THE THIRD WAY is the biggest threat to the Democratic Party

[polichick]

Right up front I'll say that this is my opinion - reinforced by articles like this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/social-security-splinters-democrats-in-debate-over-reining-in-budget-deficits/2011/03/24/ABDpApRB_story.html

Excerpt:

Meanwhile, Third Way, the centrist Democratic think tank, plans to release a memo Friday arguing that the deficit has emerged as an uncommonly powerful political issue and that 2012 voters will reward the party that takes bold action to restrain government spending — including overhauling Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

“In our view, Republicans are winning this fight,” the memo says, according to an advance copy provided to The Washington Post. “They are winning by taking on an issue that voters believe is serious; they are winning on candor; and they are winning by being on the side of reform. Democrats — who ran on change — are quickly becoming the status quo party on the budget.”

In an interview, Third Way policy director and former Schumer aide Jim Kessler said, “There’s a conventional view right now that is an issue that shouldn’t be touched within the Democratic Party, that we should wait for Republicans to act and trap them. . . Our view is, that might work in a normal time. But this isn’t a normal time,” he said.



As a lifelong Democratic activist, I find this eagerness to preempt Republican policies the biggest threat to the party. If this is where the party is going, there's no reason for it to exist. One Republican party is more than enough.

Democratic policies are both right and popular when presented in clear, unapologetic terms. I am watching and waiting - hoping that enough Democrats, citizen and Congressional, will decide that it's time to boldly highlight the differences between Dems and Republicans rather than continue to blur the lines in the service of corporations and the wealthy. We'll see...


Edit: typo

[Sanity Claws]

1. Is it the old DLC under a new name?

That blurb makes it sound like The Third Way is just the old DLC.

[polichick]

3. That's what it looks like.

[nebenaube]

2. I agree... n/t

[Armstead]

4. I agree --- My reply:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x638044

[polichick]

8. That's where we are! At least a few Dems are standing up to fight:

From the OP article:

But senior lawmakers such as Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) and Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) are lining up against them, arguing that tampering with Social Security would harm the elderly — as well as the political fortunes of Democrats hoping to maintain control of the White House and the Senate in 2012.

[Buzz Clik]

5. Centrist Dem think tank my butt! Most of those issues are Republican planks.

Gawd. :crazy: :wtf: :argh:

[polichick]

12. To me it just looks like an infiltration.

[Cameron27]

25. Invasion of the

quisling Harold Ford pod people. The Democratic Party is only a front for these corporate flunkies.

[polichick]

26. So is the party salvageable?

[Cameron27]

32. I don't know,

The liberal brand's been damaged to the point that it will take years before we can get it back, IMO. I'm probably too old to see it happen. And as long as the left refuses to risk the consequences of punishing party leadership like the right does, everything will continue to naturally drift to the other side.

[Jackpine Radical]

20. "Centrist Dems"

must be a low-budget operation or something. They seem to have moved in on low-rent territory abandoned by the Republicans, and are refurbishing all the old, decrepit policies they found there.

[LiberalFighter]

29. I agree those orgs are not centrist by a long shot.

They are not moderates by a long shot.

Rather than identify all Democrats that are to the right and sometimes in enemy territory and all Republicans that are to the left of their party as moderates... They are at best on the fringe of their party.

IMO Democratic moderates are to the left of the Democratic right fringe and Republican left fringe elements. IMO the political moderates of the population is somewhere several degrees to the left of where pundits (idiots) claim it to be.

[Autumn]

6. I am in complete agreement

with this. If this is where it is going I can not and will not belong to it. Their time is running short.

"If this is where the party is going, there's no reason for it to exist." The complete truth.
:dem:

[polichick]

13. I'm with you - I won't belong to it and their time if running short...

The next few months will tell.

[xchrom]

7. At this point - I don't know how you get rid.

Too many accept their brand of wisdom.

And in some circles it's the only brand allowed.

[polichick]

11. At this point I accept that the party may not be salvageable...

imo the next few months will tell - and then I'll know where to put my time, money, energy and hopes.

[LiberalEsto]

9. 3rd Way = Corporatism

It's that simple

[polichick]

14. Yep - maybe the goal is one corporate party.

[Armstead]

15. The problem, IMO, is that too many actually believe in that crap

rather than a small conspiracy (which there probably is) a bigger problem is that somewhere along the line too many people simply stopped thinking.

They may have started out with good intentions, but eventually bought into the soothing platitudes of Corporate CONservatism, and actually absorbed that worldview. President Clinton is an example of that.

[polichick]

16. I don't know if those pushing it are foolish Dems or fake Dems...

...if it's about a misguided strategy or actual infiltration.

[Armstead]

23. Probably both....But I believe a lot of it is misguided

From some personal experience (on the lower level of the upper crust) i know that if you spend time with people with money and power, and soak up the perks of that lifestyle it's easy to get sucked in.

Many of those people are nice and good people on one level, but they are also disconnected from the implications on the rest of the people of what they do and their philosophy.....Some of it is willful, some of it is defensive,

But the point is that for those who spend the lives among the oligarchs and the fruits of inequality, even the best of intentions can get conveniently forgotten, and it is not a big leap to adopt their worldview.

And then there alsO the craven crooks who have no morals...But that's another story.

[Peregrine Took]

10. Depressing. They are stabbing the good guys in the back.

I hate them.

[ClarkUSA]

17. Then you'd better hope that Hillary doesn't run for president again. Or a DLCer like Schweitzer...

Of course, it's their right and they probably will but I hope that liberals who oppose the Third Way will not be supporting them. Bill Clinton was bad enough (e.g., repealing Glass-Steagall in 1999, deregulating the media in 1996, etc.) that we don't need to see another repeat.

[polichick]

18. We agree on this - imo the DLC and Third Way SUCK...

The party will make itself more and more irrelevant if it continues down this path - but I have no doubt that those who truly believe in Dem principles will find a new way to fight eventually.

[LWolf]

59. Oh, please. Obama is more "3rd way" than HRC, and that's saying a lot.

All one needs to do is look at his policies without blinders to see that. He himself acknowledged that he is a "new dem," which is, like the DLC, a group dedicated to the "3rd way."

“I am a New Democrat,” he told the New Democrat Coalition, according to two sources at the White House session.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19862.html

Frankly, I do not now, and have never, supported in any way "new dems," the "3rd way," the DLC, the Blue Dogs, or any other branch of Democratic "centrism," which, underneath it's faux "moderate" image, is rampant neoliberalism infecting the party, and the nation, like a cancer.

The New Democrat Coalition was formed as a House caucus in 1997, following in the footsteps of the Democratic Leadership Council and President Bill Clinton’s “third way” policies, designed to make Democrats and their platform more business friendly. When launched, the group lacked a fundraising PAC and had no legislative staffers. However, they did have allies at the highest levels of the Democratic Party and access to the party's political and fundraising machine.

The New Democrats were as pro-business then as they are now. Many of the group's members, including Kind and Crowley, supported the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed marquee financial legislation passed after the Great Depression and paved the way for financial institutions to become "too big to fail." A year later, many also voted for the Commodities Futures Modernization Act, which curtailed regulation of financial derivatives, including the products that played a major role in the collapse of energy firm Enron in 2001 and helped to bring the world economy to the brink of disaster in 2008.

Sometimes it's instructive to see where a group finds its allies and support.

Steve Bartlett, a former Republican congressman from Texas and current head of the Financial Services Roundtable, an industry lobbying group, described the New Democrats as "awesome."

"They are my favorite group in Congress in the sense of doing the right things for the country," Bartlett said in an interview with ProPublica. "It's a group that is focused on the economy and on the business sector and on the for-profit sector, and I've just found them to be extraordinary and extraordinarily effective."

More: http://www.propublica.org/article/new-democrat-coalition

[polichick]

19. Lot of unrecs - looks like DU is A-okay with the Third Way.

[bluethruandthru]

21. The deficit is only a "powerful political issue" because the repubs made it one!

No one - republicans or democrats - worried about the deficit during the republicans 8 year spending spree! It only became an issue when the Democrats won in 2008. That's when the R's and their bought and paid for media (liberal, my ass) started talking ad nauseum about the killer deficit and how it was robbing our children of their future, etc., etc.

They've scared everyone into believing that WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!! because of the deficit. That makes people willing to accept cuts to everything - SS, education, environment, product safety, NPR, you name it and it gets the axe...except our military because they need to protect us from those evil superpowers Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq and others!

[polichick]

22. We need Dem leaders to call them on their bullshit - not echo it...

They could be standing with the people if they wanted to.

[bluethruandthru]

27. You're right but I think we're just about fresh out of "real" Dems.

Unfortunately, the party has gotten so far away from what we once were and the things we stood. I have my doubts as to whether we can ever go back.

[polichick]

28. The perfect time for a new populist movement!

[Armstead]

52. There are plenty of real Dems, even in Congress

But they get shut out by the sorta ones

Good Congresspeople like Sherrod Brown, Jan Schakowsky, Marcy Kaptur, Tom Harkin and many others do fight the good fight...It's too bad they have to fight their own party.

[polichick]

54. It doesn't seem to be "their party" anymore - maybe the sooner we all...

...realize that, the better.

[Armstead]

57. Realistically we should have four parties in a more parliamentary system

On the right there should be a moderate conservative Republican Party and a right wing Tea Party.

On the left there should be a moderate liberal Democratic Party and a left-wing Progressive Populist Party.

In that scenario, the Democrats and Republicans would duke it out in the middle. The left and right wing parties would be basically aligned with one of those(Progressive Populists with Democrats) but they would also be large enough and strong enough to have the clout to force the moderate parties to wiork with them.

Thus, the Democrats could get good things done with the support of the Progressive Populist Party -- but they could not take them for granted or assume its members have "nowhere else to go."

[polichick]

58. Wouldn't that be nice?! As it is, both parties are mostly lined up against the people...

And only a powerful peoples' movement will change it.

Maybe the union busting and threat to social security will be enough to mobilize people.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

48. The deficit IS a big issue. I'm not happy about $300B+ in yearly interest payments.

That being said, the solution is ridiculously easy to solve and relatively painless: Raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations a few measly percentage points. To really get the country cooking raise it double digits on the upper tier.

[Politicalboi]

24. How did they get so stupid?

People like the idea of SSI and Medicare being cut to get us out of this debt? How is that a winning theme? Do these assholes know what they are asking for?
What is it going to take.

[Cameron27]

33. It's going to take

someone willing to use the bully pulpit to explain in plain terms what true liberal policies mean to them. I think that most people in this country are liberals at heart and don't even know it. How could they when the few real Dems left won't even fight to keep the ic at the end of Democrat, and all the rebranding and obfuscation suits the needs of corporate DINOs very, very well.

[flpoljunkie]

30. Third Way knows Social Security can be easily fixed. That's why these people cannot be trusted.

It's Medicare that needs cost controls--but then a lot of the healthcare industry's profits would have to be squeezed--and they have lobbyists who will work very hard to prevent that.

[polichick]

35. That's right; they can't be trusted - they're not on the side of the people.

[Fuddnik]

31. We have a REVENUE problem. Not a deficit problem.

You assholes had your chance in December with the tax cuts.

I would have gladly surrendered my paltry cut for the good of the nation. But, the rich, the Republicans, and the Third Way, just don't love their country. They serve their masters.

[elleng]

34. Third Way was Bubba's thing, he > DLC, like it or not.

[Armstead]

40. Many don't like it -- Third Way gave us the Crash of 2008

The 1990's may have been fun at the time, but Bill Clinton and the "Centrists" were helping the GOP to give the store away to the Corporations and Elites, and helping them to steal from the rest of us.

[elleng]

41. Right.

[Armstead]

43. I beg to differ

Read back about some of the issues that were being pushed by Clintion and the DLC...Then fast forward and see the results.

Deregulation of media ownership...Deregulation of the financial sector....NAFTA and "Free trade" agreements...etc.

[elleng]

47. Yes, Arm, I agreed with YOUR posts 40 + 43!!

[Armstead]

50. Sorry --- I think I misinterpreted interpreted that post I responded to

It's hard to tell in DU these days..

I certainly don't want to argue with someone who agrees with me :)

[elleng]

51. Thought so!

Such a fast-moving world!

[MissDeeds]

36. K&R

:kick:

[Stoic]

37. The Third Way IS the leadership of the Democratic Party

Including Obama. I've been a life-long Democrat and for the last 10 years a hardcore Dem activist but after Obama I'm ready to jettison the party.

[robcon]

38. I still believe in the big tent for the Democratic party.

I admire Bill Clinton's accomplishments. I think the Third Way is a legitimate part of our party.

[Armstead]

39. Big tent, yes.....But Third Way and Moderate are not the same

Moderates obviously have an important place in the Democratic Party. And obviously that is the way it should be.

But the problem that many of us have with Third Way, Centrist, New Democrat stuff is not simply a matter of degree. It is a matter of basic direction.

The Democratic Party ought to represent the segment of the political spectrum from the real "center" to the left. The GOP repfresents the spectrum from the center to then right. That is (and should be) the central tug of war in our political system.

There are some great Democrats who are moderate and "pragmatic." And a healthy Democratic Party should be able to appeal to independents and moderate liberals as well as more ideological liberals and progressives.

The point, however, is that in a general sense the Democratic Party as an institution should at least be pulling in the same direction, with the membership, leaders and independent supporters same fundamental values, political philosophy and goals.

But the problem with this "Third Way" centrist stuff is that it pulls the Democratic Party in the opposite direction. Often, they are actually out to undermine basic principles of liberalism, and to replace it with conservatism. A related, and perhaps bigger, problem is that they are shifting the base of support from average American and the disadvantaged to large corporations and oligarchs.

As a result, there is one party, the GOP that is pulling in the conservative (right wing) direction. Despite the tensions within the GOP, the tea baggers and the moderate "mainstream" Republicans do share common goals and values.

But because of the Third Way, the Democrats are pulled in different directions. Often the "centrists" (code word for conservative in Democrat clothing)are undermining the goals of the true moderate Democrats, as well as the more ideologically oriented base.

We have seen the results. Too often a powerful segment of the Democratic Party are pulling in the same direction as the GOP, which gives the US a very lopsided political structure, and we have seen the devastating results.

[elleng]

42. Right, but as stated in another thread, 'conservative' is the wrong term,

tho its still used to name repugs.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x741855

As I said, I've always been 'conservative,' its my nature, so I'm a conservative progressive liberal.

I appreciate your analysis very much. Thanks

[Armstead]

55. My own phrase to distinguish it is CONservative

As in con-artists who have attached themselves to conservatism, and use it to con the populace.

I'm conservative in some ways too, as are most liberals and progressives. But, as you noted, the admittedly misused definition of conservative today is far different from its actual meaning.

[robcon]

53. I think there's a contradiction there.

"But the problem with this "Third Way" centrist stuff is that it pulls the Democratic Party in the opposite direction."

It's the opposite direction for some party members, and the same direction for others.

You're expressing it from your perspective, not that of, for example, the 'family values' perspective of many Democratic union members.

[Armstead]

56. The problem is one-size fits-all political labels

You are absolutely correct. It is also possible, and probably common, for an individual to be "liberal" in some respects and "conmservative" in others.

There are many who may be extremely liberal or progressive on economic issues, for example, but also be staunchly anti-abortion. And vice versa. Ironically, some right-wing libertarians have more in common with liberals on some social issues than they do with the "family values" group who dominate the GOP.

The GOP unfortunately has been very successful in lumping together apples and oranges. That is why they are called "wedge issues" because they use those social issues to divide people who actually should have the same interests and goals on economics and the preservation of democracy.

In my own opinion, in terms of partisan politics, the real focus of the parties should be on issues of Wealth and Power and Equality. The Democrats should be clearly on the side of liberalism and progressive economic justice on those issues.

That is not to say the other social issues have no place in politics. But in an institutional sense, those should be left to individual vboters and individual candidates, and debated and contested seperatly from the core public policy issues.

I see a Big Tent as a framework that includes people with many different personal lifestyles and opinions on particular issues, but who are able to work together and advance their shared interests and economic and larger societal values on those issues related to money and power.

[polichick]

44. If you like con men, they're great.

[ProSense]

45. Third Way is a huge problem

The biggest problem is not realizing that the first thing to do is limit Republican power. Third Way thrives when Republicans gain strength.

The Republicans have been working to increase Republican power, going all out, for more than a decade. They didn't gain control of the Senate in 2010, but they managed to replace Republican Senators with wingnuts, who are still members of the Republican Party. They didn't force out Republicans just to force them out, they did it without losing the seat to a Democrat.

Evan Bayh is the typical Third Way clown. Still, it would have been better to hold that seat even if the Democrat filling it wasn't a progressive. Of course, Bayh announced his retirement too late, limiting the time for Democrats to support a strong candidate.

Then there is WV's Joe Manchin, ugh!

[Jakes Progress]

46. Also the biggest threat to American way of life.

[polichick]

49. True - Republicans are one thing, but this is a fox in the hen house situation.

[Jakes Progress]

60. Yep. We were supposed to be the check to their greed.

Now we just help them help themselves.