Skip to main content

View Diary: Third Way fantasizes that Democrats want a more conservative Obama (181 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I still don't get it though (7+ / 0-)

    Shouldn't these guys be more at home in the Republican Party than the Dems? I mean, haven't the Dems, at least in the last 10 or so years, been heavy on the Economic Populism?

    •  They already screwed up the GOP, (19+ / 0-)

      now, they're trying to change the Democratic Party to suit themselves.

      "Let us never forget that doing the impossible is the history of this nation....It's how we are as Americans...It's how this country was built"- Michelle Obama

      by blueoregon on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 12:36:35 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And they're doing a fantastic job... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        blueoregon, CA wildwoman

        might I add.
        I hope President Obama's excellent Inauguration Speech is the start of a new day.

        •  me too. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dclawyer06, CA wildwoman

          "Let us never forget that doing the impossible is the history of this nation....It's how we are as Americans...It's how this country was built"- Michelle Obama

          by blueoregon on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 05:21:18 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Unlikely (0+ / 0-)

          On the economic front, he's beguiled by these guys.

          Lew, Geithner, Daley and Obama are all lawyers.

          All they know about economics is the neoliberal claptrap, backwards math (see above) that will prevent -- simply because Obama has fallen for it -- him from actually achieving anything he purports to support that requires spending (other than little stuff he can do by executive order).

          They don't understand the economics of government.

          They don't understand what it means for a nation to be  "monetarily sovereign".

          United We Understand — e MMT unum

          by dorkenergy on Wed Jan 23, 2013 at 01:47:59 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  They're not neocons & not heavily MIC invested (5+ / 0-)
      haven't the Dems, at least in the last 10 or so years, been heavy on the Economic Populism?
      Not at all.
    •  I'm not sure that I know what heavy economic (9+ / 0-)

      populist policies that you have in mind.

      Don't forget that many of Clinton's and this Administration's trade pacts/policies have contributed to the loss of many industrial jobs, therefore the 'shrinking middle class.'

      And the minimum wage hasn't been raised since the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007 was signed into law.  It took almost two years to raise the minimum hourly wage to $7.25 an hour, and to the incredibly low $2.13 an hour, for tipped labor.

      And, of course, welfare as we know it, was abolished in the 1990's, making it a federal block-grant to states, with little oversight.  This allowed many states to almost eviscerate the only cash assistance program in the US.  [Check out the TANF program.  The top monthly benefit in my mid-Atlantic state is less than $190 monthly.]

      And Medicaid has been handled very similarly, with much state discretion regarding who even qualifies for the coverage.  Many states have contracted out their Medicaid programs to private insurers.  My state literally "slashed" its Medicaid equivalent program (they opted out of Medicaid) by eliminating tens of thousands of beneficiaries.  Court suits stalled this move here, but not for long.  And the Governor was a DLC Democrat who presided over the cuts.
      Personally, I would like to see a much more aggressively populist agenda.  But I don't think that it will happen unless the American populace demands it.
      After all, we're presumably getting ready to witness the 'slashing of our social insurance programs' (according to the pundits).

      I urge everyone to 'burn up the phone lines' to Capitol Hill and the White House.  Let them know that slashing the social safety net is unacceptable.

      Mollie

      “If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

      by musiccitymollie on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 02:04:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  My sense is that these people (9+ / 0-)

      do not really identify with any party. They are ready to frame the conversation so their interests are protected--doesn't matter Republican or Democrat. They are political opportunists, plain and simple. I would think in the Koch brothers' and their ilk's playbook, you take your power where you can get it.

      Force is the midwife of every old society pregnant with a new one. Marx

      by Marihilda on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 02:55:25 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The framing crew (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Marihilda

        The fricking framing wrecking crew:

        the Banksters, Wall St. financialists, Peterson, the Kochs, the Waltons:

        • Banksters and Wall St.: "We're exposed, it's only on the upside, but heh"
        • Pete Peterson: "Social Security -- you call that a good investment? Have I got a market for you"
        • the Kochs: Regulation is shackling my freedom (to pollute)
        • the Waltons -- "Would you like some chains with your groceries" (to customers) "… with your timecard" (to employees)

        United We Understand — e MMT unum

        by dorkenergy on Wed Jan 23, 2013 at 01:55:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  In the historic Republican party, but not now (0+ / 0-)

      I think you're right, historically those that represent interests of big business and the affluent have been Republican, but now due the the radicalization of the Republican party, no longer is merely being a corporatist sufficient, one must also be socially conservative, distrustful of government, anti-scientific, and hawkish. Fail at any of these other things or show signs of being prone to compromise and it's hard to make it through the primary.  

      Consider, for example, Arlen Specter, thoroughly Republican, had to transition to the Democratic Party.

      Of course radicalization of the Republican Party has to some extent caused the Democratic Party to trend left though not nearly as much as the Republicans have gone right.  Where does that leave the centrists?  No activist wants them (and that's probably always been true), but at least they are tolerated by the Democratic Party but not like in the 1990's.

      So what to do?  Well Democrats could become more radicalized themselves like some are suggesting, and then the centrists will have no where, or maybe the Republicans will pick them up as part of an effort jettison the Tea Party; that seems like it could lead to problems.

      Or instead they could embrace them (keep them ~ 15% or whatever) and use their big business influence to moderate corporate America, because in this case at least there's guaranteed way to do that; money.

      Keep in mind these guys didn't trick their way into office, well maybe some of them did, and maybe they all did a little, but mostly its because they represent a demographic rich (non-crazy) business types and I don't think that demographic is going to disappear.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (141)
  • Community (59)
  • Elections (39)
  • Civil Rights (36)
  • Culture (32)
  • 2016 (32)
  • Law (27)
  • Environment (26)
  • Texas (26)
  • Economy (26)
  • Baltimore (26)
  • Bernie Sanders (24)
  • Labor (23)
  • Hillary Clinton (22)
  • Republicans (18)
  • Rescued (18)
  • Health Care (18)
  • Barack Obama (18)
  • International (17)
  • Media (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site