For those of you who have been following this series, I thank you for stopping by again. For newcomers, I invite you to look at the three prior entries (#1, #2, #3) to get a sense of this bi-weekly (Sunday and Wednesday) conversation. It's a part of my thesis research and involves progressive identity and culture and new media.
Tonight I want to take a break from scholarly exploration and just get your feelings about our new Democratic nominee. Follow me after the fold for a few points and questions...
All American progressives should unite for Barack Obama. We descend from the proud tradition of independent social movements that have made America a more just and democratic country. We believe that the movement today supporting Barack Obama continues this great tradition of grassroots participation, drawing millions of people out of apathy and into participation in the decisions that affect all our lives. We believe that Barack Obama's very biography reflects the positive potential of the globalization process that also contains such grave threats to our democracy when shaped only by the narrow interests of private corporations in an unregulated global marketplace. We should instead be globalizing the values of equality, a living wage and environmental sustainability in the new world order, not hoping our deepest concerns will be protected by trickle-down economics or charitable billionaires. By its very existence, the Obama campaign will stimulate a vision of globalization from below.
The NetRoots have largely supported Obama in this campaign. What is it about him that has made him the choice of the NetRoots community? Is it his embrace of new media and social networking? Is it his policy positions? Is it his style of leadership? Is it the simple promise of change? Is there something important in the statement above that gets to the heart of it?
Along with those questions, I'd like you to think about these three in particular.
Where is Barack Obama on the progressive spectrum?
Where does he represent progressivism best?
Where does he fail the progressive ideal?
Maybe you've asked yourself these questions already a number of times. In making up your mind, maybe you had a heart to heart with yourself about what you want from your candidate. Maybe it was switching from Edwards to Obama as I did. These questions are key to any progressive's decision making, and I want to hear what you discovered and what you believe.
The other half of this situation is the general disregard that Hillary Clinton seems to garner from the NetRoots community. There are some among us that believe in NetRoots but approach things from a more centrist point of view. Many of you support(ed) Senator Clinton, but the bulk of the NetRoots is solidly progressive and seems to be firmly behind Obama.
In a January 5th blog entry at the Washinton Post, Joel Achenbach wrote of the New Hampshire primary:
This part of New Hampshire is progressive -- it's practically Vermont, to the point that Vermonters were all over the event today. Many progressives all over New Hampshire may be thinking strategically about Tuesday's vote. Both Barack Obama and Edwards are viewed as progressive -- and Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, too -- but many voters today told me they want to make sure that Hillary doesn't win. So even if they like Edwards or Kucinich more, they might vote for Obama in hopes that he'll beat Hillary Clinton.
"I think she's a Republican in sheep's clothing," said Kate Devine, a physician in the Upper Valley (of the Connecticut River) town of Lyme. She likes Kucinich's policies and Chris Dodd's verve. People in this area, which includes Hanover, home to Dartmouth College, "tend to vote more like Vermonters. Even though the student population of Dartmouth is very conservative, the faculty and staff is less so."
Pat McGovern, a retired teacher from here in Lebanon, said of Clinton, "I feel like she's part of the entrenched interests."
"I'm deciding whether I'll vote with my heart and vote for Kucinich, or vote for a more electable candidate," said Karen Swanson, a librarian from Andover.
"I will not vote for Hillary Clinton," said John Corrigan, a "hard-core Democrat" in Concord. "I'm looking for the progressive alternative to Hillary Clinton. That could be Obama or it could be Edwards."
According to a July 15th, 2007 article at CommonDream.org by Leonard Doyle, "Jane Fonda says that Hillary is a 'ventriloquist for the patriarchy with a skirt and a vagina. It may be that a feminist, progressive man would do better in the White House.'" She endorsed Barack Obama.
Are these accurate accounts of your feelings? Here are three Clinton questions for you to consider as well:
Where is Hillary Clinton on the progressive spectrum?
Where does she represent progressivism best?
Where does she fail the progressive ideal?
I expect a lot of talk about triangulation, DLC ties, Rovian campaign tactics and the like. Make sure you talk about where she succeeds for progressives if anywhere. Feel free to give me as long an answer as you like, or as short, but try to hit the 3 questions for both Obama and Clinton. Hope to see you back here again on Sunday at 9am EST/6am PST for another Progressive Identity Project conversation.
Before I close, I leave you with the speech at the Jefferson-Jackson dinner that ignited a lot of the current progressive support that Obama enjoys.
And, as always I leave you with a list of important contributors to the Media Ecology field...
