Will Marshall says "netroots types aren't really the Democratic Party's base"

He calls those of us he considers the "netroots" types a "subset of liberals".

He says we love to be attacked because it validates us.

Will Marshall is a founder of the PPI and original member the DLC, and he is one arrogant you know what. He has been one of the leaders in antagonizing and belittling us....by whatever name they chose to call us at any given time.

From Huffington Post:

On Gibbs v. the "Professional Left"



Don't you just love it? He really goes after those of us on the internet. It's insulting, it's rude, and it is typical of the stuff the Conservadems have dished out to us for decades.

He is famous for his insults toward us, and he seems to take great pride in them. He believes in raiding the red zone and winning Republican voters. He warned us over being critical of the Iraq invasion.

The neoconservative strain of Democrats actively oppose "The Left".



He also said some very cold and heartless things about the body count in Iraq.



He once made fun of populism and compared Bernie Sanders and Sherrod Brown with Lou Dobbs, Tom Tancredo, and Pat Buchanan.



I wonder just how far he and others will carry this contempt for those of us they call by many names?

It has gone on way too long.

And they expect us to hold our noses come election day?

:mad:

Then the DLC won't have to conceed anything.

The DLC would prefer to only have to "negotiate" with Republicans, that's being made very clear here.

edit: way past time for Pelosi to stop appeasing this lot and start fighting back.

One does have to wonder.

I hope she's no longer in doubt.

I really am starting to think the conservatives in the party find our majority in the House a bother what with them always trying to pass public options and things like that. Funny, though, I think most of the Progressive caucus is pretty safe.

Here's one of Marshall's statements:

"They are a subset of liberals, who are themselves outnumbered by moderates and conservatives in the party."

And it seems obvious to me a dominant conservative element in the party is his goal.
Righ

They're making it pretty clear, rather publicly. The fact that they feel they have to makes me wonder if there is a power play not just for Congress, but also for the heart and mind of the President. (not betting on it, just wondering)

Although I think I might look like that too if I was standing next to a psychopath. You can't tell from the photo if she's backing away slowly. ;)

and then we will come back for more

I won't vote for the lesser of two evils, just because he has a (D) next to his name. Give me better Dems. They have to earn my vote now.

I won't vote for anyone who doesn't value me and/or my vote.

We don't need advice from the likes of him.

:puke:

It seems to me that the true face of the DP is as imperialist and corporatist as that of the RP.

Edit to add: The "base" is another matter.

...unlike those fringe, Leftist Wackos who want to
*Stop the WARS
*decrease Military Spending
*believe that Americans deserve the same quality of HealthCare the rest of the civilized WORLD takes for granted.


Will Marshall is a conservative piece of shit whose mission was/is to destroy the Democratic Party from within by flooding it with Corporate Bribe Money.
He succeeded.

Marshall has always been a real democrats' mortal enemy. This man is the enemy.

That needs to be repeated and repeated -- he is one of the key moves and shakers in the GOP-lite takeover of the Democratic Party. He calls himself "progressive" in an attempt to hijack the left of the Party and move it further to the right -- back to where old school Republciamns were before the party went crazy.

WILL MARSHALL IS A FUCKING GOPer TROLL.

Plain and fucking simple.

"ooops, sorry! Wrong constituency!"

Don't you? They are cutting those of us center left off at the knees, because they don't need us.

for them no matter how many times they insult liberals.

If they're counting on the center right to win, they're not going to win. At least not without us.

The "center right" is going to love them if they offer accountability and honesty and leadership, even if they're just slightly left of their beliefs. They're doing all the opposite with these shenanigans, and they're not going to win like this.


I'm starting to think at least some of the people making policy in the White House really want nothing more than to help out big corporations (hell, half of them are Goldman Sachs alums). They're making arguments to convince the rest that they're doing the "pragmatic" thing and cutting down anyone who's willing to stand up for progressive ideals. And if they lose seats because of it, they don't care. They have an agenda to push forward, and winning is second to that agenda. Maybe we should take a lesson from them.

What destructive bs.

http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

On January 28, 2005, PNAC issued its final open letter. Addressed to congressional leaders, it requested that they "take the steps necessary to increase substantially the size of the active duty Army and Marine Corps." At least 25,000 troops a year would be needed to meet what Condoleezza Rice called the country's "generational commitment" to fighting terrorism in the greater Middle East. Turning on some of its erstwhile allies in the Bush administration, like Rumsfeld, the letter stated: "The administration has been reluctant to adapt to this new reality.… We understand the dangers of continued federal deficits and the fiscal difficulty of increasing the number of troops. But the defense of the United States is the first priority of the government."34 This letter was notable for the many liberal hawks and liberal internationalists—Peter Beinart, Paul Kennedy, Will Marshall, Michael O'Hanlon, and James Steinberg—who joined the neoconservatives in signing.

Who gives a shit what Will Marshall says?

That claim is a stretch.

It's time again.
Bye.

lol

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

who cares about truth or action right? Nice try.

That makes me feel so damn special.

It's just that simple now.

And how good is he at getting them out?

They're still convinced that they and only they know how to run elections, although they've been better at losing them than winning them, and they and only they know how to run the country, although they've just rubberstamped a lot of the pernicious GOP policies that contributed to the economic mess we're in right now.

They came to power originally promising to counter Nixon's southern strategy, something they failed miserably to do. Once in the center of party power, they've been remarkably tenacious and difficult to dislodge.

If only they'd been that tenacious for the country and not just themselves.

and they surely are.

The Policy Shop

Like most of the Elites and their intellectual sympathizers they think "Democracy" is rubber-stamping what the Elites have already chosen. This was carefully documented by historian Carroll Quigley, who said that the 2 parties should be nearly identical se we can "throw the bastards out" without there being a change in REAL policy. Quigley was a big mentor of Bill Clinton.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x444782

and they will say ok never mind?

Just reply---You must have the wrong number, I am Subset Liberal
and hang up.

we can save.

... and woe unto the poor volunteer who decides to try to "convince" me that the party represents anything left of center, let alone my apparently left wing ass (funny, I've become more "moderate" as I get older... but nevertheless, the party has become even more "moderate" even faster than I have... so that somehow, my "moderated" views are "more radical" than my old radical views were at the time... it's almost enough to induce vertigo...)

At this point Barbara Boxer is the only one getting a nickel from me (my rep doesn't need it... and the rest of them can go play in traffic...)

You know, since he seems to know where to find all these right wingers and moderates who'll be coming out to vote for Democrats in November.

we can say oh no we are the netroots...and they will say ok.

I don't effing think so. Unless you meant "Right."

"He recently served on the board of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, an organization chaired by Joe Lieberman and John McCain designed to build bipartisan support for the invasion of Iraq. Marshall also signed, at the outset of the war, a letter issued by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) expressing support for the invasion."

The same kind of "rightness" you see cropping up all over this board, of late...

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

What does Will Marshall do at a four-way intersection when the driveway he wants to pull into is on the street to his left?

He takes a right, goes a block, takes a right, goes a block, takes a right, goes two blocks, takes a right, another block, takes a right and then a right into the driveway. Will Marshall doesn't believe in left.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:








Oh....you were serious.


Sorry.

:blush:

Harry Truman was right about what happens when you run a fake Republican against a real Republican.

I think woodtick is a better analogy than woodchuck.

But anybody who gets offended or defensive when people specifically criticize "netroots" or "bloggers" probably isn't doing enough of it.

"The party's leftists are obviously within theirs rights to criticize Obama when they think he deviates from the true path, just as centrists and conservatives are. And the dialectic between the President's essential political pragmatism and left-wing fundamentalists is probably a healthy thing. It could force Obama to articulate more clearly the overarching philosophical framework that informs a Presidency that otherwise seems to proceed on the logic of serial pragmatism.

But ultimately, left leaning Democrats aren't going to find a better horse to ride. And the more they flog Obama, the worse Democrats are likely to do this November."

Oh sure, had race horse notion in the beginning of the sentence, so it must be A-OK, and therefore no longer evoking any thoughts of whips with black men who happen to be president.

I'd say this is a sick fuck.

Not you Snazzy, talking about Marshall and his cronies and acolytes.

..."And they love to be attacked, because it validates their rather inflated sense of political self-importance. The worst thing you can do to the netroots is to ignore them."...

Demorat I've ever read. This is the kind of thing I expect from Republicans. Body counts???? FFS!!! And right and left populism converge in the person of Lou Dobbs? I'm speechless at the hatefulness and stupidity of this man.

What do you expect?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/08/flashback_obama_white_house_re.html



The question, I suppose, is whether the WH really gives a shit about what the "netroots" thinks... or if Dan Pfeiffer, the WH communications director, was just trying to "make nice".

Since the WH and Gibbs have made a point of not apologizing for Gibbs' comments, but rather trying to "clarify" them... I lean toward the opinion of a bullshitting job from Pfeiffer. I assume that the WH will not take issue with Marshall either... it will be interesting to watch and see if I am wrong, but I'll not be holding my breath.

It would seem that the "netroots" not only "isn't really the Democratic base", but "the online left" is apparently also no longer "invaluable". Could it be because of that same assertion about the online left from Pfeiffer way back when?:

"... because we believe the online communities can often keep the focus on how policy will affect the American people rather than just the political back-and-forth."

Was that maybe only a good thing when W was in office? Is that the inference the WH wants to foster? Really?....

"watch what we do, not what we say."

And being so gullible that we must be swallowing whatever drivel the unwashed bloggers are posting...

Hmm... netroots are to Obama as dirty hippies are to Nixon? Should that maybe be put onto the SATs in the future?...

Let's have a little respect for your elders.

Show a little respect for our leftsters.

If so, I probly are one.

and haven't been drug-tested?

That takes care of the 'not getting paid for this' part. :P

as gospel truth. ACORN, federal workers, it's late, I can't remember the list, but our side uses facts, theirs not so much.

:eyes: Marshall is an SOB>

The First New Deal was in fact quite Corporatist.

Plenty of co-signatories there to the original neocon manifesto.

Nickel and dime contributions from the unwashed masses mean nothing in this era of billion-dollar campaigns.

And given how big a buck is in my eyes in comparison to theirs, my money is going to guys like Feingold and Grayson, who lack access to the gigantic contributors.

Thats why the dems have done nothing to legislate out the Corporate Peopledom the SCOTUS ruled ! But it is going to backfire on our Dem congress..but I don't think they give a shit if it does, I don't believe Dems want to remain the majority.

Send all this DLC trash back to the Republican Party where they belong.

A majority with these assholes in it, isn't a majority. They're saboteurs.

the last 25 years of active service and activism on behalf of Democratic Party candidates and 36 years of voting, I am not part of the base? You are the new comer, not me.

somewhere between 80 and 90 percent of self-described liberals are happy with this President. My guess is that they are the "base" Marshall is referring to.

If you do the math, self-described liberals make up roughly 22 percent of the population, and somewhere between 80 and 90 percent of them are satisfied. The 10 to 20 percent who are not happy adds up to roughly 2 to 4 percent of the vote, roughly the size of the Kucinich vote, though surely not all the same people.

Or the teachers, the unionized workers, the college professors, the Civil libertarians,....


We are all "Dennis Kucinich" I suppose.

say what they want.

That the DLC appears to be actively working on both suppressing the base and wooing ex-Republicans tells us more than what the polls do.

I think less and less people are falling for it. This may show up in the end.

they have been published here time and again. The numbers have been quite consistent. I have never felt that I was part of anything resembling a "base". I am part of a small fragment that was cobbled together with others to form a majority in 2008. No politician, not even DK subscribes to my agenda, anyone that would is unlikely to ever gain elected office. Philosophically, is someone who has never won and will never win an election actually a politician? If true, then there is likely no politician I agree with, but curiously, I keep voting.

was infiltrated by the right. I won't vote for or support in any way those who follow this illogic. Bernie & Sherrod represent the logical wing of the party. Marshall is just another corporate apologist scumbag!

. . . but I've understood a 'base' of a party to be a group which most regularly and dependably votes and votes (in this example) Democratic. I'm just not sure that describes the netroots. I think the definition of 'base' has been over romanticized by some to mean which group of voters is vital to the party, not the general definition of die-hard Dems that I've understood it to mean.

in my estimation. It has become their only way of communicating what they perceive as trends they can't go along with and raising money by pooling resources to go against all that corporate money.

I'm just not sure how Democratic voters actually break down in the 'netroots'.

I'm just as certain that Marshall means to splinter off whoever he sees as dissenting from the present Dem leadership's orthodoxy and deem them irrelevant or extreme. He's only going to succeed in uniting folks outside of his little clique if he persists in this, or if this actually becomes the mantra of that Dem leadership.

please consider for serious discussion:

1. The White House and the Demo Party have made it plain that they do not consider liberals and progressives as a being crucial to the success of the party.To them, we are a liability that has to be barely tolerated. They have thrown their lot in with the same special interests that control the Republican Party. Thus,the Democratic Party no longer represents the interests of American liberals and progressives.

2. The party bosses think that they can ignore our policies, disparage us at will to score points with moderate conservatives, and still get our votes because we have nowhere else to go.

3. Therefore, I suggest that this November, all proud professional liberal DLWH's stay home and don't vote at all. I realize that many will say, "oh no, that will turn the country over to the Republicans," but, that is not actually so. Even if the Reps gain control of both houses of Congress, which is unlikely in any event, they would not earn a veto proof majority in either. the president can still block any truly dangerous legislation from passing and,if he has the courage (questionable), he can introduce numerous bills, let Congress reject them, and rail against the do-nothing Republicans in Congress (worked great for Truman).

4. What it will do, however, is send a strong message to the Democratic Party that it cannot win without us and, hopefully, force the party to acknowledge our indispensability to its success at the polls and the efficacy of its policies.

5. We, as liberals and progressives are at a crossroads and must do something like this or we will be totally marginalized in the party and in American politics. Such marginalization is bad for the nation and its future. We cannot continue to condone business as usual.

6. This off year election presents a rare opportunity to protest and make our strength felt without danger of transferring a preponderance of power to the Reps (Let's face it. Even with minorities in both houses, the Reps are still setting the agenda, so nothing much will change even if they do have actual control of Congress). There is no better time than now to take this action because the damage will be minimal, but the message we send will ring loudly.

7. Again, let me emphasize that I am not looking for flamers, bomb throwers and brick-bat flingers. I present this as a subject for serious consideration and discussion. Your thoughts?

that's wishful thinking for the opposition party.

Checking out means being background noise. Joining the sitting out near and often majority is meaningless as a statement.

It seems clear that is their game. No backing down. Even one percent for none of the above says way more than twenty percent at home.

able to veto anything the pukes come up with, to actually show those who are ruining the party by abandoning most of the principles that have formed the basis of Democratic beliefs.

I firmly believe that unless they are so scared, they will continue their headlong rush to the right.

But, of course, the party-purists will scream that loyalty to the sacred D is more important than actual faithfulness to ideals and values.

But not voting is not a good idea.

Welcome to D.U., btw.

I'll be doing what I can help the candidate in the 3rd congressional district because I've known him for a long time. He despises the corporate influence in gov., has always opposed the wars, and he's gonna need a lot of help as he has pissed off a lot of the DLC types here. :hi:

You know, the type that would like the president to not be engaged in horribly unjust wars, to not torture people or detain them indefinitely, to not continue the precedent of homosexuals as second-class citizens, to not give big banks billions of dollars in barely-regulated loans, to not say he's going to get a public option, then sit on the sidelines and cheerlead as a pro-corporate health reform bill gets passed..yep.

Those kind of people aren't a significant portion of the base at all.

One of the earliest advocates of invading Iraq for its oil.

it does not discuss the points they make. That is not about them.

Although it also assumes control over something by thinking ignoring or commenting has some effect.


So thinking ignoring someone has an impact on what they can do is some claim of having the only ability to define what can be done.

I been both ignored and not ignored, and results are the same, so I don't think that is correct.


For instance I ignore some tanks, but not to change what they might do, just because at some moment there are better things to think about.

Arrogant Luddite. Doesn't give a whit about the future of the party it seems. Just the future of generous corporate campaign support (bribes).

when you have a Liberal base that challenges them at every turn by showing how non-Progressive and pro-Corporate they really are. Their only avenue of attack is to attempt to marginalize the base as a small subset of the Liberal crowd that is not representative of mainstream voters. They did this very well during the health care debates where polls abounded showing overwhelming support for a single payer system or at a minimum a public option, and yet the corporate media worked hard to inform that most were against health care reform. Successfully painting a 70% majority of the voting public as a small subset of the voting population is quite an achievement really.

I would say a sub-set of Democratic voter called Will Marshall that seems to think his boys got elected all on their own from 'middle class' families that don't know what a liberal is. Will needs to stfu and sitdown for a spell.

That should get the voters fired up and ready to go.

Because these people raised a shit-ton of money for Obama and GOT HIM ELECTED! Now he (via his puppet) kicks them in the teeth. Ungrateful assholes.

So, the dems who care enough about this country that they spend a lot of time engaged in political discussion online, arent the base, but the people who are moderates who dont have any opinions of their own and dont really follow politics, are the base?


I dont understand these guys at all, they call themselves political strategists but for some reason they cant understand the most simple things. The people who really care about this country and are willing to spend lots of their free time, educating themselves on important issues and discussing it with other people are the people who are going to show up at every election. If you insult these people and treat them like shit they might not show up.

Its like these DLC pieces of shit are trying to destroy everything that the 60's peace and student movement gave to the democratic party. They also just dont seem to get that most independents dont fucking care about how far left or right you are, they care about results and it just so happens that history has shown over and over again that LIBERAL not corporatist, centrist policies produce real tangible results that the average American can feel.

I am 21 years old, I have been studying political science for only 3 years and yet these guys in their 40's who have been in this game for decades somehow dont see this.

After all - it is the goal f the right to destroy govt, leaving a per vacuum that the corporations will fill....

I'd like to give him some advice: the Democratic Party stands for Progress for all, not Capital for the few.That party is called the Republicants.

A visit to the DLC fundraising link on their web site returns:

"Sorry, we could not find the file you requested."

On Facebook, flight attendant Steve Slater has 208,000 people who like him
The DLC has 988.
There is not a single comment on the DLC Facebook page.

Will Marshall, friend to McCain, Lieberman and Palin, is angry at the netroots because the net has made him irrelevant.
He's living in the Clinton White House circa 1993.

Net fundraising put Obama in the WH.
These idiots can't even get their link to work.

Just a whining, anachronistic, Republican trojan horse.

Here is a definitive article.


The most distressing aspect of the Centrist "New Democrat" alignment is the surprising number of "Democrats" who are willing to go along with a "Centrist" Party Leadership that actually works against their Middle Class/Working Class Economic Interests.



The DLC New Team
Progressives Need NOT Apply

(Screen Capped from the DLC Website)

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254886&kaid=86&subid=85

”I am a New Democrat!”---Barack Obama
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254931&kaid=85&subid=900184

New Republicans.

And neither looks good for 2010 or 2012.

OOOOH yeah, by a small minority of posters here at DU!

Now I know who they are getting their talking points from!!

Wash Rinse Repeat, Wash Rinse Repeat...........

The guy is an evil minion of the far-right fascist segment of the Republican party.

a good job of self-definition by making a consideration of Democrats, past and present, with whose votes he or she most closely aligns.

If in a Democratic County HQ someone says, "I'm a Dick Durbin Democrat," nearly everyone there knows what that means.

If at Drinking Liberally someone says, "I'm a Bella Abzug Democrat," may the wonderful woman rest in peace, everybody knows what's involved there as well.

I think each of us as voters tend, consciously or not, to align with fairly particular constellations of Democrats. It's not a consumer choice, exactly, but more of a grafting of one's perceptions of the society onto the voting record of a high-profile public servant.

It's possible to have strongly supported Mo Udall, for example, against Jimmy Carter in the primary but still feel that Gerald Ford was a dolt and show up early to cast a vote for the Georgian. In a case like that, the grafting will take, but not as easily or quickly as if Udall, if the graftee is a Mo Udall Democrat, is able to make a sharp distinction in expressing the preference.

Joe Lieberman is an extreme case where no amount of skin specialists can pull off a successful graft -- witness the very enthusiastic support for Ned Lamont in that primary.

I like Mo Udall, and Bill Bradley, and Bella Abzug, and John Kennedy, Mike Gravel, John Kerry, and Birch Bayh, and Mario Cuomo, and Barbara Boxer, and many others who have served and who aspired to the presidency, only one of those ever making it, and that by a very narrow margin. Add Senators Feingold and Whitehouse, too.

right wing reliable patterns!

Who is Will Marshall, anyway? I have no idea?

And i bet they're ideologically not far apart.

Contempt for the people and all.


I know quite a few educated people (doctors and lawyers) who have lately been saying they can no longer identify as Democrats because they believe at the top the leaders of both parties aren't very different. And the war spending and exporting of jobs is what they mention.

Corporate types who are scared off from the repukes by the blatant racism, misogyny, homophobia, and so forth?