Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

xchrom

(108,903 posts)
Fri Feb 7, 2014, 08:56 AM Feb 2014

No, Liberals Don't Control the Democratic Party [View all]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/02/no-liberals-dont-control-the-democratic-party/283653/



In a classroom in Harlem, the liberal new mayor of New York, Bill de Blasio, appeared with union leaders in support of his plan to raise taxes on incomes higher than $500,000 to fund public pre-kindergarten. "We're asking this of the wealthy," de Blasio said, "because there are too many working parents in this city today" who need help.

At the same time, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo was presenting his budget in Albany under a sign that trumpeted: "CUTTING TAXES."

You could hardly get a better illustration of the current tribal divide in the Democratic Party. Call it what you want—liberals versus centrists, populists versus the corporate wing—but these days, there's no doubt there are two different breeds of Democrats, both in elected office and in the activist grassroots. Along with Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, de Blasio has been hyped as the avatar of a new, more boldly progressive Democratic Party that discards the timid moderation advocated by the party's old guard in favor of a frank, take-no-prisoners crusade for higher taxes and bigger government.

But do Warren and de Blasio really represent the party's mainstream? The Democrats' liberal faction has been greatly overestimated by pundits who mistake noisiness for clout or assume that the left functions like the right. In fact, liberals hold nowhere near the power in the Democratic Party that conservatives hold in the Republican Party. And while they may well be gaining, they're still far from being in charge.


***progressives aren't in 'charge' of anything because we're too fractured:

we're environmentalists, economic populists, women's rights advocates, etc -- but some how it's become difficult to work as a bloc.
37 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Call it pragmatists versus purists. JoePhilly Feb 2014 #1
It's more a matter of social class than anything Fumesucker Feb 2014 #3
Then why help Joe Sixpack be protected from pre existing conditions? JoePhilly Feb 2014 #5
I never said anything about Democrats or Republicans Fumesucker Feb 2014 #10
Call it People-centric versus corporate-centric. Scuba Feb 2014 #4
The purist label goes to those who will decry compromise at all turns. JoePhilly Feb 2014 #7
So then Elizabeth Warren and her supporters are NOT purists, as we are willing to compromise. Scuba Feb 2014 #8
They are not ... but many of their loudest supporters are. JoePhilly Feb 2014 #11
I disagree with the "very little" conclusion. Just in appointing regulators ... Scuba Feb 2014 #14
The article mentions "liberals versus centrists, populists versus the corporate wing." Le Taz Hot Feb 2014 #20
The article says "Call it what you will" ... so I did. JoePhilly Feb 2014 #22
So much is said in choice of terminlogy. n/t Le Taz Hot Feb 2014 #28
I don't decry compromise, nor does hardly any other Liberal tkmorris Feb 2014 #16
that would be inaccurate. Warren isn't a purist, neither is Sanders or de Blasio cali Feb 2014 #9
They are not ... many of their loudest supporters are. JoePhilly Feb 2014 #12
Of course they'd have to make deals. cali Feb 2014 #18
N.Y. Mayor At Closed AIPAC Gala: Part Of My Job Is To Defend Israel ProSense Feb 2014 #21
Such a black/white, up/down Le Taz Hot Feb 2014 #13
I used the same binary structure that the OP refers to from the article ... JoePhilly Feb 2014 #15
Meaningless jargon. Folks tossed around 'I'm a pragmatist' to dress up their opposition to equality Bluenorthwest Feb 2014 #17
Ahh ... your preferred stick. Or should I say Schtick. JoePhilly Feb 2014 #37
I prefer prostitutes vs true believers. It's so much easier to be a pragmatist when your so-called jtuck004 Feb 2014 #24
Is this why Americans get war spending & wars while the REST of the industrialized world think Feb 2014 #27
Pragmatic means doing what works for your interests. Looks like a big Fail for "centrism" Armstead Feb 2014 #29
Corporations vs the people AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #36
We are fractured, and that's a big part of it el_bryanto Feb 2014 #2
It's like the plot from Iron Man 3 Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2014 #6
the most important point is made in Paragraph 16 Enrique Feb 2014 #19
Damn, where does that leave... freebrew Feb 2014 #23
Money does. Octafish Feb 2014 #25
Good piece but, quite frankly, I'm tired of the argument wyldwolf Feb 2014 #26
In my lifetime (60 or so years)... OilemFirchen Feb 2014 #30
August, 1968. That's when the Party leaders made it clear they would rather lose Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #31
To wit... OilemFirchen Feb 2014 #32
I'm a huge fan of Warren, de Blasio and Bernie Sanders. TheMathieu Feb 2014 #33
cuase the 'blogger class' has SO MUCH POWER!11 xchrom Feb 2014 #34
"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men... Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2014 #35
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»No, Liberals Don't Contro...