|
We as progressives have pulled off incredible victories within the Democratic party, but we've also been dismayed when centrism and beltway-syndrome have prevailed over our ideas. We've exposed the corrupt Republicans and set the tone for an historic Democratic electoral takeover, but we've also seen the GOP continue to push us around when our aggressive stances aren't palatable to party leadership.
When we succeed, it's because we want what's best for democracy, not the Democratic party. We aren't ammassing political points or consolidating power. We are trying to put more power in the hands of the people, and it just so happens that our ideas match up pretty well with what the majority of Americans want.
Democrats in Washington have been behind the curve on the War in Iraq, but it was much worse before progressives proved that public opinion was ahead of them, showing that Iraq was not a sore subject but would be the central focus of the 2006 elections. The netroots showed that withdrawing from Iraq was the right thing to do when Ned Lamont beat Joe Lieberman for the Democratic nomination.
The lesson that the party took away from this should have been "trust the grassroots" and "empower the people" but instead, campaigning on the Iraq War was the right thing to do because it could win the election for the Democrats. The War in Iraq came to be seen as a great big hammer that could be used to repeatedly whack the Republicans over the head with.
2008 will be different. We cannot stake electoral success on the issue of Iraq.
Progressives know better than to do this, not only could a lot happen in 415 days, but this is not what makes us effective. Progressives' ideas get promoted when the interests of real people are promoted. Democrats will get elected if they champion progressive causes like Global Warming, Universal Healthcare, Stem Cells (heck, even Medicinal Marijuana), all things that a majority of Americans want - "mainstream" if you will.
Democrats cannot lean on the War as their lead issue. For starters, many supported it to begin with, while others did not, there is no consensus within the party on what to do, and nothing has changed so far despite the Democrats being put back in control. And it isn't going to get any better in the next 415 days either. Progressives represent the will of the American people on this - they want the War ended now. But they're not being listened to in Washington right now, and to be honest, there's a pretty good chance that the left wing of the party won't get to decide the outcome of the Iraq War.
A small group of Republicans and Democrats could end up forming a crucial bipartisan swing vote, much like the "Gang of Twelve". If so, then John E. Sununu will be among them.
From today's New York Times:
After the Iraq Study Group report was released last December, offering a blueprint for changing course in Iraq, it rocketed to the top of bestseller lists and more than 1.5 million copies were downloaded from the Internet. But the reader who mattered most, President Bush, quickly shelved it.
Now, with the Bush administration?s own assessment showing limited progress in Iraq and an increasingly exasperated Congress once again debating the future of the war, a growing number of senators from both parties are making a new push to adopt the study group?s recommendations into law.
Supporters of the study group plan say that it has the best chance, of the many war proposals ricocheting around Capitol Hill, of unifying Democrats intent on forcing the administration to shift its war strategy and Republicans who have criticized the president but so far refused to vote against him.
If this were to happen, these Senators would be credited with ending the Iraq War. Harry Reid and most Senate Democrats do not favor simply implementing the ISG recommendations because they don't go far enough, and they certainly don't come close to what the American people want. Unfortunately, if enough of these "moderate" Democrats band together with some of these "maverick" Republicans, the Democrats will have very limited options if they want to make progress.
One supporter, Senator John E. Sununu, a New Hampshire Republican, said he had favored adopting the study group?s proposals all along. ?It?s a good framework,? he said.
It comes as no surprise that our vulnerable junior Senator is among them. The unfortunate part is that he's basically telling the truth.
All the way back in December (h/t Dean):
In an interview last week on National Public Radio, Sununu said that withdrawing U.S. troops "without setting a goal for the Iraq people - for governing structure, revision of oil law, reconciliation process - I think that would be a mistake. I think refusing to make any changes in tactics or approaches is unacceptable, given that we can look and see what's happening in Iraq and recognize that we aren't being as successful as we'd like to be."
He told NPR that the Iraq Study Group's recommendations, "by and large, hit the mark."
He's covered his ass by supporting the bi-partisan ISG report, and he has preempted the lack of success with low expectations.
This isn't the issue that's going to take down John E. Sununu.
415 days from now, we have no idea what the situation with Iraq will look like. What's certain is that Sununu has set himself up to blow whichever way the wind blows. He can bash the President's foreign policy, vote for withdrawal from Iraq, even vote for impeachment, and in the end he could be just as safe as any Democrat who supported the War to begin with.
This election is not a chance for us to take advantage of Bush's failure in Iraq and to hang it around the neck of the Republican party. Time will show that many people are partially to blame for this prolonged war.
We will not defeat a Republican Senator like John E. Sununu on the issue of Iraq because when it comes down to it, we don't.. we haven't provided that much of a difference.
- We need to offer a clear alternative to John E. Sununu, not a red vs. blue distinction, but someone who listens to the people vs. one who ignores their constituents.
- We need a progressive candidate.
- We need to advance progressive issues and people-powered politics - that is what won us the 2006 election and that is what Americans want more of. Not calculation, posturing, pandering, and opportunistic attacks.
- We need to lead with our ideas, and I argue that, as progressives, 2008 is our greatest opportunity to do so. Politics as usual - where we run against things, like Bush or the War - has seen its day and Americans are sick of it.
They want bold ideas, they want fresh candidates, and they want politicians that are accountable to people and their needs, not to any political party.
|
