"Actually, I don't really Looking at the advisors that both of them have, they're both rooted pretty heavily in a lot of the old dynamic. I don't see that there's a huge amount of difference other than the approach that they both publicly take. But it remains to be seen whether the public approach, if they follow through, will be different. Both candidates' foreign policy advisors, for example, have been part of the DC establishment for a long time. I don't know that there's going to be a huge change from either of them until we see if they follow through on their campaign rhetoric."
Rob Kall: "How about the DLC?"-
Christy Hardin Smith: "The DLC's been so weakened over the past few years. I don't know that they're going to fit in much at all. You see that with Harold Ford, who's been a fairly big DLC proponent. He really only has a say occasionally on MSNBC when they don't have anybody else to throw on as an analyst. I think the DLC has been substantially weakened as any sort of force.
"So, I ask, "If Obama takes it, do you think that would dramatically decrease it even further?"
Rob Kall: "Do you think an Obama win would move the general democratic leadership and vision more towards the left?"
Hardin replies, "Just looking at their policy issues, whether it's economics or health care or foreign policy-- they're pretty similar. They really come down on their policy issues in a very similar way. I don't see either of them moving things very far left, just seeing the policy that they've floated out so far on the campaign.
"Obama's public rhetoric tends to tack a little further left than Clinton's rhetoric, but the policy information on their website, the advisors that they have-- they're pretty similar down the line.
* * *
I wrote to Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, "kos" of dailykos.com, saying, "Besides a contest between Clinton and Obama, this a contest for control of the Democratic Party and vision. If Clinton loses, it is the beginning of the end of the DLC. What will the new leadership look like, who, where what etc.?"
And he replied, "The DLC as an organization is pretty much irrelevant, but the forces it represents are alive and well. Many are rallying around Third Way, which is relatively new. You have the Blue Dogs which are as influential as always. And others will use their deep wallets to curry favor from even the most well-meaning Democrats.
"So killing off the DLC, at the end of the day, may hand us a "W" in this struggle, but the broader war is nowhere near being finished.
"As to what new leadership will look like, I have no freakin' clue, to be honest. I am cautiously optimistic that we'll see more 50-state organizing and reconnecting with our progressive roots, but I'm not about to declare victory. "
* * *
On the other hand, here's a line from a moveon.org fundraiser email, sent out today, the day after Obama crossed the delegate threshold, "After years of DC insiders running the show, a progressive candidate who started in politics through community organizing, who unequivocally opposed the war in Iraq, who isn't afraid to stand up to the politics of fear, an African-American, became the Democratic nominee for president.
What does that mean? The change we all want, the things we petition and hold vigils and make phone calls and rally for""things like universal health care, social justice, and an end to the war""these things are really truly possible, if we believe in them and if we're willing to fight for them."-
I called former CT senate candidate Ned Lamont, the newcomer who challenged incumbent Joe Lieberman in the 2006 senate Democratic primary, and asked, "What's it going to look like, if Obama wins, how will the Democratic party be different? Where will it move? Who will be involved in leadership? How will it change? How will it affect candidates like you, who are trying to go in a different direction?"
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
