Merging the best of "Deanism" & "Clintonism"

[moggie12]

Sticking just to the domestic side of the political equation, what I like about Dean is his emphasis on the Party's populist economic soul. Unlike the DLC guys, he's not afraid of a little "class warfare" and I like that: I mean, c'mon, why are we Democrats if we're not going to fight the rich people always trying to grab all the money???

BUT,

I still like elements of Clinton's "centrism". True, he and some of the centrists went way overboard bending-down to corporations and Wall Street, but I don't think we should throw the whole centrist ideology out like so much bathwater. Some of what Clinton and the centrists advocated is good: I LIKE fiscal discipline. I LIKE the idea of putting a sensible, reform-minded twist on what are thought of as traditional Republican issues (for example, Clinton's "Community Policing" program was a "law-and-order" initiative that turned the "crime control" issue on its head -- the COPS program advocated community-oriented policing, use of technology to improve police efficiency and effectiveness, etc.) I LIKE the "opportunity and responsibility" message of centrism: For example, I worked in local government for years and saw firsthand that the welfare system was in need of reform -- it was a well-intentioned program but had counter-productive effects on the very people it was designed to help.

PLUS,

There seems to be much overlap between "Deanism" and "Clintonism": Both, for example, advocated health care reform and an expansion of benefits to those not currently covered by private insurance. As Governors, both emphasized fiscal discipline.

So, my question is: Instead of the progressives and the centrists beating each over the heads (as they seem to be doing a lot lately), is it possible to take a cold, hard look at what each side advocates and come up with something new and better? In other words, take the best of each, discard the excesses of each, and devise a "new practical governing philosophy". I have this feeling that if we could do this, it would appeal to 60-70% of Americans.

Comments?? Of the specific elements of "progressivism" and "centrism", which are the ones that should be emphasized and which should be de-emphasized as we go forward?

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

1. Is it unusual to like both Dean and Clinton?

As a moderate Republican, I like them both. I just don't understand all this far-left label I hear assigned to Dean. I've heard Howard Dean speak and he doesn't appear to be out of the mainstream or too radical. In fact, I really respect the fact that he has been brave enough to call 'a spade a spade'...he was the first person that I heard actually talk openly in the MSM about the manipulation of the terror alerts for political purposes (when they raised the terror alert right after the Democratic convention). Lot's of people thought it, but he actually said it. That's a good thing...confrontation based on rational thought helps to clear the fog, in my book. I'm glad that the Dems will have Dean as the new DNC chair because he's an intelligent man with passion and drive. Bill Clinton was a great politician who I will always give credit for the super-90's. I could care less about his sex life...that's for his wife to worry about.

[Pirate Smile]

3. He isn't far left, he just got labeled that because he was against the

Iraq War.

Anyone - left, center or right could have (should have) been against that War.

I think Dean is an example of how screwed up the media is and how far off the labels they assign to people can be but once the echo chamber starts, it is hard to stop.

[Warpy]

4. You hit that nail on the head

Neither man is left at all, both are centrists. Only a thoroughly corrupted media has managed to label either one a leftist, or even a liberal.

Your point about those terror alerts was good, too. There has been only ONE in the three months since the fake election, and that one was an obvious hoax on Boston the day after Kerry voted against Contradicta Rice, and centered on people who had been IN CUSTODY for months.

It's all fear based, and hate based, and ignorance based, and I want no part of it.

I sincerely hope Dr. Dean will be able to push the DLC aside and get the party back to a centrist economic populism. It's the only thing that will ever defeat the neocons.

[Larkspur]

2. Clinton won in 1992 running a populist theme

The DLC forgets that.

[dolstein]

5. Excuse me, but I was there -- stop trying to re-write history

I volunteered for the Clinton campaign in New Hampshire. He didn't run as a populist. He ran as a "different kind of Democrat." He had a pretty cozy relationship with the business community in Arkansas, and, as demonstrated by his appointment of estabishment figures like Lloyd Bensten and Robert Rubin to Treasury, there was never any indication that Clinton would adopt a populist economic policy. If you think his proposal for targeted tax cuts for the middle class was populism, then you obviously haven't seen a real populist.

[moggie12]

6. Your points are good and well worth exploring

That's why I wrote this post -- I wanted to have a good discussion since I think the issues are important. Your subject title sounded somewhat hostile though, which I wanted to avoid in this thread. I don't want to start arguments with this thread but instead see if there is common ground.

Edited to add: Pretty please???

[dolstein]

8. Sorry if it sounded harsh

It's just that Larkspur keeps trying to tell people that Clinton wasn't elected as a DLC Democrat -- even though he was the quinessential DLC Democrat, having both founded and chaired the organization. You see, if he concedes this point, then he'd have to admit that perhaps there's something to the idea that a moderate Democrat stands a better chance of getting elected than a left-wing Democrat.

[moggie12]

10. Aha, that exchange was part of an on-going debate then...

Now I get it.

We really do need to get past the labels somehow. I think there's much more agreement between the "moderates" and the "left wing" than is commonly thought. Clinton, for example, was not a "liberal" in the same vein as ted Kennedy, yet he advocated at least one very "progressive" policy (his health care plan keeps coming to mind --were there others that I'm just not thinking of??). It just seems to me that a bit more economic populism, combined with some "smart packaging" of issues traditionally associated with Republicans (crime control, e.g.) could win us a lot of elections. I liked the 10-point plan Reid and the Senate Dems came up with for that reason -- one of the 10 pieces of legislation they proposed dealt with strengthening veterans programs -- would appeal to Red states (and be the right thing to do in-and-of itself).

[CTLawGuy]

18. what about

universal health care?

You know that plan that ended up failing in 1994?

Didn't he run on that?

[libodem]

7. governing philosophy

centrism vs progressivism god I hoope nobody's really argueing about that.. in this day and age when we really need to get organized and define what we stand for off the soap box we are the liberal party left of center we arn't all radical anarchists either We have to be progressive and physcally responsible I think there is a perception that centerist is the only popular opinion that could win votes you have to keep the middle or you will loose your base you have your left of center and you have your kook finge we have to stand together Civil rights we are loosing them we are asleep at the wheel good question to ponder

[BlueInRed]

9. I think the label centrism means different things to different people.

[moggie12]

13. That's my problem, too -- I used to think I was a centrist

But now I'm nothing!! I'm not a DLC centrist and I'm not a progressive. I like elements of each, yet dislike elements of each....

The good thing is, whether Dean has an impact on policy decisions or not, simply his getting the DNC Chair position is evidence that his populist message and grassroots emphasis will be heard in the Party. And Harry Reid, even though he's seen as a moderate, is leading the charge against Bush's attempt to gut Social Security. Maybe a new philosophy will be born out of the battle against Bush's agenda over the course of the next year. I agree with you that the problem has been Democrats trying to figure out whether to dig their heels in against Bush or "triangulate". Clearly, many more are now digging in their heels (e.g., on SS, Rice, and Gonzales). This is nothing but a good sign in my opinion.

[BlueInRed]

15. wonder where my post went; you're right

Hmmm, wonder where my post went to. That was a long post to disappear. Guess I hit the wrong button when updating, but luckily you summed it up very well. You and I are in the same boat. :hi:

[Rowdyboy]

11. You've written one of the most interesting pieces I've ever read on DU

I'm almost embarrassed to admit, but I agree with you on every point. I don't remember that ever happening before.

I admire Clinton and Dean tremendously-they, along with Clark, Edwards and Kucinich represent the best of the Democratic party of my generation (boomers).

Democrats used to be a "big tent" party. George McGovern and George Wallace ran against each other for the party nomination in 1972 for Christ's sake! But now, anyone who fails to vote correctly 100% is demonized as a DINO and treated to scorn. This a a self-defeating and self-destructive strategy...we're being manipulated into crucifying our best candidates (see multiple anti-Barack Obama threads) by people who are little more than Republican shills...

Its time to get a grip, and start being proud of the fact that we're Democrats, instead of apologizing...

I'd like to nominate February 12th, the day Howard Dean becomes party chairman, as a day of pride for all Democrats, leftist, liberal, moderate, conservative or whatever.

Its a new beginning.

[moggie12]

14. Well, gosh, thanks -- very few people use the word "interesting"

in reference to my writing (or in regard to me, for that matter).

I like your idea of Feb 12th being Democratic Pride day. It really could be a new beginning. I think the Democrats have gotten a bit lost the past four years, but that maybe -- between Howard Dean, Harry Reid, and Barbara Boxer -- we're on the way to finding our voice. If everybody can get behind all three of these people, we have a good shot at exposing Bush and Rove and those folks for what they are.

[Rowdyboy]

16. I'm just surprised that someone else can see the connection between

Dean and Clinton so clearly. They are anything but enemies, people, they're comrades.

I really like the idea of 2/12 as a celebration! Democratic Pride Day. I may just have to suggest it!

[RealDems]

12. Interesting... you've found the "third way"

between Dean and the "third way." Wouldn't that make it a fourth way?

[moggie12]

17. LOL - that it may be a "fourth way" shows how confusing this all is

I just think if we could take Dean's economic populism and merge it with Clinton's pragmatic approach, we'd be winning elections hands-down. The whole debate about shifting to the left or going towards the center seems too simplistic. We need to do pieces of both -- take the best from each somehow........

By the way, welcome to DU! :hi: