Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Progressive Change Campaign Committee angles for a conversation, or a meeting, or a summit, or something, with the Clinton camp

MSNBC:

Hillary’s critics on the left may finally have the opportunity they’ve been waiting for.

Adam Green, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, one of the groups most closely associated with the so-called “Warren wing of the Democratic Party,” said his organization reached out to Clinton’s camp before the election and that a meeting was coming “very soon.”

He declined to name the Clinton advisers with whom he’s been in contact, saying discussions have so far been limited to “conversations about having conversations.” “We want to keep as open a line of communication with Hillary Clinton and her team as possible,” he told msnbc.

Well, is the meeting coming, or are they having a "conversation" (hate that word) about the meeting? Mush.

The meeting will hopefully [indeed] be a precursor to a larger summit with more progressive leaders and Clinton herself. “The more the merrier,” Green said. “Individual meetings are useful, but progressive movement-wide meetings would be really smart for her.”

Their message is that Clinton should adopt the kind of economic inequality issues championed by Warren, both for substantive and political reasons. “This is the path to victory in the primary and general election,” Green and co-founder Stephanie Taylor wrote in an op-ed in The Hill.

Well, let's suppose these guys get their meeting. What kind of outcome could the PCCC get from Clinton that make this meeting, or conversation, or summit, or whatever it is, worth paying attention to? What's "the iron price"?

I would say some policy commitment from Clinton that would drive the conventional wisdom dudes in the Beltway nuts. Anything from the 12-Point Platform, for example. If Clinton came out in favor of single payer, or a minimum wage of $15.00 an hour, or Free Public Education, K-16, that would be paying the iron price.

Of course, it's far more likely that Clinton meeting with the PCCC would have exactly the same outcome that Cuomo meeting with those idiots from the Working Families Party did: Clinton would promise something vague, then renege, then set up a parallel and competing voice to the PCCC.

NOTE Also, it's not the mushy "inequality." It's "class warfare."

0
No votes yet
Updated: 

Comments

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

interesting C-Span forum.

A political reporter who covers FS Clinton, Maggie Haberman, (she's on one of my Twitter accounts--she is very friendly in her reporting) says that generally the people who surround FS Clinton would welcome someone to run to her left--so that she wouldn't have to run to the left. (Also, FS Clinton wouldn't have to take all the slings and arrows coming from the Repubs.)

IOW--scary 'socialist' Bernie Sanders, and all, LOL!

Never mind that Sanders wouldn't "say boo" to his shadow, and always toes the Establishment Dem Party Line.

Sorry--but you know how much 'hype' I think the talk of his liberalism, is.

Although C-Span broadcast the panel live, they did not "tape it" so that I could embed it for you guys.

Here's the forum roster, though:

So whether it's Sanders, Webb, or O'Malley--some Democratic Party primary challenger will serve as a "foil."

From the election spin, I'm hearing all the corporatist/Third Way Dem shills/strategists (like Jonathan Cowan on C-Span, several days ago--President of Third Way) say that Democrats ran TOO populist of a campaign in the midterms (never mind that this is a ridiculous statement, and a 'falsehood.')

Convenient, huh?

;-)

Now, some reporters don't agree with the above. The MSNBC reporter, Alex Seitz-Wald, was on with Julie Mason today.

He thinks that the meetings are meant to see if they can avoid running a primary challenger. IOW, if they can get enough populist rhetoric out of FS Clinton--these groups may not support a primary run against her.

I suppose that time will tell, who is correct.

Oh, here's what Alan Seitz-Wald wrote in his piece:

Their message is that Clinton should adopt the kind of economic inequality issues championed by Warren, both for substantive and political reasons. “This is the path to victory in the primary and general election,” Green and co-founder Stephanie Taylor wrote in an op-ed in The Hill.

We'll see.

***************

Don't know about the voting demographics from Webb's Senate race against George Allen, but seemed to me a pretty accurate description of him from all that I've read.

IMHO, Webb could definitely do better than Sanders or O'Malley with working class Americans. (especially Southerners)

He's been against more than one of our Middle East engagements, and has definitely sounded a populist message (economic).

He wrote this WSJ Op-Ed (it may not be the entire thing--can't tell)

16 November 2006

Jim Webb on "Class Struggle"

The most important--and unfortunately the least debated--issue in politics today is our society's steady drift toward a class-based system, the likes of which we have not seen since the 19th century. America's top tier has grown infinitely richer and more removed over the past 25 years. It is not unfair to say that they are literally living in a different country. Few among them send their children to public schools; fewer still send their loved ones to fight our wars. They own most of our stocks, making the stock market an unreliable indicator of the economic health of working people. The top 1% now takes in an astounding 16% of national income, up from 8% in 1980. The tax codes protect them, just as they protect corporate America, through a vast system of loopholes.

Incestuous corporate boards regularly approve compensation packages for chief executives and others that are out of logic's range. As this newspaper [The Wall Street Journal - bc] has reported, the average CEO of a sizeable corporation makes more than $10 million a year, while the minimum wage for workers amounts to about $10,000 a year, and has not been raised in nearly a decade. When I graduated from college in the 1960s, the average CEO made 20 times what the average worker made. Today, that CEO makes 400 times as much.

In the age of globalization and outsourcing, and with a vast underground labor pool from illegal immigration, the average American worker is seeing a different life and a troubling future. Trickle-down economics didn't happen. Despite the vaunted all-time highs of the stock market, wages and salaries are at all-time lows as a percentage of the national wealth. At the same time, medical costs have risen 73% in the last six years alone. Half of that increase comes from wage-earners' pockets rather than from insurance, and 47 million Americans have no medical insurance at all.

Manufacturing jobs are disappearing. Many earned pension programs have collapsed in the wake of corporate "reorganization." And workers' ability to negotiate their futures has been eviscerated by the twin threats of modern corporate America: If they complain too loudly, their jobs might either be outsourced overseas or given to illegal immigrants.

"Class Struggle"; Senator-Elect Jim Webb (D-VA), writing in The Wall Street Journal, November 15, 2006

I wouldn't underestimate Webb. He is the only Senator that I have ever seen to talk populist rhetoric on the Sunday Talk Shows other than Sanders and Warren (not that I believe any of them).

And we all know that most corporatist Dems wouldn't dare touch the topic of "economic populism," with a ten-foot pole.

This all goes back to what I said Charlie Cook's been saying--Democrats cannot scare up white votes in the South, anymore. Or very few.

That's "why" Landrieu ran an almost populist campaign this election cycle (not that she meant a word of it, I'm sure).

She had no choice--and she still may lose.

Just my 2 cents . . .

nippersdad's picture
Submitted by nippersdad on

I agree with Lambert, this is just an opportunity for her to start the lying campaign early. No one at this point should ever confuse her with a populist and yet they seem to want to give her the opportunity to do just that. It is the WFP all over again. I haven't donated to Blue America since the Tester/Webb/....debacles.

These groups seem invested in making themselves irrelevant.

jo6pac's picture
Submitted by jo6pac on

could thrown in a free lunch it still a waste of time.