On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Jim Devine
<jdevine03@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
me:
>> It doesn't really matter what Obama is "fundamentally
>> sympathetic to" if he can't form coalitions to get behind them to
>> counteract the forces that are against them.
raghu now writes:
> Or if popular pressure forces him to act.
Right. Then what does it matter what Obama is "fundamentally
sympathetic to"? (except, as Doug points out, he seems to be
fundamentally sympathetic to capitalism.)
That's exactly my point: it matters hugely what Obama is "fundamentally sympathetic to". In contrast, no amount of popular pressure is likely to persuade someone fundamentally unsympathetic like Bush. Witness the anti-Iraq war movement.
raghu:
> It is hard to imagine him *not* ending the Iraq war. That's what he
> campaigned on.
"that's what he campaigned on"? how many US elections have you
experienced? It's quite common for politicians to forget what they
campaigned for once they're elected.
I don't see how Obama can survive politically if he fails to deliver on this one..
raghu:
> That really depends on how the left reacts.
One important part of any left reaction is to avoid any illusions about Obama.
Yes but lets not confuse cynicism with realism.
-raghu.