Democrats Aren't Moving Left. They're Returning to Their Roots.

[Lazy Daisy]

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/11/04/elections-2018-democrats-history-liberal-progressive-socialist-222187?fbclid=IwAR1qSzDzZErlzkbRDz1SIh8Sj7_fjwKMFoKzxqhBzMvRFQbHQjg5JZWbwpk

What pundits today decry as a radical turn in Democratic policy and politics actually finds its antecedents in 1944. With the country fully mobilized for war, President Franklin Roosevelt called for “a second Bill of Rights … an economic bill of rights” that would entitle all Americans to a “useful and remunerative job,” “the right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation,” the “right … to a decent home,” “the right to adequate medical care” and the “right to a good education.” His speech found partial inspiration in a report by the National Resource Planning Board, which advanced the necessity of a “socially provided income.”

[shanny]

1. So SO glad to hear "FDR" again.

One of the best, most effective presidents in history...and until very recently a virtual ghost in his own party.

[katmondoo]

3. I haven't stopped praying for another FDR

WE need one so badly

[OhNo-Really]

2. We backed away from The Third Way towards The First Way

Are enough disappointed enough to set course for a Fair Policy America? A more well distributed wealth America? An equal justice for all America? A tolerant America? A loving America?

I sure as hell hope so! So does Mother Earth.

[WiffenPoof]

4. Thank You

I'm so glad that you posted this. I have always felt that this supposed move to the left is actually a return to our fundamental roots. For years, Democrats have forgotten what it means to be a Democrat.

[Yavin4]

5. Rubinism failed

Robert Rubin, Bill Clinton's secretary of the Treasury, believed that growth alone would increase the well-being of the populace and replace social programs. Income inequality would be a by product of this growth, but what would it matter if folks on the bottom saw their incomes rise as well. I must admit. I too subscribed to this theory, but it's deeply flawed. Rubin never accounted for the ubridled greed of the 1%. A few hundred million is not enough. A billion is not enough. The arrogance of the 1% knows no bounds.