Playing a Difficult Hand

The 2004 presidential election was almost as much of a tie game as the last one. True, this time BushCheney eked us instead of the other way round but overall, their margin is no big deal. (If these were poll results, they would be a statistical dead heat.) Those of us mourning yet another defeat should remember that. Almost as many Americans voted against BushCheney as voted for them. What these voters need are strong voices to represent them. With a majority of popular and electoral votes and solid majorities in Congress, BushCheney has earned the right to pursue its agenda but they have not earned the right for complete acquiescence. I have no doubt that BushCheney will push hard for their view of radical reform. I expect Democrats and other progressives to push equally hard for social justice in the process.

The next two years leading to the mid term Congressional elections will be a defining time for America’s progressives and those who speak for us. During BushCheney’s first term, Democrats co-operated and supported them on numerous issues only to find themselves targeted for defeat the following year. This time Democrats must stand firmly for social and economic justice. BushCheney fooled us throughout their first term, pledging openness and co-operation when they needed help and shutting the minority out whenever they could get away with it. In the new Congress, they won’t need Democratic help too often but the Senate minority is positioned to stop BushCheney’s most egregious excesses. They’ve little to lose and much to gain.

By this I do not mean reflexive opposition. At a minimum, outright rejectionism is ineffective and self defeating. BushCheney will make every attempt to smear opponents as unreasonable partisans. Better to base opposition on ideas and principles. American progressives and the Democratic Party have a long tradition of serving this nation. Much of what is humane and reasonable in American life came from these traditions: child labor laws, minimum wages, workplace safety, social security, medical care, environmental protection. These values are important to the vast majority of Americans and should be at the forefront of our opposition to BushCheney. Using ideas and principles to articulate our objections to their policies will have the added benefit of actually requiring our community to take a stand and define ourselves in our own terms.

Definition is the key. Kerry never defined himself well. BushCheney did that for him, much to his disadvantage. America’s progressives cannot continue to allow BushCheney’s distortions and misinformation to define us or the candidates who represent us. Nor can we tailor our beliefs in pursuit of popular acceptance. Instead, the progressive community needs to say clearly what we stand for and show the American people why our vision of social and economic justice warrants their support. We may risk rejection but we will be real, we will be credible

This election shows that progressives can organize almost as well as BushCheney. Remember that the 2004 presidential election was supposed to be a financial blowout with the Democrats barely able to compete in fund raising. As it turned out, we blunted the BushCheney’s financial advantage and remained competitive throughout the entire campaign. We built networks that turned out voters. These are real achievements and I look forward to building on them.

But in the near term, progressives must respond to the BushCheney “mandate” that will start more wars, reduce government service, create more regressive taxation, reduce civil liberties (except firearms) and degrade the environment. American progressives and the Democratic minority need to speak out against those assaults. One of the people I expect to see speaking out is John Kerry. He certainly earned the right to offer his views and knowledge on national issues. I would hope that he uses that opportunity. He has four years remaining in the Senate, knows the process well and has a strong reputation for working hard and knowledgeably on a wide range of issues. With more than 55 million votes behind him, John Kerry still has a hand to play.

And maybe now that he does not have to worry about election, he will speak out more clearly on important issues. John Kerry gave some voice, inconsistent and feeble, to progressive aspirations. But he did not offer a real choice on the War on Iraq. Nor did he ever learn how to present himself effectively as a strong candidate. Kerry only occasionally demonstrated his knowledge and strength, most notably in the debates. Even with all of his reported shortcomings as a candidate, exacerbated and echoed by the Republican Disinformation Machine, Kerry still garnered nearly half of the votes cast. Now he is back on familiar turf, the Senate, and an excellent position from which to represent the 55 million Americans who voted for him. I hope to see more of the intrepid commander and thoughtful critic that John Kerry was when he first served this nation. No time could be more appropriate.