Detritus wrote:OK, so is it "idealistic" to expect the head of the national party not to screw over the base in a state he won four years ago? If so, then it's "realistic" to expect him to lose that state this time around, right?
I didn't mean "idealistic" in a pejorative sense. I actually paused over that word before I wrote it. Idealism can be a valuable part of political thinking and action.
But the other part of politics is the uglier, sometimes less noble, business of the possible, the probable, and the unlikely - the deal making, compromising, the positioning, the messaging, the blind-eyes turned, fingers-crossed-behind-backs, the tactical retreats... etc, etc.
I think that Obama made the right decision to stay out of Wisconsin on tactical grounds. That's not the same thing as saying that that decision was noble. But I long ago ceased to view politics as noble.
I do understand that you're making the argument that if Obama had thrown his weight behind the Wisconsin recall election it might have tipped the balance in June and November of this year. For the record, that sound's to me like a pragmatic argument, not an idealistic one (which would be more like Obama should have been involved in the just cause - even if it was a lost cause - November be damned). I respect the argument - but I do think it is mistaken.