[lbo-talk] Nader, et al

[Michael Smith]

On 08/07/07 12:50:32 PM, Doug Henwood wrote:
> 
> On Aug 7, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Michael Smith wrote:
> 
> > The fact that they never get
> > sanctioned for breaking from what the party supposedly advocates
> > suggests to me that, far from contravening the actual will of the
> > party, the aisle-crossers in fact *represent* the actual will of the
> > party
> 
> Do you have any sense of political geography? A lot of the new crop
> of Dems elected last November came from conservative districts whose
> voters were fed up with Bush, but think Nancy Pelosi is some sort of
> Bolshie.

But... but... doesn't this rather undercut your insistence on the  
difference between the two parties? You laid a lot of stress on the  
fact that some, or even many, Democratic officeholders express mildly  
liberal sentiments. And of course you're right, there are such. But if  
the "swing" legislators were elected to be Bush-lite -- then the  
liberalism of the Kennedys et al. is just decoration, isn't it? Which  
was sorta my point, except that I think the legislators are responding  
to their donors rather than their constituents.