention and staying power of the Wright ravings!

About ten days ago, I was finishing breakfast at my favorite diner, when I was joined by a well-known 60s-something feminist friend. I won't name her, but people would recognize and respect her if I did. We got to talking about the election, and she left me utterly depressed some 45 minutes later (during which I kept my patience and my cool while arguing, but felt devastated). She probably won't vote for Obama, she says, because she has to "punish" the Democratic party for its sexist treatment of Clinton. "We cannot wait" any longer for a woman president, she says, and she won't accept an "unqualified" man who "cannot win." She barely listened when I told her I could hardly believe what she was saying, that women above all suffer from the terrible economic policies that have been followed the past two decades. It makes a big difference for most working women, most families, who wins this fall -- because, as the research of Larry Bartels and others shows, Democrats follow very different social and tax policies. This is not just about abortion law. It is about the wellbeing of the middle and working strata in this country, and when they suffer, women and children suffer the most.

My friend was so tied up in her identity-politics bitterness she could not see the larger issues. Generations of women in American public life would be aghast at the navel-gazing nature of this sort of feminism, I realized. The women I wrote about in PROTECTING SOLDIERS AND MOTHERS, who always thought about the more vulnerable and families, would never understand an early-twenty-first-century kind of feminism that privileges bitterness and revenge about Hillary Clinton (who entered public life as a political spouse) over the wellbeing of the working nation's families. Jane Addams would not believe this.

I have been kind of depressed ever since that morning at the diner, especially because the supposedly progressive blogs are full of similar kinds of diversions -- and Obama's campaign is clearly being hurt by the lack of unity and discipline, as well as by its own tentativeness. I am not so sure progressives are going to do what is necessary to win -- even in this year when all the stars should be aligned. Unity and practical realism are the order of the day, and the fire must be directed outward, not inward. Can we do It?

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/11/can_progressives_unite_or_will/

-----------------------------------------------------------

This kind of weak shit makes me hate the ultra progressives of the Democratic Party. What is this feminist going to do? Retaliate with a vote that is completely counteractive to her over all goals and ideals out of spite?

Some one should slap her, and everyone else on the left who's bitching about Obama moving to the center. He's doing what he's got to to win.

Malik Rows
07-13-2008, 11:05 PM
The 100 true comrades or whatever are not going to decide this election.

ggoose25
07-13-2008, 11:25 PM
I wouldn't be so dismissive. This isn't 100 Commies. This is a large percentage of Clinton supporters who are too bitter to swallow some humble pie. All it takes is enough of them in some important states, and that's the election.

Malik Rows
07-13-2008, 11:27 PM
Obama will need to motivate the Clinton supporters (the run of the mill white rural/suburban ones, not the feminists from Pluto) to show up in November to win.

ggoose25
07-13-2008, 11:44 PM
yeah but the point is, how is going to do that effectively when he's got defend his left from attacks? It keeps him off his message to have to waste time and energy with that bullshit.

Malik Rows
07-13-2008, 11:53 PM
He should ignore them.

Nbadan
07-14-2008, 12:08 AM
Great thread....I think that there are just as many divisions within the Republican party as there are within the Democratic Party....fiscal conservatives don't support McCain and his support among evangelist, a traditional catalyst of votes for the GOP, is also very weak...the big difference I see is that the media shills, and I'm not just talking FAUX News, MSNBC and CNN, but also the major media conglomerates, ABC, NBC, and even CBS all play up the divisions within the Democratic Party while simultaneously downplaying the divisions within the Republican Party..

....you can see it happening on other issues too, for instance, how many times did the major media outlets play the Jesse Jackson comments? No one gives a fuck about Jesse Jackson, he has no part of the Obama camp, but the media saw a chance to up-play the divisions in the Democratic Party, now compare that to the comments by McCain's chief economic advisor, Phil Grahm about the U.S. being a nation of delusional whiners, or McCain comments about Social Security, many of these issues divide Republicans, but the M$M corporate media didn't play them that way....

Nbadan
07-14-2008, 01:26 AM
Incidentally (and in a rare instance), Republican Governator SCHWARZENEGGER did a interview on ABC that completely slams McSames and Dubyas stand on Global Warming and off-shore drilling....hot-button issues, but how many news outlets have played this as a division within the Republican Party?


kPsStAH_89c