A New Brand of Democrat That Could Mean Trouble for Hillary...

[polichick]

On The Cycle next.

Should be interesting...

Edit: Here's the article mentioned - great read!
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/12/the-rise-of-the-new-new-left.html

[Peacetrain]

1. Keep us updated!

no tv here.. thanks

[polichick]

2. They're beginning the segment with de Blasio in NYC

[Peacetrain]

5. I will check back in 15 minutes..

thank you thank you thank you..

[polichick]

10. You're very welcome. It's good news!

[Peacetrain]

26. Just finished reading the link.. very very informative

As the mother of a millennial .. may I say.. they are different.. in so many different ways..maybe we as baby boomers can take some credit for that also.. but they do not have as much garbage to try and resort out the truth from..

They on the whole are a pretty awesome group.. not as environmentally conscious as I would like..but so much better in some many other areas..

But the one thing I can never see my 26 year old supporting is a Cruz or Rubio even if they are closer in age.. My son is far more to the left than I am. Age does not mean squat to him.. but values.. that is where is at ..

Thanks again for the link.. when you are tv'less sometimes you do miss some fun conversations..

[polichick]

28. You're right about millennials...

I too have kids in that age group and they're even less apt to buy bullshit than I am.

They're also less trusting of media sources and read from a more global perspective than previous generations - and they're also so good with technology they can shake things up that way.

I've always told my kids - big change could come with your generation, but you're gonna need our music to inspire you! lol (THE BEST MUSIC EVER!)

[Peacetrain]

31. Ah Yep!

I have a jazz guy (my 26 year old).. they do need a little... One Two Three Four.. what are fighting for.. don't tell me I don't give a damn.. next stop is++++++++

I have a niece and a nephew in Basic for the NG.. so they can go to college.. its a dog chasing its tail reality !!

We fought to get rid of the draft.. partially by going off to college (the guys) and they have to go in to the service to afford college..

My head just spins somedays.. I do not know whether to laugh or cry

[polichick]

33. I know - it's really scary to think of what they're inheriting...

The world is a crazy place these days - and there's no security as far as healthcare, retirement, a decent family life without both parents working all hours, climate, etc.

I think it'll take boomers and their children - and the oldest generation too - using all our best stuff together!

[Peacetrain]

53. Gotta work together for sure

if we are going to be able to stand up to the money guys..

[socialist_n_TN]

104. Well, this boomer has a couple of grown millennials.....

and while I never pushed socialism on them while they were growing up, they absorbed it anyway.

My youngest when she was 10, took an internet questionnaire and asked me what a socialist was. That's what her answers told her she was. And now my oldest while working at the biggest employer in the city is facing working class problems with a socialist attitude. She's not a commie yet, but she's getting there because she sees what an unfair system capitalism is first hand. My biggest problem with them is not their political beliefs, but it's overcoming the helpless feeling you get when you recognize the size of the problem and the immensity of the solution.

So this boomer/millennial family is working on it.

[polichick]

105. The millennials in my family are thinking that way too...

So it's a little confusing to read here on DU that millennials are likely to be conformists.

[socialist_n_TN]

106. Well as the article said, millennials favor socialism as an economic system......

over capitalism, so there is hope. And you're right, they are NOT necessarily conformists. They do share traits though like all generations do. That incipient apathy is one reason that folks might consider them conformist. I personally think that they just haven't found the correct political movement to commit to.

Our job as old boomers (or in my case an old socialist) is to help them avoid the problems of a bureaucracy that pops up and tends to try and suck up power in any system, including socialism. That bureaucracy is what killed the promise of the October Revolution and it CANNOT happen next time around.

One reason I joined Worker's Power is because they seemed to have the best answer to this question.

[polichick]

3. Peter Beinart writes about a new coalition...

like the one that de Blasio organized.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/12/the-rise-of-the-new-new-left.html

[reformist2]

47. This is spot on.

[mick063]

84. The link you provided was an extremely compelling read.

According to that link, at my age, I should be influenced by Reagan.

I do not fit the narrative of the author. The economic collapse of 2008 and the rise of Occupy had incredible influence on me. Perhaps more influence than any events in my lifetime.

I am almost 100% aligned with the young folks here. They do, however, need to understand the importance of Social Security. There will come a time when they must look out for their parents and retirement comes much quicker for them than they perceive.

[MADem]

4. Is that Feet-on-the-desk Rightwing Nutjob Sippy Cup still on that panel?

I would rather watch Steve Harvey on the Family Feud than that tripe. It's just unwatchable.

[polichick]

9. She's been replaced by Abby Huntsman, who is enjoyable imo.

[LiberalFighter]

83. Abby is more rational and reasonable.

[KamaAina]

43. Nope. She moved to CNN.

On Crossfire (Release 2.0).

So if you needed a reason not to watch CNN, there you go.

[MADem]

52. That was a good move....gotta wonder if she jumped, or she was PUSHED!

Absolutely nails-on-chalkboard awful, she was!

I have to wonder how many people pulled muscles grabbing for the remote when she came on the screen!

[polichick]

6. It's about millennials and inequality - both economic and racial.

[liberal_at_heart]

7. the new left. Yeah baby!

[polichick]

8. They're saying millennials really get it - they're well educated and also...

know first-hand about inequality, since their degrees are buying them nothing.

So true! I say, they also know their way around technology and can be creative about how to shake up the status quo.



edits: typos

[liberal_at_heart]

11. I think their anti-establishment attitude will definitely help shake things up.

[polichick]

13. This is from Beinart's article:

America’s youngest adults are called “Millennials” because the 21st century was dawning as they entered their plastic years. Coming of age in the 21st century is of no inherent political significance. But this calendric shift has coincided with a genuine historical disruption. Compared to their Reagan-Clinton generation elders, Millennials are entering adulthood in an America where government provides much less economic security. And their economic experience in this newly deregulated America has been horrendous. This experience has not produced a common generational outlook. No such thing ever exists. But it is producing a distinct intragenerational argument, one that does not respect the ideological boundaries to which Americans have become accustomed. The Millennials are unlikely to play out their political conflicts between the yard lines Reagan and Clinton set out.

[LondonReign2]

32. Please please let it be so

The pendulum has been swinging rightward in this country starting with St. Ronnie of Raygun and continuing through President Obama...it can't start swinging back to the left soon enough for me.

[Maedhros]

74. "...between the yard lines Reagan and Clinton set out."

That's a very, very narrow yard.

[Eleanors38]

85. I recommend watching the film "The Inheritance" (1964) to young folks (and others).

[ProfessorPlum]

96. Can you tell me more about this movie?

I can't find it definitively on either Netflix or IMDB, although there are some movies with that title.

[Eleanors38]

100. I googled around and found it. If I had my laptop, I

could track it down & give you a link. The actor Robert Ryan narrates, music includes Judy Collins, Tim Paxton. High production values; some ground-breaking. It was offered in 2 parts, under an hour. Some disturbung footage that brought out many a gasp and "Is that a movie?" from my government students. Tanks on the Whitehouse lawn, goons with Tommy guns, bodies being toted away, all caught on hand-cankers. I'll try to find a link.

Edit: google The Inheritance film youtube.
It's in 4 parts, good "print"

[ProfessorPlum]

102. Thank you

I think I found it - it seems to be title "History of Unions - Inheritance" on YouTube. Does not seem to be on IMDB or Netflix, as it wasn't perhaps ever released as a feature film. The link to part 1 of 4 is

[Harmony Blue]

71. Yay!

[pampango]

12. Daily Beast: The Rise of the New New Left - "Maybe Bill de Blasio got lucky."

Maybe Bill de Blasio got lucky. Maybe he only won because he cut a sweet ad featuring his biracial son. Or because his rivals were either spectacularly boring, spectacularly pathological, or running for Michael Bloomberg’s fourth term. But I don’t think so. The deeper you look, the stronger the evidence that de Blasio’s victory is an omen of what may become the defining story of America’s next political era: the challenge, to both parties, from the left. It’s a challenge Hillary Clinton should start worrying about now.

America’s youngest adults are called “Millennials” because the 21st century was dawning as they entered their plastic years. Coming of age in the 21st century is of no inherent political significance. But this calendric shift has coincided with a genuine historical disruption. Compared to their Reagan-Clinton generation elders, Millennials are entering adulthood in an America where government provides much less economic security. And their economic experience in this newly deregulated America has been horrendous. This experience has not produced a common generational outlook. No such thing ever exists. But it is producing a distinct intragenerational argument, one that does not respect the ideological boundaries to which Americans have become accustomed. The Millennials are unlikely to play out their political conflicts between the yard lines Reagan and Clinton set out.

If Millennials remain on the left, the consequences for American politics over the next two decades could be profound. In the 2008 presidential election, Millennials constituted one-fifth of America’s voters. In 2012, they were one-quarter. In 2016, according to predictions by political demographer Ruy Teixeira, they will be one-third. And they will go on constituting between one-third and two-fifths of America’s voters through at least 2028.

Still, Hillary is vulnerable to a candidate who can inspire passion and embody fundamental change, especially on the subject of economic inequality and corporate power, a subject with deep resonance among Millennial Democrats. And the candidate who best fits that description is Elizabeth Warren.

Today, that New Democratic infrastructure barely exists. The DLC has closed down. The New Republic and Washington Monthly have moved left. And all the new powerhouses of the liberal media—from Paul Krugman (who was radicalized during the Bush years) to Jon Stewart (who took over The Daily Show in 1999) to MSNBC (which as late as 2008 still carried a show hosted by Tucker Carlson)—believe the Democrats are too soft on Wall Street.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/12/the-rise-of-the-new-new-left.html

[polichick]

14. Thanks - I was just reading it. Very good piece!

[DontTreadOnMe]

78. This is good analysis, and correct about the changing politics

The Teabaggers are going off the cliff and losing all credibility.

It's the income gap that needs to be addressed.

[Eleanors38]

87. Thanks for the post. I read it. It is crucial that what ever happens...

That Marijuana legalization be front & center, simply because it signals this generation where things should be going. Perhaps more importantly, student debt needs to be dealt with in a forthright manner. This is a meaty issue which should catch everyone's attention, including parents with whom 36% of everyone between the ages of 18 and 32 reside. Finally, a commitment to job security must be made, and that means pro-union legislation.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

15. Kicking and Reccing to read later. nt

[DinahMoeHum]

16. What happens in 2016 depends on what happens this year and 2014. . .

. . .and if the millennials really want to make their impact, they damn well better not sit home these next two Election Day/s in 2013 and 2014 pissing and moaning about Obama, the Democrats, or whatever because things don't move fast enough for them. Get in there and volunteer for somebody's campaign, or give $$$.

[polichick]

20. Yes, they have to vote - but imo they also are able to find new ways...

to disrupt the status quo - they've already begun to do that in several areas.

[liberal_at_heart]

21. If democrats want the Millennial vote then they need to do things that will help Millennials like

start funding universities the way they use to before Reagan economics began the long road to defunding schools. They can push for a living wage and not just adding a few pennies here and there to the minimum wage. They can continue to push for immigration reform and stop all this silly nonsense of compromising and funding some stupid fence that makes us like we have a Berlin wall. They can legalize marijuana. Millennials are anti-establishment and are not party loyal thank God. So, if democrats want their vote they will have to do the work and earn their vote.

[polichick]

23. "So, if democrats want their vote they will have to do the work and earn their vote."

Absolutely - and with the organizing power of the internet, we all have a better chance to make that happen.

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. You know, it's time for older democrats to realize

that votes are not automatic, they need to be earned.

These kids (and I am with them by the way) are not seeing much return from just mindlessly voting democratic.

[JHB]

42. I think that realization is going to have to be knocked into them by the kids...

...and those of us who, in this context, could be considered "young at heart".

Until the writing on the wall is made obvious even through the fog of "in the club", my bet would be that we'll be treated to a whole lot of scolding, "Teddy lost us 1980", "NaderNaderNader", and so on, ignoring inconvenient details like the Iranian hostage crisis or what it was that gave Nader any traction in the first place.

[Maedhros]

75. The notion that the voters need to adjust their idealogy to match the Party,

rather than the converse, is myopic.

[blackspade]

93. No shit!

The DLC needs to realize that they lost a ton of us GenXers in the mid to late 90s as well.
Unfortunately I think that GenX and GenY have been virtually ignored by the Democratic Party in favor of the DLC Boomer 'me' generation that was so financially successful in the 80s and 90s.
They were able to get their American dream and, due to their wealth, have now bought their own Pro-Wall Street party.

[highmindedhavi]

17. Nothing will change if...

...the candidates take Bank/Wall St. money.

[polichick]

19. I agree - it should be a people financed campaign, via the internet.

[Capt. Obvious]

18. Awesome read. Thanks for sharing.

[polichick]

22. You're very welcome. It's exciting - makes me feel hopeful!

[Capt. Obvious]

24. It's hard to get hopeful for Corey Booker though

[polichick]

25. Yeah, Beinart summed him up pretty well...

The nationally visible Democrats rising behind Obama generally share his pro-capitalist, anti-bureaucratic, Reaganized liberalism. The most prominent is 43-year-old Cory Booker, who is famously close to Wall Street and supports introducing market competition into education via government-funded vouchers for private schools. In the words of New York magazine, “Booker is essentially a Clinton Democrat.”


Oh, ick!

[Downtown Hound]

27. The rise of the new left can't come soon enough for me

I'm sick of the wobbly, DLC, corporatist, NSA-loving wimps we've been dealing with since the 90's.

[polichick]

29. I'm with you - and I think a lot of people are just waiting for...

a movement to arise.

[Vinnie From Indy]

34. Excellent article!

Thanks for posting!

Beinart writes a brilliant analysis of generational politics. He also has provided a good, fundamental road map to defeating Hillary and other Clintonians.

Well done!

Cheers!

[polichick]

50. Yes, it is sort of a road map - wonder if he'll come out with a book.

[brooklynite]

35. Trouble, maybe. For Hillary, no.

First, an observation. It's something of a stretch to take a mayoral primary in NYC after 25 years of Republican rule as a bellwether for a national campaign.

Second: The millennials are indeed a force to be reckoned with; however, it's unclear if, as with the Occupy movement, they will engage in the political process that ultimately picks our Presidential nominees. They are certainly civic mined, and they are more progressive on many issues that their parents, but I attended several forums about them in Charlottes, and analysis suggests that they're more focused on individual issue engagement, rather than working within the Party structure.

As for Hillary? You still can't beat someone with no one. Among the preferred liberal standard bearers mentioned here (Warren, Dean, Grayson, Brown, Sanders), only Dean has even hinted that he might run in 2016, and he seems to have burned some of his admirers over Syria. Talk all you want about how many years there are left before the election, but in reality the campaign has started. In the political system we have, you need cash, and you need influential supporters in key states. Supporters of Hillary (if not her directly) are working to assemble those. Other prospective candidates have made their interest known in the past six months. The liberal firebrands have.....not.

[polichick]

36. Perhaps the answer for millennials (and others) is NOT to deal with...

party structure.

Dean started it and Obama borrowed from him - donations from regular citizens via internet.

Makes sense for millennials to use technology the way only they can.

[brooklynite]

37. But that's still the party structure...

You have to go through the State nominating process. You have to raise money to build campaign teams and advertising. The millenials are doing their own civil organization to deal with local problems, but aren't focusing on getting people elected.

[polichick]

39. As someone who's worked within the party since the 70s...

my advice to millennials would be - find another way.

Change is not going to come the usual way.

[Marr]

48. +1

The party structure has been largely seized by big money interests. It's designed to squeeze out any change that might inconvenience those big money interests.

[polichick]

62. Very true.

[brooklynite]

59. What "other way"?

We have a Government made up of officials voted by the public. YOu can work to influence their policy decisions through lobbying, or you can work to influence their policy decisions through support for and/or threats to their election campaigns. Unless you're proposing an overthrow of the Government, armed or otherwise, I really don't understand what you mean.

[polichick]

61. Don't want to break the rules - the guys who run this place have been...

very generous.

[Octafish]

98. You need money to ''influence their policy decisions.''

Democrats once did the right thing without needing lobbying or funding their campaigns -- they automatically stood for justice and equal rights, workers and unions, education and students, the middle class and poor, peace and prosperity, and most importantly, democracy.

[wilsonbooks]

58. She going to be running

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/09/elizabeth-warren-gives-liberals-the-speech-theyve-been-waiting-for-video/

[leftstreet]

38. DURec

Thanks for posting this

[Mr.Bill]

40. I think Hillary Clinton

will not only not be the next President, she will not even be the nominee. Her window was in 2008, and she (or we) missed it. I think the nominee will be someone most of us have not even heard of yet.

[gopiscrap]

41. could be interesting

I would love to see a hard liberal in the oval office.

[L0oniX]

44. Well we already know what kind of Democrats are not needed or wanted here. n/t

[Waiting For Everyman]

45. Best-written political article in a while.

I agree with the event-driven definition of generations. I only have one tiny quibble (and I'll digress off-topic a bit here). I think there was one "homogeneous generation" as far as common initial imprinting from the overall society is concerned -- the "core" boomers. We were the first media-driven generation, and it was a very narrow and universal media (within the US at least) in those early years. Anywhere in the country, we all knew the weekly tv lineup of only three networks by heart, and music was the "Top 40", and we read the same magazines, cartoon strips, and NYT Bestseller List. Movies to go and see didn't vary much. At least some awareness of major sports was pretty standard. And most important of all, public education was pretty consistent. Add to that, being impacted by the same major events. Ten years later and there were many more choices in media of all sorts, which broke up the common experience feature quite a bit.

Even though we all changed afterwards, the 1945-55 boomers had an unusually common experience starting out. Not in every detail of course, I don't mean that, but as to those things that exert a mass influence. To this day, if an American is my age, I pretty much know where they're coming from as far as that early common background is concerned.

[maddiemom]

65. You make a great point! For years one of the first topics of conversation when getting

to know someone new if you were born (as I was) between 1945-1955: "where were you when you heard JFK was assassinated?" Of course everyone in our parents' generation counted that as a major, tragic event. Having loved through the Depression and WWII, however, it did not hit them in the way it did us, in our pampered pre-to-late teenage years.

[maddiemom]

66. OOPsS! Having LIVED through those years.

[B Calm]

46. Hillary needs to worry more about Elisabeth Warren

[polichick]

49. The article mentions Warren + millennials.

[brooklynite]

99. Why -- she's NOT running...

Other than as a fantasy candidate. She's establishment enough not to run if Hillary does, and she's shown no signs (including reaching out to her donor base -- like me) to indicate she's even thinking about it. But dream on if you want to.

[bvar22]

51. NO, Thats all wrong.

Hillary is the New Brand of Republican Friendly, Privatizing, DE-regulating, Small Government, Pro-WAR, Free Trading, Anti-LABOR "New Democrat" (in name only).

Personally, it was the "OLD" Working Class Democratic Party of FDR/JBJ that I joined 46 years ago.
I haven't changed,
but the Democratic Party sure has changed,
and NOT in a good way.


[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center] [center] [center] [/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]


You will know them by their [font size=3]WORKS.[/font]

[polichick]

54. Know what ya mean - I haven't changed either...

but the party is hardly recognizable.

(That photo of Wellstone makes think of Warren and how she needs to watch her back.)

[bvar22]

57. Me too!

[olegramps]

68. That is also where I come from.

This article is one of the best analysis of the situation that I have read in recent years. The young people coming of age are experiencing much of what gave impetus to the FDR policies. It is a generation that is facing the daunting acceptance that they will not be able to even achieve the level of prosperity and security that their parents enjoy and which were directly attributable to the FDR policies that provided them with a fair share of the wealth they produced. While I was born at the later stages of the Great Depression, I was fully aware of the effects of the depression and cost that it had caused my grandparents and parents. It made me a devoted Democrat. However, I have seen the Democratic Party totally lose its way when the began to court Big Business thinking it was a necessity for the party's survival and ending up being nothing more that Republican Light.

[bvar22]

101. Pretty much nailed it, olegramps.

I am very embarrassed by The World and the Democratic Party we are leaving to our youth.
The History of the LABOR Movement has been erased from the History Books,
and the Party Leadership no longer embraces it.
I hope today's youth can look to The Past for a template for their future,
because it looks like they will have to fight the same battles fought by OUR parents and grandparents all over again.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.”[3] People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.

---FDR, SOTU, 1944

There was a time, in MY living memory, when voting FOR The Democrat
was voting FOR the above Rights and Values.
Sadly, this is no longer true.

---bvar22

[olegramps]

108. Aristotle's observations.

Aristotle made an extensive study of every form of government at his time which is just as comprehensive of the forms of government today. I suppose there is nothing new under the sun. He concluded that the most important element of maintaining a thriving democracy was maintenance of a large financially secure middle class. He observed that when the wealth was concentrated in the oligarchs the eventual result was revolution as the only option for the oppressed. It could either be a peaceful or violent revolution depending on the reaction of the ruling class. He also took note of something that we are experiencing. That is during the preliminary stages there is an increasing number of demagogues who are nothing more than the tools of the oligarchs who deride those who call for change. I can't help from observing the rise of the Limbaughs, Savages, and their ilk such as Cruz.

[madrchsod]

91. hillary is a rockefeller republican

socially progressive and with a dab of conservative values.

[Warren DeMontague]

55. I want to know if HRC will make a firm commitment to ending the war on sick pot smokers.

Or is she firmly in the pocket of big pharma and the drug war gravy train crowd.

[bluestate10]

56. If that's the case, then why did two Colorado Senators that supported rational gun laws

get defeated? Was the new brand of democrat in Colorado not enough? Or is it that the people that speak the loudest and puff up the most an impotent minority that can't get anything done unless the majority agrees with them?

The Mayoral candidate in NYC worked in the Bill Clinton Whitehouse AND was the campaign manager for Hillary Clinton's first Senate race in New York State. What does those facts make him? I see the candidate as a pragmatic progressive who saw the mistakes and successes of Bloomberg and wants to correct the mistakes while building on the successes.

[socialist_n_TN]

86. You can't equate social issues (and gun control IS a social issue)......

with economic issues. The Colorado Dems who lost were probably of the mode of HRC because that's the mode most Democratic candidates are in. No all, but most. Since these Dems aren't solidly based in the politics of economic justice, then almost ANY social issue from the right will have the possibility of being able to topple them.

It's the same reason that almost all of the Dem politicians that lost in 2010 were Blue Dogs. The RW social issues toppled them because they weren't firmly grounded in left populist economic issues.

[Eleanors38]

88. Possibly because gun-control is less popular and more elitist than you think.

You may have noticed that nothing much was said about this until we dealt with it.

[L0oniX]

60. "largely a contest between Reaganism and Clintonism." Nailed it!

[bread_and_roses]

63. A ray of hope ... (n/t)

[snot]

64. Thanks!

Hillary is vulnerable to a candidate who can inspire passion and embody fundamental change, especially on the subject of economic inequality and corporate power . . . . And the candidate who best fits that description is Elizabeth Warren.

. . . . A video of {Warren's} first Senate banking committee hearing, where she scolded regulators that “too-big-to-fail has become too-big-for-trial,” garnered 1 million hits on YouTube. In her 2012 Senate race, despite never before having sought elected office, she raised $42 million, more than twice as much as the second-highest-raising Democrat. After Bill Clinton and the Obamas, no other speaker at last summer’s Democratic convention so electrified the crowd.

Warren has done it by challenging corporate power with an intensity Clinton Democrats rarely muster. At the convention, she attacked the “Wall Street CEOs—the same ones who wrecked our economy and destroyed millions of jobs—[who] still strut around Congress, no shame, demanding favors, and acting like we should thank them.” And in one of the biggest applause lines of the entire convention, taken straight from Occupy, she thundered that “we don’t run this country for corporations, we run it for people.”

. . . . Warren won her Senate race by eight points overall, but by 30 points among the young. . . .

[polichick]

69. "Warren won her Senate race by eight points overall, but by 30 points among the young."

She must be an enormous threat to the powers that be.

[Historic NY]

67. The problem with picking NY politics is.......

most think its only about NY city.

[Harmony Blue]

72. The economic inequality that is spreading throughout the country

is the greatest in NY.

Where NY goes the rest of the country goes. IF Wall Street continues to dominate NY politics then it will be business as usual everywhere else.

[Voice for Peace]

70. thanks! VERY interesting article

[CrispyQ]

73. Long but worth the read! Thanks for posting.

A swing back to the left can't happen soon enough, imo.


~kick

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

76. "Young wolves, show us your teeth." John Steinbeck

[Eleanors38]

89. Good quote. Compliment and exhortation all in one.

[liberal_at_heart]

103. I love it. That is a wonderful quote.

[Deep13]

77. Well, on a personal level I love Hillary, but...

...she's a hawk, a corporatist, anti-Palestinian, and doesn't seem to be worried about the environment. If a viable candidate who was further to the left than HRC is was a primary candidate, I would seriously consider her.

[gordianot]

79. There is a generational shift coming I welcome the shift.

Warning folks your kids see it differently and they are frustrated; more likely to consider their own needs. The corporatist are making a huge mistake shutting them out after picking their talent for free as interns.

[Romulox]

80. Not my experience with Millenials, at all. MORE conformist than previous generations, not less...nt

[Eleanors38]

90. Perhaps. But a lot of that has to do with communication...

I'm 65, and I don't know if I even speak the same language the young speak. They are using communication completely different from what I use, esp. with technology. It is easy to see this as un-involved conformity and apathy. But in reality there is a big question mark.

My days were huge street demonstrations, push-cards, phone banks, even sit-ins. But so far, most of that is tail fins, chrome and VistaVision. One thing is sure: They won't/can't put up with things the way they are much longer. If that's hope, I'll take it.

[DonCoquixote]

81. Hear Hear!

I do not think of Warren as any liberal messiah, hell, I do not even think Dennis K is half the liberal he seems, but that is not the point. The point is, Hillary has had YEARS to prove she is going to become a liberal, and for years she has made it clear she is not! From support of outsourcing, to her support of Mid east war ("we came, we saw, he died" and "assad must go" being top hits) she has shown she is what she is, a Rockefeller Republican who, like her former boss Obama, really thinks she can make the GOP see reason.

20 years ago, she might have been a good remedy, right now, she would be the equivalent of treating AIDS with baby aspirin. And let's NOT get into the fact that Bill is always ready to push her rightward.

[sabrina 1]

82. Not surprising. OWS should have been an awakening for what is now the old, DLC/Third Way disastrous

politics from both parties.. I guess from now on the Left they so despised for want better for everyone, will take over once again and try to undo the harm they've done and the rotten world they've created.

I remember before the last election the Coalition that was formed of those on the Left who got tired of being dismissed and ignored which was a really good sign that they were organizing and no longer allowing the Right Wing of the Party to determine the direction of the party anymore.

It was bound to happen. The Third Way/Reagan policies were a disaster for the country. They should have been stopped long ago.

No more 'you have nowhere to go'. Looks like the 'left' will be in the majority and calling the shots in the party before long.

[Left Coast2020]

92. For those of you who were down in the dumps claiming nothing would change....

This proves Michael Moore was correct. I sat and watched him say it on either Ed Show, or with Rachel. Forgot which it was around Spring time. He stated that this generation is going to make changes. Things are going to improve. Bummer it has to happen really slow. Nonetheless, it also proves that publicly funded (that is what I heard on MSNBC this week) campaigns DO WORK! We still have to work our asses off the undo Citizens U. But to those who thought it was over, you should have listened to Michael Moore. I didn't think he was a philosopher either, but maybe he was before he started making documentaries. This is encouraging. And while I'm thinking of it, do people really want another possible 8 years of someone who may have that DLC mentality with the last name "Clinton"? I thought "new and fresh" was the overriding belief?

So lets talk about "new and fresh".

Who was the dark horse in 04? A former governor from Vermont.

Who is the dark horse in 16?

Could it be a Senator from Massachusetts.

If this is what we want, lets do what Ed says: "Lets get to work".

[Warren DeMontague]

94. Hillary's greatest strength is also her biggest weakness.

She's got the Party Establishment and Machinery.

I think if she does get the nomination, she will be a formidable candidate- quite possibly the most formidable we could field, which is in and of itself a powerful argument for her candidacy.

But she has not convinced me to support her in the primaries, not yet, although we're a long ways out still.

[blkmusclmachine]

95. Hillary Clinton, Queen of Blue Dogs/"New" DEMS/Third Way/Corporate Centrism/BIPARTISANSHIP!/etc.

[xchrom]

97. du rec.

[kestrel91316]

107. Please don't tell me a new crowd of Dems is threatening her from the RIGHT?

Because she's already way too right-ish for me.

[Jasana]

109. K&R - This GenXer is getting lefter and lefter and lefter...

as the seconds tick by. I voted for Elizabeth Warren and donated to her. I would love to see her run in 2016. In any case, if the Millennials do a hard left, I'll be right there with them.

[polichick]

110. I'll be right there too!

[Earth_First]

111. "...pro-capitalist, anti-bureaucratic, Reaganized liberalism."

What the shit is this?!

[polichick]

112. It's the shit we currently have.

[Earth_First]

113. Exactly.

I see no difference here whatsoever.

[wyldwolf]

114. Isn't there a 'new brand of Democrat' every presidential election cycle that means trouble?

[b.durruti]

115. The far left is also rising again to a level not seen since the 1960s.

I mean radical, anarchist or trotskyist left. Many people my age are leading the way.

[socialist_n_TN]

116. OOH! Have you checked out our Socialist Progressives group?.....

Under "Activism". It's an "Ecumenical Council" of DU radicals, anarchists, and Trotskyists (that's me). There are even a few CPUSA folks there.

[b.durruti]

117. Thanks, subscribed! ~nt~

[LiberalLovinLug]

118. Lets remind ourselves that its the voters that are behind this shift.

(That's a good thing)

I think a majority of voters also wanted this in 2008. Maybe many wouldn't have described themselves as "left", but they had had it with the Neo-Cons and their wars and lies and the incestuous relationship to Wall Street that the Republicans represented more so than Democrats. They rightly interpreted CHANGE as the only way it could go....Instead they got a smooth talking conservative who, to give credit, has addressed some issues that were important to the left, but either those moves were inevitable or he only pushed them part ways, and capitulated as soon as he could to make a deal. But it was the big issues like Wall Street and BushCo. crimes that were ignored. As far as the big money went and the MIC and NSA the message was it was business as usual.

That desire for CHANGE is still there...Blasio's result proves it. All we need is a candidate that is brave enough and willing to give up post Presidential perks that awaits all those that toe the Corporate line while in office. Still waiting...

[polichick]

119. "As far as the big money went and the MIC and NSA the message was it was business as usual."

Yep - voters are going to have to be much more careful next time, especially during the primaries.

There's a name for those smooth talking politicians who have pushed the party toward corporate goals - con men.

[MineralMan]

120. I think it's definitely moving in that direction, but...

I also think it won't actually reach any national goals until 2024. 2016 is still going to play by the old rules, election wise, I'm pretty certain. And, depending on who gets elected, across the board, in legislative and executive elections, they may be able to hold in 2020. However, the 2024 elections are going to be another thing altogether.

They're also likely to be my last presidential election, if actuarial tables are accurate. And there you have it. I'm a 1945 baby, just on the edge of the Boomers. A little early, but my life experience is that of a Boomer.

Will Hillary run? I don't know. I truly don't. I'm sure she's considering it, but her decision will not be made for a while yet. Will Warren run? I don't know that, either, and I doubt that she does yet, either.

But, I expect the 2016 election to go by the old rules, and that's important, because it's going to be a pivotal election. If it is lost to the Republican, they will put into place legislation that will make things even more difficult for those who want change.

My point is that I think it's premature to think that the millennials will dominate the 2016 election. They have numbers enough to spoil the election, for certain. But enough to win the election on their own? Not yet, I think.

Further, the millennial demographic isn't uniform, anymore than any demographic is. I think standing back a little further when looking at that demographic would be very useful. We may not be seeing everything from a wide enough angle with regard to the millennials.

Just my musings.