Michelle Obama addresses the crowd at the Democratic Natrional Convention at the Pepsi Center in Denver on Monday, Aug. 25, 2008. (AP Photo/(Darin McGregor/Rocky Mountain News)
We’re broadcasting live from Denver on Day Two of the Democratic National Convention.
Last night, Senator Ted Kennedy, battling cancer, made an emotional appearance in Denver. He kept the old torch burning for the faithful: “The work begins anew. The hope rises again. And the dream lives on.”
And Michelle Obama introduced her family to the world in primetime, spoke of herself and her father, and brought the big arena to its feet: “He said we know what fairness and justice and opportunity look like. And he urged us to believe in ourselves, to find the strength within ourselves to strive for the world as it should be. And isn’t that the great American story?”
Hilary Clinton speaks tonight. It’s a huge moment to test whether the party can come together and reconcile its inner struggles.
But those struggles don’t just center on big personalities, or the Obama-Clinton rivalry. Off-stage, Democrats are grappling with how to define their core philosophy. Progressives want Obama to return to the party’s liberal ideals. Conservative Blue Dogs see things very differently. This battle could define an Obama administration.
This hour, On Point: Live from Denver on day two of the Democratic National convention, we’re talking about progressives, Blue Dogs, and the battle for the center of the Democratic party.
You can join the conversation. Will it be “Happy Days are Here Again” for liberal progressives if Obama takes the White House? Are more conservative Blue Dogs wagging the dog of the Democratic party? Should they? Tell us what you think.
-Tom Ashbrook
Guests:
Joining us at our broadcast booth in the Pepsi Center is Rep. Allen Boyd. He represents Florida’s 2nd District, which includes Tallahassee. For the last ten years, he has been a leader of the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of 47 Democratic Members of the House of Representatives who advocate fiscal responsibility in the federal budgeting process.
Also with us from Denver is Arianna Huffington, editor-in-chief of the Huffington Post. She’s carrying the flag these days for progressives. Her new book is “Right Is Wrong: How the Lunatic Fringe Hijacked America, Shredded the Constitution, and Made Us All Less Safe.” You can read an excerpt here.
We’re also joined here in Denver by E.J. Dionne Jr., columnist for The Washington Post and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. His latest book is “Souled Out: Reclaiming Faith and Politics after the Religious Right.” You can read the first chapter here.
And with us from Hanover, New Hampshire, is Jack Beatty, On Point news analyst and a senior editor at The Atlantic Monthly.
More links:
In an “open letter” to Barack Obama titled “Change We Can Believe In,” progressive standard-bearers at The Nation, concerned about Obama’s “more cautious and centrist” stances during the summer, urge the senator “to stand firm on the principles he so compellingly articulated in the primary campaign.”
Earlier this summer, Salon.com’s Glenn Greenwald said “Let’s give ‘Blue Dogs’ the Boot,” and argued that pushing conservative Democrats out of Congress might help the party stand up to the GOP.
More recently, in “Blue Dogs point way with ‘Paygo’ rules,” Gray Sasser, chairman of the Tennessee Democratic Party, called attention to the Blue Dog Coalition’s leadership on fiscal policy.
And in a piece last week headlined “Liberal Democrats Turn on One of Party’s ‘Blue Dogs,’” The Wall Street Journal’s Brad Haynes reported on Democratic Pennsylvania Congressman Chris Carney’s fight with the progressive online activists of Blue America.
Meanwhile, Amy Sullivan of Time magazine asks “How United Are the Democrats?,” and finds that “the Democrats who will gather around the gavel in Denver are actually more united than perhaps at any other point in the past 30 years.”
Tags: 2008 Democratic Convention, 2008 election, politics
I hate to say this but I think the Democrats are going to lose the presidency and win more seats in the two houses.
I hope Obama wins, but it’s starting to look as if the Republican smear machine is going to convince the general public that the Democrats are in cahoots with satin and are unpatriotic. It’s seems to be working. The American people who by and large seem to me to be to be very uneducated with matters of politics, are always fooled by this BS.
Posted by jeff, on August 26th, 2008 at 10:30 am EDTThere will be three losses if B. Obama loses in ‘08.
1. Obama ‘08 of course,
2. Hillary ‘12
3. Hillary ‘16
If that does not fire up the reticent Hillarians, then I don’t know what will.
Posted by Frederic C., on August 26th, 2008 at 10:44 am EDTArianna has it right on the money in her comments about the vast difference between Obama and McCain on issues such as healthcare. The caller who claimed that Obama would have voted for authorization for the war along with Kerry, Kennedy, etc was wrong about Kennedy. He voted against authorization.
Posted by Judy, on August 26th, 2008 at 10:44 am EDTOne of many sad things about the divisions that Clinton has engendered is that those divisions do not reflect deep policy differences. As far and I can tell, Hillary was fighting to the bitter end for Hillary, not for any particular platform that would provide a legitimate rationale for disunity, or which could be resolved by modifying the party platform.
Posted by Gordon, on August 26th, 2008 at 10:55 am EDTF.Y.I. I am a Hillarian. The primaries have given new light to the state of the feminist (a beautiful word) struggle to make equal opportunities for women. If history can show that Hillary supporters put Obama over the top in ‘08, the gains will be greater than if he loses.
Posted by Frederic C., on August 26th, 2008 at 10:55 am EDTJack Beatty is right on. its a disgrace to talk about progressives and ignore corporations. Did any of Teddy Roosevelt’s (republican) progressive reforms effectively survive? Neither Obama or Hillary have much to say about corporate restraint.
Posted by Nate, on August 26th, 2008 at 11:08 am EDTI didn’t hear most of it; did anyone point out how heterogeneous the New Deal coalition was? For an example: Klansmen and their chief bug-a-boos (urban Catholics and Jews, rural black people)?
Yes, it did help the Klansmen stay in the ascendant a bit longer (being in charge of the relief money and jobs gives you power) but it set in motion events that led to their losing a lot of power and living to see their kids vote Republican.
Posted by Gerald Fnord, on August 26th, 2008 at 11:09 am EDTAs a long-term Democrat, I think “division” in the Democratic Party is being way too hyped up by the media and today’s On Point demonstrates to me that WBUR succumbed to this type of media coverage. This is very disappointing.
The media, including WBUR, is responsible for strengthening the polarization between supporters of Obama and Clinton. This is a disservice to the Democratic Pparty and to those of us who see little difference between the two in terms of their ideals or their policies.
Yes, there are some differences but many more similarities. That we are focused on the differences speaks to the larger problem of negative and divisive programing that WBUR has seemingly fallen prey to.
Posted by Linda L, on August 26th, 2008 at 11:13 am EDT“it’s starting to look as if the Republican smear machine is going to convince the general public that the Democrats are in cahoots with satin”
As long as it’s satin from fair-traded, renewable resources such as organically-fed silkworms, and not polyester from imported oil, then I don’t see the problem with Obama getting his funding from the textile industry.
One of many sad things about the divisions that Clinton has engendered is that those divisions do not reflect deep policy differences. As far and I can tell, Hillary was fighting to the bitter end for Hillary
The fact that we’re discussing this so long after the primaries shows how much damage the Clintonistas have done. The fact is that if Obama loses this will become part of the political legacy of the Clintons (both Bill and Hillary). It’s not too late for them to decide which is more important: their egos or the Democratic party. But it’s almost too late.
Posted by Peter Nelson, on August 26th, 2008 at 11:15 am EDTniether obama or hillary have much to say about corporate restraint.
Why should they? The Democrats are just as much in the pockets of big corporations as the Republicans. This is not to say that there’s no difference between the two parties - I much preferred the 8 years of Bill Clinton’s presidency to the years that followed.
But let’s be realistic here - the corporation is THE defining institution of our culture. Many Americans have a closer, more frequent relationship with Verizon and Apple and McDonalds and Microsoft than they do with their own families. The main events of the Democratic convention will be held at the Pepsi Center and Invesco field. The whole topic of corporations in our national life and and personal lives is WAY bigger than we can discuss here. On Point could easily devote a week to discussing the role of corporations in everything from politics to language to art to family relations to foreign policy to the environment.
Posted by Peter Nelson, on August 26th, 2008 at 11:33 am EDTThat we are focused on the differences speaks to the larger problem of negative and divisive programing that WBUR has seemingly fallen prey to.
It’s part of a larger problem and I feel like I’m in a race with the moderator here because I think some of my comments about this have been deleted.
But basically, the convention is not a very newsworthy event because the whole thing is scripted spectacle and designed to have as few suprises as possible. But WBUR and others have spent vast resources in coming to Denver so they have to talk about something; they’ve got to find some interesting attention-getting angle and the Clinton-Obama division is one of the very few genuinely interesting topics at the convention, so as a result it gets amplified or magnified.
Posted by Peter Nelson, on August 26th, 2008 at 11:40 am EDTGeorge Carlin sums it up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0u6lCBnRoHQ
Posted by jeff, on August 26th, 2008 at 12:45 pm EDTI am a 68 year old white woman, registered as an Independent who usually votes Demo. I have spent most of my life breaking gender barriers and I would love to see a woman as president, but I am sick to death of these Hillary women who are so-called Democrats, still in full pout, saying they would rather vote for McCain than Obama. It’s disgraceful and they should be ashamed of themselves. Don’t they care about Roe v. Wade?
Here’s a proud vote for Obama!
Posted by Katy Crawford, on August 26th, 2008 at 1:39 pm EDTMcCain lost my consideration with the “We are all Georgians” nonsense. Scary.
For Obama — Biden helps ease the FISA blow.
Posted by Lux Interior, on August 26th, 2008 at 2:55 pm EDTI won’t deny it - I’m a Republican. That said, I do like a number of liberal/progressive commentators including Jack Beatty typically. Ariannna Huffington though drives me nuts. Her whole spiel is basically complaining about the media being even-handed and she’s gone after such benign targets as Tim Russert.
Posted by Sam E., on August 26th, 2008 at 5:09 pm EDTHope is bigger than ‘man.’
Posted by Frederic C., on August 26th, 2008 at 9:29 pm EDTFour more months!
Quatro mas mes!
Posted by Frederic C., on August 26th, 2008 at 9:29 pm EDTWe welcome comments from all of our listeners.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
These comments are moderated by On Point and WBUR.
This site supports Gravatars.