(May 3, 2016 at 10:31 am)Tiberius Wrote: I don't think any of us have delusions of grandeur either, but I honestly don't see your logic with the obstructionism argument. If anything, Clinton is more hated than Obama by the Republicans. She's got a shady history, she's married to a President they all hate. If a Sanders win means obstructionism, I fail to see how a Clinton win would be different.
If the Dems went and ran Jeb Bush for president (or whoever was the actual republican favoured son), they'd still run a programme of obstructionism through the parliament.
The only way there is going to be an effective democrat president in the White House for the forseeable future is for the party to win either of the houses in non presidential elections, and the only way they'll do that is by getting the base out nationally. And the current party strategy of tacking to a milder version of the right wing politics of their opponents will never do that, in fact it is shrinking their base. The fact of the matter is the third way politics that socialist and soc-dem parties have engaged in since the late '80's is as much a busted flush as capitalism is. No leader of a left wing party has helped his/her vote by tacking to the right (even the third way's prophet the "sainted" TB managed to lose over four million votes between 1997 and 2005, dropping voters in large numbers at every subsequent election).
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Home