The Progressive Populist Moment

Back in 2004, I wrote an essay predicting "the progressive populist moment" was at hand. Katrina vanden Heuvel disagreed. It turns out I was premature. In this year's Democratic primary, the activists and rank-and-file of the Democratic Party have been the magnet pulling the candidates towards a common platform of ending the Iraq war, misguided trade agreements, and economic injustices that have ruined the lives of so many Americans. The movements for peace, justice and economic reform should be proud of the contributions they have made to public opinion.

It was not so long ago that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were hawkish neo-liberals, eager to prove that they were neither peaceniks nor mindless populists. Now they appear as solid progressives in sync with the broad base of their party.

In tonight's debate, Hillary Clinton personified the empathy of Franklin Roosevelt while Barack Obama invoked the new spirit of John F. Kennedy. I thought Clinton excelled with her wrap up, which led to a standing ovation. She succeeded in expressing a deep empathy for working families. Obama won on the issues of Cuba, Iraq, and held his own on health care against her severe attacks. They seemed equal on their opening statements, what they would do on Day One, Mexican-American issues, and Bush earmarks. Once again, Clinton's attacks seemed to bounce right off Obama.

Her performance might re-ignite her campaign, but also could be a memorable farewell, a dignity in defeat, for which she will be well remembered and honored.

Comments

[mansky]

Progressive politics have been stymied in recent years by Nader. One thing I'm sure of --Ralph Nader has health insurance. When is this guy going to give those of us don't have health insurance a break?

Come on you well-to-do progressives! Get off
your egos and really care for people who need help.

We need leadership from people like Hayden NOW to prevent a Nader run.

[RS]

Don't forget mansky--Ralph Nader also wrote a book in 2004 entitled "The Good Fight". It was published by--are you ready for this--Harp­erCollins, which is owned by none other than perennial rightwing plutocrat Rupert Murdoch (aka Josef Goebbels II). I'll bet Murdoch paid Nader a HUGE MULTIMILLION $$$$ advance for writing this book.

[mansky]

Good point. When Nader runs, he makes more money to pay for his health insurance.

Take a look at the Supreme Court. Call it the "Nader Court."

How about the "Bush/Nader" War in Iraq.

[FearlessFreep]

And Nader, unlike Obama, has actually called for A SINGLE-PAYER SYSTEM! (Still insist he doesn't care about giving poor people health insurance?) We mustn't have any single-payer advocates in the fall campaign, of course.

[mansky]

There are honorable positions and then there are selfish actions. I support Nader's positions but am amazed that he is willing to cede elections to the Republicans.

He ain't that pure. He's got his health insurance. And his actions make it clear that he doesn't give a damn if I have insurance.

He will be remembered as a selfish oddball. Egotistical and uncaring. A cold, self-centered fish.

And ALL the people I know that support him have health insurance too: trust fund babies and university
profs, and organic farmers with million dollar spreads but wear down and dirty threads.

COme on. Get real. Come on you check-book progressives, Give people without health insurance a real break.

[TheKiddy]

"It was not so long ago that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were hawkish neo-liberals, eager to prove that they were neither peaceniks nor mindless populists. Now they appear as solid progressives in sync with the broad base of their party."

Thank you John Edwards.

[ChristianEcon.com]

Heh, yeah John Edwards. Man, I miss having the real deal in the mix. It was nice while it lasted.

When will people who go to work everyday and care about their families ever learn?

[clevelandchick]

Amen.

[Jonny38103]

Great post - although not that many of the hate-filled people on this site will get it. They're too busy being "inclusive" (eyes rolling). Sen. Clinton is an amazing person, has done great things for this country, and I applaud her public service. I will still vote for the Dem nominee, although it worries me a bit. The kids on Obama-Aid don't even really grasp what Obama is saying; their behavior shows that.

[rixhex56]

Jonny,

You say, "The kids on Obama-Aid don't even really grasp what Obama is saying; their behavior shows that."

What do you mean by this? Frankly, I don't think a lot of people "really grasp what Obama is saying", nor do they "really grasp" what Clinton is saying.

But your statement here seems a bit presumptuous, not to mention shortsighted. I'm not a kid, but I know there are some who are politically aware, and there are more kids involved right now than there have for a while.

One thought I have in this matter is that what Obama is talking about has never existed during the lifetimes of many of these "kids" to whom you refer.

Perhaps you can elaborate on what you mean by your statement?

[clevelandchick]

Don't be such a hypocrite, calling people "kids" to demean them and implying they are cult members for supporting him doesn't exactly make you a very nice person. Rolling your eyes and mocking inclusiveness is not exactly the mark of a mature individual.

I'm 40, hardly a kid. I've read all of Obama's positions on his website and read up on his record, not just listened to his speeches. I've done the same for Hillary. Obama's record and platforms are more progressive, that's why I chose him over Hillary. I've also taken note that Obama has run a much tighter focused organized compared to Hillary. She's let too many people screw this up for her. That speaks to a candidate's leadership qualities.

I chose to support Obama over Hillary based on intellectual reasoning, not emotional whim. If I were to make a strictly emotional choice for a candidate, as a woman I'd have chosen Hillary because she's a woman. But I know that would be wrong.

I will vote and support whoever the Democratic nominee is and not be the least bit worried because whoever it may be will be light years above John McCain.

[tbone99]

I think its over for Hilary and she ended her speech in a very touching way.It was not the soldiers remarks that got me but her statement of recognition that she knows she has been blessed and wants others to have the same opportunities. So very few white middle class (and above) people recognize that their priviliges are not universal.

She has been through a lot and has conducted herself with a lot of grit and grace considering the forces against her for so very long.

[Nonamnesiac]

Tom, I've got an important question for you.

Have Obama and/or Clinton made the same commitment McCain has made to refuse to issue signing statements that in effect repeal the law? It is important to force them to make a similar commitment and not just trust them on this.

Although McCain is a stupid, contemptible, unprincipled warmongerer still fighting the Vietnam War, he must be congratulated for his position on signing statements.

Now let's see if the Dem frontrunners will take the same position. Both of them are sufficiently squishy on the war and national security that we need a direct answer from them.

[clevelandchick]

Do you really believe that John McCain won't use signing statements? He voted against torture and now says he will vote against a torture ban, that he supports Bush's promised veto of the ban?

Seriously, John McCain is going to say what fits the crowd he's in front of. He hasn't an ounce of credibility.

[lwfky]

If Senator Obama's responses about foreign policy (meeting with all foreign leaders unconditionally) and health care (not making it universal) do not convince people that he is not prepared for the presidency, than I guess we'll all get that 4 year and out term, like President Carter's. There is such a thing as too much compromise.

[Merin]

Meeting with leaders of countries "we don't like" is a good first step. You try talking, cajoling, bribing them to do the right thing. It is the right thing to do. You cannot expect an opponent to make change against their selfish interest by taking your ball, going home, and telling your mother (effectively pulling out of talks (or never engaging in them) and then threatening them with sanctions or the military.) It doesn't work - it just makes your opponent more antagonistic and less willing to compromise.


Gunboat diplomacy is a failure - it just makes everyone work harder to have the biggest gunboat.


Military should be for defense, not negotiations. Sanctions should be a punishment for the worst offenders who don't even respond to attempts to talk.


---


As for the Health Care debate: Senator Clinton makes some false analogies by comparing Social Security and Medicare to her Health Care plan. Let me detail them for those who aren't sure -


1. SS and MC are GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS, which collect TAXES out of people's PAYCHECKS PROPORTIONAL to their INCOME (to a certain extent, at least) and GUARANTEES the protections for everyone. There are NO penalties for not being on SS nor MC - you just are, at no extra cost to yourself.


2. The part of Senator Clinton's Health Care plan that MANDATES everyone BUY INSURANCE from PRIVATE COMPANIES. The mandate will make it ILLEGAL to NOT HAVE INSURANCE, therefore GUARANTEEING profit windfalls for the INSURANCE INDUSTRY. If you don't buy insurance, the GOVERNMENT will GARNISH YOUR WAGES with FINES and you STILL WON'T HAVE HEALTH COVERAGE. What you have to PAY is NOT COMPARED TO YOUR INCOME but is what the INSURANCE COMPANIES DECIDE TO CHARGE. Her plan DOESN'T GUARANTEE COVERAGE, her plan GUARANTEES PENALTIES FOR THOSE WHO REMAIN UNINSURED.


To be fair, she adds to this plans to bring costs down and offer subsidies to lower income families, but for me it is the whole "it is the law to have to buy insurance from a private company" that bugs me - this DOESN'T affect HMO's and everything that is wrong with the USA's health care industry - it solely addresses the uninsured period. As Michael Moore will tell you, the insured have big problems too. And not just costs.


To be completely fair, Senator Obama's plan is only really substantially different on the MANDATE side - it too doesn't really address the issues, but it doesn't make things worse either.

[Merin]

Meeting with leaders of countries "we don't like" is a good first step. You try talking, cajoling, bribing them to do the right thing. It is the right thing to do. You cannot expect an opponent to make change against their selfish interest by taking your ball, going home, and telling your mother (effectively pulling out of talks (or never engaging in them) and then threatening them with sanctions or the military.) It doesn't work - it just makes your opponent more antagonistic and less willing to compromise.


Gunboat diplomacy is a failure - it just makes everyone work harder to have the biggest gunboat.


Military should be for defense, not negotiations. Sanctions should be a punishment for the worst offenders who don't even respond to attempts to talk.


---


As for the Health Care debate: Senator Clinton makes some false analogies by comparing Social Security and Medicare to her Health Care plan. Let me detail them for those who aren't sure -


1. SS and MC are GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS, which collect TAXES out of people's PAYCHECKS PROPORTIONAL to their INCOME (to a certain extent, at least) and GUARANTEES the protections for everyone. There are NO penalties for not being on SS nor MC - you just are, at no extra cost to yourself.


2. The part of Senator Clinton's Health Care plan that MANDATES everyone BUY INSURANCE from PRIVATE COMPANIES. The mandate will make it ILLEGAL to NOT HAVE INSURANCE, therefore GUARANTEEING profit windfalls for the INSURANCE INDUSTRY. If you don't buy insurance, the GOVERNMENT will GARNISH YOUR WAGES with FINES and you STILL WON'T HAVE HEALTH COVERAGE. What you have to PAY is NOT COMPARED TO YOUR INCOME but is what the INSURANCE COMPANIES DECIDE TO CHARGE. Her plan DOESN'T GUARANTEE COVERAGE, her plan GUARANTEES PENALTIES FOR THOSE WHO REMAIN UNINSURED.


To be fair, she adds to this plans to bring costs down and offer subsidies to lower income families, but for me it is the whole "it is the law to have to buy insurance from a private company" that bugs me - this DOESN'T affect HMO's and everything that is wrong with the USA's health care industry - it solely addresses the uninsured period. As Michael Moore will tell you, the insured have big problems too. And not just costs.


To be completely fair, Senator Obama's plan is only really substantially different on the MANDATE side - it too doesn't really address the issues, but it doesn't make things worse either.

[beck]

Obama's style has been said to get people to yes before even asking the question. If he can work that on some leaders of other countries more power to him.

[TeddySalad]

Your insights into Diplomacy are ignorant. Give one example where just talk got anywhere. Has to be something they want or do not want. An ass whoopin or money? I'm tired of giving money.

[CanSoc]

When are critics of Clinton's health plan going to remember that she advocates creating a public insurer (as does Obama), so they will stop saying that people will be be forced to buy insurance from private companies?

[rbrooks]

Performance is the operative word. Pick your Hillary. Bad Hillary got booed, and in an exercise in real time behavior modification, turned into Good Hillary until her boffo closer wherein she coldly used wounded veterans of the war she voted for to set up a terrific line ripped off from Bill, and wound up with another terrific line ripped off from John Edwards. What was that, a death wish? Dumbness? Treachery? Who writes this stuff?

I thought last night was a self-inflicted disaster for her: the obvious low point the insistent and frantic worrying of the plagiarism talking point like a dog with someone's pantleg, bookended by Mr. Rogers. And all the way through, the unnerving fake smile.

Why don't I trust this woman? Dunno, but could it be the tension between her progressive applause lines and the repulsive presence of her chief strategist, Mr. Monsanto, Mark Penn? Anyway ... with all due respect - did we see the same debate?

[GLBorchert]

Why has no one on any blog I've found, not on Huffington Post, not on MSNBC, not on CNN, not on NT Times blogs, highlighted that Hillary's plagiarism accustions lost credibility when she stole John Edwards words for her closing?
From the cheap seats, it's hard to figure why this obvious plagiarism isn't mentioned.

[rbrooks]

Actually, I got up early this morning, sucked it up and turned on CNN to see how they were spinning the debate.
To my amazement, CNN had clips of Hillary's closing effort, and of Bill Clinton and John Edwards delivering the heart-tuggers she had ripped off. It was astonishing. I expected to see these clips up on Youtube but it was a shocker to see it on CNN. But that was around 5:30 EST - haven't seen it since, did they pull it?
Even if they did, there's Youtube. I think, and hope, she's toast.

[clevelandchick]

That certainly indicates hypocrisy on her part and the bad advice her consultants have been giving her. They tell her to go after Obama's authenticity and then it's illustrated she is just as guilty. They tell her to go after Obama for Rezko and then it's illustrated that her husband and her campaign chair both took money from Rezko.

It's the old lesson that a smart woman like Hillary should know well; you don't throw rocks when you live in a glass house yourself.

[Heidfeld]

You, like so many other Obamabots STILL don't get it. Her problem with Obama is not "plagiarism" (that is a word from the media), it is lack of orginality.

He is allowed to use the words of others. That is ok... but he is not allowed to claim he is so new and different, when he doesn't have words of his own.

Will BO have a quote that people remember for years to come? I can't think of one so far.

But what about, "Women's rights are human rights." Thousands of women around the world will never forget those words.

Yes SHE Can... and she DID last night

[rbrooks]

She sure did:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RernchYH-Ec

[nancytheragingliberal]

If the Clinton's bow out graciously, I will be shocked. The Dem. party highter-ups will have to demand that she exit, stage right. I suspect that she will be offered a high powered position in Obama's Presidency. Hillary has great talent and he will have the intelligence to offer her a position. Time will tell.

[independentrepublicrat]

She didn't do anything worthwhile in 8 years in the senate and he shouldn't offer her any position because she is not interested in progress but his sabotage so she can run again in four years.

[CaseyBabes]

"so she can run again in four years." Correct. Behind that mask she's been wearing in this presidential run is the true calculating pol without any allusions. Hillary sees the writing on the wall and is setting up for 2012 in case Obama gets beat in November. McCain may be an old fighter jock who happens to be a senator for too long, but face it, he's running against a candidate without substance, just rhetoric. Recognize reality, after the Wisconsin victory Obama gave a 45-minute speech oozing liberal/pr­ogressive/­socialist/­Soros/surr­ender promises. Same ol' stuff; nothing new, typical blarney of the Democrat Party.
Sure, I'm being unfair by not recognizing Obama's ability to inspirate and actually give hope.........more like just seeing down the road though, seeing that republicans will coldly dismantle Obama's mirage.
Hillary knows it all.

[Overd0g]

Many say she has great talent. I'm not sure how they know, given that she never shows any.

[EspritDeVoltaire]

"Well remembered and honored"? I never realized Tom Hayden was a closet comedian. Very funny!

The citizens of New York state should have a recall election for dereliction of duty (not that she did anything of note in the Senate before the 2007-2008 endless presidential campaign).

[kempis]

"Her performance might re-ignite her campaign, but also could be a memorable farewell, a dignity in defeat, for which she will be well remembered and honored."

***************

Thank you. We should all reflect a bit on the value of graciousness--in defeat and in victory. Thank you for modeling some graciousness yourself.

[dannysdad1]

In a matter of three minutes, Hillary said more to inspire the nation than anything that Obama had said throughout this campaign. Let us hope it gives her at least a small bounce.

[MPeter]

I hope Texans give her a whooping. She needs to stop wasting money attacking Obama and begin to work for a united front to help Dems get the WH. The millions chanting and contributing for the Obama campaigning can't wait to get out and start campaigning against McCain. The sooner Hillary and her hubby exit, the better off we'll all be.

[eddiestardust]

MPeter,

You need to realize that the rest of us who haven't voted need to be heard....

Sell us short and there will be a lot of folks who may decide to stay home....

[Querent]

This is quite true. The primaries should be allowed to play out. The candidate who wins the nomination must be seen to do so in free and fair elections. Trying to force Hillary out now is bad for the party, and would be bad for the country. The voters in the late-voting states should, for once, be given their say.

[Boadicea]

She'll be remembered for how her reptilian performance backfired and ended her campaign if there's any justice.

Hillary had to do two things tonight - she had to smear Obama's character for a national audience with something that would stick - "xerox" and she had to come out of that attack smelling like a rose - thus the nicey-nicey at the end.

Unfortunately, the video of her husband using the same words years before is already all over the internet, and Hillary will be exposed for the hypocrite she is.

Meanwhile, the campaign is still hitting up it's richest corporate donors to fund the 527 that will attack Obama's character. They consider the fine they'll pay for breaking campaign finance laws to be "just an expense."

Unbelievable how gullible people are.

[dtd]

IT WAS A REHEARSED LINE BORROWED FROM JOHN EDWARDS AND BILL CLINTON CIRCA '92!

Obama's been beat up for a week over Clinton's plagiarism allegations, but she's guilty of worse: HYPOCRISY!

Bill Clinton 1992: "The hits that I took in this election are nothing compared to the hits the people of this state and this country have been taking for a long time."

Hillary Clinton Tonight: "You know, the hits I’ve taken in life are nothing compared to what goes on every single day in the lives of people across our country."

Edwards the December 13 debate:

"What's not at stake are any of us. All of us are going to be just fine no matter what happens in this election. But what's at stake is whether America is going to be fine."

Hillary Clinton Tonight:

"You know, whatever happens, we're going to be fine. You know, we have strong support from our families and our friends. I just hope that we'll be able to say the same thing about the American people. And that's what this election should be about."

[evekendall]

I almost feel sad for her that she doesn't get it that most of us out here are too smart not to see through her dirty tricks and hypocrisy. In just the space of a few hours, all of her own lifting of other people's words is all over the internet in posts and on youtube. Really sad and embarrassing for her.

[tommjk]

If you were so smart you'd see through Obama, and you'd realize the things Hillary supposedly copied are standard idiomatic phrases and common sentiments that are so common as to be pretty much always in the public domain, so to speak--"whatever happens, I'll be all right" or "what I've experienced is nothing compared to what other have gone through"; I've said those exact things many times in my life, and so have most people. Whereas Obama has been caught copying much more complicated compositions and constructi­ons--phras­es and concepts no one could just accidentally stumble across and echo. For example, I've never said "I'm not just asking you to take a chance on me, I'm asking you to take a chance on your own aspirations."

[classof77]

Actually, I believe _I_ said "Whatever happens, we're going to be fine" WAY before John Edwards, I think it was during that cold snap in '92 when the power went out for a couple of hours.

Get real. Try turning off your computer, going outside, and getting some sun.

[Bladernr1001]

Populism is lowest common denominator

[abbiehoffmansghost]

Time to empty the drool bucket.