Third Way Has A Sure-Fire Way To Lose In November

Zach Goldfarb celebrated the 4th of July with a column for the Washington Post informing us that the moneymen behind the New Dems, Blue Dogs and Third Way-- i.e., the Republican wing of the Democratic Party-- have had enough of all this income gap and economic inequality palaver. JUST STOP! And he seems to have some kind of measurement to be able to claim that Obama has. "After making fighting income inequality an early focus of his second term," he wrote, "President Obama has largely abandoned talk of the subject this election year in a move that highlights the emerging debate within the Democratic Party over economic populism and its limits."

Recall a few weeks ago when we looked at the way for the Democrats to turn things around but all getting on the Elizabeth Warren train? I guess the Steny Hoyer/Steve Israel/Mark Warner wing won that argument. Unless the Democrats want to "teach voters a lesson" by showing them how bad GOP rule will be as a processor to the 2016 election, this decision is pure and simple self-inflicted debacle.

The conservatives are afraid of… well everything, but in this case, they're afraid of being accused of stoking the embers of class warfare. Do New Dem leaders Jared Polis (CO), Jim Himes (CT), Rick Larsen (WA) and Ron Kind (WI) think someone is going to start calling endangered conservative caucus members like Ron Barber (AZ), Joe Garcia (FL), Kyrsten Sinema (AZ), Scott Peters (CA), Ami Bera (CA), Pete Gallego (TX), Brad Schneider (IL), John Barrow (GA) and Patrick Murphy (FL) "commies?" That would be a riot! Or are the Clintons calling the shot? It has their odor all over it. I asked the Blue America-endorsed candidate from the Tampa Bay area, Alan Cohn, who's been campaigning on a populist agenda, where he comes down on Goldfarb's assertions. "I'm running as a middle class American for a middle class which is drowning as the cost of living continues to rise and incomes don't. I'm running against a guy sitting by the river bank with a smirk on his face. You can call it income inequality or whatever you want. I'm running to do something about it."

Honolulu City Councilman Stanley Chang, a former law student who studied under Elizabeth Warren at Harvard, is the progressive in the race to replace Colleen Hanabusa. "It's discouraging that President Obama has abandoned talking about income inequality during this election year," he told us last night. "Even worse, Third Way is taking a victory lap for this shift in rhetoric. I haven't hesitated to call out the President when he is wrong on issues, from his proposal to use chained CPI for Social Security benefits to attempts to negotiate the TPP in secret to benefit large corporations while gutting labor and environmental protections. Senator Warren and Congressman Grayson have shown us how effective progressive messaging can move the debate forward. I share their passion for real solutions to income inequality: raising the minimum wage, ending giveaways to the top 1 percent, reining in Wall Street, and expanding Social Security. I'm also fighting for universal preschool, affordable student loans, and free college tuition for service. These proposals will build a secure middle class over the long term. Democrats will never succeed in taking back Congress if they limit themselves to vague Republican-lite talking points about creating opportunity. We won't move forward unless we can talk frankly about the fact that economic growth has helped the wealthiest Americans but has left working families with stagnant incomes and declining mobility." I doubt Third Way will be inviting Chang to join their Republican-lite insiders club and time soon.

"It was clear in 2013 that income inequality was the top narrative for the White House, but they abruptly switched away from it," said Jim Kessler, senior vice president for policy at Third Way, a centrist Democratic think tank that has advised the White House and Democrats to avoid excessive populism. "Income inequality seems like it’s on the back burner now-- at least in terms of their rhetoric.

The shift hints at a broader repositioning of Democratic messaging ahead of the midterm elections and, perhaps, the 2016 presidential race. House and Senate strategists and their pollsters have concluded that they should focus less on the wealth gap and more on emphasizing that all Americans should have economic "opportunity" to get ahead or a "fair shot."

"Both the White House and the Senate agreed that the decline of middle-class incomes was the most serious issue we face in this country, but the focus had to be on how to get middle-class incomes up, rather than drive other people’s incomes down," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), the messaging chief for Senate Democrats.

He added, "There are some who believe it’s better to talk about the negative parts of wealth that people have accumulated, but our polling data show people care less about that and more about how we’re going to help them."

But many liberal Democrats, represented most prominently by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), have been pushing an increasingly populist economic agenda. Some warn against papering over the wealth gap with euphemisms.

Like the other Blue America candidates, Oklahoman Tom Guild doesn't shy away from identifying himself with the populist wing of the party. A few weeks ago in the party primary he beat a conservative Democrat with the more Republican-leaning perspective. "The middle class," he told us, "has been eaten alive by shrinking incomes and the increasing costs of providing a college education for their children. Social Security checks are not big enough to offset increased medical costs for seniors, co-pays for Medicare are increasing, and the minimum wage is inadequate at $7.25 an hour. Just as the middle class has been squeezed hard in the past 15-20 years, the working poor, if anything, have fared even worse, and may be losing hope of moving into the middle class, and providing a comfortable life for themselves and their families. Lowering the rates for Stafford College Student loans will help educate a generation of students from the middle and working classes. Increasing Social Security benefits keeps seniors above the poverty level. Protecting Medicare means that the poverty rate among seniors will stay around 7.5% and not the 30% it was before Medicare was enacted in 1965. Raising the minimum wage to $10.10 will help many working families, particularly those with a female head of household working full time, stay out of poverty. A rising tide will lift tens of millions of boats, and greatly benefit the beleaguered middle class and the working class, struggling to make ends meet. For the good of our country, we need to help both groups simultaneously. Surely, we can walk and chew gum at the same time. Our country’s future depends on doing just that."

Clearly, the guy's not headed for the New Dems or Blue Dogs if he gets into Congress in November. Neither is Paul Clements. Paul's running for the southwest Michigan congressional seat held by Whirlpool heir and hereditary plutocrat Fred Upton. Clements, who Steve Israel is studiously ignoring in order to protect his pal Upton, is running a strong issues-based campaign. "People in my district," he told us, "seem broadly aware that a significant factor behind the increasing wealth of the super-rich and the decline of America’s middle class is that big corporations and the super-rich get special favors in Washington-- tax loopholes, subsidies, and generally tilting the playing field in their favor. These are fundamental issues on their own, and they are critical to addressing other challenges people care about, such as cutting the national debt. I certainly talk about them."

Rick Weiland is the prairie populist running is South Dakota for the open Senate seat. His campaign is all about South Dakota and South Dakota values and barely references that Beltway politics that have wrecked both the political parties. "For all the hand-wringing about ‘class warfare,’ he said this morning, "the facts are very straightforward-- the last thirty-five years have witnessed major class warfare by the very, very rich against middle and lower income Americans. This theft of opportunity is the most significant threat facing America right now. When we rob the ability of individuals to work their way into the middle class, we not only weaken our country, we also jeopardize democracy. From billions of dollars in corporate pork to tax laws that reward enormous risk-taking by speculative investors, the federal government’s spending priorities reflect the enormous power Big Money has on our system." No wonder Elizabeth Warren is campaigning for him and helping him raise money, while Third Way types like Guy Cecil and Michael Bennet at the DSCC are trying to sabotage his campaign! You can contribute to the Blue America Senate candidates here and to the Blue America House candidates here.

Polar opposite of Goldfarb's report is one from Ed Klein in today's New York Post, claiming that Obama is going to back Elizabeth Warren, the progressive choice for president, over centrist Hillary Clinton. Keeping in mind that the Post's reporting is often no longer even a baby step more credible the National Enquirer's reports of Kim Kardashian bearing an alien baby, Dick Clark's gay witch hunts or New Orleans mob boss Carlos Marcello admitting to have assassinated JFK, Klein claims that "privately he worries that Clinton would undo and undermine many of his policies."

A former Harvard law professor and administration aide, Warren would energize the left wing of the Democrat Party just as Obama did against Clinton in 2008.

Thanks to her outspoken stand against big banks and the top 1 percent, Warren is the darling of progressives. She won her Senate seat thanks to millions of dollars in donations from outside Massachusetts, including from rich environmentalists and Hollywood celebrities.

Obama has authorized his chief political adviser, Valerie Jarrett, to conduct a full-court press to convince Warren to throw her hat into the ring.

In the past several weeks, Jarrett has held a series of secret meetings with Warren. During these meetings, Jarrett has explained to Warren that Obama is worried that if Hillary succeeds him in the White House, she will undo many of his policies.

He believes that the populist Warren is the best person to convince the party faithful that Hillary is out of touch with poor Americans and the middle class. Warren, in his view, would carry on the Obama legacy after he leaves the White House.

…Bill Clinton has worried for some time about Obama backing another candidate, as I revealed in my book Blood Feud [Regnery Publishing].

"I’ve heard from [Democratic] state committeemen about Obama’s preference in ’16," Bill confided to several of his close friends. "And they tell me that he’s looking around for a candidate who’s just like him. Someone relatively unknown. Someone with a fresh face. He wants to clone himself-- to find his Mini-Me."

…This person continued: "For the time being, the Obamas have decided not to broadcast the fact that they’ve tapped Warren as their chosen candidate. They are waiting until the moment is right, which will probably be after the midterm elections."

Sounds like this is a combination of a wing nut trying to sell his comic-book and Post publisher and Clinton ally Rupert Murdoch, trying to somehow make her sound palatable to the kinds of crackpots who get their news from Murdoch sources.