SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
neoliberal
The Corporate Centrists Cannot Hold: 'Big Tent' Democrats Cave Once More
The perils of unprincipled, performative so-called "resistance."
Nov 12, 2025
Wow, seriously? The Democrats are caving yet again? What was all that suffering and harm for, those 40-plus days of anxiety and uncertainty, all the lost Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, jobs, and income, the swelling lines at food banks and unemployment offices? After all that, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer enables a centrist cave-in by corporate Democrats, right as President Donald Trump and Republicans acknowledge they are “getting killed” politically by the shutdown and the erasure of essential benefits?
Democrats and progressives everywhere are shouting and screaming—WTF! And rightly so.
Just a week ago, the Democrats appeared ascendant, having run the electoral table on November 4. The “abundance” crowd was agog about the party’s “Big Tent” coalition, ranging from a democratic socialist mayor in New York City to centrist wins in Virginia and New Jersey. Now, that tent has caved, precisely because it is too big and lacks any core pillars. To paraphrase the great Joan Didion, the center cannot (and did not) hold.
Most of what I’d call the Enabling Eight who spearheaded the Democrats’ cave-in are established centrists or about to retire. Sens. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), and Angus King (I-Maine) are all center-right politicians who might as well be “moderate” Republicans. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) proclaimed that these cave-in enablers chose “principle over their personal politics”—but it’s likely the opposite. None of the senators who were likely deputized to vote Yes are up for reelection, most are in swing states, and put their political calculus above the principle of protecting healthcare for millions of Americans.
As Jeet Heer summed up in The Nation: “At a moment when the elections had left Republicans on the ropes, Democrats caved in exchange for a couple of months of government funding and a vote on healthcare that they are bound to lose, if Republicans even hold one. It’s hard to see that as much of a deal at all.” By agreeing to the capitulation, that handful of centrist Democratic Senators “are validating the cynical view that the shutdown was simply a stunt to hurt Republicans in the off-cycle elections.”
From the Mamdani miracle in New York City on November 4 to the Enabling Eight in the US Senate just six days later, the Democratic Party’s huge internal contradictions have been on full display.
Adding further injury to the insult, Robert Reich pointed out, “There’s no guarantee that Trump’s White House will go along. In fact, it’s clear that the White House will dig in on all sorts of programs Democrats support.” Now that they’ve willingly erased their own leverage, Democrats have zero bargaining power on anything. In the name of ending the harm of the shutdown, they voluntarily squandered their one shot at forcing Republican concessions and lessening harm to millions of Americans. It’s not only shameful, but also downright bizarre and pathetic.
You could see the Democrats’ cave coming from a mile away. Not only have they caved so many times before—there was never a clear winnable strategy, beyond punishing Republicans politically for their attacks on healthcare, food stamps, and other essential human life supports. The Democrats exacted their little pound of flesh with some hopeful wins on November 4—then they folded up their tent and squandered whatever inspirational energy and momentum those wins gained.
Sunday, as news of the collapse broke over social media, former Ohio state Rep. Nina Turner crystallized it cogently: “Tonight is a glaring reminder that gerrymandering this spineless party into power isn’t a viable fight for democracy. It further erodes democracy while allowing Democrats in Congress to have even less of a backbone. Fight for fair maps. Organize the working class.”
Indeed, the cave-in reveals the precarity of the Democrats’ generally tepid and wavering resistance. Even when they have resisted, it’s been tactical and lacking any inspiring core principles. There is a real danger in the Democrats relying on gerrymandering, redistricting, and performative “resistance” that sells out both constituents and principles. Voters and activists must keep demanding a party that inspires, engages, and mobilizes working-class power. Don’t let unprincipled, unreliable centrism be the Democrats’ “Big Tent” pillar.
The Democratic Party has proven itself unable and unwilling to be a real opposition party. When the “opposition party” keeps flailing and failing, what do we do? Just keep electing more of them? Plow yet more time, energy, money, heart, and soul into a party that continues to squander it all?
Is this the “end of the Democrats” as a Newsweek column surmised? Certainly not in the immediate term—but it’s yet another final straw for many. At the very moment that Democrats seemed, at last, ready to stand up and fight the hideously fascistic Trump administration, and just as they seized momentum and some political capital, they threw it down the drain.
Indivisible, which has been reliably supportive of Democrats, is sounding the alarm, “launching the biggest Democratic primary program we’ve ever run,” cofounder Ezra Levin announced, adding, “The only path to a real opposition party is through a cleansing primary season.” That fight has already begun with fast-spreading calls for Schumer to step aside as Senate minority leader and will rapidly pick up steam as more candidates jump into the fray.
The same energy and exasperation with the establishment that powered Mamdani to victory is now erupting over the Democrats’ cave.
Even one of the more prominent November 4 victories is problematic and should cause us to demand better. California’s Prop. 50, essentially a voter-approved temporary redistricting to counter Texas’ less-democratic gerrymandering, while perhaps necessary in the moment, is merely a tactical move that offers voters nothing beyond electoral chess or checkers. The party needs to embrace a bold, economic populist vision and program that can inspire and mobilize working-class, middle-class, and lower-income voters—something substantially more than just defending a foundering healthcare system and food assistance that barely keeps people going.
Tactical redistricting and fighting to preserve a fragile and insufficient status quo cannot be the Democrats’ calling cards. It’s time for another progressive uprising within and beyond the Democratic Party. Remember Bernie Sanders’ (I-Vt.) “political revolution?” It seems a distant memory amid the necessary, urgent focus on combating Trump’s vicious and vile fascism and racism.
Zohran Mamdani’s remarkable victory in New York City has reignited progressive hopes nationwide. Polling shows Mamdani’s policies resonate far beyond the Big Apple. In a recent YouGov survey of voters nationwide, 69% supported raising taxes on corporations and millionaires; 66% supported implementing free childcare for every child ages 6 weeks to 5 years; 65% supported freezing rent for lower-income tenants; and 56% supported raising the minimum wage to $30 by 2030.
A “big tent” may sound nice and may be necessary up to a point—every winning campaign involves a coalition, not just a core base—but it depends on who the tent is for and how big and broad it is. Stretched too wide and thin, lacking a core foundation, a “big tent” can easily collapse when its pillars are so malleable.
This problem goes beyond the shutdown and affects the identity of the party itself. When you have a party with such vast disagreements within it, ranging from fiscal conservatives and neoliberals to progressives—what does the party stand for, beyond the most basic notions of democracy? How can the party stand for and with working-class people when many of its leaders promote policies that alienate those voters?
In the short-term, it may be enough for the Democrats to unite around protecting democracy and the Constitution, but that will not be a lasting coalition unless the party offers real economic solutions and vision. On economic policy, the differences between democratic socialists and corporate neoliberals or fiscal conservatives are nearly as wide as those with the GOP. We are talking about the difference between whether we tax corporations and the rich fairly to address poverty, homelessness, hunger, and other critical human needs. We are talking about the difference between a healthcare plan that enables corporate profits and one that prioritizes human needs.
In the space of one week, we’ve seen the perils of the Democrats’ ill-defined, precariously erected “Big Tent.” From the Mamdani miracle in New York City on November 4 to the Enabling Eight in the US Senate just six days later, the Democratic Party’s huge internal contradictions have been on full display. Whether or how these contradictions get resolved, and for whose benefit, remains an open question and an ongoing battle. As the midterms hurtle closer, we should be wary of re-erecting a Democratic tent whose wobbly center cannot hold.
On the more hopeful side of this ledger, there is a political wildfire afoot nationwide—some are calling it a Democratic “Tea” Party. Millions are fed up, not only with Trump but with the stultifying Democratic establishment. The same energy and exasperation with the establishment that powered Mamdani to victory is now erupting over the Democrats’ cave. The surging energies of the 7 million people who marched nationwide in the latest “No Kings” protests have intensified pressure on the Democrats to mount a more serious and sustained resistance to Trump. While the cave has collapsed the party’s momentary momentum, it could now give rise to greater progressive uprising and a rebellion tilting toward that political revolution.
One can, and should, hope.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Neither Snow, Nor Rain, Nor Sleet, Nor DOGE
Help family farmers and other rural folks defend a strong public U.S. Postal Service from the Trump administration’s attacks.
Mar 22, 2025
Since 1775 when Benjamin Franklin became the very first postmaster general, the United States Postal Service has faithfully fulfilled the many lofty goals that are now inscribed outside the entrance of the U.S. Postal Museum in Washington D.C.: “Bond of the Scattered Family; Enlarger of the Common Life; Carrier of News and Knowledge; Instrument of Trade and Commerce.”
Affordable universal reliable communication is not something many people can take for granted. In fact, the USPS was such a great American idea (like our national park system) that it has since been replicated across the globe. Under the pretense that the USPS is “bankrupt,” though, President Donald Trump and other neoliberal free marketeers are hellbent on imposing an austerity program and ultimately privatizing this vital public service.
During Trump’s last stint in the White House, USPS was forced to shutter half of its mail processing centers, leading to longer delivery times, and 10% of the nation’s post offices, mostly in rural towns, were put on the auction block. Despite such, the USPS continues to have some of the highest public approval ratings of any federal government agency. After all, who else can you trust to make sure you get your seed orders or drug prescriptions in a timely fashion?
Now is the time to speak up and insure the proud iconic eagle of the USPS is not replaced by some anemic vulture version.
How did this quite preventable (and orchestrated) mugging of the USPS come about? Well, one needs to go back a few decades when the government first opened the door for corporate competitors to undermine the viability of the USPS. At just 73 cents to deliver a first class letter, USPS rates remain among the lowest in the industrialized world. Given the surge in packages, accelerated by the pandemic, private outfits like Fedex and Amazon are now allowed to mooch off the USPS’ amazing efficiency to help deliver their own packages (saving themselves up to 75%). Contrary to some naysayers, the USPS does not get a dime from U.S. taxpayers—it provides a valuable public service at cost to consumers. So attacks on the USPS claiming it is “horribly wasteful” are just flat out wrong.
The USPS is also hamstrung from taking advantage of other ways to expand its services that many people, especially rural folks, desperately need. For example, the USPS still offers money orders, but many other countries’ postal systems offer a much wider range of popular financial services such as checking and savings accounts, even low-interest loans. One recent study found that the USPS could earn an extra $8-9 billion per year just by providing basic banking options to the millions of Americans who now subsist on the fringes of the financial system. It is no surprise that Wells Fargo is drooling over the possible demise of USPS (as revealed in a recently leaked internal memo), since they hardly want any other option for those now subject to their predatory lending practices.
Now is the time to speak up and insure the proud iconic eagle of the USPS is not replaced by some anemic vulture version. Family Farm Defenders is among dozens of organizations that have joined the Grand Alliance to Save Our Public Postal Service. And just like many family farmers rely upon cooperatives for their collective bargaining against agribusiness, postal workers also deserve to have their labor rights respected as fully unionized federal employees. Please contact your elected officials to insure the future of USPS as a vital public good, and next time you are at the post office thank the workers for their essential service! As the unofficial motto of the USPS goes: “Neither snow, nor rain, nor heat, nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.” Neither should DOGE!
Keep ReadingShow Less
Defeating Fascism Our Top Priority Today: Long Before and Far Beyond One Election
If we don't defeat fascism today, we set our progressive movement back during a moment of history in which we don't have a minute to spare.
Nov 05, 2024
It is both complicated and simple.
Liberation is not voting. Voting is a tool. Liberation is the ability to lawfully declare and defend the full humanity of everyone. This election is not about liberation. No single election can or ever will be. This election is about defense and blocking the most immediate threat to our survival so our social movements can continue to struggle toward winning everything our people need to live good lives.
In 2020 when our coalition of social movements defeated former U.S. President Donald Trump, we not only blocked his second term, but we made room for what immediately followed. When President Joe Biden took office in 202, his day one executive orders included rescinding Trump's Muslim ban, canceling construction on the Keystone pipeline, implementing and extending moratoria on deportations and evictions, rejoining the Paris climate agreement, and firing the anti-union lawyer Trump appointed as the general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board. And beyond that, social movements were able to pressure Biden to forgive 175 billion dollars in student loan debt. It mattered then and it matters now who will be president. Not to mention the actual progressive policies that cities and states have been able to pass during this period. Our movements will be better positioned to win more things if we defeat Trump.
And that’s not the lesser of two evils; it’s a strategy. If the coalition to defeat Trump and elect Harris wins, that means we are less likely to lose more Supreme Court justice seats, which means legally we won’t be less human under the eyes of the law.
I'm saying I'm voting for Kamala Harris because all of what Trump represents and will deliver is bad for our movement.
Y'all, fascism has a definition. Fundamentally, fascism is a far-right authoritarian political movement aimed at controlling government. We don't currently live under fascism, corporate Democrats are neoliberal and not liberatory but they're not actually fascists. Trump and MAGA Republicans are fascists because they lie about the legitimacy of elections that they don’t win and have shown they will attempt coups and set fires to ballot boxes and threaten election workers. Trump and MAGA Republicans know their policies are devastating for everyone except billionaires and that their policies don’t actually have the support of the majority of people, so they can’t actually control government without violence - i.e., if they allow democracy to continue. They understand that what our social movements have won is an obstacle to implementing the policies they want.
So basically, I'm saying I'm voting for Kamala Harris because all of what Trump represents and will deliver is bad for our movement. Having a fascist president will destroy (astronomically) more lives than having a neoliberal capitalist president. And because I made a lifetime commitment to ensure that our people are recognized as full humans, I have developed politically to not abandon options that get us closer to or push us away from that commitment. Because my goal is liberation, like it is for so many of you, and because we simply do not (yet) have the political power to influence (let alone make) liberatory decisions/policies/laws (in perpetuity), I’ve come to the conclusion (because preserving life is always my immediate goal and liberation is my north star), that even when the options are unsavory (which is not new, they have always been at the presidential level), a choice to take action within the political system we all live in, must be made.
It is complicated. And it is simple.
Politically, we are and have been in the realm of strategies vs. strategies. Our opposition: capitalist, patriarchal, white supremacist goal since 1865 is to strip away every hard-fought and strategically won right from our freedom movement—like the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments. More recently, these forces have been joined by evangelical Christans in repealing Roe v. Wade. And striking key provisions from the Voting Rights Act. That’s their overarching strategy. That’s the great America our opposition wants. And it is complicated and it is simple. And for 159 years our freedom movement has been utilizing our own (one of many, I might add) strategy to fight back. Yes, elections and voting. There are millions of people who now have the right to vote, not because it was given, but because it was a strategy that won. A political campaign that countless numbers of people across many southern states, throughout multiple decades, dedicated innumerable hours to. Because our ancestors in political struggle understood 159 years ago that elections and voting are a brilliant vehicle to use as we move towards our ultimate goal of liberation.
Y’all. It is complicated. And it is simple. They are both imperialist. One a fascist imperialist and the other a capitalist imperialist. And there is an ocean of difference between the two.
And we might be in the fourth quarter of humanity. I am not being alarmist or hyperbolic when I say this. We have limited time to decrease carbon emissions such that the planet doesn't reach a climate "tipping point" from which humanity cannot recover. We can't lose another four years, and we may lose way, way more than four years, because every time Republicans gain power, they change the rules of the game in order to move closer to one-party, minority rule that can't be challenged through democratic channels (fascism). So we have to be able to shift climate policy—but we're potentially headed into a political reality where everyday people won't be able to impact any policies.
It isn’t true that every time when we fight, we win, but when we don’t fight, we’ll definitely lose.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular