Skip to content

Are the Democrats Learning?

It seems that, perhaps, the Democrats have learned some lessons from their experiences over the last 12 years. This is a remarkable phenomenon, since as recently as a year ago, Joe Biden seemed determined to learn nothing, as he predicted that the Republicans would have an epiphany should they lose the election in 2020. We’ve all seen how that worked out, but apparently Biden put that belief aside long before the moment when that epiphany was supposed to happen. Now we have a couple of other encouraging developments.

If you want to change your ways, it helps to admit your mistakes, and apparently the Democrats are coming to terms with one of the biggest mistakes they made:

As Democrats pushed this month to pass the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package, they were eager to rebuke Republicans for opposing en masse a measure filled with aid to struggling Americans. But they had another target as well: the core policy of President Barack Obama’s first-term agenda.

Party leaders from President Biden on down are citing Mr. Obama’s strategy on his most urgent policy initiative — an $800 billion financial rescue plan in 2009 in the midst of a crippling recession — as too cautious and too deferential to Republicans, mistakes they were determined not to repeat.

It wasn’t just Obama. I can’t recall a single Senator questioning this strategy, though I may be wrong about that. Despite evidence that proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Republicans would obstruct and do nothing else, Democrats continued to pay lip service to the fairy tale that they could bargain in good faith with McConnell and his ilk. Even Susan Collins played them, trading an affirmative vote for neutering the bill by making it heavily skewed toward unnecessary tax breaks for…well, you know who for.

Besides acknowledging that there’s no use bargaining with Republicans, Democrats are also facing up to the fact that they can’t allow the Republicans to frustrate the Democratic agenda by using the filibuster. Dick Durbin’s recent speech can only be interpreted as the opening shot in a campaign to change the rules to render the filibuster fairly toothless. It also may mean that they have persuaded Manchin, Synema and Feinstein that they must get with the program, and pronounce themselves satisfied with whatever fig leaf they are given so they can claim that the filibuster survives.

Mitch McConnell wouldn’t be making threats about what he will do if back in power if the filibuster is destroyed, if he wasn’t afraid that the end is near, and those threats provide further proof that the Democrats have learned their lesson, since they have essentially responded that he would do those things anyway if he took power once again. The filibuster has never served the purposes of progressives; it has always been a weapon of the right. They want to use it now to make sure they can keep the federal government from interfering with the states that are trying to disenfranchise Democratic leaning population groups. If the Senate does not pass HR 1, we can pretty much kiss Democracy in America good-bye.

If the Democrats want to maintain control of the House and Senate (while hopefully expanding their majorities) they have to prove to the people of this country that they can deliver. Republicans don’t need to do that; all they have to do is feed the base red meat, suppress the vote where possible (with the help of the right wing judiciary), and convince a slice of the electorate that there’s no use voting. They do the latter by harping on the theme that the Democrats have failed to deliver on promises. It was exactly that strategy that they used against Obama after he agreed to the weak tea that was the stimulus bill of 2009.

It appears that the Democratic establishment may have learned what has been obvious to us dirty hippies all along. Here’s hoping they pull it off.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.