I remain puzzled by how many of my fellow progressives are supporting Howard Dean – a centrist Democrat – in the primary. Some of them natter on about “electability” – but the way a candidate proves himself electable is by proving he can win the primary. That’s what the primary is for<\/i>.<\/p>\n
Instead, progressives are simply giving up without a fight, refusing to support a genuinely left candidate like Kucinich<\/a>. But if Dean wins because the opposition gives up, how meaningful is that? It’s not like George Bush is going to give up, too.<\/p>\n A Christopher Caldwell article (via Dale Franks<\/a>) about Dean in the Weekly Standard <\/i><\/a>explains why, I think:<\/p>\n As for the general election, Republicans seem unaware of how riled up Democratic activists remain, even three years after the 2000 elections. A substantial segment of the party’s base has been radicalized to the point where it does not recognize the legitimacy of the Bush presidency. <\/i>This is a very different thing than mere dislike of a president. It means that Democrats are prepared to fight this election as if they were struggling to overthrow a tyrant.<\/div>\n Dean may be a centrist – but he’s a pissed-off centrist, and to many lefties that seems to matter more than his substantive positions.<\/p>\n As for myself, I’ll probably vote for the Democratic candidate (regardless of who it is – I don’t understand lefties who say “I’ll vote for a centrist democrat like Dean, but never for a centrist like Lieberman!”) if the outcome looks at all close come November 2004, because I’m hoping (perhaps unrealistically) that Justices Stevens and Ginsburg will retire if a Democrat is in office. Otherwise I’ll vote for the Green candidate (who I hope will not be Nader).<\/p>\n But it’s not November 2004 yet. What’s at stake in the democratic primary isn’t if Bush serves a second term; it’s which views in the Democrats will have a voice in the party for the next few years, and which views will be even more marginalized. Most progressive democrats are, in effect, voting to keep progressives like Kucinich as marginal as possible. I don’t understand their decision; but it certainly adds to my suspicion that there’s no longer a place for progressives in the Democratic party.<\/p>\n Related link: Check out this interesting debate at The New Republic <\/i><\/a>over if Dean is electable or not. And also this appeal from Kucinich <\/a>to Green Party members to support his candidacy – a bit of outreach that I’m not expecting to see from any other Democratic candidate. (Via Blargblog <\/a>and Body & Soul<\/a>)..<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I remain puzzled by how many of my fellow progressives are supporting Howard Dean – a centrist Democrat – in the primary. Some of them natter on about “electability” – but the way a candidate proves himself electable is by … Continue reading