As we wait to see what Congress will do on FISA, I thought the Democrats could use a reminder:
When Sherrod Brown prevailed over Paul Hackett in the primary for the Ohio senate, many Democrats became nervous; Hackett, an Iraq War veteran, seemed like a more viable option to run against incumbent Republican Mike DeWine than the unabashedly liberal Cleveland congressman whose record on the hot-button social issues was completely progressive. In the fabled state that won the election for Bush in 2004, it seemed like a bad idea to run a candidate whose record was to the left of John Kerry’s. Well, as it turned out, Sherrod Brown proved to be an excellent candidate. Instead of fudging his answers and trying to make himself look like something he wasn’t, he proudly stood up for his principles, emphasizing his economically progressive ideals, but without attempting to conceal his stances on the social issues. His unapologetic championing of the disadvantaged called to mind another progressive who never backed down from his core beliefs: the late, great Paul Wellstone.
Over in Missouri, then-State Auditor Claire McCaskill waged a tough fight against Jim Talent, the incumbent GOP senator. The stem cell initiative was on the ballot in that state, a potential risk in a state with such a high number of evangelicals. It was, therefore, a pleasant surprise when McCaskill put Talent on the defensive on that issue, and on the issue of abortion, in nearly every debate. In a key appearance on Meet The Press, Talent lobbed Republican talking points at McCaskill, and, rather than attempting to fit her responses into those frames, she effectively twisted them around to leave Talent as the weaker candidate, hemming and hawing and making excuses for his every statement. McCaskill’s margin of victory was small, but in a very conservative state like Missouri, it was enough!
Out on the ranges, where libertarianism runs strong, the Montana senate race saw a battle between two very colorful characters: the doddering embarrassment Republican Conrad Burns, who was often looked upon as something of a senile uncle even by his fellow GOPers, and the plain-spoken, buzz-cut-sporting Jon Tester, who won the senate primary over a less progressive state official. Burns trotted out the old canard of fearmongering, trying to to use Tester’s opposition to the PATRIOT Act as a political bludgeon. Had Tester been a weaker candidate, he would have attempted a nuanced explanantion, trying to convince people that he could be patriot without supporting the PATRIOT Act, accepting the right wing’s frames instead of creating his own. Luckily, Tester unleashed the no-nonsense directness that is a trademark of the Mountain West; in one key debate, in which Burns accused Tester of wanting to “weaken” the PATRIOT Act (clearly a standard GOP frame, portraying the Democrats as weak on terror and weak in general,) Tester famously responded, “I don’t want to weaken the PATRIOT Act, I want to repeal it.” Had John Kerry been anywhere near this bold in 2004, Bush would not have had a second term.
After looking at the victories of Brown, McCaskill, and Tester, I now turn to the only high-profile loser on our side, Harold Ford Jr. of Tennessee. Yes, I am well aware of the racist tactics that the Republicans used against Ford in the infamous “Call Me” ad (a frame-by-frame analysis is available here,) but I remain convinced that a stronger candidate, one with more backbone and more confidence in his own platform, would have been able to fight back and prevail. Ford embodied the ideals of a DINO at best. He appeared in a clumsy ad in a church, going too far into the territory of unsubtlety in an attempt to prove his religiosity. (I had serious flashbacks to John Kerry’s 2004 proclamation of himself to be the “candidate of conservative values.” The minute we accept the GOP frames, we’re dead in the water). On the campaign trail in ’06, Ford frequently trumpeted his opposition to gay marriage. He spoke in tones that ranged from cautious to mildly complimentary toward Bush’s Iraq policies, all the while distancing himself from the Democratic leadership in the senate. In short, he ran as a Republican. And why would anyone vote for a Republican who doesn’t have the conviction to actually run within the party that actually represents the conservative values he preaches, when they could vote for an actual Republican whose voting patterns are more sure-footed?
You see where I’m going with this. 2006 was a Democratic tidal wave, yet Harold Ford lost because of his own spinelessness and willingness to act like a Republican. The moral of the story here is to stick to your guns, champion your own progressive record, and be who you are.
Yes, Dorothy, progressive politics really are popular. Show some spine and you will be rewarded. Say ‘no’ to Bush and fear-mongering and law breaking. It’s not so hard and it actually feels good.
