Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Rise of far left policies signals Democrats’ embrace of Bernie Sanders progressivism

“There is a reason why it’s called economic populism: it’s because it’s popular,” says Charles Chamberlain of Democracy of America, whose 1 million activists support both Sanders and the more reluctant Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren, whom they are also encouraging to run.

“It’s a real stretch to say [Sanders] is out of the mainstream; he is very much ahead of the curve when it comes to a lot of politicians in Washington,” argues Chamberlain. “It is Washington DC that is out of touch with where the average American is really at.”

For this reason, many progressive activists rankle at the description of their members and favoured candidates as leftwing.

“I don’t call ourselves ‘left’ and part of the reason is the centre of the country agrees with us,” claims Adam Green, co-founder of Progressive Change Campaign Committee.

He argues that the surprise decision of Clinton to champion many of the same themes as Warren and Sanders shows such views are now mainstream among Democrats, and the only question is how forcefully Clinton will follow through with policy.

Related: Elizabeth Warren on Hillary Clinton’s embrace of her populist message: ‘Eh’

“The shift in direction of the Democratic party is now coming to a close with the victory of the Warren wing,” claims Green. “It is now about a scale – do we go big or settle for smaller changes?”

It is certainly true that Clinton’s apparent conversion from avowed centrist to critic of the economic elites has caught many by surprise.

Skjellyfetti wrote:Eh.

What exactly are Republican solutions? Seems like they can get away with claiming stopping Obama is a "solution" to the problems in-and-of-itself.

But, I don't see them proposing (let alone actually implementing) any solutions. It seems like "implementing" anything is anathema to their actual platform.

GannonFan wrote:Like most "progressives" today, Bernie is full of catchy slogans but pretty much empty on actual solutions. Sadly, most of us weren't alive when progresssivism actually had concrete, tangible ideas. But hey, it sounds and feels good so go for it.

Ivytalk wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Like most "progressives" today, Bernie is full of catchy slogans but pretty much empty on actual solutions. Sadly, most of us weren't alive when progresssivism actually had concrete, tangible ideas. But hey, it sounds and feels good so go for it.

What is this "sadly" shit, GF? You're frittering away your well-cultivated centrist street cred. I can tell you what George McGovern was like, and I suggest that you read up on Henry Wallace.

Sanders and Vermont are a perfect fit: an old Jewish socialist appeals to a state full of aging Birkenstock-wearing, hygienically-challenged, hirsute, ex-hippie Chizzangs.

Ivytalk wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Like most "progressives" today, Bernie is full of catchy slogans but pretty much empty on actual solutions. Sadly, most of us weren't alive when progresssivism actually had concrete, tangible ideas. But hey, it sounds and feels good so go for it.

What is this "sadly" shit, GF? You're frittering away your well-cultivated centrist street cred. I can tell you what George McGovern was like, and I suggest that you read up on Henry Wallace.

Sanders and Vermont are a perfect fit: an old Jewish socialist appeals to a state full of aging Birkenstock-wearing, hygienically-challenged, hirsute, ex-hippie Chizzangs.

Ivytalk wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Like most "progressives" today, Bernie is full of catchy slogans but pretty much empty on actual solutions. Sadly, most of us weren't alive when progresssivism actually had concrete, tangible ideas. But hey, it sounds and feels good so go for it.

What is this "sadly" ****, GF? You're frittering away your well-cultivated centrist street cred. I can tell you what George McGovern was like, and I suggest that you read up on Henry Wallace.

Sanders and Vermont are a perfect fit: an old Jewish socialist appeals to a state full of aging Birkenstock-wearing, hygienically-challenged, hirsute, ex-hippie Chizzangs.

GannonFan wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:
What is this "sadly" ****, GF? You're frittering away your well-cultivated centrist street cred. I can tell you what George McGovern was like, and I suggest that you read up on Henry Wallace.

Sanders and Vermont are a perfect fit: an old Jewish socialist appeals to a state full of aging Birkenstock-wearing, hygienically-challenged, hirsute, ex-hippie Chizzangs.

Eh, I was reaching back further for a progressive cause that was both full of tangible ideas and ideas that were actually sensible/worthwhile. I don't think McGovern or Wallace would meet that criteria - plus they were both kind of wacky. I don't think we've had a truly worthwhile progressive movement since the turn of the last century ala Roosevelt and Wilson and their ilk. Although you could make the argument that, once the war began in Europe, Wilson was poorly positioned to be effective because of his myopism that tends to inflict most progressives.

I said sadly because we do have a lot of problems today and it would be great to have a political movement that could be the panacea for that. It would also be nice to have a perpetual motion machine and to be able to turn lead into gold.

kalm wrote:CID's favorite politician throws his hat into the ring.

Rise of far left policies signals Democrats’ embrace of Bernie Sanders progressivism

“There is a reason why it’s called economic populism: it’s because it’s popular,” says Charles Chamberlain of Democracy of America, whose 1 million activists support both Sanders and the more reluctant Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren, whom they are also encouraging to run.

“It’s a real stretch to say [Sanders] is out of the mainstream; he is very much ahead of the curve when it comes to a lot of politicians in Washington,” argues Chamberlain. “It is Washington DC that is out of touch with where the average American is really at.”

For this reason, many progressive activists rankle at the description of their members and favoured candidates as leftwing.

“I don’t call ourselves ‘left’ and part of the reason is the centre of the country agrees with us,” claims Adam Green, co-founder of Progressive Change Campaign Committee.

He argues that the surprise decision of Clinton to champion many of the same themes as Warren and Sanders shows such views are now mainstream among Democrats, and the only question is how forcefully Clinton will follow through with policy.

Related: Elizabeth Warren on Hillary Clinton’s embrace of her populist message: ‘Eh’

“The shift in direction of the Democratic party is now coming to a close with the victory of the Warren wing,” claims Green. “It is now about a scale – do we go big or settle for smaller changes?”

It is certainly true that Clinton’s apparent conversion from avowed centrist to critic of the economic elites has caught many by surprise.

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/04/rise-of ... ressivism/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Americans may not always care to admit it, but they like their socialist safety nets, roads, fire departments, state fisheries programs, military, schools etc.

It sounds like Hilary and the Republicans are already being forced to campaign a bit on economic populism. Despite being completely full of **** (Obama style), can Hilary differentiate herself enough from them on these issues to make a difference?

Skjellyfetti wrote:Eh.

What exactly are Republican solutions? Seems like they can get away with claiming stopping Obama is a "solution" to the problems in-and-of-itself.

But, I don't see them proposing (let alone actually implementing) any solutions. It seems like "implementing" anything is anathema to their actual platform.

Ivytalk wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
Eh, I was reaching back further for a progressive cause that was both full of tangible ideas and ideas that were actually sensible/worthwhile. I don't think McGovern or Wallace would meet that criteria - plus they were both kind of wacky. I don't think we've had a truly worthwhile progressive movement since the turn of the last century ala Roosevelt and Wilson and their ilk. Although you could make the argument that, once the war began in Europe, Wilson was poorly positioned to be effective because of his myopism that tends to inflict most progressives.

I said sadly because we do have a lot of problems today and it would be great to have a political movement that could be the panacea for that. It would also be nice to have a perpetual motion machine and to be able to turn lead into gold.

What do you mean by "truly worthwhile progressive movement"? And why do you assume that only "progressive" movements can cure our social and economic problems? Our students were revolting (in both senses of the word) from roughly 1968 to 1975. Feminists started not shaving their pits at about the same time, and the gays had their Stonewall riots in 1969. dbackjon may have been there.

GannonFan wrote:Like most "progressives" today, Bernie is full of catchy slogans but pretty much empty on actual solutions. Sadly, most of us weren't alive when progresssivism actually had concrete, tangible ideas. But hey, it sounds and feels good so go for it.

JohnStOnge wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:Eh.

What exactly are Republican solutions? Seems like they can get away with claiming stopping Obama is a "solution" to the problems in-and-of-itself.

But, I don't see them proposing (let alone actually implementing) any solutions. It seems like "implementing" anything is anathema to their actual platform.

I think it's a shame that people think the existence of a problem means government is responsible for solving it.

GannonFan wrote:Like most "progressives" today, Bernie is full of catchy slogans but pretty much empty on actual solutions. Sadly, most of us weren't alive when progresssivism actually had concrete, tangible ideas. But hey, it sounds and feels good so go for it.

GannonFan wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:
What do you mean by "truly worthwhile progressive movement"? And why do you assume that only "progressive" movements can cure our social and economic problems? Our students were revolting (in both senses of the word) from roughly 1968 to 1975. Feminists started not shaving their pits at about the same time, and the gays had their Stonewall riots in 1969. dbackjon may have been there.

Well, the ones that were worthwhile had goals like direct election of Senators, reducing the work week, ultimately suffrage for women, lowering destructive tarriffs, creating the Federal Reserve System, passing laws against child labor, passing laws to inspect meat factories and prohibit false food labeling - I think most of us can agree those were pretty positive things, acheivable, and long lasting in the benefits. Plus there was an actual plan that could realistically make all those things happen. Now when you read Bernie Sander's platform or Elizabeth Warren, it basically reads "things aren't fair, we need to make it fair" and then talk about making college affordable (no actual detail, just saying everyone should have it and it should be cheap to get) and basically erecting a trade wall around the US so that we don't need to be bothered with the rest of the world. Again, sounds great, just has a lot of negative consequences that kind of get in the way.

And I never said only a progressive movement can fix things, that's you presuming that assumption. There are many ways from both sides of the aisle to correct what ails us, and not everything has to be done through politics as well. I was just pointing out a political movement and a time in the past when it did a lot of good. I just think today's movement is trying to steal the mantra of that time without the same devotion for accomplishment, just cliches.

∞∞∞ wrote:Kinda weird, but I personally know Bernie Sander's Chief of Staff. He's a very good fella and wicked smart (former lawyer for some pretty important people). I met him when he opened up an awesome comic book store about 5-6 years ago (which has done remarkably well since) and I was one of his first customers.

∞∞∞ wrote:He's a successful lawyer that wanted to do something that he loved when he retired. I hope to be in his position when I'm that age! And no joke, it's an awesome store. The thing I love about comic stores is that they're kinda like real life message boards...so many different walks of life (except girls ) all gather to share in something they love. At the last social gathering I attended at the place...think nerdy wine and cheese event (they have them every other Sunday), I saw a fairly goth artist speaking to an Exxon exec about "Daredevil," something I'd never otherwise witness in the "real world."

http://www.yelp.com/biz/victory-comics-falls-church" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;