I couldn't get anywhere with your link but I'm listening to it now through the Facebook link.  Good interview!

http://www.wpr.org/listen/620336#.U-PG-kSgcxo.facebook

I listened to the interview and although I wasn't able to give it my undivided attention I did learn a few things. In the first couple minutes I learned [presumably] the correct pronunciation of two names that I was mentally mispronouncing; Wolraich and Follette.
 Next, I learned that 'Fighting Bob', a hero to many, employed long term tactics that very much paralleled those being successfully employed today by the Tea Party even though the differences in the political philosophies intended to be advanced are nearly dead opposite.  He was willing to challenge members of his own party if they were not supportive enough of the positions he wanted to see prevail or gutsy enough to fight for them. He was willing to take short term losses in the pursuit of long term gains.  He was supportive of primary challenges to incumbent Democrats as a way to influence the political direction and commitment of his party even though they might cause a Republican to be elected. He was NOT willing to vote for the lesser of two evils, if I understood correctly what I heard, because doing so would simply lead to prolonging evil. He was successful to a degree in changing the Democratic Party for the better, I think. Do you agree? Do I have this approximately right?
 This is significant to me in light of the conversations here at Dag, often vitriolic, during the run-up to the last election. Most any idea regarding a constructive alternative to voting for incumbent Democratic candidates, most certainly in the case of the Presidential vote, was seen by the majority as not even possibly a vote for constructive change but instead a vote for all the evils of the GOP. Anything but total support for all things Obama during the run up tp the election was considered by at least some to be stupidly wrong, dangerous to even seriously consider, to be a de facto sellout to the devil. To be stupid and wrong headed politics.  Pointing out the effectiveness of the Tea Party tactics was completely dismissed.  

Too bad it was only an hour ... seemed like only 10 minutes ... and it was getting really good with some real meat to chew on ... It would have been nice if there was more time to discuss how present day politics mirrors the history of that time period.