Inside the Party Democrats are understandably troubled waters. Who is more openly, some less, many of the leaders are presenting the bill to Walter Veltroni, both for the election defeat, and for the reluctance in wanting to formally analyze the reasons and collegial.
One of the topics under discussion concerns the Presidency of PD: although for different reasons, all major components of the party say (today) would agree is almost natural that President Romano Prodi. Of the latter, however, is well aware of the oft-repeated unwillingness to take up the post.
are days, these, in which the theme of the political agenda is much debated. By Vien the question of whether an assignment usually more honorific operating is really one of the current priorities of the Democratic Party at this time when the economy goes bad, the company (if possible) is even worse economy and the head of government Squaderno back to the institutional foundations of the Republic to solve his own personal quarrels.
I think so.
While there are doubts about how the PD is raised (and probably will continue to arise) from the experience of the Union, I believe that it should clarify itself with what that relationship has been Prodi and his government and the experience of the Olive.
I find that the discontinuity is been with the settlement of Veltroni has been great. It is said that Veltroni's PD party has a majority in vocation and that his attitude has been demonstrated primarily by the choice (even if not fully covered) to present themselves to the elections. Even more so, in my view, the habit is strong majority in addressing the issues within the party. Under the 75% consensus achieved in the primaries, Walter Veltroni has abandoned any form of internal dialogue, not only on the definition of the policy of the party (who can judge it imprudent, but not incorrect), but also on the fundamental issues PD itself, that the inability to make a synthesis between the various spirits of the party, remained open, most notably the position on the European political scene. President Prodi Veltroni wants
despite this profound difference to get what he placet on his leadership that would give its formal 75% a corresponding substantial force. Bindi wants to force President Prodi Veltroni to acknowledge that his leadership is not now and never will be the absolute ruler of a kingdom, that we must return to the path of patient dialogue that Prodi has always followed the paths to harmonize groped post and post-communist Christian Democrats and just wanted to take for granted in having some of the passages they are the reasons identity of the entity of electoral defeat.
Prodi, meanwhile, has its reasons for denying the 'endorsement Veltroni. First, it was tactically incomprehensible to the celebration of crowning the primary leaders of the new PD at no more than a year after Prodi's victory in 2006. This situation could only result in mutual attrition (you will recall, for example, the activism of Veltroni, leader in pectore, poorly tolerated by Prodi at Palazzo Chigi after the death of poor Mrs. Reggiani), which was a the real reasons for the fall of the center-left government. Secondly, once again for a supposed tactical convenience, Veltroni in campaign scientifically repudiated in toto the experience of the Prodi government. We can say that he never appointed Berlusconi, calling him "the leading exponent of the line against us", as did the former prime minister, throwing out with the bathwater dell'impopolarità the baby for fiscal consolidation and a virtuous cycle again.
This results in currents that are organized today (D'Alema), claims to be convened in the organs of the party (Bindi), and in requests for change at the top (Paris). A headless
PD not only will not stop Berlusconi (and indeed will be responsible for eventual accession to the Quirinale man More than any other has divided the country rather than join it), but neither ever wins the elections if and when ever you come back to vote. I hope that in the first place Veltroni whether they know it as soon as possible.
One of the topics under discussion concerns the Presidency of PD: although for different reasons, all major components of the party say (today) would agree is almost natural that President Romano Prodi. Of the latter, however, is well aware of the oft-repeated unwillingness to take up the post.
are days, these, in which the theme of the political agenda is much debated. By Vien the question of whether an assignment usually more honorific operating is really one of the current priorities of the Democratic Party at this time when the economy goes bad, the company (if possible) is even worse economy and the head of government Squaderno back to the institutional foundations of the Republic to solve his own personal quarrels.
I think so.
While there are doubts about how the PD is raised (and probably will continue to arise) from the experience of the Union, I believe that it should clarify itself with what that relationship has been Prodi and his government and the experience of the Olive.
I find that the discontinuity is been with the settlement of Veltroni has been great. It is said that Veltroni's PD party has a majority in vocation and that his attitude has been demonstrated primarily by the choice (even if not fully covered) to present themselves to the elections. Even more so, in my view, the habit is strong majority in addressing the issues within the party. Under the 75% consensus achieved in the primaries, Walter Veltroni has abandoned any form of internal dialogue, not only on the definition of the policy of the party (who can judge it imprudent, but not incorrect), but also on the fundamental issues PD itself, that the inability to make a synthesis between the various spirits of the party, remained open, most notably the position on the European political scene. President Prodi Veltroni wants
despite this profound difference to get what he placet on his leadership that would give its formal 75% a corresponding substantial force. Bindi wants to force President Prodi Veltroni to acknowledge that his leadership is not now and never will be the absolute ruler of a kingdom, that we must return to the path of patient dialogue that Prodi has always followed the paths to harmonize groped post and post-communist Christian Democrats and just wanted to take for granted in having some of the passages they are the reasons identity of the entity of electoral defeat.
Prodi, meanwhile, has its reasons for denying the 'endorsement Veltroni. First, it was tactically incomprehensible to the celebration of crowning the primary leaders of the new PD at no more than a year after Prodi's victory in 2006. This situation could only result in mutual attrition (you will recall, for example, the activism of Veltroni, leader in pectore, poorly tolerated by Prodi at Palazzo Chigi after the death of poor Mrs. Reggiani), which was a the real reasons for the fall of the center-left government. Secondly, once again for a supposed tactical convenience, Veltroni in campaign scientifically repudiated in toto the experience of the Prodi government. We can say that he never appointed Berlusconi, calling him "the leading exponent of the line against us", as did the former prime minister, throwing out with the bathwater dell'impopolarità the baby for fiscal consolidation and a virtuous cycle again.
This results in currents that are organized today (D'Alema), claims to be convened in the organs of the party (Bindi), and in requests for change at the top (Paris). A headless
PD not only will not stop Berlusconi (and indeed will be responsible for eventual accession to the Quirinale man More than any other has divided the country rather than join it), but neither ever wins the elections if and when ever you come back to vote. I hope that in the first place Veltroni whether they know it as soon as possible.
