Jim Webb: "I've been warning" Democrats

Wonderful Piece - spot on! (4.00 / 1)

Your piece, that is...Webb is absolutely correct in his analysis and I am quite happy to have him as a senator.  He may not like "being a politician" but he is one, and reads the winds quite well, and I suspect his decision will rest somewhat on the political winds in Virginia next year.  

The important thing to take away from this is that we Democrats need to really stand for something - Bush-II never engaged in 'transactional' - they wanted the whole loaf, so they demanded two and left it for us to push them back to just one!  On ever single issue.  Obama has been a middling "make nice" non-confontational guy while the other side is unabashed and unrestrained at every single turn.  

Of course, I'm another TR fan...how the hell did Lincoln and Roosevelt wind up in the GOP?  At least there is this consolation: TR was despised as a RINO and neither would be welcome in that party today.

Enough "GOP-lite" from the Democrats!

---

by: scott_r @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 14:03:08 PM UTC

Parties Have Changed (0.00 / 0)

Lincoln was the first candidate for president of the new Republican Party, which was a business-friendly party that opposed the spread of slavery into western territories. The Democrats were the party that defended slavery and wanted it to be an option for the west.

TR was the product of a progressive backlash to the first Gilded Age of rule by plutocrats. (I firmly believe we are living in the second Gilded Age.) President McKinley was a tool of nineteenth century corporate interests. Roosevelt was on the ticket as vice president over the objections of many in the party. When McKinley was assassinated, TR became president.

I personally believe that the Democratic party lost its "populist soul" after Ronald Reagan was elected and the "southern strategy" of the GOP had succeeded. Southern Democrats, including Chuck Robb in Virginia and Bill Clinton in Arkansas, formed the Democratic Leadership Council...sort of the corporate-friendly, centrist wing of the party. As labor unions withered, manufacturing jobs went overseas, etc., that became a dominant force in the party. As long as lobbyists for corporate interests and corporate money - along with the rich - fund our elections, I don't see any change possible.

I hope Jim Webb will run again, but he might not. I certainly don't want George Allen back in the Senate.

---

by: Elaine in Roanoke @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 14:46:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Erm. (0.00 / 0)

"... evolved too strongly into interest groups rather than representing working people."

I'd be a lot happier with that sentence if he'd said "all working people." Reminds me a little too much of the ugly Hillary Clinton line about "hard-working Americans, white Americans."

---

by: somethingblue @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 15:17:29 PM UTC

I strongly doubt (0.00 / 0)

that he meant what you're implying. I read it straight, as an admonition for the Democratic Party to represent working people - all working people. Having said that, I can understand why people might be a bit suspicious, given Webb's anti-affirmative-action writings. In this case, however, I think the suspicion is misplaced.

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 15:24:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's hard to tell. (0.00 / 0)

Kuhn places the comment in this context:

Webb is weighing my report the morning after the election: Democrats won the smallest share of white voters in any congressional election since World War II.

That makes it sound like the "interest groups" are non-white people (perhaps also women and gay people), and "working people" are white.

I'd certainly like to think that Webb's "interest groups" means hedge-fund managers, insurance executives and defense contractors. But I'm not sure it does.

Then again, I don't feel any particular confidence that Kuhn is representing the context honestly.

---

by: somethingblue @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 15:43:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rust Belt (0.00 / 0)

I think we do have a problem in the rust belt.  There, too many people can't see a way forward, either for themselves, or for their children.  More to the point, this is something that has been going on for at least two generations in many areas (in some areas, even more).  Add to this a declining population base (meaning more young people move away than stay) and you now have young people who can't see a way forward and an increasing demographic of older people.  And when you get that combination, people,(for lack of a better word) cling harder to the things in their lives that give them a sense of worth and define who they are.  (This includes, but is FAR from limited to things like guns and religion.)  When this happens, Republicans, who, for the most part, are less about change temperamentally and structurally than Democrats, gain a natural advantage.  And this is a problem that has been building for a long time -- I've watched the county where I grew up, just outside of Pittsburgh, fall a little more into Republican hands with every election since 1980.

Part of the elitism charge (which is mostly rhetoric, but rhetoric doesn't take root if there isn't some feeling for a listening to attach to it) comes, ironically, I believe, in the mostly Republican notion of the meritocracy.  If you have done well in life, very few people seem to believe that they weren't the main force in why that happened.  It's human nature, coupled with a great American as individual mythos.  The downside is, of course, that if you did NOT do well, then that must be your fault.  That's a lot to put on someone's head, and in years like now, when we're in recession and too many Americans out there simply can't handle on more responsibility on top of the ones they are already caring, it comes out in starker relief.

---

by: GretchenLaskas @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 15:47:28 PM UTC

Really spot on, as others have already said (4.00 / 1)

 FWTW, I saw Webb on election night at Gerry Connolly's party, and he shook his head at the overall results and said to my husband that the Democrats have to stop ignoring the working people.

When it comes to economic populism and a concern for issues such as income inequality and the well being of the middle class, he's the real deal.  I hope he chooses to run again because he's the one willing  to fight for the unpopular causes like this and prison reform.

He can indeed be maddening on some issues, like the environment.  But he's got an independence from the corporate Dems that have been selling the middle class down the drain while Wall Street executives continue to amass huge bonuses for essentially driving the economy into a ditch.

---

by: AnonymousIsAWoman @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 18:09:33 PM UTC

It's Webb's populist views that allows me to tolerate some of his misplaced deference (0.00 / 0)

to the military and CIA types on foreign policy and related issues, like DADT, on which he can really be irritating some times.

In contrast, I haven't found a single redeeming aspect of Prince Mark's portfolio.  He's just dead wrong all the time.

---

by: martinlomasney @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 23:58:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ditto (0.00 / 0)

---

by: libra @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 01:47:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Generally Argee with Webb but will NOT vote for him (0.00 / 0)

I believe he says one thing and does another. He and Warner talk of leadership but themselves stay hidden.  Where are they?

Where is the Democratic Party leadership - gone.
Who does the Democratic Party represent - Ain't me.

I strongly suspect what you will see in the next two years is capitulation after capitulation. As republicans dismantle every social safety net and service for the working poor and what's left of the middle class in America, where will Webb and Warner be? most likely at a cocktail party.

What Webb fails to mention is that he and Warner are part of the problem with the Party. No, because Webb writes an article does not mean he believes it or works toward that goal. Warner was a good Governor but an unseen and unheard Senator.

Before you dismiss me, ask yourself, why didn't the base come out and vote? I AM THE BASE, insult me and you don't get my vote or money. Lie to me, cheat me, treat me as a problem and you will ALWAYS be a minority party. I gave my time and money to Gerry, but Webb and Warner, nope, I see nothing but talk.

---

by: Mike1987 @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 00:13:48 AM UTC

I think you're wrong (0.00 / 0)

to think of Webb and Warner as if they were two peas in one pod; they're not. You say:

As republicans dismantle every social safety net and service for the working poor and what's left of the middle class in America, where will Webb and Warner be? most likely at a cocktail party.

That may very well be true of Warner but definitely not of Webb. I watched both of them when each came here during their respective runs and their behavior and comfort zones were entirely different. Webb doesn't mind the ordinary and the sweaty; it's having to be nice to the big donors that makes him uncomfortable.

Warner is just the opposite. I remember him coming, in '08, to the Dem booth at the County Fair, where we were "peddling" all the runners. The appearance -- meet your future Senator -- was scheduled to last half an hour. He came 10 minutes late, rearranged some materials on the table so that his stuff would be more visible than Obama's and Rassoul's (our candidate for the House of Representatives), forced himself to shake hands with us (yes, we were sweaty; it's an open air event so there was no AC), noticed the press -- such as it is, locally -- wasn't there, and left 10 minutes early.

Additionally, for a small "investment" (I can't afford a large one), I'm still getting e-mail updates from Webb about his legislative initiatives, what they'll do for VA and for the country if passed, etc. 4 years after the fact. Warner? For about 6 months, I used to get e-mails with photos -- Senator Warner with X, Y and Z, at an A, B, and C event. After 6 months, even those "no substance" messages ceased.

There's no comparison.

---

by: libra @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 02:11:49 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Warner V Webb (0.00 / 0)

There is no contest.

I've written to Webb before, and he's sent me letters and replies via email. Obviously from his office, but still..

I would then get emails about what Webb was trying to do in the Senate. For Virginia. For the Country. I haven't had one in a while, but still.

Warner?

The only emails I get from him are from his damn "ForwardTogether" PAC in which he asks me for money to fund centrist (do-nothing) candidates.

Warner is certainly still better than James "Failed on the Car Tax" Gilmore would have been as a Senator, but he's been pretty damn disappointing on his own.

I'm not going to say Webb is a super ultra Progressive hero, but the way he carries himself, and the way he seems to genuinely care about people - this article being just one piece of that evidence - makes him my preferred Senator.

I'm definitely voting for Webb in 2012 if he runs again, barring some epic bus-throwing-under episode between now and then. Warner? I honestly am starting to hope he quits after one term.

---

by: hrprogressive @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 03:21:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Okay, Warner is not exciting (0.00 / 0)

But it is still better to have him than to have one of the nutcases that the GOP will come put forth. Sure, he doesn't display the leadership that we wish to see, or even side with his more progressive base to keep them happy, or even has the decency to respect them. But he is not a Republican who will be more than happy to really work hard on dismantling the social fabric.

I have a lot more respect for Webb. I may not agree with him all the time, but he got the economic part of the equation correct.

I know that it is not exciting, but let's remember 2000. After the election I thought, "how bad can it be?" It was proven to be very, very bad.

---

by: Hugo Estrada @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 02:36:19 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

You must be joking. (0.00 / 0)

Are you confusing leadership with whoever makes the most noise and has the most camera time in the Rotunda?  Webb joined with Claire McCaskill to push a Truman type commission through to investigate the scandalous state of private contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan.  He pushed through a new GI Bill, advocated very strongly for things beneficial to our troops such as increased dwell time at home and access to much expanded veterans' services.  He's fought the loss of Virginia jobs with the current DOD plans for Norfolk and Hampton Roads, and opposed moving a supercarrier to Florida for what seemed like no particular reason.  Webb has attacked the incarceration crisis with vigor, running seminars, gathering testimony, bringing together reform advocates to try to stem the horrifying effects of a current system which sees young people - particularly young minority people - being sent to prison for years for non-violent drug crimes.  Their communities and families have been decimated by the hardline, zero tolerance policies and he's about the only Senator who's really taken notice and gone front and center to argue for substantial reform.

Just what are YOU doing besides complaining?  Webb understands that Democrats have largely ceded the blue collar working stiff's ground to the Republicans and he's trying to bring that to the party's attention.  Back in the 40 through 60s the blue collar white working stiffs were all Democrats.  He's trying to get Dems to see that working white people aren't the enemy and if we're going to succeed we need to get them to the point where they understand that their interests run parallel to the interests of minorities and women.  What he means by "interest-based" politics is that too much is made of particular niches within the Democratic community without attention being paid to the big picture.  Dems DO allow themselves to get sucked into stupid distinctions between the interests of, say, rural white people versus urban minority people.  They allow the Republicans to define the parameters of the debate by making it about particular groups instead of what it should be about, which is an entire demographic consisting of everyone who isn't a Wall Street gazillionaire taking billions in bonuses while asking the same said working stiffs of all hues, genders, and sexual orientation to take the hit for them because being in business is "so hard" these days.  

---

by: Catzmaw @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 03:24:06 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

What Am I Doing (0.00 / 0)

I vote, I volunteer, and I give money. Webb AND Warner have demonstrated NO leadership. I have not seen one time where Webb or Warner have stood up to the Repuglies and said NO, this is wrong. Not once have I heard him delineate moral rights and wrongs that are core principles that guide you as a champion of the working man (or women).
What am I doing? Not voting for either. That's what I am doing.

---

by: Mike1987 @ Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 00:59:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

What If (0.00 / 0)

I would like to see us start a discussion of What IF.....What If Jim Webb says he is not running...what do we do then?  Who would the good candidates be?  Is it Tom P?  Is there someone else...Is there someone one in the state legislature?  We need to start thinking...just in case

---

by: vaambition @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 16:04:52 PM UTC

Tom Perriello would make a terrific (0.00 / 0)

Senate candidate IMHO.  I hope Webb stays in there because he's actually working very hard and has a lot of stuff on the table which I'd like to see him continue working on.  Thing is, if he does decide not to run the potential replacement most likely to continue Webb's work would be Tom P, so I'm all for him.  He's young, energetic, and unapologetic about his progressivism.  He can't be intimidated and he's no will of the wisp adjusting his viewpoint to the prevailing winds.  He'd be very attractive to the more liberal parts of Virginia, particularly Northern Virginia.  

---

by: Catzmaw @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 16:27:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree 100%. (0.00 / 0)

I hope Webb stays, but if he decides not to - or, if he really doesn't have his heart into running full out - then I say "Go Tom!!!"

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 16:31:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm looking forward to Webb's Steering Committee comments. (0.00 / 0)

I think what Webb has to say in unvarnished, even blunt, language at the Steering Committee meeting about the state of the DPVA Friday evening the 3rd of Dec. will be well worth the drive down to Newport News. He does have a way with words, and what he says about the need for a strong, energetic and pro-grassroots chair with real leadership abilities may well determine who is elected Saturday morning by the Central Committee members.

With Harry Reid returning as Senate majority leader, and remembering a comment Webb made some months ago that "this is no way to legislate" in the context of Reid expecting Senators to vote on a 2,000 page Health Reform package they'd never seen just three days before they were expected to vote on it, I have a feeling Webb might just decide another two years of putting up with Reid will be enough for him. Webb can probably get most of his remaining top initiatives passed in two years.

And I agree that Tom would be a great candidate to replace Webb if Webb decides not to run for re-election.

---

by: Tom @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 17:26:03 PM UTC

Ok and if not Tom (0.00 / 0)

Is Tom the only candidate?  If thats the case...that we only have one guy....then thats a tough position that we find ourselves in...he cannot be the only Progressive in Virginia...and what if Tom does not want to do this?

---

by: vaambition @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 18:28:14 PM UTC

Do you have any suggestions? (0.00 / 0)

n/t

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 18:36:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

My thoughts... (0.00 / 0)

I think Tom would best serve by waiting until 2013 and running for Attorney General. Reason being that 2012 will come faster then we realize and whoever runs will be tied to Obama. That may be a great thing it may not be. We already know that on his own Tom can gin up turnout and excitement. His problem is that VA-05 is to the right of the rest of the state. Tom will only be 39 in 2013 and can run to clean up Cooch's mess. Given how flamboyant Cooch has been whoever runs from the GOP will be tied to him and Tom running will be a great thing for the Democrats. However if Allen gets the nod for the GOP (I see no reason why he won't if he is in which I think is 95% likely) Allen's opponent has an immediate floor of 45%. Allen will never crack 55% in a Presidential year. Allen has a lot of negatives and in a Presidential race the turnout will be a lot less white and a lot younger. Could Kaine beat Allen? I think Kaine may be too damaged to even beat Allen. Possibly a generic Democrat in the mold of Kay Hagan may be the Dems answer if Webb doesn't run again.  

---

by: Cool_Arrow @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 19:37:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]