Tuesday, September 25, 2007

David Brooks vs. The Netroots   [Jonah Goldberg]

I think Brooks comes pretty close, but perhaps doesn't go all the way, in popping the netroots bubble.

An excerpt:

Fourth, the netroots are losing the policy battles. As Matt Bai’s reporting also suggests, the netroots have not been able to turn their passion and animus into a positive policy agenda. Democratic domestic policy is now being driven by old Clinton hands like Gene Sperling and Bruce Reed.

And while Clinton may not go out of her way to offend the MoveOn types, on her TV rounds on Sunday she made it obvious that she’s not singing their tune.

On “This Week With George Stephanopoulos,” Clinton could have vowed to vacate Iraq. Instead, she delivered hawkish mini-speeches that few Republicans would object to. She listed a series of threats and interests in the region and made it clear that she’d be willing to keep U.S. troops there to handle them.

The fact is, many Democratic politicians privately detest the netroots’ self-righteousness and bullying. They also know their party has a historic opportunity to pick up disaffected Republicans and moderates, so long as they don’t blow it by drifting into cuckoo land. They also know that a Democratic president is going to face challenges from Iran and elsewhere that are going to require hard-line, hawkish responses....

I particularly liked this closer:

Several weeks ago, I asked John Edwards what the YearlyKos event was like. He couldn’t remember which event I was talking about, and looked over to an aide for help.

One point David doesn't make is that one could make the argument that this is the moment of maximum power for the netroots. Activists are always more important in primaries than they are in the general election. And if they can't get their favorite or even near-favorite candidate into the lead, how much less important will they be after the nomination, when activists tend to simply fall in line?

09/25 08:54 AMShare