“. . . he has this amorphous message of change and hope”

Amorphous mess is more like it.

Yeah, you’re right about the Republicans.

And Dodd, Edwards and Paul are the only ones who are true to their traditions in their entirety. Dodd and Edwards, liberal; Paul, libertarian.

Actually, a lot of Republicans have the same problem with unintegrated policy positions. That’s why the right-wing base hasn’t embraced Mike Huckabee, for instance–true, he’s an evangelical fundie, but he’s also supported real positions on global warming, supports protections against predatory lending, and (most of all) raised taxes as Governor of Arkansas. That’s driving them nuts.

Ron Paul is the same way–his positions are probably the most consistent in terms of a framework, but they’re not positions that the business/neocon wing of the GOP can embrace.

You’ve seen how Giuliani and Romney have feverishly cast aside some of their old progressive stances (abortion rights, national health insurance) to embrace the psychosis of the fundies. That’s how these guys work–their policies are as inconsistent as the Dems, but they’re better at being two-faced.

Now, as far as the Dems go, Dodd and Edwards have fairly consistent policy frameworks coming from their histories–Dodd embraces both the best and worst aspects of the classic patrician Northeastern liberal, and Edwards works the Southern populist angle. Hillary is the centrist and the one most likely to appeal to the big money players who just want someone to ensure the stock market will be stable, and the neocons who want a continued military presence in the Middle East.

Obama’s trying to appeal to all of these different bases at once, and the end result is he has this amorphous message of change and hope, but nothing really solid to back it up.

In the latest Rolling Stone, actor/comedian Chris Rock is interviewed. Here’s part of his answer to the question “Is America ready to elect a black president?”

“I think sometimes Obama doesn’t realize he’s the black candidate. . . If you’re the only black guy playing ball with white guys, they expect you to dunk. ‘We could have picked another white guy to stay on the ground.’”

“. . . he continues to portray himself as the candidate of change, of building bridges”

There you have it. Like a bridge, he seeks to span the great divide with his “wide stance.”

Curious to me that you posted on this, Martin, because I had been wondering the same thing about him. In fact, I’d been wondering why most Democrats are inconsistent in their positions.

To true progressives, they seem unintegrated. They thus resemble much of the public, who approach issues one at a time, as if they exist in a vacuum. Instead of as links in a chain.

It speaks to lack of grounding in the core progressive values, around which positions should revolve. I won’t use the word “ignorance,” but I think many Democrats demonstrate a naivete about issues that apes that of the public.

It was amusing that the Republicans have picked Minneapolis for the 08 convention. They must’ve sent Larry Craig to scout things out.