DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus The New Democratic Party

This is an opinion piece in the WaPo. It discusses the state of the Dem Party, then infighting, and what direction it is headed. And even though I don't agree 100% with everything he thinks will happen moving forward, his description of the state of the party now is spot on IMHO. Pit and several others will especially like the first part. But just because progressives have a better agenda, I don't think we are losing popularity among the people who can see how screwed up our country really is and our agenda to fix things even if it's less than perfect for the times we are living in.

Opinion Why progressive Democrats are losing ground

Progressive Democrats have lost substantial ground over the past year, weakened by a combination of real-world events and smart tactics by their centrist rivals for the upper hand in intra-party disputes. In fact, the ascendance of more left-wing politicians and policies within the Democratic Party may have peaked — with real potential that some progressive advances will be reversed. In the months after the 2020 election, it looked as though progressive Democrats had advanced on four fronts. On economic policy, the Biden administration and congressional Democrats adopted a huge stimulus with little regard for its effect on the budget deficit. On domestic policy, the administration was pushing a sweeping bill that would have moved the United States closer to a European-style social safety net. On racial issues, President Biden and other Democrats were embracing a sustained effort to address disparities and discrimination, particularly around policing. And on electoral politics, fresh off the Democrats’ victories in Georgia, the party seemed open to electoral strategies beyond its usual focus on winning White swing voters.

But big problems emerged last year in all four of these areas — and more centrist Democrats leapt to blame the left and its ideas.

There was a big surge in the murder rate, and centrist Democrats such as New York City Mayor Eric Adams have suggested that the increase was in part because Democrats had gone too far in embracing police reform.

Inflation surged, which Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) and other moderate Democrats blamed on big increases in federal spending and other economic policies pushed by progressives.

On domestic policy, the Build Back Better Act (BBB) stalled, with centrist Democrats such as Rep. Stephanie Murphy (Fla.) arguing the party’s left pushed too hard to get their preferred policies into the legislation.

And in electoral politics, Biden’s approval rating sank, and Democrats performed dismally in gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia, losing the latter and almost the former. More centrist figures in the party such as prominent political consultant James Carville attributed the party’s political weaknesses to progressives damaging the Democratic brand.

All these arguments were oversimplifications, and in some cases they were outright wrong. Yes, the stimulus and other big spending policies urged by progressives contributed to inflation, but supply-chain disruptions and other issues related to the covid-19 pandemic were also a major factor. It is ludicrous to blame the party’s left wing for the loss in Virginia when the moderate Biden-aligned Terry McAuliffe was the candidate. The main barriers to passing BBB were centrists such as Murphy and Manchin; progressives kept dropping their demands, desperate for anything to pass. Murder rates rose across the country, not just in places that adopted more progressive criminal justice policies.

More than that, real-world events were, in fact, validating the left’s arguments. Child poverty plummeted when the federal government simply gave families money directly through the tax credits in the stimulus, the kind of big-government policy the left has long urged. The political struggles of Biden and McAuliffe showed, as the left has argued, that voters won’t be satisfied with a do-little Democratic Party even if it is fairly moderate ideologically and focused on wooing White swing voters. The murder rate surged even as police spending either stayed the same or increased, bolstering the progressive argument that reducing crime will take more comprehensive strategies than just relying on law enforcement.

But despite all that, the centrist arguments gained traction. That’s partly because the mainstream media, the wealthy and Biden himself are skeptical of progressives and inclined to take the side of centrist Democrats in intra-party fights. One telling example: Presidents don’t usually comment on local elections, but Biden joined much of the media in casting last month’s recall of San Francisco district attorney Chesa Boudin as a sign that voters across the country want more police spending.

And because these anti-left arguments have become conventional wisdom in Democratic circles, they are resulting in policy and electoral defeats for the party’s left wing. Biden started downplaying police reform while he and other Democrats leaned into pro-police rhetoric and funding increases. Most of BBB has been shelved. The Federal Reserve, with the encouragement of many centrist Democrats, is taking aggressive steps to rein in inflation that are likely to reduce wages and increase unemployment.

Give the centrists their due: They have many advantages (like the backing of wealthy Democrats and Biden), but they also have been smart, strategic and focused. For example, they have spent tens of millions of dollars to defeat left-wing candidates in primaries in heavily Democratic areas, closing off one path to power for the left. And, in many cases over the past year, the progressives have not been as savvy. The emphatic insistence last year from many prominent left-wing figures that inflation was “transitory” and overstated cost them credibility as prices stayed up. In New York City, progressives didn’t mobilize behind a single candidate early on, easing Adams’s path to victory.

Overall, while there are a lot of progressive activists, groups and prominent politicians like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), left-wing Democrats are struggling in part because they don’t have a formal leadership structure or political strategy.

Now, they face a troubling future — a Biden-led Democratic Party that is likely to lose in November and then argue that the defeat is a further repudiation of left-wing ideas. The 2024 election cycle could feature the party adopting conservative ideas, abandoning liberal ones and potentially even trying to defeat prominent progressives such as Ocasio-Cortez in primaries.

But all is not lost for progressives. While more centrist Democrats have greater power and money, many of the party’s most compelling ideas and figures come from its left wing. The left’s arguments that the party’s political strategy is outdated have been validated by Biden’s struggles. And real-world events over the past few months, particularly the spate of mass shootings and the upending of abortion rights, not only make it hard for the party to move to the right, but are pushing it left.

So the triangulating Democratic Party of 1995 isn’t coming back. The big question is whether the deficits-don’t-matter, firmly antiracist party of March 2021 is permanently gone, too.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...democrats-losing-ground-biden-centrists/

Disenfranchising progressives is what the democratic party does best, but they always come crying at election time.

Ok...no BS here.

The problem with Progressives is they represent the far left reaches of the Democratic party. Be it the left or right, most people don't like the extremes of either party.

There needs to be a balance on a center line. Slights tilts left or right are normal and healthy. Violent wobbling right and left create an unstable environment that can't be sustained. You end up with what we are getting right now, everybody ticked off, pointing fingers, riots, loss of community, and not addressing anything.

Extremes are what I mostly rail against. I've always been of the opinion that you start in the middle and work your way left and right until you find the solution that meets the need of the most Americans.

Extremes only want what they want without any consideration for anyone but themselves... That's both parties....

J/C

To add another wrinkle to the issue, though, I would posit that the country has been pilfered by many politicians who assert they are moderates, but are in fact self-interested. They just appreciate the stability, so that nobody questions when they start siphoning money and power for themselves. Then they got too greedy with it, and then they got called out for not actually doing anything. Then the blame game started, both internally and externally until it gave way to the extremes and more radicals.

The real problem is the politicians far from the center are the only ones with actual plans. I’m not saying they’re good plans, or effective plans, but they’re plans. The people in office who profess to be “stable” moderates are still sitting there with their thumbs up their butts. They can’t even come to agreement that their insider trading is wrong because that goes back to their original gravy train.

Looking at groups like the progressives, we may not always agree with what their solutions are, but at least they’re calling out legitimate issues and offering something. They’re calling out the wealth gap. They’re calling out the student loan bubble. They’re calling out medical costs. What are the “moderates” doing? So far, Biden hasn’t done nada that I’ve seen to address his campaign promises in these areas. The Republicans’ - and Manchin for that matter - only solution is to talk about how bad the Democrats are. The only Republican I’ve actually seen come up with a plan - good or bad - was Rick Scott, and he was EXCORIATED for it from his own party, who basically said “Stop being proactive! We’re just trying to wait for the Democrats to fail, and just obstructing anything they put forward!”

Drives me crazy.

Another point I've made before that burns me up with talking about progressives being extreme is that there are numerous leftists beyond progressives to the left that are extreme. However, since FDR, a 4 term populist progressive, the country has moved steadily to the right. What is now considered the center used to be considered the far-right moderates bordering the extremist. Under Trump, that line jumped to "not quite Fascist, but bordering it". And MAGA is clearly fascist, just not full-blown to the Nazi extreme.

On the left, the moderate centrists are no different than the moderate right under Reagan, Clinton, and both Bush presidencies. The Tea Party changed all of that and started this racism-based push to the far right.

Like you, I prefer a party that at least puts forward solutions, even if they are less than perfect. ANYONE should be able to see the status quo of being all about the socialism for rich and corps and rugged capitalist individualism for the working class and poor is no longer good for America. The working class (middle class) needs some relief before they vanish into poverty with the trapped in place impoverished forced to beg for handouts just to get by. Unfortunately, the money-grubbing moderates, national media, corps, and the financial elite will continue to spread disinformation to maintain the status quo where they are the only winners. So anything progressives offer is painted bad or extreme before it ever had a chance to get off the ground. Bernie is far from perfect, and he'll admit that to anyone. But he would have easily been a better POTUS than Trump or Biden simply because he would have shown up every day and tried to improve the lives of common Americans across the board. Imagine that, a POTUS that goes the extra mile to do things for working-class America instead of manufacturing more wars and higher profits. While the true extremists would say we dodged a bullet, I think we missed out on a real leader. At a minimum, he is somebody that would have started us in the right direction.

I think that at least a part of you assertion is wrong. I'll present it this way. Has Biden done nothing, or is it the Republicans and Manchin, as you mentioned, that have prevented Biden from doing anything? You see a president doesn't have the power to write laws or vote on them. All he can do is propose his policies and have his party present them on the floor of congress. He most certainly has done that. We often times hear "*insert name of president here* has done nothing!".

The reality is our system has been set up that a president has very limited powers. I think people need to be looking at the people who really do hold the power. The House and Senate.

Otherwise I don't necessarily disagree with you. I will say that I don't see either extreme being any different in how they would line their pockets. I don't actually think they're any different than the moderates in that regard. Power creates corruption.

And OCD, I'm really not concerned with what some WaPo reporter's opinion is either way.

CNN panelists on Democrats backing 'extreme' GOP candidates: 'Be careful what you wish for'

Democrats have been propping up 'extreme' Republican candidates they believe will be easier to beat in general elections

CNN's chief national affairs correspondent Kasie Hunt and Hans Nichols, a political reporter for Axios, argued that Democrats will have to answer for their meddling in GOP primaries if the "extreme" candidates they're backing actually get elected.

Host Manu Raju noted earlier in the segment that the "central message" of the Jan. 6 hearings was that democracy is "under assault." He also said that Democrats were "meddling" in GOP primaries by trying to "prop up" certain candidates they believe to be "extreme" and easy to beat in general elections.

Raju brought up Gov. Larry Hogan's, R-M.D., comments on the Democratic strategy as well, who said that the party was "playing with fire."

https://www.foxnews.com/media/cnn-p...-candidates-be-careful-what-you-wish-for

I have talked to other democrats here in Tennessee. Republicans usually win here at a margin somewhere between 65% and 80% with the exception of urban areas. Many of them have indicated to me that since there's no chance a Democrat can win, they're simply going to vote for "the least trumpian republican" on the ballot. So it looks like to me that in at least some cases they will try to help promote a trumpian candidate and also vote against them at the same time. At least they are being creative.

Nothing the Looney Left does these days surprises me.

I'm so sorry they have a plan to help keep your trumpian brothers from taking over our government. But it will be okay.

I think it’s a mixture. Blame goes to the obstructionists and Manchin for things like the BBB, although I don’t know what initiative has been taken by the administration and Congress to try and circle back to negotiating that in at least some form.

With other things - like student loans - I think there has been an eerily silent amount of inaction.

Manchin is the only person trying to hold the country together right now. If it weren't for him, inflation would be even higher.

Not a conflict Pitt, you believe what you believe and 99% of the time we agree. Nobody is always going to agree. But you can't pretend the media and centrists don't always go for low-hanging fruit when they need a fall guy. It's easy to blame progressives because they are the only ones trying. Moderate Dems can't lead because they all have their thumbs in the corporate funding pie. Corruption 101, most are owned outright, especially Manchin and Sinema. Abd I don't give a damn what Sinema claims, she's a corporate shill.

How?

I can't really argue with that. As I've made known on this board, I embrace more of a traditional conservative mentality to an economic setup that emphasizes capitalism with "guard rails." The problem, like you said, is that the deck has been stacked heavily against the fulfilment of the American dream for each succeeding generation. One thing that kind of confuses me is the outcry against potential socialism or even communism, but when you look at the modern day compared to the rise of American economic dominance in the 50's, and compare things like tax brackets, mega-corp influence, the ratio of CEO to frontline worker salary - or even the wealth gap as a whole, the cost of education, and so on and so forth - we were a lot closer to "communism" or "socialism" (quotes for emphasis) back then than we are now.

You don't really anticipate a legitimate response to that do you?

J/C

Joe Manchin is a Democrat in a right leaning state.

He is a moderate democrat. The fact that he is trashed by other Dems shows that there is no room for moderate thinking in the "New" democratic party.

Look at where he is from. West Virgina is a coal state. Other Dems actually expect him to vote for things that will put hard working coal miners out of work? Seriously, you have to be pretty stupid if you think he is going to do that.

They're already out of work. They've been out of work. Manchin could care less about them being out of work. Manchin is only looking out for himself. He wants to be reelected which is why he votes the way he does. He also has close ties and a financial, personal interest in coal. I don't mind anyone stating why Manchin refuses to vote for fighting climate change as long as they aren't embellishing and fabricating the reasons why he's doing it. And don't get me wrong here. It's not like many politicians on both sides don't do the exact same thing. They say and do what will get them elected and vote based on their own personal interests.

Joe Manchin, who just torpedoed Democrats’ climate agenda, has long ties to coal industry

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/15/politics/joe-manchin-coal-financial-interests-climate/index.html

Right, and why I said it isn't realistic to think he would vote for anything that would hurt the coal industry. Or if it helps you, hurt it any further.

Especially since coal is his family's business.

Far left or far right ideology is unsustainable.

Their only hope is to swing what is considered as the moderate position, and the right is winning the battle if you have not figured that out. The right figured out how to gerrymander, and now has an upper hand.

That is why a the democrats have to win by a boatload to gain control.

Meanwhile we have been witness to further left and right candidates as the only option.

I yearn for the party of pragmatism, the “purple” party if you wish to call it that would scoop up all the moderates and the tell the loonies on the left and right to go pound sand.

j/c...

SAME PARTY AS THE OLD PARTY.......DEMONS!

JMHO, I'd agree with most of what you typed, EXCEPT Trump changed lots of things in Republican Party- he hit a huge nerve, lots of less educated whites/ and number of educated HATE/DISLIKE career politicians. He captured huge hunks of fed up voters- tired of do nothings who vote their own retirements and medical benefits and get little done. Trump, like other politicians, promised lots and got little done. Two years past his loss he's still relevant by lying continuously. They wanted a non-politician- he broke his oath to Constitution and most of Republicans still adore him.....man, we are screwed up. Truth vs lie, no one can claim the high ground- we are in a [censored] storm.

She's absurd. She left the part way back I thought. No dem has liked her for years.

Maybe true... well, except Bernie... she was the only one to stand up against the shenanigans when Clinton was stealing his nomination in '16.

To be honest, any of my dem friends could have written that speech. Not that the middle class white vote matters.

Now my dark horse pick for VP.

Hope not. She faked being progressive. And I think she's pro-Putin, but not 100%.

Ohio really needs this.

She wants you to vote for her just to make history instead of voting for her policies. People voting like this is why our country is so screwed up.

There are many, many issues. But perhaps this is a distillation of so many of them.

Politicians largely don't have values any more - they do what's needed to keep themselves in power. The Republican Party as recently as 2014/215 - wasn't the party we see today, it's become corrupt and infected because Trump Supporter is a way of staying in power that, if they lose Trump Supporter, in many cases they will lose power.

The 2 party system corrupts candidates that might otherwise be a positive force - you either tow the party line or you don't get their backing. Without their backing and the $$ that brings, it is supremely hard to be elected.

The wealth gap between the ultra wealthy 1% and the rest is a real problem and unsustainable - but to talk about addressing that is labelled Communism.

Policies the rest of the industrialized 1st world embrace (Nationalized health care, easier/cheaper prescriptions, easier/cheaper or free higher education, more aggressive welfare programs targeted at the neediest) ... are all scorned/labelled as Communist - yet Australia, New Zealand, Europe - none are Communist, most rank as 'Happier' and 'Better quality of Living'.

Pork Barrell spending - $Hundreds of Billions since the 90's.

Lobbyists spending - $3.7 Billion in 2021. No end in sight despite anyone with a brain recognizing it corrupts and devalues our processes.

And then there is the general population at large who either don't care enough to educate themselves or get their "news" and politics via the distorted lens of social media or in some cases the propaganda of MSM.

🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮

Extremely well-said.

Thank you both ! As always I think the majority are in agreement over 80% of the "stuff" - but most of the attention gets spent (and is focused on those in MSM) on the 5% at the very fringes.

Agreed.

I've spent many years calling social media "the scourge of society". It took me a long time to realize that social media is merely the vehicle... We all participate in the game of our own free will. The real scourge is as you stated it above. It is our media, bots, algorithms, and idiots on either side; working their asses off to galvanize those in the middle to either outrageous fringe.