It would be pointed out that he is a progressive in the American sense of the word, offering specific goals for progress in specific areas, and in a sense as moderate a progressive as practicable, given the scope of the problems that the country faces ... and not a "progressive" in any sense of being ideologically to the left on a broader global ideological spectrum.

It would be pointed out that he only offers moderate centrism in foreign policy, and while a shift from military power as a first resort back to military power as a last resort is a welcome change, the true progressive position is in support of a new international order in which the US weans itself from geopolitical dependence on a global imperial system that drains economic resources from investment in domestic productive capacity. Any appearance of progressivism in his foreign policy position within the US media bubble is only because of the massive rightward swing of the conventional wisdom about American foreign policy.

It would be pointed out that his New Energy Economy plan is only 3/4 of a plan to arrive at Sustainable Energy Independence and address global warming, and it largely ignores the needed changes in modes of transport.

... oh wait, maybe those things would be pointed out in any event, but if he was the front runner they would get more play in the progressive blogosphere.

On the other hand, while it clearly has big holes, his program covers more and leaves less uncovered than the program of any other candidate that can make a serious run at the White House.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.