Home | About | Donate

As Support for Progressive Agenda Grows, Sanders Says 'Big Money Interests' and Corporate Democrats 'Should Be Scared'


As Support for Progressive Agenda Grows, Sanders Says 'Big Money Interests' and Corporate Democrats 'Should Be Scared'

Jake Johnson, staff writer

On the very same day that democratic socialists Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen.


Dear Karen and Richard sung the truth to me:


The Democrats would rather have eight years of Trump than a real alternative to corporate rule. They’re going to lose again in 2020.


Thank you, Wise Owl, and for all your posts that I so enjoy reading! We would probably be great friends!


Remember the names of these motherfuckers and make sure you get to the polls when the primaries are in your state. We are starting to see more and more names of these corporate Democrats, like Hoyer, Feinstein and Kaine. Vote them out OR if they are not up for re-election (or running unopposed) hold their feet to the fire at their rallies.


And in the next election [drum roll please] Pelosi & Schumer!


We need the list of all 250 of them from Ohio. They can’t all be ousted, but we need to make their constituents aware of what they were doing. I don’t watch MSM, but I’d bet their convention didn’t get much coverage.


No doubt about it in my mind! The dog and pony show that a progressive agenda is growing, is just more of the same old con by the fake opposition party. In my view, the corporate, Democratic party is beyond reformation.


I think that people need to take into account the complex nature that the left in the US has to operate in. There is a reason why we never had an actual socialist party, or a labor party, and we can see the difference in things like our healthcare system versus systems in other countries. We don’t have Medicare like Canada does, or something like the NHS systems in the UK, and the relative weakness of social democrats and democratic socialists is why. I think that it isn’t at all certain that the Democratic Party can be reformed, I myself am skeptical. However, thinking about that is not the same as questioning the intentions of those trying to push through change, and it isn’t as if the left in the US has done swimmingly well in recent decades. I mean, we have popular support on every major issue, yet we have until very recently not existed at all nationally. That is a pretty big fucking failure, on a mass scale. I don’t think that there is a dog and pony show, I think the people are serious about change and they are clearly making progress. The question, for me, is if the Democrats do push back and continue to undermine the left, if the corrupt “centrist” types win in their war against the left, then what? Does the DSA break off? I can’t provide an answer, and realize that the takeover of the Democratic Party is far from certain, but I also know that Corbyn has had some good success in moving Labour to the left and things seem to be trending in his direction. Again though, I don’t think it is a dog and pony show. I think, for the time being, the left is being pragmatic, but it also shouldn’t put all of its eggs in the Democratic Party basket. What it ultimately has to do is exactly the thing the “centrists” oppose, which is to develop an alternative infrastructure that is outside of the control of the Democratic Party. If the left does that and continues to build on this foundation, it will be in good shape and it could potentially (down the road) break off from the Democratic Party if it proves to be beyond repair, and it might be. Regardless, the same barriers and the same rough interests that control the Democratic Party control the system and a good portion of the Republican Party. It isn’t as if the battles they are doing with people like Pelosi and the Third Way types are the only battles, but they are very important, because the far right that controls the Republican Party is easy to beat, even with their money. They have the power they do, despite their deeply unpopular policies, despite the fact that only a quarter of the country identifies with them, because their opponents in elections are often the centrist types that are crappy, uninspiring candidates that offer crappy policies and have a dated worldview. The victor in those elections often enters office with support of 15% or so of the voting age population, and their policies continue to be a net negative for most people. The left’s biggest obstacles are in the Democratic Party, and those in that party will work hard, even if they lose primaries, to undermine the left in general elections, which they are in a number of different instances. They will do so by supporting the Republican or by running third party candidacies when the left candidate wins. If Sanders does run and win the nomination, you can book it, a Bloomberg type will run, and many “centrist” Democrats will quickly jump on board.


Might be? The Democratic Party has been where progressive policy goes to die since forever.

You’re among my favorite commenters here, so I ask you: What progressive policy have Democrats passed nationally in the 40 years?


Well, I could name a few policies here or there, but I agree with your overall point. In regards to reforming that party, whether or not it is possible, that is a separate question from what the party has done. Labour under Blair privatized lots of stuff and got them into a horrific war. Whether or not Labour is able to be reformed is separate from what Labour has done. In fact, what the Democrats and Labour have done in recent decades, since about the time that Thatcher and Reagan took over, speaks to the need to reform those parties. I think the same critique could be said of Labour. What has Labour done in recent decades but moved steadily to the right? Is what Corbyn is trying to within Labour then worthless? I don’t think so. Will he succeed, is Labour a path to the left taking over and structurally changing things? Who knows, but no other option seems plausible in 2018.

Whatever happens in the medium to long term, the left doesn’t have a national infrastructure in place independent from the Democratic Party at this point. It is building it up, and we should work on that. But it isn’t there yet. So, do we just sit on the sidelines until it is built up? I think we take part in elections at every level. If there is a race between a “centrist” Democrat and a Republican, we should work to support a third party candidate (not five). If the Democrat is AOC, I think that would be lunacy. I agree with your skepticism regarding the Democrats, but we need to build up an alternative infrastructure regardless and we need to push existing institutions to their limits. If they aren’t up the task, we need to create or operate in new institutions.


It was a “closed event”, you know the kind the sleazy pols love the most. Nobody around to snoop around about them taking money from these 3rd way ghouls. Tim Ryan the Ohio Rep was one of them. You know he wants Pelosi’s job, I’ll take Pelosi any fucking day over T Ryan and I ain’t a fan of Pelosi.


The first step toward building the alternative infrastructure you propose is to get serious about no longer falling in line behind dems because the repubs are so bad. Because so many of us do that, the dems are free to take us for granted. Bernie may be fine with that lesser evil stuff, I’m not.

Thus, I’m willing to hang the dems out to dry. If that means a long term project demonstrating we do have somewhere else to turn, so be it. Meanwhile, I’m not falling for the reform from within BS. Been there, done that.


Yes! Total BS, but so many still believe that BS!


I respectfully disagree. Thank you for your reply.


Even though Bernie Sanders enthusiastically supported Hillary Clinton for president and raises money for the Democratic Party no doubt many will fall for his left wing rhetoric. It is tried and tested and never fails. And no doubt corporate Democrats like Andrew Cuomo are concerned about policies like free tuition for public colleges and a $15 minimum wage. Oh wait, hold on a second, didn’t he get those passed into law in New York State? Whoa, this stuff is more confusing then I thought. Corporate Democrats are passing the same type of legislation they are concerned about. I don’t think that I will ever get this straight. At least Bernie Sanders understands it.


Curious, but if politicians were trying to implement structural changes, what would they be doing differently to not make it a dog and pony show? What politician working on these issues does so in a way that isn’t a dog and pony show? Personally, I would like to get to the point where Sweden was in the early 1970’s, where they had already advanced because of the policies of the social democrats and actual socialism was then on the ticket and being offered. Going to be needed to deal with the environmental crisis.


Well, it seems to be me, regardless as to the party that the left tries to operate in, that an infrastructure has to be created nationally that is outside of the control of the Democratic Party, and that infrastructure has to be focused on things outside of electoral politics, like expanding workplace democracy. Untouched by the bullshit ideas and worldview of the national leaders, their corruption and bribes, their access to power and all of the trappings that come with it, outside of their think tank universe. That, and not rebuilding the Democratic Party, is needed. I would prefer that the DSA was built up, had enough people elected eventually that it could just break away and form an actual independent party. The DSA is involved in the daily struggles of working people in ways that the Green Party doesn’t seem to be on a national level at this point. I just think that getting from here to there requires us to be open minded and pragmatic. A Bolivian politician, forgot who, said that building socialism in the modern world is akin to trying to repair a car engine while the car is driving. I think something similar is at play here in the US. We are in a situation not radically different than people that operate in one party states are in.


Speaking of one-party states, I live in Ann Arbor. Total D-party control. No Repub on the ballot over 4 cycles.

The result: Gentrification run amok, infrastructure in shambles while developers grab any and all properties, mom & pop businesses cleared aside for corporate brands, families of color being squeezed out of neighborhoods featuring Black Lives Matter lawn signs. So pragmatic, it almost seems conservative.

I’d heard your Bolivian quote. So apt. But I’m working on two local campaigns, both candidates running as Independents. I’ve canvassed and talked about one-party rule in our city. There is a surprising and refreshing openness, if not eagerness, to politically branch out beyond the duopoly. We’ll see, I guess…


I hear ya. Originally from Chicago, same thing. The party machinery there is sickening and the impact of that machinery is devastating for poor and working class areas of the city. Corruption rules. Good luck on the campaign.