U.S. vote not a shift to left, Bill Clinton says

[CHIMO]

OTTAWA — Former U-S president Bill Clinton says it would be a mistake to view the results of Tuesday's mid-term elections as a move to the left.

Clinton says Americans are demanding a government that is fact-based and doesn't ignore the interests of the middle class and working poor.

He says voters rejected hard-headed ideological politics, where people make up in their mind what the answer is and make the facts fit the answer.

Clinton told an Ottawa fundraiser that the triumph for the Democratic party is clearly a call for a new direction in Iraq.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&pubid=968163964505&cid=1163026212579&col=968705899037&call_page=TS_News&call_pageid=968332188492&call_pagepath=News/News

[texpatriot2004]

1. As always, President Clinton gets it right nm

[The Jacobin]

19. Yep.

It would be a mistake to think the country has shifted to the left. Of all the spin flying around, the kernel of truth is contained in the line "the Dems didn't win, the repugs lost."

This sweeping change is a collective vomiting against the filth of the current administration, not a permanent change in attitudes. We must concentrate on the positive in both the short-run and the long-run. We now have the power to set the agenda. That agenda must not look back over the last six years. It we spend all our time detailing all that was wrong in the past, we will be wasting our (political) time.

We have been told: the repugs have really messed things up, now bring us back to sanity of peace, balanced budgets, and reigning in out of control companies. If we spend the next two years telling them how bad the last six were, we will be wasting our time. The voters know that already. The question for us is how do we go forward now?

[Bullshot]

46. I would agree. If the Dems shift policy to the extreme left, they'll be history

even faster than the Repubs.

[mike_c]

2. "a new direction" out of Iraq!

eom

[AtomicKitten]

27. that would be an excellent direction to move

eom

[beyurslf]

3. It is a move to the left. It may not mean we have a liberal mandate

but our government has been mired in the far righht outfields of republican crazy land. Moving to have a more responsible govt IS a move to the left.

[GetTheRightVote]

4. I hope it leans left but still moderate as well, if it can be done.

:kick:

[tularetom]

5. It's a move away from Clinton pro bidness policies

like NAFTA. If he thinks that ain't to the left more power to him. Frankly what he says is of little or no concern to most Amurkins. He's yesterday's news. And it won't do him any good to try to position Hillary for an 08 presidential run. Dems don't like her, repubs despise her. I wish he'd just go away and take all his sycophants with him.

[lancdem]

8. Hmmm

I don't recall NAFTA being an issue.

And Clinton's awfully popular for somebody who's yesterday's news.

:eyes:

[Ikonoklast]

18. If you don't think that NAFTA is STILL an issue

Please come to Ohio and see our industries decimated by that disastrous treaty.


Sherrod Brown was right to oppose NAFTA, and the DLC ignored him.

[blm]

6. BULLSHIT - complete BULLSHIT from the coverup wing of the Dem party.

Let me guess,Bill, you promised Poppy Bush you'd make sure his boy gets the same protection?

Fock that. That's what got us Bush2 in the first place.

[BayCityProgressive]

11. I think he is right

most people want an end to the corruption, a raise in the minimum wage, better perscription benefits, 9/11 recomendations ect. and a plan for Iraq...people didn't elect the Dems to enact medicare for all, repeal Taft Hartley, and outlaw the death penalty. As much as I wish that was true I don't believe it is. We need to govern from the center-left on issues that have at least 55% support if we want to keep our majority for more than 2 years.

[blm]

15. Ending corruption means opening the books, and that is NOT something Clinton supports.

Just like when he PRETENDED that he never heard of the Downing Streeet Memos when asked to comment on their content.

The country is ready for the left to be HEARD for a change, and Clinton is trying to make sure the view from the left is once again run through some filter till it becomes palpable to the CORPORATISTS aand is no danger toBushInc.

[hatrack]

7. So, we moved to the right? Sorry, Big Dog - really shitty analogy.

We stayed stuck in the middle?

Uh, no - we didn't end up over in Trotskyite Territory, but we sure as hell didn't stay put, and we sure as hell didn't move to the right.

[lancdem]

9. We moved away from right-wing fundie governing

Thank goodness!

[PretzelWarrior]

10. actually, he's correct. just need to go 3 degrees to the right

and we'll be all the way to FAR LEFT. That's how far right this country has been dragged by the neocon thugs and religious conservatives.

I just wish Bill Clinton would shut the hell up. It is a move to the left. It is about more progressive social policy. It is about liberal beliefs regarding interactions with other nations on the world stage.

I am going to look forward to watching Billary go down in flames in 2008 while someone more respectable takes the Democratic mantle for presidency.

[AtomicKitten]

14. "Billiary" -- nice RW epithet.

eom

[TheWraith]

33. I'd say it's a matter of degrees.

It's not really a shift to what would traditionally be considered left-wing policies. It is a move left in the sense that it's a departure from the far right and a return to more moderate, centerist governance. There's a strong streak of populism in the new Democrats, as reflected in people like Casey, Webb, etcetera. This election was about a return to common sense. Things like the minimum wage, clean government, and Iraq are the important issues, much more so than what you might think of as left-wing issues like universal healthcare, international relations, capital punishment, etcetera.

[alarimer]

51. Well considering that the center is actually on the right

it was a shift to the left, by repudiating the right-wing.

[bemildred]

12. Go away Bill, you had your chance. nt

[AtomicKitten]

13. He's right, of course, in spite of the same 'ol chorus of vilification.

eom

[laugle]

16. As usual he's right!! And one thing about the

Clinton's they know how to win elections!!!

This should be a very happy day for all of us.....but all I hear is bashing of Democrats......it's really sad......

[frankenforpres]

30. i dont get the antipathy

"This should be a very happy day for all of us.....but all I hear is bashing of Democrats......it's really sad......"


it is sad, we are eating our own in victory more than the repugs are in defeat

[blm]

34. Clinton telling the left that the vote didn't validate their efforts IS a slap at his own

side. If he hadn't said it, there'd be no backlash against his words, would there? So who started eating their own first?

[ProSense]

17. It wasn't a complete shift, but it was a dramatic enough shift:

(CBS/AP) A Missouri ballot initiative to promote stem cell research, a topic that blew up into a national controversy over the reach and effectiveness of political ads, was approved by voters last night by a margin of 51-49.

The amendment to allow research using embryonic stem cells, which inspired a prominent Michael J. Fox television ad in support, became a lightning rod of national importance when commentator Rush Limbaugh attacked Fox's sincerity. The push to pass the referendum was a key factor in Missouri's crucial Senate race; Democratic challenger Claire McCaskill rode her support of the measure to take the seat of incumbent Republican Jim Talent, who opposed the measure.

Another controversial referendum, South Dakota' toughest-in-the-nation law that would have banned virtually all abortions, even in cases of rape and incest, was strongly defeated by voters.

That result was a tremendous blow to conservatives, as was Arizona, which became the first state to defeat a gay marriage ban.

Conservatives did prevail in seven states where voters approved constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage, though CBS News political analyst Sam Best notes that they didn’t pass with as great of a margin as such bans did in 2004.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2943638&mesg_id=2943638


Ballot measure losses jolt the religious right
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15627022

In 2005, Connecticut's legislature approved civil unions .

NJ approved civil unions this year.


Three red states when blue:

Jim Webb (VA)
Claire McCaskill (MO)
Jon Tester (MT)

Clinton may not want to admit it, but there has been a shift to the left nation wide!

[Bucky]

20. I think we're exploring the limits of the left-right metaphor

It wasn't a shift in favor of big government and socialism, true. But it was a shift away from the right wing lunacy of the Republicans (and therefor a shift away from big intrusive government). People want sane policies in Iraq, smart regulation of business, basic modern social safety nets, and a foriegn policy that stresses alliances rather than ideological knee jerk Ramboism. If that's not a shift to the left, nothing is. Not a full swing, but yes, a shift.

[leesa]

21. It better be a shift to the left, because the right and the "moderates" have

damned near destroyed our country. Typical DLCers at work demonizing the left already.

[Hosnon]

22. Brilliant move. Come on people, he's trying to do what the Republicans have been

doing to us for a long time: Redefining the middle.

If we label THIS as the middle, we can get things accomplished that are considered "very left" because they will then only be "left".

[ProSense]

24. We've been playing this game too long!

Bill started it with the DLC and it doesn't work it confuses people and denigrates real progressive achievements. He can label the minimum wage initiatives anything he wants to, but to pretend that civil unions, stem cell and abortion are centrist issues is nonsense!

[laugle]

28. I agree that civil unions are not a centrist issue, but

most of the country is pro-choice and strongly supports stem-cell research, so why would you not conclude that they are centrist issues?

Also, what would you consider to be centrist issues?

[struggle4progress]

43. Uh ... Civil unions for gays favored, polls show (2004)

... Reflecting what appears to be a search for middle ground on the issue, both the Washington Post-ABC News poll and the USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll showed a significant shift in public opinion on civil unions in recent months. The latter survey found 54 percent of respondents favor civil unions for gay and lesbian couples, with 42 percent opposing them ... The Washington Post-ABC News poll found that 51 percent of respondents favor allowing same-sex couples to enter into civil unions with the same basic legal rights as married couples, up 6 percentage points in less than a month ... But both surveys also reflected deep divisions on same-sex marriage ...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4496265/

What's going on is a name-game. Most believe that individuals should be able to enter into mutual contracts, fixing inheritance and allowing non-traditional partners to visit the ill in hospitals just like family: that's is, Americans have no problems allowing the traditional civil benefits of marriage for gay couples. But -- "marriage is sacred": people are very uncomfortable with calling gay-partnerships "marriage." The proper solution of course is to split the two concepts cleanly and to separate church and state: if you want the civil benefits, go before the judge for a civil union; if you want the religious blessing, go to the priest or rabbi or guru for a marriage. Just get the state out of the business of "marrying" -- and get the clergy out of the business of certifying civil-unions for the state.

[Mass]

38. Why do we need to label it, period.

I am tired to see so called centrist telling me I do not matter because i am from the left. I may consider voting for somebody who values my vote.

My governor was elected by saying that we should ALL be included and work together, left, right, and center. Clinton is saying that we should not listen to the left. Two different messages. I support proudely the first one. I am tired of the second one who excludes systematically solid supporters of the democratic party in order to get the "swing voters".

[sandnsea]

23. Rejecting the rabid right means moving left

Shut up Bill. Just shut up. You didn't win this election. Those fighting to expose the Bush incompetence and corruption the last 2 years did.

[madmusic]

25. Clinton's "centrist" polices shifed us to the Right

Is that what he means? While I agree we can't jump too fast, centrist today, even leaning left, is still conservative.

[Clarkie1]

26. He's correct. nt

[Ignacio Upton]

29. Unfortunately he's right

But that is because Bush has taken this country so far to the right.

[Hippo_Tron]

31. Democrats got a mandate to do what WORKS

Voters have said that they are willing to let us govern. They don't care whether we govern to the left or to the center. They care about how our policies impact their lives.

[NVMojo]

32. I agree with Bill

[Apollo11]

35. What's "left"?

I agree with Bill Clinton's above quoted statement that "Americans are demanding a government that is fact-based and doesn't ignore the interests of the middle class and working poor".

Clinton knows that in order to win elections, Democratic candidates must attract votes from people who consider themselves "centrist" and/or "moderate". In some cases - because of pernicious propaganda telling them that liberals are "out of the mainstream" and/or unpatriotic.

I'm pretty sure that it helps Democrats to say "we are the center, they (the Republicans) are out on the right; we are the moderates, they are the extremists".

If you take a historical and/or international perspective of politics, then most Democratic Senators and Congress(wo)men are probably more "center" than "left".

Compared to Bush-Cheney-Rove ... it's definitely a shift back to the center.

[alarimer]

52. Some people who call themselves centrist or moderate

actually hold progressive or liberal positions. When asked specific questions on health care, the environment, most Americans hold positions that could be called "liberal" but that word has been so demonized that they won't use. We need to demonize the word conservative. Maybe reframe the debate.

[demokatgurrl]

36. He's right. It's not a SHIFT...

For the most part, we were already there. But a lot of people got hoodwinked, or hypnotized, by the rethugs and their fear factors. I blame the voters as much as anyone, for not THINKING, and voting out of fear and pumped up nationalism.

Some of our fellow voters just woke up out of their stupor. Hopefully they can stay awake until 2008.

[Mass]

37. What does he think the left stands for?

a government that is fact-based and doesn't ignore the interests of the middle class and working poor.

Why are democrats so afraid to say their ideas are progressive (as for progress). Why cannot we be proud of what we stand for and stop worrying about the labels?

[Mass]

39. We need Instant voting runoff now. Statements like that show that it is

an emergency. This way, we will be able to have solid third party candidates who support progressive policies without being ashamed and we will be able to vote for them and make clear where we stand. May be after than the Clinton of the world will stop bashing us.

[progressoid]

40. We were so far to the right that we need to go a LOT more to the left to even get to the center.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

41. It's about holding the centre-ground

which was vacated by the GOP lurch to the Right.

[JCMach1]

44. No, it''s a new dynamic... Convincing the Indys that you are right

and THEY are wrong.

Party loyalty became extremely polarized in this election.

[Strawman]

42. He's right. Voters aren't ideological. If anything they're pragmatic

And the shit the Republicans have been doing is clearly not working in the eyes of anyone but the most hard core RW ideologues.

I wish they were more ideological and more left-leaning. But they're not and wishing won't make it so. Doesn't mean that the left isn't correct on the major issues of the day. Just means we have some work to do to persuade voters on the good sense of the kinds of things we advocate.

[upi402]

45. we ARE left in America, no shifting required!

Hell, Goldwater and Nixon would be lefties now.

[mtnsnake]

47. I guess that's why President Clinton made & became such a great President

He says all the right things.

[Orsino]

48. Baloney. A shift from hard-right to middlin'-hard right is a move LEFT.

If his point is that we have not turned progressive, he's right. We are a long way from that.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

49. He is campaigning for Hillary and everything he says is to support her nomination. But, there is

more than a grain of truth in his statement, Democrats need to support programs for the working class and they will be successful in 2008.

[alarimer]

50. But a lot of the candidates who won were not supported

by the national party. And some who were, lost (like Tammy Duckworth). I heard John Nichols of the Nation on Counterspin this week refuting a lot of the spin that has been coming out about this election.
Keith Ellison, Jerry McNerny, etc. The progressive caucus has 64 members, currently, with more expected to join. The new Democrats have 50 right now. The Blue Dogs have even less. Now all those groups will probably grow. But I think the conventional wisdom and the spin is wrong. And it seems like they are setting up to throw "the Democratic wing of the Democratic PArty" under the bus yet again. We helped put these people in office. We held our noses in some cases because everyone was telling us to vote the Party. And it was more important to get the Repukes out. Definitely. But they had better throw us a bone or two, starting with restoring habeas corpus and getting us the fuck out of IRaq.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=139093

[mitchum]

53. DLClinton barks right on cue