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)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 wantliberals versus centrists, populists versus the corporate wingbut 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
So then Elizabeth Warren and her supporters are NOT purists, as we are willing to compromise.
Scuba
Feb 2014
#8
The article mentions "liberals versus centrists, populists versus the corporate wing."
Le Taz Hot
Feb 2014
#20
Meaningless jargon. Folks tossed around 'I'm a pragmatist' to dress up their opposition to equality
Bluenorthwest
Feb 2014
#17
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
August, 1968. That's when the Party leaders made it clear they would rather lose
Egalitarian Thug
Feb 2014
#31
"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men...
Tierra_y_Libertad
Feb 2014
#35