Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
17. This!
Sat Nov 16, 2013, 07:36 PM
Nov 2013
But the bigger problem is that speculation over who the presidential nominees will be three years from now ascribes too much power to whoever tops the ticket. For example, the question of whether Elizabeth Warren will challenge Hillary Clinton is really a proxy for discussing the future direction of the Democratic party. For five years, usually warring Democratic factions have been unified in revulsion toward the tea party’s growing dominance within the GOP. But the divide between the centrist, Clintonian wing and what the late Senator Paul Wellstone called the “Democratic wing of the Democratic Party” still simmers beneath the surface, and there will likely be a reckoning during the 2016 nominating process.

The reality is that the fight over the direction of the party will determine the ideological lean of the nominee, not the other way around. Presidential nominees tend to hew closely to their party’s median vote in Congress. If the Democrats end up adopting a more populist platform, than Clinton, if she runs, will move to the left regardless of who is challenging her. This kind of analysis is, of course, less fun than the horse race.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Nader should have run for Senator years ago Skink Nov 2013 #1
I am reminded of 2007-2008 and the "inevitability" of Hillary. NYC_SKP Nov 2013 #5
This message was self-deleted by its author BootinUp Nov 2013 #2
I am the first person to hate Nader DonCoquixote Nov 2013 #3
Ralph Nader was a really good product safety advocate.... Walk away Nov 2013 #4
I'd say Gore handed the presidency to the Republicans, Maedhros Nov 2013 #18
I don't see how ANY true progressive can win pangaia Nov 2013 #6
If she wanted to try, I think Liz Warren could have a good shot at winning the primary. NYC_SKP Nov 2013 #7
Liz is one person I would definitely go out and work for. pangaia Nov 2013 #11
Please, no more Clintons and no more Bushes. (n/t) spin Nov 2013 #8
here here. she is a corporatist, was hawk and she will bring all the bill people in. roguevalley Nov 2013 #9
I just firmly believe that we do not need any political dynasties in our nation, period! spin Nov 2013 #10
Now I like her. I'm sick of Nadir opening his BlueToTheBone Nov 2013 #12
Nader haters gonna' hate. [n/t] Maedhros Nov 2013 #19
Kick, thanks. Scuba Nov 2013 #13
I see the irony of a corporate sponsored Ms. Clinton getting the best of Citizens United ruling. rhett o rick Nov 2013 #14
Hillary is a solid investment for TPTB. NYC_SKP Nov 2013 #15
So do you get the irony? Citizens United was about corp-money to be used to torpedo her rhett o rick Nov 2013 #16
This! KoKo Nov 2013 #17
Bizzare bedfellows. I'd love to be a miniature drone for a week. nt adirondacker Nov 2013 #20
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Progressive Media Resources Group»"The Dynastic Hillar...»Reply #17