Democratic (Party) Direction

Many of the disputes between today’s establishment and its radicals are merely continuations of where we were about 25 years ago. When Bill Clinton intervened in the war over Kosovo, in 1999, the establishment center supported him, while the outer bands of right and left opposed it. Similarly, trade agreements such as NAFTA in 1993 and GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) in 1994, passed on the strength of a broad center, while Democrats and Republicans on the edges voted no. On immigration, the center took a high-influx view while the disruptors took a more restrictive one. On business policy, the establishment center supported things like the Export-Import Bank of the United States, while the left and right radicals deplored it as a special interest or, as a candidate named Barack Obama would one day put it, corporate welfare.

Several factors reduced the urgency of these divisions for about a decade. One was blistering economic growth in the late 1990s. Another was a reasonably harmonious world. Then came 9/11, which reshuffled everything but also caused the right (with plucky exceptions such as Ron Paul and the founders of The American Conservative) to put aside internal disputes and, for the most part, fall in line behind George W. Bush. After the failures of Iraq and other Bush policies, though, the divisions roared back to life. If there was a crystallizing moment, it was when Wall Street as we knew it was about to collapse. In the eyes of the establishment, left and right, an unforeseeable real-estate crash had threatened the survival of the country’s vibrant financial sector and, with it, the wallets and neighborhood A.T.M.s of every American. In the eyes of the radicals, our financial sector was an out-of-control predator built on a rotten edifice that was finally about to crumble. Its collapse wasn’t the threat; it was the cure. For the first time in years, an immense policy question was breaking out not between parties but within them. Among both Democrats and Republicans, an establishment wing was supporting the bailouts, while the radical wing was opposing them.

This was Obama’s moment of truth, and it happened months before he was elected. Would presidential candidate Barack Obama side with the radicals? Much of his campaign rhetoric suggested he would. Or would he side with the establishment? Again, much of his campaign rhetoric suggested he would. We all know how he chose, and people will long debate whether it was right or wrong. Siding with the establishment certainly earned him plenty of defenders, and it was the safer choice. But it also came at great cost. Only one Wall Street executive ever went to prison for his part in the financial crisis. For millions of Americans, any residual trust in the competence and integrity of the ruling class was lost, and Obama had become part of the problem.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/01/why-democrats-are-turning-on-obamas-legacy

I saw that article getting tweeted

I don't disagree with most of it, but it's like, I read this in 2016 and 2012 and 2010.

“Obama was bad” is probably not gonna succeed in the primary

I don't think "Obama was bad" is the point so much as sorting out whether "let's turn the clock back to before the Obviously Bad Man" is a winning strategy or not

Yeah fair enough. There was a hunger for a post Obama figure that Warren and Bernie have spoken to an extent and they seldom get seen as (and themselves don’t frame their messages in terms of) rebuking his presidency.

The alternative to "Let's Turn Back the Clock" would be "We Desperately Need to Move Forward in a New Direction". My money would be on the latter.

bump 4 killfiled fule

.@AOC is the difference between *leadership* and holding office.

Other politicians poll test and operate on consensus. She changes poll results. https://t.co/vHBQ4h4xfw

— Briahna Joy Gray (@briebriejoy) January 15, 2019

Bit of news: Democrats want some of Twitter power ⁦@AOC⁩ has. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and ⁦@jahimes⁩ will give Democrats a Twitter briefing tomorrow. https://t.co/CNsZVlQ7Te

— Eliza Collins (@elizacollins1) January 16, 2019

AIDE: [angrily tossing flashcards aside] No -- that frog sips tea. This frog rides a unicycle. For fuck's sake
HILLARY: Sorry. Sorry. I know

— Brooks Otterlake (@i_zzzzzz) May 20, 2016

hahahaha

.@AOC is the difference between *leadership* and holding office.

Other politicians poll test and operate on consensus. She changes poll results

tbf I thought higher marginal rates on top wage-earners were already pretty popular pre-2018!

Yup, just no one bothering to take the pulse on that recently. Whatever, happy for any headlines that make her appear superhuman and thus make the chuds tremble

they were already pretty popular, but it's been a while since someone just straight up said "it should be 70%" and stood behind it

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Says She’s Going to ‘Run Train on the Progressive Agenda’ https://t.co/cWdsmdtah5 pic.twitter.com/Mc6hzXBplN

— Mediaite (@Mediaite) January 16, 2019

uh

I won’t trust any news site with a larger than 12 font size.

pokemon run train on the polls

There’s a link to the Post interview where it’s quoted. I don’t think it will end up being a thing, probably good to have stumbles, it’s just funny imo.

DARRYL, AOC'S FRIEND: fuck him up aoc

Presumptuous Congressional Freshman Thinks She Can Just Come In And Represent Constituents

Per source, a bunch of progressives just added to House Oversight Committee: @aoc, @RashidaTlaib, @AyannaPressley and @RoKhanna

— Lissandra Villa (@LissandraVilla) January 23, 2019

let's check in on progressive dems and their opinions on current events-- oh, no

#Maduro is an illegitimate dictator — it’s long past time for him to go. So inspired by the tens of thousands of brave protestors who are making their voices felt around the world. Estamos contigo! #YoSalgoEl23 https://t.co/5lMd7Z96M1

— Andrew Gillum (@AndrewGillum) January 23, 2019

Wouldn’t count on the Monroe Doctrine going away anytime soon

Maduro is an illegitimate dictator, though, and the opposition-dominated parliament is the institution with the best claim to a public mandate, no? I get that the US should probably stay out of this, but it seems as if people are skipping a few steps on twitter tonight in both camps.

"probably"

how magnanimous

Yeah Gillum is pretty much correct there

I mean, Canada is recognizing Guaido too.

We sure are.

Canada and most South American countries, including Colombia, which has the biggest stake of anyone (they've taken in millions of Venezuelan refugees).

Maduro stepping down and Guaido taking over seems like an unbelievably good outcome, all things considered?

Yeah I'm sure it's gonna go great

Anything to relieve the suffering of so many of my students is a good thing, but I wonder if it's the meet-the-new-boss-same-as-old-boss scenario.

Might be some instinct to push back against the narrative or hesitance to accept sky is blue reality of “Madura sucks” from some quarters as the right wrongly and repeatedly points to the situation as largely indicative of socialism in broad terms.

Yeah, sure. But for the same reason I'll push back against those trying to make Maduro a cause for the left. There's a difference between socialism and kleptocracy.

Btw, it's all posturing, Maduro likes the US plenty: https://thinkprogress.org/venezuelas-billion-dollar-money-laundering-ring-reaches-the-u-s-1d9fe2c6b59b/

Local news: podcasting Canadian sure knows how, when and who Venezuleans should protest for.

I'm with Fred here (que raro) -- having talked to some Venezuelan left wingers their orientation tends to be "Maduro is shit, but he's *our* shit, and the rest of you get your nose out of our shit"

Wait, Maduro still enjoys leftist support? Damn.

By "our" I suspect hoos was expressing "Venezuala's" more than "the left's".

the takes are rending left twitter as we speak, dyed-in-the-wool communists from california archly shitting on any left player who notes today's developments positively while others stake out more cautious positions xp oh yes, aimless is right, but also, alfred is right

not cheering on a US-backed coup =/= supporting Maduro btw thx

like it's not a secret that he sucks

Local news: podcasting Canadian sure knows how, when and who Venezuleans should protest for.

honestly eat shit VHS I said no such thing and you know it

but hey speaking of Venezuelans' opinions

#Venezuela | "Nobody voted for #JuanGuaido" citizens reject coup plotters. #Venezuela23E pic.twitter.com/rMjJ7LI2iP

— teleSUR English (@telesurenglish) January 23, 2019

Is it still a coup when the elections to the National Assembly were legitimate, while the presidential election was rigged?

I'm relieved the people of Venezuela, in this time of violence and misery, have a ressource in the form of Simon's expertise and some tweets by Chapo Trap House.

teleSUR does not seem like a very believable news org, and from what I've seen the pro-Maduro demonstrations were dwarfed by the anti-Maduro ones.

plz pick a thread I do not have bookmarked to have this fight in

it's OK I'm out and I already FPd myself

I'm out and I already FPd myself

smart move