At the coverage this morning. I fucking despise what passes for the 4th estate in this country.

Shes not even mentioned in the article.

I was thinking EW when I was typing this up. I think something I saw in a thread or two before I got here.


On edit I meant to click the "populist reform of the democratic party". Right below the EW group.

Should I delete this and re-post in the right group?

phew. I thought I was missing something.

that Warren said. A little different take when compared to telling the banks that she has their backs.

Progressives oppose the third-way program, which is to pander to the rich, the bankers, the war profiteers, to big money, while paying lip service to some abstracted "social issues". As if the latter can and should be paid for by accepting the former. Progressives oppose mindless hawkishness that sees the world purely in terms of brute force, in terms of a "diplomacy" that only kicks in after a country submits to brute force violence and threats. Republicans don't oppose that. Republicans won't mention that. There's no similarity whatsover between Republican objections and progressive objections to third-way warmongers.

It's up to progressives to define the terms of debate -- and progressives will get nowhere by hoping third-way Dems can somehow, on the eve of the election, be persuaded or pressured to in fact "swing to the left". That idea, that all that's needed is to run a token progressive candidate, or even suggest a token progressive candidate, so as to somehow force third-way to change its campaign rhetoric, is totally discredited in 2015. We all know, now, to look to a politician's actions, not just listen in blissful ignorance to their lofty words.

On the contrary she's best they could lose to.