Alan Rudy wrote:
>
> Without celebrating them, or suggesting that they're doing anything
> unexpected, the Dem's are their own worst enemies... anyone with half a
> shred of savvy, planning or chutzpah could have won that seat and stopped a
> whole boatload of TP momentum in its tracks... but they continually dump on
> their traditional lay constituencies, they continue to show themselves to be
> timid in all cases and incapable of planning their way out of a paper bag,
> and they continue to put up losers as candidates... you don't have to have
> liked LBJ or FDR but at least those guys knew their politics and how to play
> from a strong hand.
LBJ & FDR served in different conditions. The whole nation was further to the left. That is all.
But otherwise, I would say No to all your points.
The DP leadership has cetain fundamental loyalties, and they serve those loyalties with intelligence (savvy) and courage. Obama's statement that he is willing to be a one-term president was seirous: he will maintain a principled course regardless of consequences. The principles are those of our enemy, but don't confuse serving those principles loyally with being afraid to support "our" princpels.
The argument you give here has been an even more important defense of the DP for the last 50 years than the "lesser evil" argument. The DP would do "good" things if only it wasn't timid and stupid. No it wouldn't. They are neo-liberal to the core. They know they hurt themselves by spurning their base, but they know too that the base will just grumble and whine and howl and then go to the polls and vote DP, and as SA points out, in 4 to 12 years they will always get back in, as the Republicans will.
Carrol