October 3, 2012

Tammy Baldwin will appear with Obama and talk about their "shared vision of building a progressive nation from the middle class out."

At the University of Wisconsin—Madison tomorrow.

I think she's a lot more "progressive" that Barack Obama wants to look... but for present purposes — beating Tommy Thompson in the Senate race — she doesn't want to look that way either.

And yet she says things like "vision of building a progressive nation." Do her people have any idea how awful that sounds to people who are not on the left, i.e., the people she needs to convince/trick if she wants to win?

40 comments:

AJ Lynch said...

Two Frigging Idiots there- this ain't a chicken vs the egg argument. A growing economy is what creates a healthy middle class which then enables a lot more pulling up by one's own bootstraps.

MadisonMan said...

What's the over-under on the number of times she says working families?

I'll say 12.

edutcher said...

Kiss her aspirations a fond farewell.

Even more than Willie, an endorsement from Choom is the Kiss of Death.

AprilApple said...

4 more years of progressive ideology under Obama, the middle class will be buried. Oh wait- buried even deeper.

bagoh20 said...

There is a real problem with the conservative/progressive labels. they just aren't accurate or even close.

"Conservatives" want a basket of reforms that don't actually represent any time in the past. Some parts do, but many do not. The past policies are what got us where we are. I think most of us want something completely new that has some basic safety net, and a lot of freedom, but just a much smaller public (non-profit) sector. We want to try new things, blow up some sacred cows. It's really progressive.

The "progressives" want to stay with what we have now, and just keep making it bigger as each problem gets folded into it as a new program. They want to conserve the status quo and grow that.

AJ Lynch said...

Mad Man:

Does that ever bug you the term "working families" as if you, a white collar fairly well-off person, does not really work?

Christopher in MA said...

Do her people have any idea how awful that sounds to people who are not on the left, i.e., the people she needs to convince/trick if she wants to win?

It only sounds awful to people who don't realize that "progressive" is the new disguise word for "leftist." They might half-remember some old history class where TR or Wilson were described as progressives and so associate the word with good people working for a better, happier, freer America.

cubanbob said...

WI appears to be one weird state.What other state would vote to retain a republican governor and elect a communist to the senate?

Christopher in MA said...

Man, I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue. I meant sounds awful only to people who do realize "progressive" is the latest way of hiding the fact that you're a leftist lunatic.

Sorun said...

But "progressive" is such a nice-sounding word. Everyone should want to be progressive. No thinking required.

Sorun said...

The religious right should refer to themselves as simply "spiritualist."

DADvocate said...

Destroying the middle class has been more of Obama's impact. Maybe they mean building a progressive nation with the middle class out.

MadisonMan said...

Does that ever bug you the term "working families" as if you, a white collar fairly well-off person, does not really work?

Working family is such a meaningless, undefined term. I suppose Baldwin tries to convey concern to the poor schlubs who aren't Congresscritters with it -- I'm sure it's a term that's been focus-grouped -- but it just fails for anyone who thinks for one minute.

Curious George said...

"cubanbob said...
WI appears to be one weird state.What other state would vote to retain a republican governor and elect a communist to the senate?"

We haven't elected a communist to the senate...yet.

McTriumph said...

Progressive always sounds better than national socialist.

Oso Negro said...

To the contrary, though I find her vision appalling, I applaud her candor in being straight up about it.

shiloh said...

Indeed, Obama will be the kiis of death for Tammy ...

Oh wait!

blessings

shiloh said...

kiss of death, much like Obama will literally be the kiss of death for Scott Brown in MA.

shiloh said...

Again, Tammy is better looking than Tommy. Althouse key prognosticator!

Brennan said...

Isn't this an illegal campaign contribution to Tammy Baldwin's campaign for US Senate?

The University of Wisconsin is providing an "in kind" donation to Barack Obama and Tammy Baldwin by permitting the use of taxpayer owned property for partisan campaign purposes.

ricpic said...

I think most of us want something completely new...a much smaller public (non-profit) sector.

Limited government is a new idea? It's the blueprint. Been there since the founding. Still there. All that's needed is a vigorous refutation of the statist argument that limited government is a reactionary and therefore bigoted concept (just ask hatboy). In other words the usual leftist claptrap has to be confronted and vanquished.

Lem said...

There is that "middle out" thing again.

I remember when it was "Bottom Up"... Rumsfeld's Bottom Up Review... (BUR)

"Top Down" has been discarded, it seems, never to return.. “The 99%” will see to it.

Although I believe “top down” will never fall out of favor in cars.

"Middle Out" only conjures Michelle rebukes.. and Lord of the Rings geography.

garage mahal said...

Tommy sez he's just *hiccup* just "exhausted" after the primary. That's why he isn't on the campaign trail or taking any questions from the *hiccup* media.

AF said...

And yet she says things like "vision of building a progressive nation." Do her people have any idea how awful that sounds to people who are not on the left, i.e., the people she needs to convince/trick if she wants to win?

Very good point. I think part of the problem is simply bad writing -- putting the adjective in the wrong place. "Progressive vision" would have been better than "progressive nation."

AprilApple said...

Progress

furious_a said...

What other state would vote to retain a republican governor and elect a communist to the senate?

...for starters:

Iowa: (Branstad and Harkin)
Mass: (Weld/Romney and Kennedy/Kerry)
Cali: (Wilson/Cranston)
///

dbp said...

Is there any awareness on the left, that having to change the word you use to describe your outlook every few years means something?

The problem with "liberal" is not that it got tainted with incorrect connotations, but rather that people figured out what was meant by "liberal". They will eventually figure out what is meant by "progressive" and then progressives will search for a new monniker.

Sometimes they will write self-soothing books like What's the Matter with Kansas? so they won't have to feel bad about their subterfuge. The people may not want the progressive program but the people will benefit, so who cares if we only get there by trickery?

SGT Ted said...

Progressivism as practiced these past 70 years is a huge failure.

We need to reject Progressive ideas and policies, because they don't work in the long run.

SGT Ted said...

Giving tax money to the public sector unions doesn't grow the middle class. Ever. It competes with it.

furious_a said...

"..."shared vision of building a progressive nation from the middle class out.""

...like the way that space critter erupted from the middle of John Hurt's chest out in Alien.

garage mahal said...

They will eventually figure out what is meant by "progressive" and then progressives will search for a new monniker.

The Progressive Party was started in Wisconsin and has been around for over 100 years. She is running as an unabashed anti-war populist, and winning.

bagoh20 said...

"She is running as an unabashed anti-war populist, and winning."

Yes, Wisconsin has a real problem with it's constant wars.

And, I'm sure another Democrat is all we need to get us out of Afghanistan.

garage mahal said...

Yes, Wisconsin has a real problem with it's constant wars.

How many Wisconsinites died in Iraq/Afghanistan, do you think, dipshit?

Paul Zrimsek said...

She is running as an unabashed anti-war populist

Let' hope she's not also running as an unabashed anti-kinetic-military-action populist, or things might get a bit awkward on that podium.

chickelit said...

garage mahal said...

The Progressive Party was started in Wisconsin and has been around for over 100 years. She is running as an unabashed anti-war populist, and winning.

I see little difference between Baldwin there and Boxer here. The same people lovin' her for the same reasons.

PatCA said...

We already have a progressive nation, Tammy. That's why your party is in such trouble.

Andy Freeman said...

You'd think that Holmes' "three generations of imbiciles are enough" would have caught on by now....

Henry said...

As others have said, four more years of progressive policies under the O'Bumbler would be a disaster. What sentient being could even consider voting for him...oh, wait, AA can!

purplepenquin said...

Yes, Wisconsin has a real problem with it's constant wars.

Yes, it sure does.

Carnifex said...

Garage said--"Tommy sez he's just *hiccup* just "exhausted" after the primary. That's why he isn't on the campaign trail or taking any questions from the *hiccup* media."

If you drive drunk, run off the side of a bridge into a river, and leave your date to drown, you might be a Democratic Senator with aspirations of the presidency.(apologies to Jeff Foxworthy)