Quo vadis, Obama?

In his column of June 30, 2008, noting how similar the current election feels to those of 1980 and 1992 Paul Krugman reflected on a set of important and related questions regarding Obama's "real" agenda: If elected, would be "a Ronald Reagan of the left," bringing about significant change, or "just another Clinton"? Is he moving to the right, as he has done in recent weeks, because he thinks he has to in order to win big, which would then allow him to bring about major change? Or does his "triangulation and poll-driven politics" actually make it harder for him to win? What is the relationship between how a candidate campaigns and how he governs? And perhaps most importantly, is Obama a "transformational figure behind a centrist facade," like so many progressive activists would like to believe, or actually a centrist behind a transformational facade. How much is substance and how much is style?

To these important questions, Krugman tentatively suggests a few answers. They are also relevant for progressive strategy and the ongoing debate on how best to nudge Obama to the left, difficult as this is likely to be, especially if he doesn't move much by himself.

For now, Krugman concludes, Obama looks more like Clinton, and pretty centrist. The parallels between Clinton and Obama are indeed noteworthy: Projecting the image of transcending traditional divides; not more but smarter government; the economic plan; etc.

Krugman concludes:

In any case, what about after the election? The Reagan-Clinton comparison suggests that a candidate who runs on a clear agenda is more likely to achieve fundamental change than a candidate who runs on the promise of change but isn’t too clear about what that change would involve.

Of course, there’s always the possibility that Mr. Obama really is a centrist, after all.

One thing is clear: for Democrats, winning this election should be the easy part. Everything is going their way: sky-high gas prices, a weak economy and a deeply unpopular president. The real question is whether they will take advantage of this once-in-a-generation chance to change the country’s direction. And that’s mainly up to Mr. Obama.

Indeed, there has been the concern all along that Obama raises very high expectations in trying to win the election, which he then can't meet once in office, because of the power structure he enters, and because of the very bad shape this country is in. I wish I could share Krugman's optimism that it is "mainly up to Obama" which direction this country takes. I am afraid that even a very progressive Obama could only do so much.

This is precisely where progressive strategy comes in. While for electoral strategists getting Obama elected is the ultimate goal of strategy, in our understanding it is, if not the beginning, at best one component. For immediately, the question becomes: Now what? How to move Obama to the left? This raises the crucial strategic question of how best to articulate what we call movement-electoral strategies to get progressives elected, and then, once in office, how to hold them accountable to a progressive agenda.

A New Blog to Advance the Conversation among Progressives

Mike Lux, a consultant for progressive organizations, today announced the creation of a new blog, OpenLeft.com, to advance the conversation among progressives. OpenLeft is not yet active, but will be launched next week. He will be joined by two of the leading progressive bloggers, Chris Bowers and Matt Stoller, who previously blogged at MyDD. In August 2005, they published "Emergence of the Progressive Blogosphere: A New Force in American Politics," the first report on the role and potential of the netroots in progressive politics.

In his article, he expresses their intention to bring together his expertise within the Democratic Party and establishment with their experience of blogging and organizing to contribute to the formation of a lasting progressive movement and majority.

This is very similar to what we refer to in our report as "movement-electoral strategies," and what Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) call their "inside-outside" strategy. Likewise, Bill Domhoff also considers the transformation of the Democratic Party into a more progressive organization as the best option progressives currently have. It is striking how similar these approaches are. An In These Times article in May, "Dancing Into the Majority," reported primarily on how PDA, but also other grassroots organizations are making progress in working together with the Democratic Party. The current editorial of The Nation, "Get In It to Win It," suggests a similar approach.

Here is how Lux articulates his credo and approach (in excerpts):

We are all strongly committed to building a strong and progressive movement and an enduring progressive (not just Democratic) majority. We are all weary of politics as usual and an elite political establishment that cares more about staying comfortable and less about really making most Americans' lives better. We are all believers in the ground-up and democratizing movement-building power of the netroots, and are excited about the innovative strategies of that movement. That unity in terms of values and mission will make OpenLeft.com a powerful place to do movement-building and strategic initiatives. (...)

I have always believed that the progressive movement needs both kinds of folks. I am convinced that when big changes have happened in American history, it is at the intersection of dialogue between insiders and outsiders, between the sympathetic people inside the party structure and the outside movement beating impatiently on the door, between blunt and angry agitators and diplomatic bridge-builders. (...)

When progressivism fails, it is a failure of both the party insiders and the movement -- political leadership that is too comfortable with the status quo, outside movements whose organizing is lethargic, and bad strategy for both. That is the story of the last three decades. Fortunately, things are beginning to change, and OpenLeft.com wants to be at the center of that conversation: how can the progressive movement best rebuild and revitalize ourselves? How should progressive institutions change? How should Democratic politicians make their party both more strategically effective and better at delivering on the things that will really make a difference in the lives of their constituents? Those kinds of questions, and more, with honest and open dialogue about what the answers are, will be discussed daily at OpenLeft.com.

We are happy to find so many references to strategic considerations, and are looking forward to participate in the conversation on how best to transform the Democratic Party into a more progressive and more powerful organization.