"Making the perfect the enemy of the good."

[JCanete]

54. One of the problems we face often is our politicians suggesting to us

that they really want those biggest things but that the climate isn't right. Want to have an actual discussion on these subjects? Hell yes, I'm for that, and I will certainly pick a different candidate in the primaries. I want people to tell me what they actually want, not what they have to go for because it is " the practical option today." They have to campaign on their beliefs. Did Clinton stop believing in Single Payer, or did she just decide it was politically unfeasible to continue to advocate for it?

Don't get me wrong, there are points in history where honesty will lose you the game. I may not be happy about it, but I get why Bill Clinton weaseled for "Don't Ask Don't Tell" and why Obama started from a position of advocating only for Civil Unions. I have never held a grudge against politicians trying to find that line...but in this climate? That was not the issue. Populist ideas will NOT kill a campaign right now, obviously. I mean, sure, if it starts looking like an actual possibility, it's probably a safe bet to say the hounds will be unleashed like nothing we've seen to date, even compared to what was done to Clinton or Obama. But the power of social media is something that didn't used to exist as a counter-weight to corporate propaganda. The possibilities are different than they were previously.

Another problem is that you can't pretend this is solely an arena where the best ideas win. You can't pretend that Dems advocating for less dramatic change don't have a disproportionate amount of corporate support that amplifies their message over those who have no big industry friends, or worse, draw the ire of one lobby or another. There is a reason why we want our leaders to not do big corporate fundraisers. We don't want that influence to overpower other influence. And just to be clear, who cares whether the politician in question's views are being bought or whether a seat is being bought for a politician with certain views? Either way, money is speaking too damn loud.


But you have certainly gotten to the heart of the issue once the bullshit and obfuscation gets stripped away(not yours personally). Our own disagreements. If Republicans have gotten to a point where they will not budge towards anything that helps the American people, then this is no longer an issue of whether or not we need to reach across the aisle to any of them. That ship has sailed. This is an issue of whether or not we can get our own damn party behind something, and you said it...its within our own ranks that we are conflicted on what we want...so any argument about how the Republicans will never go for..."insert plan here" is an argument we can dispense with as entirely moot, and bogus, because they will never go for anything no matter how diplomatic the offer, UNLESS we change the climate. So lets be honest about it. Pragmatism is not about finding something that can win over republicans. That's some unicorn shit right there. Pragmatism is about what some of our own democrats will allow to happen. What will those democrats stand in the way of because of their beliefs....not because of the big bad republicans.

See, it is just as pragmatic for them to come on board a more left-wing platform as it is for the lefties to come on board a more centrist platform, if both are in the service of defeating republicans, since republicans are clearly not part of the equation. Except that the argument is always framed as if its those people who won't budge in the middle who are the pragmatic ones, and its those lefties who refuse to move to the middle who must be the ideologues. Granted, the difference is who got to the top of the ticket, but that goes back to who the money helped to get there, and that goes to why there is justified distrust if not in motives, certainly in direction.

As to whether or not you would then make the case that their approach is more pragmatic because it gets them to the top of the ticket, its only more pragmatic if getting to the top of the ticket is the end-game. Its highly questionable whether it helps us get elected in the GE and whether this approach has moved us left as a nation over the last 30 years.