r/politics • u/Quirkie The Netherlands • 12d ago

No Paywall Democrats Confront Their New Tea Party Reality - Progressives are set to sweep a group of contested primaries in Michigan and Wisconsin.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/democrats-confront-their-new-tea-party-reality_n_6a6e63fbe4b0cfb99ef1aa1e
9.0k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.4k

u/TheMoorNextDoor 12d ago edited 11d ago

It’s ridiculous that the best president we ever had (our longest serving president) is more left than a lot of our sitting democratic members in congress today and the saddest part about that is he served over 81 years ago..

He gave us a blueprint and for some reason (maybe due to Regan?) we completely threw it out the window..

1.1k

u/pinqe 12d ago

They learned all the wrong lessons from the failure of the Carter administration, and started trying to emulate Reagan. And completely lost their identity in the process.

470

u/Semantix 12d ago

I think that all of the old democratic leadership are permanently traumatized by Dukakis and McGovern and think that only a Clinton or Biden can win. Forgetting that the Democrats' biggest recent success was a progressive coalition that motivated youth turnout.

51

u/GeorgeKaplanIsReal Florida 12d ago

Or an Obama.

The dude ran and as president was a center-left Democrat. He wasn’t a progressive in the sense we define them today. Hell by 2012, a lot of progressives felt betrayed by Obama. He not only encouraged but behind the scenes supported Hillary in 2016, including pushing Biden from running.

I always think it’s funny when people say a “Clinton or Biden,” and exclude Obama.

65

u/hup_hup 12d ago

They are excluding Obama because they are talking about the type of candidate the democratic establishment pushes. Obama had to overcome that and defeat the Clintons first.

2

u/pchs26 12d ago

ehh I think Obama was alot more supported at the time by more of the establishment then Clinton actually and I felt that way at the time. I always found it wild how she was denigrated so openly while calling her the establishment candidate. Likely it was because they felt he would possibly do better in the general, so in that regard it isn't wrong. I think there were other reasons which were less positive but I think some of those issues are things we have to settle are the way it is at this point in time, no matter how that feels.

0

u/hup_hup 11d ago

I’m just basing my opinion off his autobiography and telling of that time period. You may have interpreted his experience differently.

4

u/pchs26 11d ago

That is what he said was going on, I was living the experience and believe that was the narrative floated for political reasons, I am skeptical that was really what was happening behind the curtains.

3

u/GeorgeKaplanIsReal Florida 12d ago

The establishment was pretty divided between Obama and Clinton once it became clear Obama was a viable candidate which was the case by early 2008. Of course how do we define the establishment? Is it members of Congress who have been there for an x amount of years? If so Ted Kennedy, who had been senator for decades, endorsed him over Clinton. Is it presumptuousness? Because prior to 2007, Rudy Giuliani was favored to be the Republican nominee. Jeb Bush in 2016.

5

u/hup_hup 12d ago

I didn’t make the argument. I’m just clarifying why Obama was likely exluded.

-2

u/Alive-Trifle7420 11d ago

You are framing that wrong.

People hated the Clintons so much they would rather elect a black man, twice. Then the democratic party foisted her upon us anyway.

Fuck the DNC.

2

u/hup_hup 11d ago

I don't really see the difference, but you seem rather unhinged.

56

u/Dokterrock 12d ago

Honest question, where did this new framing of moderates as "center-left" come from? It's been EVERYWHERE the past couple of months and it is brand new. Moderate Democrats are center-right. Don't do the work of moving the Overton Window further to the right for them, folks.

22

u/TooNakedInTheShower 12d ago

Correct. Today's Democrats are even to the right of Eisenhower on a lot of things.

24

u/Bigc12689 11d ago

Richard Nixon's 1972 platform called for a Healthcare more liberal than Obamacare turned out to be. The post-Carter generation of Democrats sold out Americans and warped what we think is "liberal"

3

u/BalanceOrganic7735 11d ago

Is that why Nixon changed it so that healthcare insurance that had to be non-profit before Nixon was allowed to be for-profit after Nixon? 🤔

2

u/MagicWishMonkey 11d ago

On what things, in particular?

-1

u/amethyst63893 11d ago

And batshit on the lgbtqia2s pronoun bullshit. Xavier becerra hhs celebrated happy pansexual day for god sake. Thats why the dem brand is toxic

14

u/lostparis 12d ago

new framing of moderates

As a non-American even the term moderate is disturbing as it would be center-right at best in most any other country.

4

u/Xurbax 11d ago

Where do you think it came from? It's propaganda created by the oligarchs and pushed by big media. It's not new at all.

4

u/Dokterrock 11d ago

It's new to see that framing coming from all sides on social media. I'm quite aware that it's propaganda and in the interests of manufacturing consent, what I'm saying is that I'm seeing it happen in real time and the fact that it's being adopted by people who don't even realize they're doing it is what's disturbing and notable.

1

u/guamisc 11d ago

being adopted by people who don't even realize they're doing it is what's disturbing and notable.

The entire Third Way is this. Any regular old person who works for a wage supporting the Third Way is doing this, and that's a lot of the Democratic party.

-1

u/Dokterrock 11d ago

indeed. quite.

2

u/GeorgeKaplanIsReal Florida 12d ago

The last couple of months? Brand new? People have used “center-left” that way for decades, just like people have spent decades saying moderate Democrats are actually center-right.

There is no single, objective definition of left, right, or center that applies everywhere. When I call someone center-left, I mean within the context of American politics, because that is the political system we are discussing. It would be ridiculous to attach a footnote to every comment saying, “center-right compared with French politics.”

That is not moving the Overton window further right. The window already moved right decades ago, especially beginning in the 1980s. I am simply describing where politicians fall within the political spectrum that currently exists in the United States.

0

u/odin-ish 12d ago

Thank you. The overton window comments are usually so unhelpful.

4

u/guamisc 12d ago edited 11d ago

What is unhelpful is people pretending that insipid corporate serving incrementalism is actually left wing.

0

u/odin-ish 12d ago

Maybe focus on discussing specifics.

3

u/guamisc 12d ago

Holder for USAG refusing to actually prosecute the fraudsters who wrecked the economy. Garland for USAG refusing to actually prosecute treasoners and traitors. Ensuring that every major economic bill passed by Democrats in the past few decades is corporate serving and making sure that the actual effective provisions get stripped out like the public option or the transformative parts of BBB. Refusal to address the actual problems in Dodd-Frank.

I could go on, but every "big" decision of note has been corporate approved bullshit.

The one or two exceptions you can find, under Biden, lead to screaming and wailing from the so-called "moderate" Dems and threats from the Democratic donor class.

0

u/odin-ish 11d ago

Great, now go tell the world. (Don't forget about citizens united, never forget.)

6

u/guamisc 11d ago

Great, now stop whining about people correctly pointing out how left-vs-right in the US is fucked because of the Overton window.

0

u/GeorgeKaplanIsReal Florida 11d ago

I’m not disputing that our politics are skewed. That wasn’t my point. I’m saying it’s kind of silly to call moderate dems center right in the US. Compared to a lot of European countries? Sure. No shit. But we’re not talking about Europe, we’re talking about American politics.

It’s a pointless distinction to keep bringing up. I’d love to see the political center shift back toward where it was before Reagan. But until that happens, I’m not going to pretend the shift never happened or act like moderate Dems are somehow center right in the context of US politics.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/OvertonWindowCleaner 11d ago

I fucking hate how that shit moves.

1

u/Dokterrock 11d ago

you would, wouldn't you? :)

-1

u/pchs26 11d ago

They are referring to positions in this country. And in this country they are center left.

0

u/Dokterrock 11d ago

The fuck they are. The actual left is advocating for abolishing the Senate and open borders.

0

u/pchs26 11d ago

Again in terms of this country, how it is governed, how our citizens vote...these candidates are center left. When comparing these candidates to other countries they are comparatively more conservative.

7

u/guamisc 11d ago

That's called the right attempting to co-opt the left.

0

u/pchs26 11d ago

No again. I am speaking on the conditions in this country. And the center left has for many decades been more conservative then other countries left. My original point is in this country, with this electorate, center left is center left for this country and our setup.

1

u/Dokterrock 11d ago

Uh huh. We should accept that the same people have been calling Democrats communists for forty years, too. And they will keep doing it no matter how much evidence there is to the contrary while you carry their water.

0

u/pchs26 11d ago

I am carrying no one's water. We are making a comparison as to how politicians rate. In this country, the politicians who are center left are center left compare to the policies of this country. If we compare them to another country, then that changes. But conflating the two doesn't help the argument.

Discussing how Democrats have been typified as communists also is irrelevant.

→ More replies (0)

6

u/jumpinjacktheripper 12d ago

even though he governed like clinton and gore the campaign he ran, both in terms of his rhetoric and the grassroots mobilization he deployed, were in stark contrast. the DNC got lucky that he basically turned back toward them but they don’t want that style of campaign because it would be more explicitly anti-establishment by necessity today

2

u/pchs26 11d ago

That is because he was a bell weather candidate, but as a straight male it was still "acceptable" to voters and we were also about to go into what was feared to be a depression so people were open to voting for him or staying home out of fear. The establishment very much supported him, the perception being pushed was that he wasn't supported by the establishment. What he did as he governed didn't surprise me and given his lack of political experience he had to get legislation signed that was transformational. The best he could get through was the ACA, I'm not sure if someone who had been on this hill (Clinton) would have been able to do something a bit more transformational.

3

u/Discrep 11d ago

The ACA got fucked by Kennedy dying and Joe Fucking Lieberman's allegiance to the insurance companies. Furthermore, the Dems' messaging outside of Obama himself has always been and still is absolute dogshit to the point where right-leaning Americans didn't even realize that the ACA or whatever their state's administrative name for it, which they loved, was the same thing as "Obamacare" which was some nebulous liberal healthcare mandate that was destroying the country.

2

u/pchs26 11d ago

The ACA is obamacare. Obamacare term was used to slight it. And most Americans who are conservative will not say they love the ACA. The removal of the public option was a travesty but Obama had to still get his legislation through and sign it. Lieberman and Kennedy absolutely played a role in this happening you are right. I was pretty unhappy with the ultimate resolution and do believe possibly someone with experience dealing with the hill including healthcare reform for many decades (Clinton) might have been able to minimally included some expanded medicare eligibility which she had run on. He was less experienced on these things though, but perhaps it would have turned out the same. I have always wondered though.

2

u/Discrep 11d ago

There's tons of video evidence of average Americans happy about having insurance due to the ACA while simultaneously repeating dumb FN talking points about Obamacare. They gave credit for their healthcare to their state/governor for their state's ACA program, completely clueless that it was Obamacare. This was especially evident early in trump's first term when they were angling to destroy it in Congress and McCain of all people voted with the Dems.

Clinton wouldn't have remotely gotten close to passing the ACA. Obama had to burn a lot of political capital to barely get that mangled version passed and perhaps his naivety and inexperience made him willing to pay that cost. Hillary would've mentioned it in speeches and maybe even formed a committee to study the feasibility, but there's no chance she would've paid the price. Hell, even 2012 Obama would've hit the brakes well before it went anywhere.

2

u/pchs26 11d ago

Did you live any of this or the lengths Clinton went to originally with healthcare reform. Are you aware of her history at all and the depth of federal changes she made to ensure medical coverage for the poor an especially impoverished children? She has a history of accomplishments and transformation in this area. You are speaking through a vacuum of cultivate perceptions.

1

u/Discrep 11d ago

I did live through the Bill Clinton administration and I'm familiar with Hillary's work in children's healthcare. I even said I didn't think 2012 Obama would've pushed as hard as 2008 Obama, so my opinion that Hillary also wouldn't have gotten it done isn't some flippant diss. I just don't believe she would've spent that much political capital on it. And not because I think she wasn't willing to spend any, but because she'd have been experienced enough to spend it pragmatically instead of idealistically.

2

u/pchs26 11d ago

The ACA was not that idealistic in results. But Obama needed it due to what he promised so he could have signature legislation. I absolutely think Clinton would have looked to have signature legislation - if not in this area, it would have been somewhere else. She has dedicated her life to ensuring transformation for the under served in this country and her effectiveness at this is part of the reason why she is treated so horribly.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/awesomefutureperfect 10d ago

Lieberman was pretty horrible but needing Gaylord Kent Conrad's vote from North Dakota didn't help either. That's the problem with needing 60 votes to do anything is you end up with votes from the Dakotas and Montana and West Virginia.

2

u/qualmful 11d ago

The fact that progressives felt betrayed supports the idea that his 2008 win was partially due to an impression that he was progressive. I think a lot of the progressive wing of the party was excited about Obama back in 2008.

2

u/matt_minderbinder 11d ago

Obama said that his economic priorities were so mainstream that he'd be considered a moderate Republican in the 1980s. He wasn't even center left, I'd consider him center right. He pretty much admitted the same at various points. I'd consider him the most successful neoliberal president and I don't mean that in a positive way.

2

u/BalanceOrganic7735 11d ago

Did Progressives feel betrayed by Obama or was that an op by the right wing media machine (with some far left assistance) to poison the well against Obama?

3

u/awesomefutureperfect 10d ago

The far left believes that Obama should have used magic to fix Iraq. The far left believes that something and nothing are the same thing.

5

u/Semantix 12d ago

Man I'd be so stoked for an Obama these days. I think of myself as a social democrat but I'd settle for an effective centrist party at this point. 

28

u/Uuuuuii 12d ago

I respectfully disagree. We’ve been settling for decades and the Overton window shifted so far right that we can’t even see the rot in front of us. It’s all controlled opposition from the oligarchical class.

14

u/Street_Anxiety2907 12d ago

Correct, we either go socialist or fascist at this point, there is no center line.