Shout out to the neoliberal corporatist third-way identity politics DLC neo-con wing of the party!

[DanTex]

I have no idea who any these people actually are, but the more I hear them being insulted, the fonder I grow of them.

So whoever and wherever y'all are, keep fighting the good fight!

[boston bean]

1. I've been called each and every single one of those and my fealty questioned by those who wish to

burn down the party and rebuild it. Not sure if that really makes me one, though!

harumph!

HELLO!!!!!!!!!!

[think]

2. Most of them hang out at this site nowadays:

http://www.thirdway.org/

[DanTex]

4. Looks like an obscure think tank. But I'm not sure why everyone keeps attacking them.

Never heard of most of the people in the "Our Team" section -- I've heard the name Jonathan Cowan somewhere, but that's about it.

The top article is about fighting DeVos's plans for deregulation and privatization of education. The next one is about how Trump's "simplification" of the tax code is just cover for a big giveaway to the top 1%.

These are supposed to be our evil overlords? People I've never heard of writing things progressives agree with?

[think]

8. Third Way Dems new war on Elizabeth Warren progressives: Why their centrist pitch is a political lo

Third Way Dems’ new war on Elizabeth Warren progressives: Why their centrist pitch is a political loser

JIM NEWELL - TUESDAY, AUG 11, 2015 08:00 AM EDT

The New Democrats want to spread their message of fulfilling big business's wish list. That'll sell!

~Snip~

The floor’s all yours, New Democrats. What policy ideas would sharpen House Democrats’ appeal to moderate voters?

• Trade deals. “When Obama needed support from his own party to pass landmark trade legislation, he turned to the New Democrat Coalition. The group mustered just enough votes — 28 in total — to clear fast-track trade authority through Congress, despite opposition from the party’s left, including Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California.“

• Dynamic scoring. “Reps. John Delaney of Maryland and Scott Peters of California introduced a ‘dynamic scoring’ bill — an issue normally favored by Republicans — that would encourage budget scorekeepers to score tax cuts favorably to reevaluate how Congress spends money on infrastructure, research and education.”

• “Reforming” Dodd-Frank. “Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes is one of the most outspoken advocates for reforming the Dodd-Frank financial regulations bill.” [Jim Himes seems like a nice fellow and has a good-by-congressmen-standards Twitter account. He is also owned by the banks.]

• Corporate tax reform. “Lawmakers in the coalition repeatedly stressed that reevaluating how the U.S. taxes corporate profits from overseas operations could be an area of compromise between the moderate Democrats and Republicans.”

OK OK, I think I see the problem here. This article and the quotes within it frame New Democrats’ proposal as geared toward appealing to voters. You know, voters! Humans who visit polling stations and cast their ballots for either Democratic or Republican candidates....


Read more:
http://www.salon.com/2015/08/11/third_way_dems_new_war_on_elizabeth_warren_progressives_why_their_centrist_pitch_is_a_political_loser/

[DanTex]

13. "...the partys left, including Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California."

Interesting. So now we know that Nancy Pelosi is not part of the mysterious neoliberal thirdway DLC cabal. I could swear I heard otherwise...

Also from that article.

Moderates are tired of being overshadowed in a party where liberals have long dominated the agenda, even as Democrats slipped further into the House minority after the 2014 midterm elections. They’ve accused the White House and party leaders of focusing too much on niche economic issues like the minimum wage and pay equity — policies, moderates argue, that turn off suburban voters Democrats need if they want to take back the House. And top Democratic leaders have released them to break with the party’s liberal base, in many cases an acknowledgement that many moderates come from tightly contested districts.

Wait, wait, wait. Moderates are overshadowed, and liberals dominate the agenda. But DU keeps saying that the thirdway corporatists are controlling everything. What gives?

[think]

16. The part you're quoting is an excerpt from Politico that the author was countering

That quote came from this article:

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/new-dems-plan-assertive-new-presence-in-house-121208

That was not the author's view but rather the view he was countering.


As for all the minutia, I care about issues and that's why I do not support many of the issues that Third Way supports controversial including their stance that Social Security and Medicare needed to be cut:

Wall Street Agitates for Social Security Cuts

BY RICHARD ESKOW - Posted: FRiday, 23 November 2012

The anti-Social Security propagandists should’ve thought this one through a little more carefully: On the same day that Goldman Sach’s CEO issued his “balanced” demand for Social Security and Medicare cuts, the Wall Street-funded group called “Third Way” published the results of a poll which precisely reflected the wishes of Goldman Sach’s CEO.

Coincidence? I report, you decide.

It certainly doesn’t look good when the poll in question contains misleading questions, is deceptively presented, and includes sentences like “Questions 50 to 55 held for future release.” Any remaining shred of credibility disappears in the face of numerous other polls which directly contradicts Third Way’s claims about these results.

Oh, and we almost forgot: Two of that group’s board members worked for that CEO.

Read more:
https://www.laprogressive.com/social-security-cuts/

Elizabeth Warren Fires Back at Centrist Dems on Social Security

ERIKA EICHELBERGERDEC. 9, 2013 6:00 AM

Last week, the president and vice-president of the centrist think-tank Third Way accused Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) of ignoring what they call Social Security's "undebatable solvency crisis." In an interview with Mother Jones, Warren fired back, countering the charge, and elaborating on how Social Security could be expanded.

"If we made no changes at all to Social Security," Warren said, "it would continue to make payments at the current level for about 20 years," meaning there is no immediate crisis facing the program, which assists some 58 million Americans. "Modest adjustments," she added, "will make certain… we could increase benefits for those who need it most."

~Snip~

President Barack Obama, along with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, have proposed trimming the program to rein in the deficit. Each year, the Social Security Administration increases benefit payments to keep up with inflation. The president and lawmakers have suggested using a new, supposedly more accurate formula to calculate inflation, which would make monthly Social Security payments increase more slowly. In a speech on the Senate floor last month, Warren said this new formula is far from accurate, and that Congress should not balance the budget on the backs of the elderly. (Budget negotiators, who must reach an agreement by mid-January, have since decided against including Social Security cuts in the deal.) Warren's floor speech prompted the Third Way op-ed.

A coalition of liberal advocacy groups, including the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, have also lashed out against Third Way. The organizations called on their members to ask congressional Democrats affiliated with the think tank to disavow the op-ed...

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/12/elizabeth-warren-expand-social-security-third-way

[DanTex]

19. It's a simple mathematical fact that the New Democrats are a small coalition.

The Progressive Caucus is bigger. Not only that, but not all "New Democrats" agree on everything. In fact, there are some Dems who are members of both the New Democrats and also the Progressive Caucus. Mindblowing!

The Politico article (which was a news article, not an opinion piece like the Salon article) is correct: moderate Democrats are a minority of the party. I agree with you on Social Security, but then so do most Democrats. It's some kind of fantasy that the thirdway has outsized influence.

On the other hand I don't disagree with moderate Dems on everything, for example, those two articles direct from the thirdway website. So why the demonization?

And the thing is, there are certain parts of the country where a Sanders or Warren couldn't get elected. I'd rather have a moderate Democrat than a teabagger any day.

[think]

20. Supports TPP, cuts to Soc. Security & Medicare, tax breaks for corporations, "reforming" Dodd-Frank

We could start there.

[DanTex]

21. With the exception of TPP, very few Dems agree with those things.

And even with TPP, Dem support would be weaker if it wasn't for Obama pushing it. Personally I think most opposition to TPP is misguided, but I'm in a minority position on that among Dems.

And to find a Dem who wants to cut Medicare, you have to really dig, there are hardly any.

Yet people act like somehow the third way controls the party. Which is nuts.

[CajunBlazer]

6. Hey "Think" do you think I am one of them?

[think]

9. No.

[guillaumeb]

3. Keep fighting the good fight?

That depends on what one feels is a good fight. But considering that the GOP will soon control all three branches of the Federal Government, the DLC obviously has a different agenda than winning at the state and national level.

So what is that agenda?

[DanTex]

5. The good fight is the one against the GOP.

And by the way, the DLC doesn't exist anymore, so they don't have any agenda at all.

[guillaumeb]

10. The DLC does not exist as a formal organization,

but the philosophy endures.

[think]

12. True. The DLC no longer exists. It's formal organization ended February 7, 2011

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council

But as you say the philosophy lives on....

[DanTex]

15. Well, that's where you lose me.

Because I have no idea what this philosophy is nor which Democrats supposedly adhere to it. I just hear a bunch of terms thrown.

I went to the actual thirdway website that someone posted a link to above, and the top articles there were opposing privatization and deregulation of education, and opposing tax cuts for the 1%.

That sounds pretty good to me.

[guillaumeb]

30. I think that people sometimes use the acronym "DLC"

as shorthand for policies that have the effect of favoring corporations over workers.

Trade policy is just one area.

And the ACA is seen by some Democrats as a bailout to the insurance industries. While it did increase access to healthcare, it did nothing about costs.

And the acronym is of course associated with the Clinton Presidency.

[DanTex]

31. The problem is, it carries the implication that anyone

who disagrees with certain policies actually wants corporations to thrive at the expense of workers. Which is totally false.

"DLC" and all the other labels used in my OP are used by people trying to stifle any deviation from a certain ideological purity. And this is seriously counterproductive given the realities of governing.

With ACA, for example, there are plenty of ways it could be improved, and maybe single payer would be better. But tarring Obama and the Dems who voted for it (including Bernie) with labels like "corporatist" is stupid. ACA was a huge improvement over what was there before.

And by the way, ACA did cut the rate of growth in healthcare costs.

[guillaumeb]

33. Agreed. The use of any labels as shorthand risks oversimplifying.

And I read plenty of examples of such ideological purity from some few at JPR. A purity that involves, for some, an apparent quest for the perfect candidate, and a willingness to refuse to support the non-perfect.

And I argue at JPR against this type of "waiting for perfection" because during that wait, many good but imperfect things will not be accomplished. And more people will suffer.

As to the ACA, it was an improvement to the US system, but only by taking profit out of access to healthcare can access really be extended to all. Most western democracies, including my home, already solved that problem many years ago. It is purely a matter of political will and courage.

[JCanete]

7. gotto distinguish yourself on the financing issues if you want to hang the GOP with them.

As you say, nobody is squeaky clean. Well, that's a shame because it makes addressing things that need to be addressed in a convincing way, really damn hard.

[el_bryanto]

11. That's pretty funny - i mean combining all those notions into one and pretending it's a confused

mess. That's a hell of a lot easier than actually untangling them and dealing with what people are actually complaining about. Plus it has the advantage of picking the most unhinged representative of those who oppose thirdway policies (as I do for example) and declaring the whole movement dead based on that.

It's such a time saver and prevents you from having to actually think, which, lets face it, takes effort. And who wants that.

Bryant

[DanTex]

14. Thirdway policies, hmm.

It just so happens that this mysterious "third way" has a website. What sort of evil policies are they promoting?

Well, the top article is warning about Betsy DeVos's plans for privatization and deregulation of education.
https://medium.com/third-way/holding-ed-secretary-pick-betsy-devos-accountable-on-accountability-b0f99ef63617#.hm5qbbtmi
The next one is arguing that Trump's tax cuts for the 1% should be opposed.
https://medium.com/third-way/buyer-beware-the-red-herring-of-tax-simplification-1a5ead169e59#.ao3rli2vm

These are the bad guys?

Based on what I'm seeing, I'd pick the third-way wing of the party over the Susan Sarandon wing every day.

[JCanete]

17. There's always more solidarity when you aren't in charge. Common enemy and all.

Picking a couple things off a website and using that to determine what 3rd way means is silly. How do you go about using issues that Sarandon would certainly agree with to distinguish these two wings? Seems disingenuous in the extreme.

[DanTex]

22. How would you suggest we determine what 3rd way means?

I didn't cherry-pick those issues, those were the top two articles when I went to the 3rd way website.

Yes, Sarandon and Third Way do agree on those issues. That's my point. The 3rd way gets demonized all the time, but go read what they actually write, and what do you know? It's pretty progressive.

And I'm sure they agree on a lot of other issues. And yet the Sarandon/Cornel West wing of the party decided to sit out the election, a move that helped Trump get into office.

[JCanete]

23. But the point is you brought everything you know about Sarandon to the table, versus the two

issues you pulled off of a site about 3rd way politics, and then made a comparison about who was better. That doesn't seem slightly skewed to you?

[DanTex]

24. Ok, yes it's skewed.

I think if we went issue by issue, there would be some where I agree more with Sarandon, and others where I agree more with third way. And a lot of places where we all agree: income inequality is too severe, we need to address climate change, racism is bad, etc.

But then comes the part where Sarandon/West say that it doesn't make any difference whether Hillary or Trump is president. Or worse, in Sarandon's case.

I'd rather have people with generally progressive values, and some areas of disagreement, than people who are going to, in effect, give help to Trump, no matter how closely their policy views align with mine.

[NCTraveler]

18. .

[ismnotwasm]

25. It's essentially bullshit term (s)

That some people like to use instead of actual substance. Plus it can make wordy pseudo-intellectual criticism like, several words longer.

[yallerdawg]

26. After 12 years of Corrupt Trump/Pence...

"Third Way" moderation reflecting the will of the electorate will make a comeback.

Meanwhile, we'll just have to endure the excesses of capitalism and greed on our own.

[leftofcool]

27. Thank you. I have been labeled one of those.

[Gothmog]

28. I agree

[betsuni]

29. The magic words!

Repeated constantly every day all day, the magic words will make the fictional neoliberal corporatist third-way identity politics DLC neo-con bad bad bad Democratic Party disappear with a big poof and the Real Democrats and True Progressives can take over. OMG, after I typed that I thought about myself, "How authoritarian, what an elitist" -- heck, now I'm now self-insulting. IT'S HAPPENING.

[Bobbie Jo]

32. Pure gobbledegook

from a bunch of pseudo intellectuals.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

34. lol. good one.

[baldguy]

35. Funny thing: the people crying most about the DLC et. al. actualy helped actual fascists win.

[AgadorSparticus]

36. Hahahaha!!!