Yesterday, Massachusetts turned into another debacle for the Democrats as Ted Kennedy's former Senate seat went to a Republican. It's a case of deja vu of what went down in Virginia last November - a defeat that I had been months earlier - and results not from the Democrats trending too liberal, but instead from their failure to deliver the change that the country so desperately wanted. The result: anger and a desire to punish the Democrats. Some are now saying that the Massachusetts defeat is a repudiation of Obama - and I believe that it is indeed - for all of his broken campaign promises. He's tried to please everyone and as a result has pleased no one. No one that is other than the banks that took the nation into recession, the health insurance industry and the drug manufactures. The average American has received nothing. Just last night as I walked down Duval Street, I saw a shop that had a sign "Where is my bailout?" in a prominent place in the front window. If Obama doesn't wake the Hell up, I see things as only getting worse as disappointed Democrats stay home this coming November or cast protest votes for Republican candidates. And Obama and the Congressional Democrats will have no one to blame but themselves. Here are highlights from a Huffington Post column that mirrors my view:*
It took more than half a decade, countless American and Iraqi deaths in a war based on lies, a sinking economy and the drowning of an American city to finally kill Bush-Cheney-Rove's dream of a conservative realignment. Democrats, controlling the White House and both houses of Congress, have managed to kill their own dream of dominance in 12 months. How did it happen?
*
Theories abound, but two diametrically opposed narratives have taken hold: The first, promulgated by conservatives, is that the new administration has moved too far to the left and alienated a large swath of independent and moderate voters. The second, pushed by progressive activists and bloggers, is that the administration hasn't been true enough to fundamental Democratic principles, has embraced some of Bush's worst excesses on civil liberties, and has ditched popular ideas (like the public option) in favor of watered down centrist policies, thus looking weak and ineffectual.
*
With a military surge in Afghanistan, a denuded health insurance bill limping through Congress, Bush-era detainee policies reinforced, a deflated climate summit, and a windfall year for bankers, among other things, it's almost ludicrous to claim that the new administration is run by a gang of lefties.
*
The case by progressives that Democrats are undermining themselves with faux-bipartisanship and tepid policies gets much closer to the heart of the problem.
*
But I'd like to suggest an additional explanation for the demise of Democratic fortunes, namely, that Democratic leaders made two crucial miscalculations in early 2009. A quick glance at the news a year ago today offers clues. On January 19th, 2009, CBS published the "Obama-Lincoln parallel." The Washington Post wrote about a "bear market for Republicans leaving the Hill or the administration." The same day, techPresident discussed "How the Obama Transition is Using Tech to Innovate." Elsewhere that day, LGBT bloggers were complaining that gay Bishop Gene Robinson's prayer was left out of HBO's live broadcast of the inaugural concert.
*
In that small selection of stories, key themes emerge: a) Obama is the next Lincoln; b) The Obama online revolution continues; c) Republicans are finished; d) a handful of progressives aren't buying it.
*
Looking back, it's not that difficult to see how the seeds of today's Republican resurgence were planted in those early days:
1. Democratic leaders and strategists, high on victory and awed by the Obama campaign's online prowess, underestimated the dormant power of the old rightwing message machine.
*
2. Democratic leaders and strategists, privately disdainful of the netroots, underestimated the influence of progressive bloggers. Nothing should have been a bigger red flag to the new administration than the growing complaints by established progressive bloggers that Democrats were veering off track on the stimulus, the health care bill, civil liberties, gay rights, and more. But scoffing at the netroots is second nature in many quarters of the political establishment
*
Progressive bloggers have been jumping up and down, yelling at their Democratic leaders that the path of compromise and pragmatism only goes so far. The limit is when you start compromising away your core values. I sincerely hope that's the lesson learned today.
It took more than half a decade, countless American and Iraqi deaths in a war based on lies, a sinking economy and the drowning of an American city to finally kill Bush-Cheney-Rove's dream of a conservative realignment. Democrats, controlling the White House and both houses of Congress, have managed to kill their own dream of dominance in 12 months. How did it happen?
*
Theories abound, but two diametrically opposed narratives have taken hold: The first, promulgated by conservatives, is that the new administration has moved too far to the left and alienated a large swath of independent and moderate voters. The second, pushed by progressive activists and bloggers, is that the administration hasn't been true enough to fundamental Democratic principles, has embraced some of Bush's worst excesses on civil liberties, and has ditched popular ideas (like the public option) in favor of watered down centrist policies, thus looking weak and ineffectual.
*
With a military surge in Afghanistan, a denuded health insurance bill limping through Congress, Bush-era detainee policies reinforced, a deflated climate summit, and a windfall year for bankers, among other things, it's almost ludicrous to claim that the new administration is run by a gang of lefties.
*
The case by progressives that Democrats are undermining themselves with faux-bipartisanship and tepid policies gets much closer to the heart of the problem.
*
But I'd like to suggest an additional explanation for the demise of Democratic fortunes, namely, that Democratic leaders made two crucial miscalculations in early 2009. A quick glance at the news a year ago today offers clues. On January 19th, 2009, CBS published the "Obama-Lincoln parallel." The Washington Post wrote about a "bear market for Republicans leaving the Hill or the administration." The same day, techPresident discussed "How the Obama Transition is Using Tech to Innovate." Elsewhere that day, LGBT bloggers were complaining that gay Bishop Gene Robinson's prayer was left out of HBO's live broadcast of the inaugural concert.
*
In that small selection of stories, key themes emerge: a) Obama is the next Lincoln; b) The Obama online revolution continues; c) Republicans are finished; d) a handful of progressives aren't buying it.
*
Looking back, it's not that difficult to see how the seeds of today's Republican resurgence were planted in those early days:
1. Democratic leaders and strategists, high on victory and awed by the Obama campaign's online prowess, underestimated the dormant power of the old rightwing message machine.
*
2. Democratic leaders and strategists, privately disdainful of the netroots, underestimated the influence of progressive bloggers. Nothing should have been a bigger red flag to the new administration than the growing complaints by established progressive bloggers that Democrats were veering off track on the stimulus, the health care bill, civil liberties, gay rights, and more. But scoffing at the netroots is second nature in many quarters of the political establishment
*
Progressive bloggers have been jumping up and down, yelling at their Democratic leaders that the path of compromise and pragmatism only goes so far. The limit is when you start compromising away your core values. I sincerely hope that's the lesson learned today.
No comments:
Post a Comment