Political Cortex: Brain Food for the Body Politic

 As Howie Klein recently wrote, many of  Rahm Emanuel's most cherished "business friendly"candidates are not on the list of winners, and many of the names that are, are men and women who he either actively fought or just ignored.  Case in point is Carol Shea-Porter.  She had little name recognition, little money and almost no support from the national party, but her pull no punches criticism of the Bush Administration attracted the grassroots and netroots, and their efforts paid off with her victory in Republican dominated New Hampshire.  Yes, we do have power.

The question remains, however, how do we use that power?  I was bothered in the days leading up to the election by comments on this and other blogs by people who stated that we need to let Democratic candidates say what they need to say to get elected or ignore their voting record - just support them because they are Dems.  Now, I understand this argument and I agree with it to a certain point, but absolute adherence to this "strategy" relinquishes the power that we have.  I am not saying we should not support a Democratic candidate based on his or her position on one issue, but what if it become multiple issues?  Do we simply ignore a candidate's support of torture, domestic spying, scapegoating of minorities, or business friendly votes because they are a Dem?  If we do that, then we have effectively lost our power.  The inside-the-beltway establishment will know they can do or say almost anything and that volunteers at the netroot and grassroot level will simply return to the fold come election time.  Worse yet, it will mean far too many people will remain uninspired by the Democrats and simply not vote at all.

Our power lies in supporting or not supporting candidates.  Some will argue that it is during primary season that we should voice our displeasure with an incumbent candidate and attempt to oust him or her by finding an alternative candidate.  It certainly worked in Connecticut with Ned Lamont, but how many multi-millionaires are out there waiting to challenge Democratic incumbents?  Others will argue that a Democratic candidate in a red state must pander to the Christian right and redneck voters in order to get elected.  I disagree.  I believe a powerful populist economic agenda can be successful in culturally conservative areas.  It was successful in the South over one hundred years ago during the Populist Movement and has proven to be successful recently with the likes of John Edwards, Peter DeFazio in Oregon and Gene Taylor in Mississippi.  However, this type of message is frowned upon by the DLC types in Washington who believe that in order to be successful, the Democratic Party must abandon working-class roots and embrace the agenda of big business.

Again, as Howie Klein, stated in his recent post,

Emanuel gave no help- or too little too late help- to many victors and, worse still, near victors, while squandering a fortune on his shill candidates, many of whom lost. These shills, like Rahm himself, don't represent the people of a district; they represent national and business interests often antithetical to working people and consumers and to the very values and principles the Democratic Party is built around.

If we are to change this inside-the-beltway mindset then we must be willing to not support candidates who practice business as usual - no volunteers, no financial support, no netroots.  This may mean getting a Republican elected, but it would send a powerful message to Rahm Emanuel and others that we want quality candidates who will go to Washington to work on issues that matter to the majority of people in this country.  No one said this was going to be easy, but then again, using your power effectively is not an easy task.  It means making tough decisions, but failure to make these decisions will only render us powerless in the end.