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
Populist Reform of the Democratic Party
Showing Original Post only (View all)The Third Way: 'Why are Democrats affiliated with this group that wants to gut Democratic Programs?' [View all]
Last edited Sat Jan 10, 2015, 05:39 PM - Edit history (3)
In this article from Richard (RJ) Eskow , some very pertinent questions now about the presence of this Wall St backed Think Tank in the Democratic Party.
Questions that are growing by the day as their control over the Dem Party shows signs of crumbling, finally.
The Democrats' 'Third Way' Quarrel Could Change Your Future
There was a big dust-up in the Democratic Party last week, triggered by a somewhat incoherent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal from the leaders of a Wall Street-funded "think tank"/lobbying group called Third Way. Many of the responses dealt with the op-ed's attack on Sen. Elizabeth Warren, but don't be distracted by that. As Sen. Warren would undoubtedly agree, the issues involved are much more important than the personalities.
As politicians affiliated with Third Way hasten to distance themselves from the op-ed, the question remains: Why are Democrats affiliated with a group which works so strenuously to gut Democratic programs? Voters deserve more than platitudes from these politicians. They deserve clear answers about the issues.
As politicians affiliated with Third Way hasten to distance themselves from the op-ed, the question remains: Why are Democrats affiliated with a group which works so strenuously to gut Democratic programs? Voters deserve more than platitudes from these politicians. They deserve clear answers about the issues.
Eskow is referring to the article written by two of the Third Way's founders, Jon Cowen and Jim Kessler in the WSJ in December.
If you have not read it, you can find it here:
Third Way Founders Jon Cowen and Jim Kessler tell us Economic Populism is a Dead End for Democrats
Out of Hand:
Clearly Jonathan Cowan and Jim Kessler blundered in writing this editorial. It's badly written and its arguments are poorly constructed -- unlike other, much slicker Third Way materials. Worse, it's misleading. (We discussed the content here. Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times did an excellent analysis.)
At times the op-ed descends into vituperation and becomes, as Rep. Keith Ellison noted, "out of line" and "really ugly." We said there seemed to be "an almost palpable air of desperation" to it as well. That suspicion seems to be borne out in later remarks by co-author Jim Kessler, who said they wrote it because of Sen. Warren's support for a bill to expand Social Security. Said Kessler:
"She is a very compelling elected official and national figure. Her involvement in that particular bill, we just looked at it and said 'okay, this seems to be starting to get out of hand.'"
"Out of hand" is a telling phrase for a corporate-backed faction which has tried to keep the leftmost limits of debate very much in hand and under tight control. It has done so with striking success for decades, thanks in large part to its ability to influence politicians like Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.
Clearly Jonathan Cowan and Jim Kessler blundered in writing this editorial. It's badly written and its arguments are poorly constructed -- unlike other, much slicker Third Way materials. Worse, it's misleading. (We discussed the content here. Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times did an excellent analysis.)
At times the op-ed descends into vituperation and becomes, as Rep. Keith Ellison noted, "out of line" and "really ugly." We said there seemed to be "an almost palpable air of desperation" to it as well. That suspicion seems to be borne out in later remarks by co-author Jim Kessler, who said they wrote it because of Sen. Warren's support for a bill to expand Social Security. Said Kessler:
"She is a very compelling elected official and national figure. Her involvement in that particular bill, we just looked at it and said 'okay, this seems to be starting to get out of hand.'"
"Out of hand" is a telling phrase for a corporate-backed faction which has tried to keep the leftmost limits of debate very much in hand and under tight control. It has done so with striking success for decades, thanks in large part to its ability to influence politicians like Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.
Many people certainly agree that they have tried to keep the 'Left' under tight control, and as Black says, have succeeded for various reasons, Bush was one of them imo, 'anyone but Bush' and, as he says, its influence over two Dem presidents.
The article is long but definitely worth reading. There is SOMETHING going on, something is shifting and the Third Way IS getting desperate, showing their hand more than they ever did, making that error of attacking Elizabeth Warren eeg. The backlash to that article was probably a shock to them.
It shouldn't have been. But having become accustomed to being treated so well by the Dem Party itself, or at least by the leadership, they took the voters for granted.
Oops, underestimating voters, BLAMING them when it was their policies that cost Dems two elections so far. That is never a good idea especially when voters have discovered what the problem with THEIR party is.
And we know now that the problem is the Third Way.
They are lying about polls, something that is foolish since polls are available and show how much support SS, Medicare and Medicaid have among the voters, across the political spectrum.
Who in their right mind thinks that Democratic Voters will continue to vote for a party whose policies are so similar to the Republican Party's on their favorite issues?
Policies like this:
One of this faction's key goals is to roll back three of the Democratic Party's signature achievements: Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. It is a measure of their power and influence that they've been able to get so many Democratic politicians to support Social Security cuts when public opinion is so strongly against them.
Putting SS on the Deficit Table, was SHAMEFUL. And I suppose they never expected the voters would be as outraged as they were/are.
It is encouraging to see them under fire as they should have been a long time ago.
Today we heard from another Democrat outraged that some Dems' support for non-Democratic issues 'causes us to wonder if they don't belong in the Republican party', he said.
It has certainly caused US to wonder the same thing.
Burned by the reaction to their article attacking Warren, they are now writing articles about the horrors of 'populism'. We KNOW they are referring to her, however.
I think we are at a turning point in the Democratic Party. As Black said, the Third Way's policies were completely discredited by the Economic meltdown in 2008.
With populism spreading like wildfire, and Warren in the role of speaking for all those who DID see the problem but were silenced by the Third Way, maybe there is hope after all!
Edited to correct wrong attribution of the article to William Black. Thanks to DUer Eomer for pointing out the error. The article was written by Richard (RJ) Eskow
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
60 replies, 15178 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (52)
ReplyReply to this post
60 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Third Way: 'Why are Democrats affiliated with this group that wants to gut Democratic Programs?' [View all]
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
OP
They are "liberal" on issues that don't cost the 1% money. on all the others they are
Doctor_J
Jan 2015
#12
Exactly, moderate on issues that don't cost Wall St anything. What WOULD cost Wall St
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#21
It is actually a travesty that needs to be explained to the brain dead.
world wide wally
Jan 2015
#4
I have done that and the contrast between his focus on the needs of the PEOPLE and the current
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#22
REALLY great info, thanks! And even scarier? Third Way is just "the tip of the iceberg"
RiverLover
Jan 2015
#5
K&R! This post should have wider exposure. And it should have hundreds of recommendations.
Enthusiast
Jan 2015
#8
You are just supposed to concentrate on those lollipops, as far as I can tell.
djean111
Jan 2015
#18
And realize that if you don't vote, you'll just get the apples with no lollipops
Doctor_J
Jan 2015
#37
One reason I like the idea of this Group is that this is where these discussions should be held.
rhett o rick
Jan 2015
#23
Thank you for the correction, I will edit. I was reading Black's article at the same time, which are
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#17
And they scream that we have to support them because we must be loyal to all Democrats.
rhett o rick
Jan 2015
#25
They're ex-Republicans (as is Hillary, for example) who find the current Republicans
Lydia Leftcoast
Jan 2015
#14
This is a great thread. One of the best I've seen in a while and not surprised it's by sabrina.
rhett o rick
Jan 2015
#24
Thanks rhett, but it's no longer difficult to find material on these Wall St infiltrators.
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#30
Exactly. So many pieces fall into place when you learn the facts. Thankfully many people are now
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#31
When will the media learn? Conservatives are not “centrists”! (Another article by RJE)
RiverLover
Jan 2015
#35
"If we are to live in a world where words have meaning, they really should stop doing that."
delrem
Jan 2015
#36
'Reality based community' was a Third Way phrase designed to make Liberals look
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#39
That is another excellent article. Labels & Talking points are something that should be discussed
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#38
It's been extremely eye-opening, reading about 3rd Way, and then seeing the spin
RiverLover
Jan 2015
#41
Left is good. Hillary is right of center. So don't let them frame the discussion. Take their
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#45
Thanks Orwellian, it really is a great forum, a lot like the old DU when people were able to discuss
sabrina 1
Feb 2015
#50
The Third Way is politically agnostic. They are not Democrats. The are a Wall St backed Think Tank.
sabrina 1
Feb 2015
#52
They are registered Democrats, so that does make them Democrats, by definition
Agnosticsherbet
Feb 2015
#55
I don't like their fiscal policies because they are Republican fiscal policies
Dragonfli
Feb 2015
#60
Pull any strand of the anti labor, pro capitalist spider web and you find the same spiders.
Warpy
Feb 2015
#54
Because all that matters is electing people who put a "D" next to their names.
Maedhros
Feb 2015
#56