HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » A New Third Way/No Labels...

Sat Apr 22, 2017, 10:14 PM

A New Third Way/No Labels Movement - A Coalition Between Progressives and the Alt-Right?

On the left, you have Justice Democrats, Glenn Greenwald, the Young Turks, the Sane Progressive, Jill Stein and Ed Schultz. On the right, you have Breitbart, Michael Flynn, Donald Trump and Alex Jones. What do they have in common?

* A desire for better relations with Russia.
* A belief that U.S. elections are not legitimate and are rigged.
* Attacks on trade agreements as victimizing the U.S. economy.
* A resentment of "establishment" Democrats and Republicans who are only seeking to promote the interests of global elites.
* A belief in a conspiracy by a shadowy deep state that is working to promote the interests of global elites and seeking to promote a cold war with Russia.




The Alt-Right and Justice Democrats, for example, rail against the global financial powers and the corporate establishment. For example, sounding like a Justice Democrat, Trump repeatedly attacked Hillary Clinton of working for the "global elite" and bankers:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/us/politics/trump-comments-linked-to-antisemitism.html?_r=0

Donald J. Trump on Thursday accused Hillary Clinton of guiding a “global power structure” that has rigged the economy against the working class, language that some suggested echoed anti-Semitic themes.

Mr. Trump made the accusation in a speech in West Palm Beach, Fla., in which he also defended himself against several accusations of sexual harassment, published by The New York Times and others.

Early in the speech, he said that a global elite had “stripped” the United States of its wealth in order to line the pockets of corporate and political interests. “The Clinton machine is at the center of this power structure,” he said.

We’ve seen this firsthand in the WikiLeaks documents in which Hillary Clinton meets in secret with international banks to plot the destruction of U.S. sovereignty in order to enrich these global financial powers, her special interest friends and her donors,” he said, referring to the group that has, most recently, published thousands of hacked emails from Mrs. Clinton’s campaign chairman.


Indeed, the Alt-Right and Progressives sometimes share the same talking points as explained by Samantha Bee in her segment on the Deep State.



Even on issues where the left and right clearly disagree such as issues of race or sexism, you will have both the far left and alt-right agreeing that such issues are just identity politics that should be ignored in favor of an inward looking economic populism that promotes a U.S. withdrawal from international engagement.

My prediction is that as we approach the 2018 elections we will once again see the rise of both the Alt-Right and the Justice Democrats attacking "establishment" Democrats and Republicans as being essentially the same. Indeed, I have no doubt that on both the left and right, you will see a dramatic increase in online activity by folks pushing this alt-right/progressive view that largely overlaps on the issues referenced above.

43 replies, 6296 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 43 replies Author Time Post
Reply A New Third Way/No Labels Movement - A Coalition Between Progressives and the Alt-Right? (Original post)
TomCADem Apr 2017 OP
nikibatts Apr 2017 #1
TomCADem Apr 2017 #4
Hortensis Apr 2017 #18
JHan Apr 2017 #2
ProudLib72 Apr 2017 #3
Hortensis Apr 2017 #21
ProudLib72 Apr 2017 #40
Hortensis Apr 2017 #43
FiveGoodMen Apr 2017 #5
betsuni Apr 2017 #6
Cha Apr 2017 #7
TomCADem Apr 2017 #16
MountCleaners Apr 2017 #8
stevenleser Apr 2017 #23
pnwmom Apr 2017 #9
TomCADem Apr 2017 #12
pnwmom Apr 2017 #13
MountCleaners Apr 2017 #10
TomCADem Apr 2017 #24
MountCleaners Apr 2017 #11
TomCADem Apr 2017 #14
Tom Rinaldo Apr 2017 #15
TomCADem Apr 2017 #27
Tom Rinaldo Apr 2017 #28
renegade000 Apr 2017 #17
MineralMan Apr 2017 #19
KittyWampus Apr 2017 #20
VOX Apr 2017 #22
alarimer Apr 2017 #25
HughBeaumont Apr 2017 #33
TomCADem Apr 2017 #35
LeftyMom Apr 2017 #26
Warpy Apr 2017 #29
TomCADem Apr 2017 #37
Volstagg Apr 2017 #34
TomCADem Apr 2017 #36
Volstagg Apr 2017 #38
TomCADem Apr 2017 #39
HughBeaumont Apr 2017 #30
wasupaloopa Apr 2017 #32
wasupaloopa Apr 2017 #31
sharedvalues Apr 2017 #41
mercuryblues Apr 2017 #42

Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sat Apr 22, 2017, 11:11 PM

1. Yep. It has already happened.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nikibatts (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 22, 2017, 11:35 PM

4. Instead of a Coalition Between Moderate Dems/Repubs, We Have a Far Left/Right Coalition

Maybe this Third Way/No Labels coalition might actually stick.

Heck, they even will have their respective secessionists with the Far Right demanding that Texas Secede while some folks on the left might push for California secede:

http://www.latimes.com/world/europe/la-fg-russia-separatists-snap-story.html

Moscow welcomes the (would-be) sovereign nations of California and Texas

The speaker was calling for California’s independence from the United States.

Alexei Gavrilko nodded approvingly. A burly, bearded, camouflage-wearing separatist from eastern Ukraine, he said he had come to the posh Moscow hotel just outside the Kremlin to “communicate with colleagues” representing separatist and secessionist groups from the United States, Europe, the Middle East and the former Soviet Union.

During a conference dubbed the Dialogue of Nations, Gavrilko listened carefully to Louis Marinelli, head of the Yes California group that is determined to hold the Golden State’s “independence referendum” in 2019.

“For the first time in history, we, the people of California, who were conquered and annexed by the American military about 170 years ago, will have a chance to express our voice to either remain a state in the American union, or instead, to pursue a path toward a nationhood,” Marinelli said solemnly.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Reply #4)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 03:17 PM

18. Union of far left and right is how democracies destroy themselves.

Right now the Kochs and others who want to destroy government as we know it are investing in making this union happen by promoting radical left politicians to right wingers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sat Apr 22, 2017, 11:13 PM

2. thanks for this Tom. Great explanation of horse shoe theory at work.

Hope you have your flamesuit on

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sat Apr 22, 2017, 11:23 PM

3. I was just going to post about how I miss the Cold War days

when everything was simple. Gorbachev was the antichrist and little girls were writing passionate letters about not wanting to be blown up. Now it's all about secret dealings and cyber warfare. And our politics is caught up in a tangle of Russian intrigue that seems to have no beginning or end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #3)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 03:25 PM

21. Well, don't forget how Eisenhower was a commie plant,

Hoover was trying to get MLK to commit suicide, etc.

And keeping our grandchildren alive by scrabbling for any available food and carrying pails of drinking water home (there are rivers several hundred yards to perhaps a quarter mile away, both all uphill coming back but the latter much more gradual) after a cyber attack seems a lot more doable than trying to do the same through a nuclear winter. (The first would allow people to hope for relief to arrive from outside zones of devastation also.) I think I call that an "advance"...





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #21)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 06:45 PM

40. Rain on my nostalgia parade!

I'm still standing by my contention that the lines were a lot more clearly drawn in our relationship with the Soviets. They were the enemy. Now we have imposed massive sanctions because of Crimea and the military buildup on the Ukrainian border, but, at the same time, we have Tillerson making plans for a joint oil drilling adventure and tRump calling for warmer relations. It's just weird.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #40)

Mon Apr 24, 2017, 11:47 AM

43. Lol. Well, here comes le deluge: The right has redrawn

the lines in the post Cold War world, currently pretty implacably too: Democrats and liberals, as well as others farther left, are the new evil axis they must save America from.

I'd say they're effectively crazy, not just a weird situation, but we didn't arrive in this dangerous mess by accident. There IS a vast right wing conspiracy, but it is obviously against the American electorate as a whole, very much including right-wing voters. We have been divided and are in great danger of being conquered.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 01:05 AM

5. Dealing with the Devil

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 01:30 AM

6. Ugh, it won't stop.

Makes me tired just thinking about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 01:39 AM

7. Ah yes.. there's the Pawn for putin now.. jill stein

Wait a minute.. ed Schultz on the "left"?! Wasn't he the first speaker at the cpac?

Fucking Idiot trump is still using Hillary to distract from his FAILURE as being Rigged in by the Russians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #7)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 01:39 PM

16. Ed Schultz Chooses the Limelight over Principles

At one time Ed Schultz had a show on MSNBC where attacked Trump, the Russians and claimed to speak for American workers. On Russia Today, he is still featured as progressive commentator.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434731/ed-schultzs-russia-today-tv-show-he-loves-limelight-loses-principles

Crowley begins and ends his piece with a close study of none other than Schultz. You see, when Schultz lost his show at MSNBC, he cast about for a new broadcast job. He found it on Russia Today’s American channel RT America, the newsy faç​ade of Russia’s global propaganda machine.

At MSNBC, there was no praise of Hillary Clinton too effusive and no slander of Republicans that was too extreme. Schultz often spent his days spewing out such statements as: “This is what the Republican party stands for, though: racism. I think Donald Trump is a racist.”

In 2011, when Trump was reportedly thinking of running for president (again), Schultz wrote in the Huffington Post: “When it comes down to the devil in the detail of dealing with the issues . . . and making real change, Trump, you don’t have it. You’ve never had it. Money is not a measure of a man’s character or success in the arena of public service.” Now, I happen to agree with that second bit. The interesting thing is, Schultz doesn’t — anymore.

The man who once mocked Putin, now cashes his checks, as a pundit on his network, lending aid and comfort to the Kremlin’s pro-Trump PR campaign. Schultz recently told Larry King, his RT colleague, that Trump was like Ronald Reagan (he meant it in a good way). Trump, Schultz explained, “certainly has shaken up the Republican Establishment, and I think he’s done it by talking about things that people care about.” Schultz now says Trump is a great and decisive decision-maker.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 04:00 AM

8. That's not true

Anyone of any political persuasion can criticize "elites". The difference is that far right claims of a "globalist" conspiracy have their roots in anti-Semitic notions about Jews controlling the global economy. The "alt-right" is anti-Semitic, while the populist left includes Jews.

That one is critical of corporations and trade agreements or skeptical about elections does not make one in alliance with the far right.

Frankly, the left has done a much better job of exposing and opposing the far right than mainstream corporate Democrats.

I'm an unapologetic leftist and have never considered voting for Jill Stein. A good leftist is a good anti-fascist.

Here is a web site that criticizes right-wing populism and explains its origins. It is a left-wing website:

http://www.politicalresearch.org/#

The last thing I want to see is a resurgence of McCarthyism on DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MountCleaners (Reply #8)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 04:04 PM

23. Actually it might be, and your first paragraph is countered by something we see right here on DU

 

as of late and that is an effort among some on the left most portions of our party and beyond objecting to "identity politics" and suggesting we should jettison them.

Support for measures to protect women, LGBT, POC, Jews, Arabs etc are a major obstacle in terms of the far left working with the far right. And here we see efforts to remove that obstacle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 04:11 AM

9. Except no "progressive' who would willingly join the alt-right is a progressive.

There is no room for racism, anti-semitism, homophobia, anti-Islam, or misogyny in progressivism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #9)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 01:25 PM

12. Here is the "Sane Progressive" Attacking Democratic Primary as Rigged and Bernie...

...as selling out for not going all-in on attacking the integrity of U.S. elections:



Likewise, here is the Sane Progressive attacking Russian election interference claims as being motivated by a desire for war.

&list=PLs3WCRog6vhxYTudOyJ-3CLBZFCbLrZNc&index=8

So, you have progressives both insisting that there are rigged elections by Democrats, but then defending Russia against claims that they are trying to rig elections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Reply #12)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 01:34 PM

13. Wow. I wonder if she's part of Putin's team. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 04:29 AM

10. History lesson: More Republicans than Democrats supported NAFTA


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/05/09/history-lesson-more-republicans-than-democrats-supported-nafta/?utm_term=.367a704a822a

In both the House and the Senate, more Democrats voted against NAFTA than for it — a signal that the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party was strong even then. Clinton held a signing ceremony for the implementing legislation on Dec. 3, 1993, flanked by former presidents and congressional leaders of both parties. But that’s not the same as negotiating and signing the treaty with Mexico and Canada. The trade agreement went into effect on Jan. 1, 1994.


Were the Democrats who opposed NAFTA - including many unions - in bed with the far right? Some people need to learn the history of criticism of trade agreements. People on the right and people on the left oppose them for different reasons. Opposition to NAFTA or any other trade agreement doesn't make one a fascist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MountCleaners (Reply #10)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 04:46 PM

24. Here Is Ron Paul Agreeing with Trump's Attack on NAFTA.

I am sure we could also easily find similar attacks on NAFTA from the left as being a deal that is leading to a race to the bottom with demands that the U.S. renegotiate these rigged deals, which only benefit the global elite. In other words, the Alt-Right and Far Left not only oppose deals like NAFTA and TPP, but they use the same anti-global elite rhetoric.

http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com/archives/donald-trump-and-getting-out-of-nafta

NAFTA is government-managed trade. It's regional protectionism and a forced-trade agreement between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico.

A real free trade agreement (if Americans really thought it were necessary) could be written in a couple of sentences. The monstrous NAFTA runs over 1,000 pages and is loaded with cronyism, regulations, production codes, and government bureaucracy that prohibits free trade.

When NAFTA was passed, Henry Kissinger wrote in the Los Angeles Times: “What Congress will have before it is not a conventional trade agreement but the architecture of a new international system...a first step toward a new world order.”

NAFTA is a globalist scheme, and not "free trade" as the servile American media likes to refer to it. The media tells us that NAFTA and free trade doesn't work. That's incorrect. Only NAFTA doesn't work. Free trade would work if it were allowed to exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 04:37 AM

11. Daily Kos on Democrats' opposition to trade deals

Apparently only "progressive" lefties oppose them.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/1/1/1255736/-NAFTA-at-20-An-Unhappy-Birthday-and-a-Look-at-the-Roll-Call-Votes-on-Free-Trade-Deals


7 of the NAY votes are still in the Senate: 6 D, 1 R.
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL)
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA)
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD)
Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI)
Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV)
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)
9 of the YEA votes are still in the Senate: 6 R, 3 D.
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
Sen. Tom Harkin (R-IA)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS)
Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT)
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA)
8 former Representatives who voted NAY are now in the Senate: 5 D, 2 R, 1 I.
Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Bob Menendez (D-NJ)
Chuck Schumer (D-NY)
Sherrod Brown (D-OH)
Jim Inhofe (R-OK)
Jack Reed (D-RI)
Tim Johnson (D-SD)
Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
7 former Representatives who voted YEA are now in the Senate: 5 D, 2 R.
Dick Durbin (D-IL)
Pat Roberts (R-KS)
Ben Cardin (D-MD)
Ed Markey (D-MA)
Rob Portman (R-OH)
Ron Wyden (D-OR)
Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
NAFTA passed the House 234 to 200. House Democrats voted against it 156 to 102


I suppose Chuck Schumer is a "progressive" in bed with the alt-right now, since he opposed NAFTA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MountCleaners (Reply #11)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 01:35 PM

14. The Alt-Right Are Supportive of Protectionist Measures as Opposed To Establishment Republicans

Indeed, America First, is Trump's motto. This could be the roots of a new Third Way/No Labels coalition between the Alt-Right and Progressives.

http://www.salon.com/2017/03/19/the-global-history-of-the-alt-right/

Since Putin’s goals were to roll back values-based institutions like NATO and the EU that might threaten his rule (and possibly undo the Russian Federation), he had to find useful assets that could corrode those institutions. NATO and EU values are rooted in neoliberalism: free trade and open borders through the EU and human rights protected by hard power through NATO. By supporting parties that undercut these values, Putin sought to undermine both the NATO and the EU.

We now know about Putin’s Facebook and Twitter bot army and Russian financing of Alt-Right parties throughout Europe. The accusations that the Kremlin did something similar in the United States is gaining credibility. Russian spy tradecraft provided discipline to movements that were otherwise too prone to fracturing.

But that would have been irrelevant had neoliberalism’s cracks not begun to show. Even as early as 2000, it was obvious that free trade deals were widening the wealth gap and benefiting only the upper classes. The battle of Seattle, the anti-globalization protests that took place in 1999, were just a harbinger of the energy that would be mobilized against neoliberalism.

The world realized the emperor had no clothes, however, in the wake of the Financial Crisis, when all the inequalities of neoliberalism were laid bare. Years went by with both American and EU leaders trying to cobble together formulas to save the system without addressing any of the problems caused by it: during that time, conservatives began to drift away from economic freedom and free trade and towards the protectionism that had long been espoused by the Alt-Right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 01:36 PM

15. "I am a progressive who gets results and I will be a progressive president who gets results"

Most recognize that quote from Hillary Clinton. Lately I am just as tired of Democrats allowing the term "progressive" to become identified with some far left extreme as I was of Democrats allowing the word "liberal" to become identified with some far left extreme before. Republican used to intimidate us into that.

That's my complaint with your OP title. The discussion itself isn't objectionable to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #15)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 05:15 PM

27. Who is to say? Ed Schultz and the "Sane Progressive" Self-Identify as Progressives

Ed Schultz for example describes himself as follows:

https://www.rt.com/shows/news-with-ed-schultz/

Ed Schultz, one of the best-known and most well-respected progressive commentators in America, has joined RT to host his primetime news program at 8 pm EST weeknights. The political journalist is discussing the most controversial issues affecting Americans and gives a platform to diverse voices, stories and perspectives to viewers.


Likewise, Glenn Greenwald has been described as left-wing and progressive. That being said there are folks who claim to be progressive who push for the following goals, which overlaps with many of the goals of the alt-right:

* A desire for better relations with Russia.
* A belief that U.S. elections are not legitimate and are rigged.
* Attacks on trade agreements as victimizing the U.S. economy.
* A resentment of "establishment" Democrats and Republicans who are only seeking to promote the interests of global elites.
* A belief in a conspiracy by a shadowy deep state that is working to promote the interests of global elites and seeking to promote a war with Russia.

I can post any number of examples of "progressives" and "alt-right" commentators espousing these talking points. This is why I wonder whether a new Third-Way or No Labels movement will be created to attack and undermine "establishment" Democrats and Republicans with claims that the U.S. Democracy is irreparably rigged and that the media is inherently corrupt and prone to the distribution of fake news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Reply #27)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 05:19 PM

28. Sure, and Donald Trump calls himself a Patriot

I will not run away from proud Democratic labels just because the wrong people try to redefine them. Been there, doe that, it doesn't end well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 02:08 PM

17. The election of 1872 is an example of a similar confluence.

Back when the Republican and Democratic parties were completely reversed on the matter of civil rights, the Democratic party actually didn't field a presidential ticket that year, but backed the "Liberal Republicans." The Liberal Republicans were a splinter group dissatisfied by the corruption-related controversies of various Grant administration officials, but also sought to end Federal Reconstruction efforts.

Heck, the Liberal Republicans even nominated a contrarian, progressive newspaper editor as their presidential candidate (Horace Greeley). Now that would be a bizarre world. Imagine Hillary Clinton won last year, but in 2020 faced a challenge from the "Justice Democrats" fielding Glenn Greenwald backed by the Republican Party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 03:23 PM

19. It's the Worm Ouroboros. The Snake That Eats Its Own Tail.

One end meeting the other and consuming itself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 03:24 PM

20. Putin has his minions supporting the far left and far right. He is destroying the center.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 03:56 PM

22. I would add "Caucasian superiority" or anti-Semitism and xenophobia to the list...

Because when the topic of a "global elite," (particularly in finance and banking) is broached, that's exactly where the alt-right's beliefs go. To them, the terms are code for Jews, Zionists, non-whites, etc. Good example of "saying it with out really saying it":
http://honoranddaring.com/who-are-the-globalists/
"...Globalization destroys culture. Distinctive culture needs homogenous societies to develop in. Globalization increases diversity which throws cultures together into a hodge podge. The result is that the only common culture is consumerism..."
Historical perspective on "globalism":
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/16/hitlers-world-may-not-be-so-far-away
"...By presenting Jews as an ecological flaw responsible for the disharmony of the planet, Hitler channelled and personalised the inevitable tensions of globalisation..."

Breitbart "goes there" frequently, with a few cosmetic tweaks to buffer the insanity. Many on the alt-right are avowed white nationalists; some actually envision a "White Empire" stretching across North America, Northern Europe and Russia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 04:53 PM

25. This is fucking stupid.

I'm so fucking sick of this divisive bullshit. I want no part of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alarimer (Reply #25)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 05:51 PM

33. There just seems to be a lot of denial about in-room elephants.

This and more "I'd rather go down with my Third Weigh Anchors than give the pro-labor liberals even one crumb of our platform" hilarity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alarimer (Reply #25)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 06:06 PM

35. Not Divisive. Recognizing Common Ground Between Anti-Establishment Activists

What is truly dismissive is ignoring strong overlap between Trump's white working class supporters and those on the left with respect to the issues identified. Why be afraid of acknowledging such common ground on issues such as:

* U.S. Elections are rigged.
* The media is fake and corrupt.
* Trade deals are designed to protect the bankers and the global elite.
* Establishment Democrats/Republicans have turned their back on the working class.

Instead, I see folks on the left who strongly adhere to such views dismiss members of the Alt-Right as being insincere in their belief, which strikes me as being condescending and elitist.

Why does it bother some folks that they share many of the basic, foundational views of members of the Alt-Right?

Also, given that moderates in the past tried to push a Third Way/No Labels coalition in the past, why not members of the Far Left and Far Right given how partisan politics has become. There are no moderates now. Perhaps the most likely coalition will be on the extremes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 04:59 PM

26. Oh for fuck's sake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #26)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 05:42 PM

29. Yeah, the "split the party" trolling gets dumber and dumber

If I have to roll my eyes any harder, I'll have to chase them down the street.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #29)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 06:18 PM

37. Split the Party? Who Is Saying That Any of These Folks Are Democrats?

Jill Stein is most definitely not a Democrat. For that matter, I seriously doubt that Glenn Greenwald would consider himself a member of the Democratic Party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #26)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 05:54 PM

34. I don't understand cutting off part of the party, either.

 

Seems like we have a long history in the Dem party of being progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Volstagg (Reply #34)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 06:11 PM

36. Sane Progressive - "A TY to the RIGHT Opposing Missile Strikes"

The Sane Progressive was widely posted as progressive voice during the primaries. Yet, here she is thanking members of the "right" (presumably the alt-right) for opposing strikes against Syria:



Now, many Democrats, including Cory Booker, Nancy Pelosi, etc., have opposed such unilateral military action by the President without Congressional approval, but here you have the Sane Progressive thanking members of the Alt-Right.

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/04/alt-right-donald-trump-syria

ALT-RIGHT GOES “APOPLECTIC” OVER TRUMP’S DECISION TO BOMB SYRIA

In fact, Trump imbibed the pro-war Kool-Aid that is the drink of choice in elite circles even faster, to the alt-right’s disappointment. When Trump condemned Assad’s chemical weapons attack on his own people, which killed dozens of children and emergency workers, several of his fringe supporters screamed that he was being duped into a war by a “false flag” operation. “The Syrian gas attack was done by deep state agents,” tweeted alt-right agitator and the Trump administration’s favorite blogger Mike Cernovich. “The fake news media (which works for them) wants you to ignore basic logic and 101-level game theory and strategic thinking to reach an illogical conclusion. Stay vigilant!” Infowars, the site run by extreme conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, took it a step further and blamed the attack on Democrat billionaire George Soros.


Now, I am not making these videos or articles from progressives up. I am simply pointing out that there is a lot of overlap.

Finally, this is not about the Democratic Party. Indeed, many of the progressives I reference would not call themselves Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Reply #36)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 06:23 PM

38. I don't know her enough to comment.

 

But, that being said, just because Progressives and the Right are both thinking unilateral strikes are bad, doesn't mean there is overlap. The reasons for thinking it is bad are very different.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Volstagg (Reply #38)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 06:29 PM

39. Also, This Is Not About the Democratic Party. This Is About Folks Attacking the Democratic Party...

...from the "left" using talking points and positions that share a lot with the alt-right. The biggest overlap is the attack on Democratic Party "establishment." What is common is an attack on the institutions that our Democracy is based on such such as the media and elections as being irreparably rigged.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 05:46 PM

30. COME on, y'all.

You want there to be a "horseshoe" where there is none.

Democrats lost 2016 because they never saw various red flags:

* The 2010 Congressional loss
* The 2012 Presidential election narrowing (Barack Obama won, but not as much over Romney as McCain)
* The 2014 Senate loss
* The Republicans taking over a majority of state legislatures
* The Republicans taking over a majority of governorships
* Questionable managing practices by Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, who seemed rather adamant about the insanity of thinking the milquetoast Clinton Blueprint is going to work each and every time.
* Denial of a groundswell receptive to the progressive message

Rather than re-evaluate why the milquetoast Clinton Blueprint did not work, you seem to want to blame this imagined powerful "progressive left" (and maliciously/hilariously equate them to the Alt-Klan) for why Hillary lost. The fact is, the message most all of us want and need to be attached to the Democratic party is that of the Second Bill of Rights . . . . a platform we can all agree would help EVERYone, especially in a time where the social safety net is going to need to be expanded in the face of winner-stomp-everyone Capitalism.

Most of America doesn't even LIKE Jill Stein, as a candidate or a person. She doesn't know shit about shit, and by lumping all progressives into the Stein side of the Venn, brushing them off as Putinist whackjobs no different than Milo Yiannopolus or Alex Jones, you're seriously shooting yourself in the foot when it comes to getting more votes. I don't think trying to get more moderates while decrying progressives as lost causes is the best of strategies.

If you lose the labor of this country because you want to fully keep wealthy Capitalists in power and not make things even one atom speck less comfortable for them, you have no one to blame but yourself. Young people of this country are starting to realize they have no path to retirement. X-ers and Seniors are starting to realize we're never going to get Universal Health care in this country (something the USA needed last DECADE). If we're nothing but a go-along-to-get-along party, just throw our hands up and say "Sorry, but that's just the way it is" . . . . DON'T BE SURPRISED WHEN YOU LOSE TO FUCKS LIKE SCHTROUMPF.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HughBeaumont (Reply #30)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 05:51 PM

32. There are not enough progressive left to win an election. Come 2018 they will say like in 2014

 

there wasn't anything to vote for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 05:48 PM

31. Most of those are entertainment commentators working for ratings.

 

You can't count them as people who would make policy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 06:47 PM

41. Russian/right propaganda move, yes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Original post)

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 07:27 PM

42. Would the mash up

of the 2 groups be called.....the Third alt Reich?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread