The Death of Triangulation

Eli Pariser's Washington Post op-ed should get Hillary's attention. Here's what Pariser writes:
Ned Lamont's victory Tuesday night in Connecticut's U.S. Senate primary is great news for Democrats. And it's a watershed moment for the growing majority of Americans, in red states and blue, who want change.
It's understandable that Pariser wants to hype Lamont's primary victory as this great "watershed moment" in American politics. It is in one sense: It's a defining moment for Democrats. What it isn't is a moment where common sense people go flocking to Democrats.
  • People will notice how naive Ned Lamont is on national security issues.
  • People will notice how much attention Ned Lamont gets from national Democrats.
  • People will notice how much attention Ned Lamont gets from the Agenda Media.
When they see these things and hear what Lamont stands for, they'll question the Democrats' sanity and wisdom. They'll do that because Ned Lamont's policies will tell the world just how unserious Democrats are in protecting us from Ahmadinejad, Hezbollah and other bad actors on the world stage.
But you'd think Democratic strategists would be jumping for joy; after all, they should be able to ride the anti-incumbent feeling to victory in November. Instead, we hear the perennial pundit nattering about moving the party too far to the left.
I just read that the Republican base is getting more energized for voting this fall. If that report is accurate, then all this huffing about an anti-incumbent wave will be proven as punditry at its worst.

Pariser is right that Democratic candidates, especially Hillary, will have to pay greater attention to the Nutroots gang. That's a watershed moment in and of itself but not the type of watershed one should be proud of.



Posted Thursday, August 10, 2006 5:04 PM

July 2006 Posts

No comments.

Popular posts from this blog

March 21-24, 2016

October 31, 2007

January 19-20, 2012