Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Democrats' Rural Rebellions
Democrats looking to Washington during the long, hot summer for signs of their party’s renewal got little in the way of relief. President Obama’s approval ratings tanked after he compromised away historic Democratic positions in the debt-ceiling fight. The party’s Congressional leaders, who in the spring had seemed prepared to fight off Republican attempts to erode Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, sent so many mixed signals that it was difficult to tell whether the party wanted to fight austerity or embrace it.
Yet beyond the Beltway, a different story has been unfolding. And it holds out promise for a party that needs not just hope but a coherent strategy for the 2012 election season. Dramatic overreach by newly elected Republican governors, who sought to curtail labor rights, undermine local democracy and slash spending for education and local services, has provoked a backlash that draws stark ideological and political lines on fundamental economic questions. And that is winning substantial Democratic victories in unexpected territory, including rural areas where the party suffered its greatest setbacks in 2010.
In Wisconsin, where Governor Scott Walker and his allies stripped most collective bargaining rights from public employees and teachers in an attempt to render public unions toothless, unions and their allies bit back. The same Wisconsinites who protested in the streets in February and March forged a grassroots recall campaign against the politicians who had denied the will of the people. The initiative so rattled Walker’s Republicans that they spent millions organizing recall campaigns against three Democratic senators from Republican-trending districts. That set up a summer of nine recall elections—all of them in districts that had voted for Walker in 2010.
Against an onslaught of outside spending by billionaire conservative donors and their front groups, Democrats defeated two Republican senators and retained all three of their incumbents. This gave the Democrats a 5–4 winning record and a majority of the votes cast in districts that had favored Walker by higher margins than the rest of the state had just nine months earlier. The results collapsed the GOP advantage from 19–14 in the Senate to 17–16, meaning that Democrats and a moderate Republican who broke with Walker on the collective bargaining issue can form a majority to block the governor’s most extreme initiatives. That’s not the clear control Democrats had wanted, of course, but even the Senate’s Republican leader says the emphasis now will have to be on cooperation. And Walker—whose approval ratings are lower than Obama’s—is talking up bipartisanship as he scrambles to avert a recall threat to his tumultuous tenure.
Ohio Governor John Kasich, an ideological soulmate of Walker’s, got the message. After the Wisconsin results were announced, Kasich began pleading with opponents to help him rework legislation he had signed to undermine collective bargaining rights in Ohio. His hope was to thwart a November referendum that seeks to overturn the law using an old reform tool that allows voters to veto offensive legislation. Taking a signal from Wisconsin, and from Ohio’s own remarkable effort to collect 1.3 million signatures (four times the necessary total) to qualify the statewide vote, the We Are Ohio coalition’s Melissa Fazekas declared, “We’re glad that Governor Kasich and the other politicians who passed SB 5 are finally admitting this is a flawed bill. Just like the bill was flawed, this approach to a compromise is flawed as well. Our message is clear. These same politicians who passed this law could repeal it and not thwart the will of the people.”
There’s a confidence level on display in the states that goes far beyond what is being heard in Washington these days. It is rooted in the fact that state-based Democrats have found winning issues in their fights to defend labor rights, public services and public education against a GOP austerity agenda that cuts taxes for billionaires and corporations while placing greater burdens on working families in a period of high unemployment and economic uncertainty.
In New Hampshire, where Republicans scored unprecedented victories in 2010, the GOP is losing House seats in special elections that have turned on the question of whether legislators will override Democratic Governor John Lynch’s veto of an antilabor “right to work” law.
In Maine, where Governor Paul LePage may well be the most extreme of the new Republican leaders, Democrats are not just winning special elections. They are seeing spikes of nearly 20 percent over the party’s 2010 vote totals for candidates who bluntly declare that they are determined to fight the LePage agenda, which has extended so far as to attack child-labor protections. The national Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee notes that Democrats are running on average nine points better than they did in the same districts in 2010. And the DLCC says they are “performing as well now as they were in [the 2008] election—and in fact winning additional seats lost in that election,” as was the case with the defeat of the two Wisconsin Republican senators who survived the Obama landslide.
Perhaps most remarkable is where the Democrats are winning. Most of the recall elections in Wisconsin, as well as many of the special elections in other states, have taken place not in cities but in rural areas. Of the forty Wisconsin counties that were entirely or partially in Senate districts that saw recall races, twenty-three voted Democratic, and four more gave the Democrats 49 percent or more of the vote. Democrats were not just winning counties that voted for Walker in 2010; they even won several counties that voted for John McCain in 2008. That’s a big, big deal, because the national Democratic setbacks in 2010 came overwhelmingly in rural areas, with thirty-nine US House seats in the most rural Congressional districts flipping from the Democrats to the Republicans. That represents two-thirds of GOP Congressional gains, and it parallels patterns that tipped gubernatorial elections and control of legislative chambers.
President Obama and the DC Democrats know they must do better in rural areas; that was the whole point of the president’s mid-August bus tour of small-town Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois. But the president and his aides still don’t quite get what’s working at the grassroots. It’s not soft messaging about rural development, and it’s certainly not comments like the one Obama made in Iowa about the need for “shared sacrifice” from teachers and public employees, who long ago began taking cuts to help balance local and state budgets. What’s working is a clear “Which side are you on?” message when it comes to defending rural schools and services, and the teachers and public employees who provide them, against a Republican austerity message that shifts even more of the burden from the wealthy to working families.
“Schools and services are what keep small towns strong,” says Wisconsin Senate Democratic leader Mark Miller, who represents a number of rural communities. “If the fight is between Democrats who want to defend pubic schools, public services, and Republicans who want to sacrifice them in order to give tax breaks to the rich, that’s when you’ll see rural voters shifting back to the Democrats. It’s started working in Wisconsin, it will work in Ohio and, if they get the message in Washington, it will work nationally in 2012.”
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



29 Comments so far
Show All"Which side are you on?" A meme that always plays well, especially for those who only perceive reality through the prism of "either/or." It's a great way to limit the field of contenders, and narrow the conversation. It also aligns with the sports world, and the premise that only two teams can hold the field, and compete, at any given time... revealing (by numbered score) an evident winner and loser.
Although I cannot do the former poster Rich M justice, he was the one who opened my eyes with respect to how much both parties play into a shared scenario. John Nichols herewith describes the battles that were long ago won, that Republican governors (not because they're ideological soul mates, as he contends--but because they have all been giving the same marching orders and talking points from the same financial interests that backed them) have eroded--by the stroke of their pens--all of these benefits. Welcome to the new state by state monarchy!
Is it a victory to be forced to defend what one already owned?
Is it a victory to see citizens so abused by the Republican governors' over-reach of power, that they're forced into the D corner... yet again.
By these play-outs, the conversation moves to the rich, as does policy; and increasingly demoralized workers/citizens are forced to accept crumbs! Then someone like Nichols hops on board to call it a victory????
That is NOT a victory. Instead, it's an indication of how the illusion of a two-party state operating to send wealth into fewer and fewer hands, in spite of the evident misery (rising levels of homelessness, jobless "recovery," decimation of public education, denied union rights, ruination of the environment we all depend upon, etc!) remains in place.
I wonder, when John Nichols get naked in the morning to take his shower, what the mirror says to him... can he face himself there?
Thanks Sioux for saying it best. I remember when you once asked the question of what a child is supposed to do when the father is abusive and the mother not refuses to fight back but also chooses to be the enabler in partner. I think that Nichols is like that lost child but that there is something, based on the class that he's in, that keeps him from correcting his own fundamental weaknesses that you described very well. By the way, in some of the books on eastern thinking and psychology that I have been reading out of interest and getting convinced that I will improve from there, a lot has been written about spiritual idealism and why it takes a stronger mind more than actions alone to make the changes happen. Based on that and what I understand so far, I could apply it to this situation and guess that it could be that Nichols is picking up on selected actions while leaving his mind as weak as can be. I can't say that I haven't had that kind of a weakness myself and as much as it hurts me, I must confess that you're right that I try harder to break out of it. Thanks again.
Very nice insight- souix.
Nichols position seems to asserting that progressivism is about chasing one's tail. The drama might be fun to watch, filled with laughs, but when the dog stops to to catch its breath, what you find is he did not go anywhere in the first place.
Progressives like Nichols seems to be forever chasing their tails. They don't like Obama, but whatever the other team of the duopoly sends to the plate, it needs to be fought tooth and nail via the Dem Party.
No other option exists for people of Nichols ilk. His only option is to follow the yellow brick MEME of "Take Back The Dem Party from Within." As if that fairly tale is truly an option given the money changers already own the entire system.
The battle is not about progressive value ingress of significance into the corrupt system at all: it is rather about positioning oneself ideologically where one thinks the people are willing to go - or not go - and then trigger incremental movement minimally along the curve while not reaching too far in either a left or right direction.
This is -- and always has been -- the correction rigged into the corporate controlled system. We can never expect anything more profound, or more radical than small incremental steps that toggle back and forth .
In my view, the only option for meaningful change not predicated on corruption is to hope for an entire melt-down of the Super Structure of an order of magnitude that makes the Great Depression look like a walk in the park. This can happen when economic suffering continues its downslife leading to revolution, or -- perhaps -- a new consciousness takes hold through the collective archatypal forces of our mutual humanity where honor and justice lead the way... but that world is only in our highest ideals never seen in HIStory...
That's called: "GoodGuy/BadGuy". No matter which party gets elected, the government is always in control.
MEL
As Alan Macdonald would say, more and more people are seeing through the two-party duopoly Vichy facade. This forum, especially those willing to call it like it is, may help to grow their numbers. Truth CAN be contagious!
My advice for political action in general and the upcoming elections in 2012 - don't live or die wth Obama. Consider your principles - what you think is right and wrong, focus in depth and get involved (politically and non-politcally) on the issues, and vote for whomever you think best fits your views and has reasonable chances of enacting them. Pay at least as much if not more attention to who you want your local, state, and national representatives (other than President) to be and what they stand for.
Well put and I'm afraid that we Americans will have to learn to strengthen our minds and will power or something like that.
It's sad that so many progressives STILL think their is salvation to be had within the corporatist Democratic Party despite all of the evidence to the contrary. President Hopey-Changey is staking his reelection on the billion or so dollars he's going to raise from Wall Street. He never cared about the little people before other than to pay lip service to con them into voting for him, and he certainly isn't going to suddenly change now.
Bill ... Good comment. Has any Dem ever cared about the little people? Dems and Repubs do what they do. They have a long history. No one should expect them to change now. I'm voting NADER, as I have for more than 30 years.
Seems like Nichols is just reciting the happy talk, psychobabble optimism that has created an USAn society instilled with mindlessness. I once subscribed to the Nation but found it disappointing because it persists in the 2 party system which puts it on the philosophical level of competitive sports without the talent and integrity of two sports teams.
The hairpiece strikes again.
Keep the deception alive!
It's too bad John Nichols can't see over the border into Illinois,
where the democrat governor Quinn has been able to begin implementing the same agenda as Walker pushed in Wisconsin,
only WITH the support of the teacher's union.
Nichols is putting so much lipstick on these pigs, he's a one-man Revlon stock support group!
Ain't this "our man" John Nichols on the job? Do we have any dissent out there? "Hep me!"
The good news is that the Republicans are losing support. The bad news is that the voters are turning to the Democrats. We're still stuck in that lesser-of-the-evils trap.
At the risk of being redundant: Hooray! The Democrats are winning back control of government! I know it's a dream but, what if...what if they get a majority in the House, a SUPER majority in the Senate, AND the White House?? Wow! Can you imagine, do you have the audacity to HOPE...? Why we'd get, um, the same sh-t that got us into this mess, Democratic Party sell-out. How many fuc-ing times will hypnotized, narcotized 'Merkins fall for this?
I think that this sums up the silliness of this article very well and I like your wit and sense of humor. Thanks. :-)
What everybody else said.
It's true enough that on the local and state level, Democratic politicians can, on occasion or in certain areas, be more responsive to the ordinary unprivileged citizen-- e.g., in districts with more supportive and/or less affluent constituencies.
But Nichols inflates this phenomenon into the implication that it's a force for bottom-up reform of the national Democratic party-- that with sustained and vigorous Democratic grassroots activism, local politics can and will function as a tonic or transfusion to incrementally energize the national party and institutions-- Washington-- into moving progressively leftwards.
Like his suggestion that Obama and other Democratic Elected Misrepresentatives on the federal level are merely mysteriously "out of touch", this is the stuff of social fantasy.
I live in the poorest congressional district in Pennsylvania & no one even bothers running, either in primaries nor in general elections, against our Democrat.
He votes with oil interests and the military-industrial complex.
A case can be made that "safe", poor Democrat-only districts are exactly the ones least served by government.
Obedient Servant wrote:
It's true enough that on the local and state level, Democratic politicians can, on occasion or in certain areas, be more responsive to the ordinary unprivileged citizen-- e.g., in districts with more supportive and/or less affluent constituencies.
But Nichols inflates this phenomenon into the implication that it's a force for bottom-up reform of the national Democratic party-- that with sustained and vigorous Democratic grassroots activism, local politics can and will function as a tonic or transfusion to incrementally energize the national party and institutions-- Washington-- into moving progressively leftwards.
Like his suggestion that Obama and other Democratic Elected Misrepresentatives on the federal level are merely mysteriously "out of touch", this is the stuff of social fantasy.
* * * * *
My Comment:
Obedient Servant,
I agree.
John Nichols positive, feel good efforts to spin the tale of a national Democratic Party that can be moved to defend labor and help the middle class and the poor is sickening and pathetic.
You are right. "This is the stuff of social fantasy."
People aren't as stupid as the media pretends. People are voting against the Republicans locally because they know it's in their interest. Nationally the Democratic party is a joke and people know it. Obama is not for those people in the rural areas that are voting Democratic. He couldn't give a rats ass about them and the fact that he hasn't done a thing to help them in their fight just shows whose side he is really on. Fuck the national Democratic Party, fuck Obama and fuck John Nichols, Any progressive who still supports them is an ignorant moron.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
Federal level Dims and right-wing Dim governors keep giving birth to the same neo-lib/neo-con Damian Demon Baby policies. And the serious, complicated problems this country is drowning in DEMAND intelligent populist progressive national policies to address them. The failed national Democratic Party MUST BE REPLACED WITH SOMETHING BETTER.
Those Democratic voters pushing back against run amok neo-con Republicans and scorched earth, pluto-libertarian Tea Party puppets at the State level need to free their minds from their partisan identification with the neo-liberally straightjacketed Democratic Party and organize with as many unions as possible--then call on the members of the Progressive and Black Caucuses in their States to bolt the failed national Dimcrap Party and join THEM to build an independent national movement that can field it's own candidates.
Americans elect [http://www.americanselect.org/] may be a way for us to circumvent the FEC/DLC/GOP lock on the nomination process so all members of such a new movement as I describe can become delegates to nominate their own candidates who will be automatically accepted on the ballots in all 50 States. I'm still researching this.
We've got to innovate and think outside the Republicratbagger box. We no longer have time to play by their effed up DLC/GOP rigged FEC rules in their game. We must find ways AROUND them and their crooked game so we can focus on what matters: Electing our own candidates that actually represent working-class Americans to enact our own reforms. This country doesn't have time to piss away on rallying around the failed Dim McCause. Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama ARE the poster boys of that treacherous "free trade," anti-union, anti-working-class, anti-middle-class McCause.
To Democratic voters: STOP PARTICIPATING IN YOUR OWN CON WITH THESE FEDERAL LEVEL DEMOCRATS.
Insidious liberal underminers backing an egregiously, neo-liberally failed national Democratic Party like Nichols and The Nation should be IGNORED. All they will do as election cycles build is endlessly rally liberals and pwogs around the country around the "leadership" trashed Dim banner--a path straight to hell paved with nothing now but ILL INTENTIONS, TRANSACTIONS OF PLUTOCRACY, ASSAULTS ON THE MOST VULNERABLE, DESTRUCTION OF FUNDAMENTAL LIBERTIES AND RIGHTS, ENVIRONMENTAL SUICIDE, MORE "WARS OF CHOICE" AND MORE DEATH.
Our 'FDR' peace and jobs candidate Obama has opened my eyes. A person can pretend to represent the people and lie profoundly while actually representing the worst of oligarchy. I see his whole party now in that light. Thank you, Barry. I am no longer voting in the sucker booth, as it's a useless endeavor. You have freed me from my delusions. Bless you Mr. President.
There are many ways to vote without getting near the polls.
Voting is easy and takes basically no effort - might as well lodge a protest vote and Vote for a 3rd party and send a message that you Reject the 2 party scam.
Nichols is Tops on the list of dem apologists -
Obama is a complete sellout - and as the Oilybomber is the Top democrat the party walks basically lockstep with him.
Many 1st time voters finally came to the polls and pulled the lever for O because they bought the PR campaign that he was Different. Now that it's in-your-face obvious that Obummer isn't different these 1st time voters have wandered off and WON'T VOTE AGAIN.
Hence Lower Turnout in 2010 and during the Wisconsin Recall Elections - and in 2012. If O really wanted to do the right thing he'd be working at Increasing Turnout but it's obvious he is doing eveything in his power to Decrease Turnout by depressing his base.
the more the obomber turns to the right and sells out Main Street for the big monied kleptocratic banksters the more people will Opt Out of Voting.
Screw Nichols analysis - most of the CD commentators are more factual and accurate in their analysis than this shill.
" If O really wanted to do the right thing..."
That's a funny one!
I'm sure the thought never crosses his mind, out there on the Vineyard in his $25,000 a week rental.
He's doing whatt he was selected to do: Further the capitalistic, imperialstic and militaristic agenda, and undercut opposition from the left by providing a pretty black face and false humanitarian sounding speeches
"...pretty black face..."
I never found this man in any way attractive, nor his spouse, despite Vanity Fair.
-30-
I actually think he is good loooking. Just goes to show you can't judge a book by its cover.
In Iowa we defeated all 6 regressive Republican policies favoring corporate hog factories etc. last year. See Iowa CCI, the leader in the victories.