Candidates have term limits. Ideas don't.

[EconomicLiberal]

One of the things that has really dissapointed me in the last few president elections is that the Democratic candidates are unwilling to take a stand for anything other than their own election and re-election campaigns.

Don't get me wrong. It is nice that Obama was elected. I am happy that a Democratic president was elected after 8 long years of Bush Co. But where are the coattails? The only way to prevent Obama from being more than a one term president and then the Rethugs taking over is to stand for IDEAS.

I am very dissapointed that our presidential candidates have run from the world "liberal", or hell, even "progresive".

Instead, they stand for vague ideas like "change" or "I'm better than the other guy". While these techniques have the ability to get our politicians elected (look at Obama for example), they have very little in the way of coattails.

Let's be honest here. Obama was intentionally vague his entire campaign. While he shares some of the same positions as many of us loyal Democrats , he ran as his own entity. He didn't run as an extension of the Democratic Party. He ran for his own self fulfillment, his own election chances.

There was very little discussion from Obama about the rapidly growing income inequality that defines trickle down economics. How our jobs continue to ship overseas due to free trade. How our unions continue to be under attack. These are all progressive issues. Obama didn't run on any of these issues. He ran on "change". The Rethug candidate in 2012 will carry the "change" banner. Obama is the establishment now. He's not going to get away with that in 2012.

One of the things that Obama was lambasted for in the primaries was his claim that Reagan changed the trajectory of American politics in a way Bill Clinton didn't. God knows I hate that POS Reagan will every fiber of my being, but he is correct in this instance. Reagan stood for an idea. He stood for small government conservatism. I think all of us here know the follies of his ideas, but he stood for something. Bill Clinton stood for getting re-elected. His rapid swing to the right after the 1994 midterm debacles secured him re-election, but it provided the Democratic Party very little coattails as W won in 2000.

Will Obama make the same mistake? Will he run to the beat of his own drum to get re-elected, swerving and swinging right, or will he forge a liberal coalition like FDR did that dominated the Democratic Party for 3 decades? The only way to do this is to run on progressive IDEAS. Change the trajectory of American politics in a way that Bill Clinton didn't, Obama.

[EconomicLiberal]

1. kick.

Thoughts?

[wjbryan]

2. How much control does the Democratic Party have over locals?

Suppose we organized a Progressive faction of the Democratic Party significantly to the left of the leadership. We would build our powerbase independent of the DNC, but still compete electorally in Democratic primaries, especially at the state and local level.

What options and recourse would the Democratic leadership have to counter our influence? Would it be possible for them to expel us, or disqualify us from the primaries?

[EconomicLiberal]

3. How could they disqualify us from the primaries?

We'd be part of the Democratic Party, but we'd be a well-organized and cohesive wing of the party that aspiring Democratic politicians could not ignore. Much like the Religious right wing of the Republican Party. The RR is tremendously organized, has millions of members that subscribes to its philosophy, and yields considerable power of the Republican power structure.