05/30/2002 Archived Entry: "Dems vs Greens; US Senate races: KY, MN, NJ"

Dems vs Greens
I don't understand why Democrats are so perplexed, or angry, to see the Greens running in 2002, especially in area's like the Maine and MA Gov race, or the US Senate race in MN. Here's the DLC focus for 2002:

"Office Park Dads" the DLC calls them. These are men between the ages of twenty-five and fifty, non-union members, moderate, stockholding suburbanites who comprise about 15 percent of the electorate and voted for Bush at the last minute in the 2000 elections. They generally prefer Republicans, but identify as independents, the DLC reports. Yes, the guy ahead of you with the Bush bumper sticker on his S.U.V., commuting from Sprawlsville to the suburbs will, if the DLC has its way, determine the outcome of the next election.

With the DC Democratic Party establishment and leadership "100%" behind Bush's military agenda, and the DLC putting out Republicrat stuffing like the above, it shouldn't be shocked to see the Green's growing.

There was already a fair amount of progressive grumbling in Minnesota over Wellstone's votes authorizing Bush's military response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, as well as past votes supporting military actions in the former Yugoslavia and Iraq. "We want to give people in Minnesota the opportunity to vote their conscience . If they're opposed to military actions in the Middle East, the Patriot Act, the sanctions on Iraq," says Brian.

This "opposition" to the so-called Patriot Act, the War on Terror, and the increased expenditures toward the US military probably represents about 10-15% of the US population, with about half of those likely to vote.

This brings me back to an earlier point that has been made, on the growing rift within the Democratic party between the nationalists and the globalists. The Greens, contrary to the media's portrayal as being anti-globalisation, are themselves an international movement (it's a delicate balance, not conducive to sound-bite coverage).

The traditional Democratic Liberal wants to do good in the world, but puts America's concerns ahead of other nations, with protectionism and status quo favored over free-trade and reform. However, these traditionalists embraced a new kind of Democrat in the 1980's and 1990's. The DLC'ers, with its combination of Blue Dogs and the New Democrats are mostly free-traders, whose idea of reform is for the business profits, and political contributions, to go up. The formerly liberal Democratic Party, in bringing in Clinton/Gore and the DLC'ers made this bed, and now have to deal with the Green growth. Greens, at least in theory, put international justice ahead of capitalist rhetoric, and believe in thinking globally, acting locally. This puts the progressive Democrats, like Wellstone, in the middle of the Green-leaners and the DNC-like Democrats. And the way that the progressives have acted toward both Nader and the MN Green Party, is exactly the wrong way that the Democrats should respond to the Greens.

If the DNC has identified the "Office Park Dads" as the next new thing for the Democratic voter, that's fine. Just do so expecting a bit of Green growth on the side, which isn't a bad thing at all. Let the Greens push the agenda, and let the Democrats win the elections. Democrats make a mistake in blaming Greens for their defeats. Perhaps they should look at the Republicans attempts to blame Libertarians for their defeats, to see how silly this argument looks from a non-biased perspective.

Just the same, if Greens want to run candidates against Reich and Wellstone, they shouldn't expect the Democratic party to become more progressive in their election rhetoric, as they are rushing toward to middle to look for the lost vote. Greens make a mistake in saying that Democrats are the same as Republicans. I had hoped that Nader would run an honest campaign, recognizing the difference between Gore and Bush, amongst the other difference in the 2000 campaign. He didn't, and instead portrayed the Greens in a self-righteous theme that turned-off at least one former Green, Nader ('96) voter.

Instead of scapegoating and discouraging the Greens, the Democrats should ignore them, realizing that any Green success pulls the debate toward common goals. Less than 50% of those eligible don't vote, that's whose minds the Democrats should concentrate their energies upon changing.

US Senate Races:

MN
That being said, the guy who is running on the Green ticket in MN for the US Senate, besides the ecology-minded pseudo-religion, sounds more Republican and DLC-like than a Green. Of course, his likely .025% could make the difference, but probably not. It's more likely that the Independence Party in MN plays a bigger role in the US Senate election than any other 3rd Party candidate. For instance, say, Ventura runs for re-election, and manages to have Tim Penny run on the I-ticket for the US Senate.

KY
Weinburg has an uphill battle against McConnell in the US KY Senate race. We can expect a GOP push-opinion-poll out any day now that shows McConnell with a 30% lead in the race. The tight primary race she had with Barlow shouldn't be seen as totally negative. It caused a lot more coverage than would have occurred, both in KY and nationally, and a win's a win. The bonus for Weinburg is the increased name recognition due to the coverage. McConnell's re-elect numbers are below 50%. She will need more than McConnell vs Reform to win, and high name recognition will help her.

NJ
I would personally favor Diane Allen to win the Republican nomination, and possibly upset the incumbent Toricelli. Seeing the wingnuts react to a pro-choice, anti-death penalty RINO would be a sight. However, I don't think she will win the nomination. Forrester should win this primary, given the expenditures he's made, though I doubt he can beat Toricelli.

Replies: 1 Comment

Baldacci likely to win in Maine no matter what. Penny is popular enough in Minnesota that he may be able to pull it off if he runs. However, Ventura is not very popular. Weiberg has little chance against McConnel, which brings me to the New Jersey race. Although I am not a fan of Torch, I hope the New Jersey voters in the General Elections look at the bigger picture: Do they want Trent Lott and the southerners run the show and confirm right wing justices? That is exactly what would happen if they elect the GOP candidate whoever that might be. Allen, Snowe and Collins are not going to prevent right wing justices from being confirmed. That is why Jeffords left the GOP. I hope they get Forrester and the right wing Garret in Roukema's district. May be the Dems would have a better chanace.

Posted by G.C. Raj @ 05/31/2002 06:49 AM PST