The Democratic Party Still Doesn't Get It

By Scott Galindez, Reader Supported News

08 April 17

efore I get going, this is not a case for a third party. I still believe we have a system that is rigged for the two largest parties and other efforts are a waste of time and energy. I believe the route to power in America is through either the Democratic or the Republican party.

That being said, I do understand the principled arguments for a third party. I understand my friends and political allies who believe the Democratic Party doesn’t represent their views. The Democratic Party often disappoints me as well. I choose to stay and fight for a party that does represent my progressive values.

I believe that most rank and file Democrats do have progressive values and think the party is liberal. Many, however, are influenced by a belief that we have to water down the message to win elections. While they believe in single payer healthcare, they don’t think the American people will vote for candidates advocating that, so they don’t fight for it.

They believe in a living wage, but they don’t think it is achievable, so they fight for smaller raises in the minimum wage. The believe higher education should be free, but they are scared to fight for it. On issue after issue, many Democrats are afraid to fight for what they believe.

Progressives are making progress. Have we transformed the Democratic Party? The answer is not yet. We have a long way to go. Many Democrats are still influenced by Wall Street and other corporate interests. Too many progressives are still only fighting an outside strategy. They are ignoring the inside game and conceding control of the party to those who are afraid to fight for what they really believe.

Too many progressives have given up on the Democratic Party. Their skepticism is understandable but unwise. Conceding the Democratic Party to those acceptable to corporate interests has led to the Republican control of our government. Too many Democrats think moderation is the answer and fear that going too far to the left is not the answer. They still don’t get it. Voters want to vote for something, not against something. They are tired of voting for the compromise candidate.

While moderation is a logical argument, it isn’t working. The Tea Party took out many moderate Republicans by fighting for what they really believe. The Tea Party didn’t moderate their message, and they helped the Republicans take control of all three branches of government. What they did was motivate the Republican base. The “third way” Democrats were diluting the Democratic Party message while the Freedom Caucus was moving the Republican Party to the right.

The pundits and all the experts expected the Republican Party would overreach and voters would punish them at the ballot box. It made sense; the GOP was moving too far to the right. Voters at some point had to punish them. That was the smart strategy, wasn’t it?

What the Democratic Party ignored was its shrinking base. The move to the center was accompanied by an exodus on its left. Some became involved in the formation of the Green Party and even more just became independent and gave up on electoral politics entirely. The result was Republican gains in places like Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Even Illinois elected a Republican governor, and during the last few decades of redistricting the Republicans drew the maps in state after state.

The Tea Party Republicans understood that if they fought for what they believed and organized for it, they could motivate their base and win elections. Democrats thought they needed to moderate their message to attract independents and moderate voters. Rahm Emanuel and his ilk were out there recruiting centrist candidates to try to take back Congress. More people were voting Democrat in election after election, but the Republican Party was increasing its majority in the House and taking over more state governments.

The lesson the Democrats didn’t learn is that organizing around issues moves the country’s opinion. The Democrats were not making a case for single payer healthcare. Democrats were not fighting for a living wage. Democrats were not fighting against student debt. Democrats were not fighting for criminal justice reform. Luckily for them, grassroots activists outside the party were organizing around these issues and moving the country. Democrats were baffled: the country was more progressive, but the Republicans kept winning elections.

What the Democrats don’t realize is they no longer represent their base. Their base was in the Fight for 15. Their base was struggling to forgive student debt. Their base was in the Black Lives Matter movement. Their base was fighting fracking and the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines. The Democratic base was organizing outside the party structure and felt ignored by the party.

Then along came an independent candidate from Vermont who was singing their tune. They responded and nearly made him the nominee of the Democratic Party. He scared those in the party who thought the country would not vote for someone so “radical.” They ignored signs like the success of the Fight for 15 movement. They thought they had to run a more centrist candidate.

They were correct that the only success they have had recently was with a centrist candidate. Barack Obama was an exceptional candidate. He motivated the base because he had a gift. He could make everyone think he was speaking to them. He was able to overcome the weaknesses created by the direction the party was taking. Progressives turned out to elect the first African American president. They were later disappointed by the way he governed, but they did turn out and vote for him.

Even with Obama at the top of the ticket, the party lost ground. Trump winning in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania should be a wake-up call, but for many, it is not. They point to the popular vote and blame the Russians for Trump’s victory. Or they blame the Bernie supporters who either voted for the Green Party candidate or stayed home. They blame racism and sexism. All of these excuses did play a part. But there was another major reason that was more responsible. What they still don’t get is that they didn’t represent their base and give them a reason to turn out. Instead, they depended on voters rejecting Donald Trump, and they failed to excite their base.

Grassroots movements did their part; it is time for the Democratic Party to catch up to the people they should represent. It is time for the Democratic Party to serve the people and not the almighty dollar. Big Money already has a political party. The problem is Big Money has two, one they embody and the other that is in their pocket as an insurance policy.

Scott Galindez attended Syracuse University, where he first became politically active. The writings of El Salvador's slain archbishop Oscar Romero and the on-campus South Africa divestment movement converted him from a Reagan supporter to an activist for Peace and Justice. Over the years he has been influenced by the likes of Philip Berrigan, William Thomas, Mitch Snyder, Don White, Lisa Fithian, and Paul Wellstone. Scott met Marc Ash while organizing counterinaugural events after George W. Bush's first stolen election. Scott moved to Des Moines in 2015 to cover the Iowa Caucus.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.