Rethinking Progressive politics, pt. 2

Sometimes I think Matt Yglesias must read my blog, our posts are so similar.  For example, yesterday I wrote about how Progressive reform will require much more work than expected.  Then today, at precisely 12:58 p.m. EST, Matt argues that part of the reason Progressives feel like disastrous ideas receive an inordinate amount of attention and get treated as serious (climate change and evolution denial, ta cuts as the remedy to everything, etc.) is because Progressives let that happen.

His basic point is that the millions of Americans who support Progressive causes – and, in the case of the public option, this is often the majority of Americans – are not vocal enough in their opposition to conservative initiatives.  With their feet not held to the fire, our political elite either misunderstand public opinion or do not feel required to to represent it.  Money quote:

CNN was running a climate change story yesterday with the chyron “Global Warming: Fact or Fiction.” It’s clearly not the case that that happened because no one at CNN is unaware that framing the story that way is nonsense. They just chose to let it happen. John McCain used to recognize the urgency of the climate threat and then, thanks to pique or something, he decided to become an opportunistic pollution-defender. Bob Corker recognizes the need to curb carbon emissions but insists that he’ll support a bill if and only if it meets his exact politically unrealistic expectations. And millions of Americans supported the ACES bill in the House but didn’t bother themselves to call their congressman about it, helping to create a situation in which phone traffic tilted heavily against the bill and progressives on the Hill now feel defensive.

Like I said yesterday, our approach to politics needs to become more intense, more entrenched, and, most importantly, must shout louder.