A Defining Moment For Progressive Politics

In two specific races, in what would commonly be called red states, the progressive movement is moving forward because of a strong, unabashed message of values. The impact of this is overwhelming.

In Ohio, Sherrod Brown has opened up a 14-point lead on nondescript Republican Sen. Mike DeWine. This is in line with other polls in terms of the trend. And it's incedibly important, because Brown would be unique among the Senate in being a progressive populist crusader. In MyDD, Bob McChesney explains just how groundbreaking this is:

...Sherrod Brown is precisely the sort of aggressive progressive that Democrats have needed to carry the party banner in high-profile contests. He's from the Democratic wing of the Democratic party, a liberal in the very best sense of the term. This is no Bob Casey Jr. we are talking about, nor some former Reagan administration official. He is not triangulating; selling out women or gays or peace activists to win white working-class votes. Rather, he is winning over those white working-class voters with a solid economic message that takes apart the Bush administration's failed free trade policies -- which DeWine has backed with poodle-like consistency -- and promises to fight for workers, the environment and communities.

Brown has the politics of a Wellstone. He has established himself in the U.S. House over the past decade as the smartest progressive on the debilitating labor and environmental consequences of pro-corporate trade deals, not only in the United States but worldwide. He has an innate sense of fairness and a clear commitment to social justice. Sherrod has worked quietly and effectively to earn the trust of Ohioans, especially poor and working-class Ohioans, which is why DeWine's million dollar attack ad mudballs have so far rolled off the Democrat.

If Brown wins, it points the way forward for progressive electoral politics in the country, and gets us off the downward spiral of Republican vs Republican-lite thinking that dominates inside the beltway. If a progressive can defeat an incumbent Republican in Ohio, red state Ohio, with Karl Rove calling the plays, and rich people and corporations lining up to write checks for the incumbent, it hammers the last nail in the Democratic Leadership Council's coffin. A Brown win will prove that the DLC's "move-to-the-right-or-lose" mantra not only calls for repulsive politics, it is a loser at the polls. A Brown victory will also send a message to Hillary Clinton and the other 2008 presidential candidates that they had better take issues of class and economic inequality a whole heckuva lot more seriously than they seem to at present.

My praise for Andy Stern shows that I believe that this message of addressing the concerns of the vast majority of those falling behind in this country is of paramount importance. Arianna Huffington seems to be on a one-woman crusade arguing that the economy doesn't mean anything, and while I agree that Iraq and foreign policy were decisive in 2004, that's because the Democratic standard bearers weren't offering real critiques of the policies that have destroyed the middle class and working families. They were, and are, still mired in a neoliberal fantasy of globalization as a divine good, which has caused the epidemic of stratification between rich and poor you see today. Is foreign policy still important? Of course, and Sherrod Brown is smart and tough on foreign policy as well. But it's his particular economic critique that will return the Democratic Party to being the party of the people, which is their natural home, and one they never should have abandoned in the name of the DLC.

Voter interest is at a high this election season because of the Republican meltdown; that cannot be debated. But all of the failures of the Bush Administration over the last two years were completely predictable, as Chris Bowers notes in an important post which shrugs off the "incompetence dodge" conservative apologists want to use to preserve their way of thinking.

The major events that have led to the downfall of Republicans over the past two years--Iraq, Social Security, Foley, Katrina and Terry Schaivo-were not Republican "mistakes." As long as Republicans and the conservative movement maintain power, we can expect to see more reckless and theoretical uses of the military with horrible long-term results. We can expect to see more cover-ups in order to hold onto a single seat in Congress (or maybe even something smaller). We can expect more attempts to destroy Social Security and other cornerstones of successful governance in favor of private companies and large corporations who only care about making money. We can expect more incompetent and unqualified cronies in positions of real power. We can continue to expect a complete lack of accountability for high-ranking administration officials and private companies (unless they are pro-choice, in which case they better brace themselves). We certainly can expect the federal government to care more about whatever the latest fetish of the conservative base may be more than about being properly prepared and responsive in the event of a major national disaster. This is just how the conservative movement operates. These are not mistakes. All of these campaigns were conducted with the same political skill and using the same political machine that Republicans used in order to build their slim 50% + 1 majority.

Indeed, when you hear things like the fact that Karl Rove forced Mark Foley to stay in the Congress, despite his wanting out (and despite growing rumors of his Internet predilections), it fits into a pattern of conservative "leadership", based only on party, putting it above country, above safety, above children, above everything.

And while conservative ideology created the mess we're in today, progressive ideology was largely muted by the DLC, Republican-lite forces who held control, allowing articles like Sebastian Mallaby's to have a grain of truth (although not completely true). Which is why the progressive movement is so important to provide a competing ideology, a true contrasting alternative, and a ray of hope for those who see none. Bowers:

The difference is that there are now forces much more capable of countering Republican campaigns than in the recent past. While there was tremendous help from across the progressive ecosystem, Social Security would be dead right now if not for the netroots helping to keep Democrats in line. Democrats would also still be much more in favor of continuing the Iraq war if the netroots and the progressive movement had not nurtured and rewarded those Democrats willing to speak out and stand up, and punish those Democrats willing to facilitate. Would Michael Brown's previous job as a horse inspector be known if not for the netroots? Would the narrative on Foley have so quickly metastasized into a broader indictment of the Republican leadership? Republicans used to get away with these sorts of things all the time, but they are not getting away with it as often anymore. The reason is the political and media prowess supplied by the netroots, by the progressive movement and by the Democracy Alliance nexus. Republicans haven't changed or grown less competent at politics. The difference is that they are facing much stiffer competition. Democrats and progressives have earned this lead--it did not fall into our laps.

Bowers, in a separate post, notes that if the Democrats do take Congress, as looks increasingly likely, it would be the first time a party would have a majority in the House without having a majority of members in the South. It's clear to me removing that imbalance would signal a major re-ordering and re-balancing of the political map. The moneyed interests in the Northeast were Republican for decades. The populists were in the Democratic South and the Prairie. That's completely flipped now.

All of this is happening because a growing group of committed people understood that the challenge for progressives was to make themselves heard within the Party, and to use the Party as a tool to get the progressive message out. Nearly everywhere this is happening, Democrats are being rewarded because they are finally returning to the core values that has defined the Party for generations, and because they're offering the voters a real choice. This election cycle has the potential to be a defining moment, but there is no time for complacency and no time for a muddled message. Playing the politics of contrast is paying dividends; it must continue.