Mediaboss Marketing

Democrats controlled the House and Senate, but they dont claim to have a super majority

The dramatic architecture of the rotunda of the Colorado State Capitol is enhanced through a fisheye lens in Denver. (David Zalubowski/Associated Press file)

The Red Room of Doom. Thats the nickname one House Democrat gave the state Senate this past session. Others joked that the chamber with its red wallpaper, carpet and ceiling was where progressive bills went to die.

While Democrats held a near super majority at the Colorado Legislature this session, closely divided committees in the state Senate frequently blocked or watered down some of the progressive priorities.

And that inspired one supporter of some of those policies to wonder why why didnt such big Democratic majorities translate into bigger margins on Senate committees in particular?

Coming down to a single vote

Alex Nelson, a public schoolteacher in Denver, is passionate about affordable housing. He visited the state Capitol this spring to back several Democratic housing bills and testify in committee.

Nelson sees the impact that the lack of affordable housing has on schools, with students and families being priced out and having to move away, and also people choosing to have fewer children.

Housing costs, costs of living are so high that we see diminishing enrollment every single year, which is leading to closure, consolidation, all sorts of things like that.

The issue also affects teachers.

Friends in the teaching profession have a hard time accessing affordable housing, Nelson said. A couple of my friends have left the state because of housing costs.

Given how many people are struggling with housing, Nelson said he was surprised when measures like a proposal to allow local communities to enact rent control narrowly died in a Senate committee. It failed on a 4-3 vote.

I was thinking just about how many bills in the Colorado Senate came down to a single vote of either passage or failure, said Nelson. The situation led him to wonder, why those committees had only a single vote majority when the members on the floor held almost two thirds (of the seats)? ... Is that a decision made by leadership?

On seven out of the state Senates 10 committees this year, Democrats only had a one-vote advantage. Those narrow margins made it possible for a single moderate member to side with Republicans to vote down a bill, or to demand significant changes in order to win passage.

Committee make-up more than a numbers game

Nelson was on the right track with his question about who decides the committee makeup; that power rests in the hands of Democratic Senate Majority Leader Dominick Moreno. He appoints lawmakers to committees and decides on each panels size and political split.

The committee makeup is dictated by the political makeup of the chamber as a whole, he said. The rule says that the committee makeup has to be in rough proportion to the number of seats you occupy in the Senate chamber.

But because its only a rough proportion, Moreno still has leeway on each committee. Moreno acknowledges he could have given Democrats a bigger advantage on some committees, but said he doesnt have enough members to pad out all of them and that lawmakers individual expertise played a significant role in his choices.

The situation put a spotlight on several of the Senates more moderate members, like Democrat Dylan Roberts. Roberts, who was the key no vote on the rent control bill, was a swing vote on three different committees.

I reminded bill sponsors who were frustrated at my position that I didn't make the committee assignments, said Roberts. I didn't make the makeup of the committees. I was assigned to those committees, and I'm just doing my job. I got sent here by my district, not by a political party and not by a political philosophy.

Roberts lives in Avon and represents a mountain district where Democrats hold a less than seven point advantage, according to redistricting maps. He said he scrutinizes every piece of legislation.

The goal is collaboration and trying to make bills better. But there were several policies where I just couldn't get there.

Republican lawmakers said they were more than happy the Senate acted as a moderating force.

We haven't killed that many bills, said GOP Sen. Perry Will in the final weeks of session. But some of the bills that need to go away, it went away. I think it's great and I think it's much needed.

On the House side, where committees were much more steeply tilted in Democrats favor, Republicans said they were grateful that the Senate at times blocked policies they lacked the power to stop.

There were Democrats that destroyed bills that would not be good for Colorado. It's a teamwork effort here, said Republican Rep. Ron Weinberg who passed many bipartisan bills this session.

Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen said even though the GOP is at a disadvantage he thinks they are still punching above our weight to kill bad policy ideas. We are actually trying to hold the ideals of freedom for individuals to live the lives they want to live and the way they want to live them.

Progressive frustrations

The narrow committee splits didnt just result in more moderate senators voting down progressive bills; in many cases, they were able to get concessions and amendments in exchange for their support.

For progressives, the Senate results were a source of frustration throughout the session. They argue that Democrats surprising success last November the party picked up legislative seats in a year many analysts expected them to lose some show that they have a mandate to make big moves.

Voters are wanting something bigger and bolder. And we tried and that's not what's happening, said Democratic Rep. Lorena Garcia who is in her first year at the Capitol. Garcia believes voters elected Democrats to do more this year on housing and criminal justice, in particular. But several key bills on those topics were defeated.

However, Moreno defended the committee makeup as a good reflection of the Senates general views. He notes that even when progressive bills did get to the Senate floor, they still didnt have the votes to pass.

For instance, a bill to make it harder for landlords to evict people on month to month leases lingered on the calendar and ultimately ran out of time, in part because it lacked the support to move forward. The Senate also gutted a bill that would have prevented prosecutions of 10- to 12-year-olds, except in homicide cases. And when a proposal to allow local communities to set up supervised sites for safe drug use came up in a Senate committee, three Democrats joined Republicans in voting it down.

All of the policies managed to pass the House before hitting roadblocks in the Senate.

And it wasn't always progressive policies that struggled in the Senate. The governor's Land Use bill, which was sponsored by Moreno, also died in that chamber. The Senate watered down the bill significantly, setting up a showdown with the House, which passed a more robust version. In the end, the bill was dropped in the final hours of session for lack of Senate votes.

Yes, we have a historic majority, said Moreno. It doesn't mean that we have a super majority of progressive members. It means that everyone votes their own conscience in their own district.

Senate defenders also note that some progressive bills didnt even gain traction in the House. A proposed statewide assault weapons ban failed in its first committee after three Democrats joined Republicans to defeat it. The House also handily rejected a measure to mandate more predictable schedules for restaurant and retail workers.

Progressive Democrats say they plan to try again with many of these ideas next session.

And as for Alex Nelson, the teacher who started us looking into this issue he said hes glad to learn more about how the Legislature works, and is optimistic some of the housing proposals he supports will see more success down the road.

I tried to remind myself that these things take time and that the first go isn't always gonna be the one that gets you exactly what you want, he said.

To read more stories from Colorado Public Radio, visit http://www.cpr.org.

See the original post:
'Red Room of Doom' put brakes on some progressive priorities in ... - The Durango Herald

San Francisco Democrats have been called 'mean girls' after they banned a lesbian Asian from setting up a liberal club in the city.

Cyn Wang, who worked for the Obama Administration, attempted to set up a group called theWestside Family Democratic Club, but was stopped because the title contained the word 'family' and for backing a recall of a woke school board.

The Chinese immigrant has long been a Democrat, and on paper looks like the perfect candidate to represent a liberal group. Wang voted for Biden in 2020, labeled herself an intersectional feminist, and denounced the Republican Party as 'the biggest threat to our democracy.'

She also married a Mexican immigrant, who got her green card this month; runs a small family business and sends her daughter to a public school.

Wang was sure her club would be approved by the Democratic County Central Committee (DCCC) without incident, but when she and her other club members logged onto the Zoom meeting, they were sorely mistaken.

The group was met with backlash, accused of being racist, and even being secretly funded by Republicans.

'My mouth was agape,' Wang told the San Francisco Chronicle. 'Those allegations could not be more false.'

'Fighting systemic racism is one reason Im involved in local Democratic politics. To me, it lifted the veil on how narrow of a definition they have of what being a Democrat means.'

Even DCCC memberJanice Li said the meeting gave 'mean girl' mentality.

'Its that You cant sit with us mentality that makes me very uncomfortable with the state of San Francisco politics,' Li told the Chronicle. 'Its very: "Youre not even allowed in." Its very Mean Girls.'

San Francisco politics have always been a battle ground and the group planned on getting more voters registers inDistricts One, Four and Seven, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, and they wanted families to get more involved, rather than ditching the city - hence why family was in their club's name.

Wang wanted a more welcoming party for families, especially on the westside, where very few clubs existed. She even helped start the San Francisco Parent Coalition, which focused on recalling two of three school board members last year and a few parents she met there helped found her new club.

The club wanted to focus on improving the public school system, cleaning up the streets, getting more houses built, and strengthening the public transportation in the city - all causes local Democrats supported.

In addition, they met all the requirements to be chartered - a pointHoney Mahogany, a DCCC chairman, highlighted.

Despite that, they were met with negativity and a local tenant activist even told them: 'F**k you.'

'F you, Westside Family Democratic Club!'Jordan Davis said at the meeting. 'I yield my time! F you!'

Davis has been to several political events in San Francisco and always used strong language and often left the podium yelling obscenities.

Local Brandee Marckmann, who opposed the school board recall, starkly accused them of being conservative: 'I know a Republican when I see one.'

DCCC members were reportedly grillingParag Gupta - one of the parents from the parent coalition who helped found the westside club - who was left shocked by the harsh questioning.

They asked him their income levels, racial backgrounds, sexual orientations, gender identities, and even if they voted on the school board recall.

'Were just starting out,' Gupta told the DCCC. 'We seek to be an inclusive club, and we seek to be representative of all demographics, genders, races and inclusive of all families. If someone considers themselves a family, we consider them a family.'

Despite his attempt to reconcile the criticism, the DCCC garnered enough votes to shut them down temporarily - even though not all members voted.

Keith Baraka, a DCCC member,abstained from voting due to the public commenters concerns, but later told the Chronicle that he had spoken with Wang and would support the group if they went up for charter again.

Peter Gallotta, who voted to table the chartering, said he questioned why the club wanted to be chartered rather than just become an advocacy group.

'I think we need to reform our application process so we have more, and better, information as members before we give a stamp of approval,' he told the Chronicle.

Mahogany, the only member to defend the group, said another charter vote will be set up soon.

Excerpt from:
San Fran progressives BAN lesbian Asian from setting up Dem club because title had 'family' in it - Daily Mail

Brandon Johnson has been portrayed as the most left-leaning, progressive mayor Chicago has ever had.

His early appointments tell a different story about how Chicagos 57th mayor might govern.

They suggest Johnson may turn out to be a pragmatic progressive, more concerned about the art of the possible and getting things done than he is about staying true to ultra-liberal principles.

So far, Johnson has made four key appointments: Rich Guidice as the all-important chief-of-staff; state Sen. Cristina Pacione-Zayas as Guidices deputy; John Roberson as chief operating officer; and Fred Waller as interim Chicago Police superintendent.

The mayor-elect has also asked most of Mayor Lori Lightfoots department heads and agency chiefs to stay on, at least for a few months, saying he is not ready to clean house.

Chief Financial Officer Jennie Bennett has told Johnsons transition team she intends to follow Mayor Lori Lightfoot out the door.

Sources said three candidates are in the running to replace her: Jill Jaworski, managing director of PFM Financial Advisers; Euriah Bennett, director of municipal finance at Citigroup in Atlanta; and Jack Brofman, Jennie Bennetts top deputy.

Any of them would likely be reassuring to Wall Street and to business leaders dead set against Johnsons proposal to impose $800 million in new or increased taxes to bankroll social programs that form the cornerstone of his anti-violence strategy.

Johnson has been reaching out to business leaders since the election to smooth those ruffled feathers and invite alternatives to his business tax proposals.

Guidice and Roberson are government lifers who cut their teeth under former Mayor Richard M. Daley.

Waller worked his way up from patrol officer to chief of patrol, chief of operations and third in command of the Chicago Police Department during a 34-year career that began under former Mayor Harold Washington and his Police Supt. Fred Rice.

Only Pacione Zayas shares Johnsons progressive roots.

She was chosen in 2020 to fill the Senate vacancy created by the election of Circuit Court Clerk Iris Martinez. Before that, she led the Erickson Institutes Policy and Leadership Department. Shes an ally of Ald. Carlos Ramirez-Rosa (35th), chairman of the City Councils Democratic Socialist Caucus.

State Sen. Cristina H. Pacione-Zayas speaks at a special session for reproductive health rights after news of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade last year.

Brian Rich/Sun-Times file

The Waller appointment sent a message to demoralized, overworked and under-appreciated officers who have been retiring in droves.

Johnson spent the entire campaign distancing himself from his history of supporting the concept of defunding the police. Now, as mayor-elect, he needed to demonstrate to officers whose union supported his opponent, Paul Vallas that he would have their backs.

The selections of Guidice and Roberson were designed to reassure a business community that backed and bankrolled Vallas and the nearly two dozen Council members who also supported Johnsons runoff opponent.

Rich Guidice (second from left), then first deputy of the citys Office of Emergency Management and Communications, attends the Chicago Police Department roll call meeting at Taste of Chicago in 2018.

Ashlee Rezin/Sun-Times file

Their extensive government experience is expected to prove critical to Johnson, a Cook County commissioner who lacks executive and city government experience.

Jason Lee, a senior adviser to Johnsons mayoral campaign and transition team, said anyone surprised by the early appointments wasnt listening closely enough to what the mayor-elect was saying during the campaign.

Lee noted Johnson began his career in the office of Don Harmon of Oak Park, now president of the Illinois Senate. Johnson also worked for then-Ald. Deborah Graham (29th) before spending time as a teacher and a paid organizer for the Chicago Teachers Union.

What he tried to communicate on the campaign trail which people might have glossed over because of some of the other narratives was collaborative, compassionate and competent. Those were the three Cs that he used to articulate his vision for hires and all of the hires hes made so far fit those three Cs, Lee said.

John Roberson, shown in 2004 at OHare Airport after being named Chicagos aviation commissioner.

John H. White/Chicago Sun-Times-file

Lee noted 75% of Chicago voters believe the city was headed in the wrong direction. Johnson is determined to deliver that change, he said.

But to make change, you have to understand the system you wish to change. You have to have a deep, intimate knowledge of whats possible, what can wait, what can be pushed. So you build a team that has the vision for transformation, but also the know-how to make that transformation real while simultaneously maintaining the core functions of the city residents rely upon, Lee said.

After the 2008 election of Barack Obama, then-U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.) famously said, A new president must govern from the middle.

Lee was asked whether Johnson shares Pelosis philosophy about the need to govern from the middle and be more pragmatic than progressive.

Pragmatism, to me, is essential to any effective progressivism. All pragmatism says is, I have a keen understanding of the reality of what it takes to get things done, and I will organize myself and my actions around that so I can be an effective progressive, said Lee. whose mother is U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, (D-Texas), a 28-year congressional veteran now running for mayor of Houston.

Being a progressive is not just about saying things. Its about doing things.

Lee noted city government is a giant bureaucracy, often resistant to change. To make substantive change, you need people with vision about what is needed, what is possible and understand how to ... navigate the opportunities to move the ball forward, he said.

If you can do it without unnecessary de-stabilization, then you will build political consensus. If theres too much de-stabilization, then you lose the political support needed for everything else.

David Greising, president and CEO of the Better Government Association, wrote a column for the Chicago Tribune sounding the alarm about what he called the scant government experience and union roots of some of Johnsons early transition team choices.

They included members of a Service Employees International Union whose affiliates were Johnsons second-largest campaign contributor.

But Greising acknowledged to the Sun-Times he might have jumped to the wrong conclusion and put too much stock in the transition team, since it is less important than who will govern alongside the new mayor.

I went at him fairly hard saying, These people arent ready for prime time. I did point out and Im glad that theres more to come. Well, the more to come part of it has been pretty impressive. It says to us that Brandon Johnson may be more of a pragmatist than he appeared to be as a candidate. And the extent to which he is able to be both a pragmatist and a progressive will be a big factor in determining whether he is successful as a mayor, Greising said.

Hes aware of where his deficits or lack of experience as a manager may need some shoring up. And he seems to be filling that with people who are qualified to be significant contributors to the administration. If he listens to these people and takes on board their expertise and their more mainstream views and matches that up with where hes coming from, it could be quite an interesting and successful administration.

Ald. Brian Hopkins (2nd), who endorsed Vallas, was equally encouraged.

Hes trying to strike a balance. Hes clearly determined not to make the mistakes of the previous mayor and alienate people, Hopkins said.

Politics is a game of addition. So hes trying to add to his progressive, Socialist base by appealing to the more moderate wing of the Democratic Party.

Greising warned the pragmatic path Johnson appears to be paving is not without political risk. He pointed to the serious political price Mayor Lori Lightfoot paid for, as he put it, walking away from her progressive image.

During Round One of the mayoral sweepstakes, Johnson accused Lightfoot of breaking every single promise she made to progressive voters.

The hopes and desires of working families have been ignored. This is what happens when you are not legitimately connected to the progressive movement. Its not a surprise to me that she broke those promisesbecause she never believed them from the beginning,Johnson told the Sun-Times.

Mayor-elect Brandon Johnson introduces former CPD third-in-command Fred Waller as his choice to be interim police superintendent, effective May 15.

Ashlee Rezin/Sun-Times file

I dont break promises. I will be the bonafide progressive in this race who can organize and collaborate in a way that actually gets us to the type of economic justice that this city needs.

Johnsons bill of particulars against Lightfoot included her about face on an elected school board and her broken promises to reopen shuttered mental health clinics and raise the real-estate transfer tax on high-end home sales to create a dedicated revenue source to reduce homelessness and create affordable housing.

He also cited Lightfoots handling of the car-shredding operation seeking to relocate from Lincoln Park to a predominantly Black and Latino area on the Southeast Side.

Lightfoots administration initially backed the move, triggering an ongoing federal civil rights investigation. The city health department eventually denied the operating permit. Johnson slammed an administration that was willing to set up a toxic waste dump ... where Black folks and Brown folks reside.

If Johnson is unable to deliver on all of his progressive promises, including that real estate transfer tax which needs approval from state lawmakers as well as a financial transaction tax opposed by Gov. J.B. Pritzker Greising said the new mayor will have to rely on his formidable communication skills.

Progressives tend to be idealists. They often are not very realistic about what they demand and expect. But its his job to bring them along, Greising said.

Comparing Johnson to Lightfoot, Greising said: Hes a really good communicator, and she was not. What Lightfoot failed to do was communicate the whys and wherefores of those decisions. What he does best is communicate. Hell have a better chance of keeping the progressives with him even if he has to make pragmatic compromises along the way.

Also weighing in Johnsons favor is his progressive roots. Hes one of them, Greising said.

Unlike Lightfoot, he added: Hes not a corporate lawyer.

Excerpt from:
Brandon Johnsons early appointments suggest hell be a pragmatic ... - Chicago Sun-Times

Mr. Buffett parts company from boardroom progressives for two reasons, one having to do with style, the other substance. He is fiercely independent, not surprisingly for a contrarian investor. He takes pains to control his agenda; over the years, friends who asked for even a token contribution to a pet cause were typically disappointed. In his mid-70s, Mr. Buffett announced he would leave the bulk of his estate to the foundation run by his friend Bill Gates. Other than that, he does not outsource his political or social convictions.

This inner-directed style colors everything about Berkshire. Unlike other C.E.O.s, Mr. Buffett does not employ handlers or spokespeople. Calls are typically answered in seconds, not hours. Even Berkshires proxy statement reflects Mr. Buffetts minimalism (many are weighty tomes; Berkshires is 19 pages).

Although Berkshire is a corporate octopus with 383,000 employees and more than 60 operating groups everything from energy and manufacturing to residential brokerage and a premium candy brand only 26 employees work in the corporate office. It eschews corporatewide directives and procedures, letting the units run with near autonomy.

Two of its businesses, Berkshire Hathaway Energy and BNSF Railway, account for more than 90 percent of the companys fossil fuels consumption; each discloses its carbon footprint and a timeline for reduction. Berkshire Energy, which serves 12 million customers, says half of its electricity stems from noncarbon fuels. (About 40 percent of electricity in the United States is generated using zero-carbon fuels.) Berkshire Energy has invested more than $30 billion in renewables, much of it on infrastructure to, as Mr. Buffett puts it, get power from where the wind blows to where people live. Meanwhile, it has been shuttering coal facilities.

But Mr. Buffett rejects what he regards as implausible deadlines, mocking with studied impartiality both defenders of the old order and unrealistic visionaries desiring an instantly new world. He rebuffs the idea that the insurance unit, for example, should monitor the carbon use of its customers. The insurance subsidiary, the proxy notes, is in the business of gauging risk. In terms of the potential effect on profits the reason for securities disclosure Mr. Buffett does not distinguish politically charged categories such as climate from other risks. He bristles at the idea of subjecting Berkshires operating groups, which have vastly different energy profiles, to a boilerplate.

We dont want to be preparing a lot of reports and asking 60 subsidiaries each to do something, Mr. Buffett said at a past meeting. Were not going to spend the time of the people at Berkshire Hathaway Energy responding to questionnaires or trying to score better with somebody that is working on that. He noted that corporate America is worried about activists stirring up controversy, but at Berkshire, where Mr. Buffett owns 31.6 percent of the voting stock, we dont have to worry about that.

Mr. Buffett has said his critics do not read the companys disclosures, and he has a point. While Berkshire is attacked for not disclosing enough on diversity, the company, as required, provides reams of data to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which it makes public (58 percent of its insurance work force is female; 45 percent in service/retail/distribution identify as diverse). But it declines to issue a separate report on its diversity efforts. And few corporations would proclaim, as Berkshire does, that it does not have a policy on how diversity affects consideration of board nominees.

The rest is here:
Opinion | Why Warren Buffett Runs Berkshire Hathaway His Way - The New York Times

But this dust-up is actually more interesting than that, because it involves a notable change in the wider political landscape: The rise of the populist right means there are more Republicans saying positive things about traditionally left positions on issues like trade and corporate power.

Given that many of those populists have racial and social views that progressives find appalling, the question across Washingtons progressive organizations is: Whats the right way to think about working with them or even just praising their break from GOP orthodoxy? So far, theres little consensus on the question, and a high danger of vitriol in cases where it comes up, even when the cases dont involve a lightning-rod like Carlson.

To rewind a bit: The 1,200-word essay that kicked off the fireworks, by writers Lee Harris and Luke Goldstein, spent little time on the ousted Fox hosts incendiary racial and cultural statements, but instead lingered on his professed disdain for mainstream American elites. Carlsons insistent distrust of his powerful guests acts as a solvent to authority, they wrote, noting his evolution from libertarian to rejecting many of the free-market doctrines hed previously espoused.

Among other things, the piece cited his skepticism about free trade, his monologues against monopolistic Big Tech firms, and a viral segment about potential job losses from self-driving cars. It also noted that he attacked establishmentarian GOP leaders over their support for the Ukraine war.

Its safe to say that the immediate social media reaction did not give the pair points for originality.

Disgraceful and stupid, tweeted Prospect alum Joshua Micah Marshall of Talking Points Memo. Genuinely revolting, added Zachary Carter, the journalist and John Maynard Keynes biographer. The whitewashing of Tucker Carlson has begun, said The Bulwarks Will Saletan.

Much of the blowback focused, appropriately, on the actual column, with a chorus of critics arguing quite convincingly that Harris and Goldstein had been snookered that Carlson was a phony populist, part of a long American tradition of demagogues like George Wallace pretending to fight economic elites when they really want to just pick on some out-group of fellow citizens.

Fair enough. But at least some of the criticism moved beyond engaging on the arguments merits (or lack thereof) and instead cast doubt on the motivations of the authors themselves, suggesting something more sinister might be afoot.

How did these writers, who are either too dumb to notice Carlsons virulently racist, sexist & anti-labor politics, or whose own politics are so vile that they dont care, ever get hired by the Prospect in the first place?, tweeted writer Kathleen Geier.

A day later, amid the incoming flak, Prospect editor David Dayen issued a statement of his own, saying the piece had missed the mark. It is my job as editor to make sure that whatever journalism or opinion we publish upholds our mission, he wrote. I dont think we quite got there with this story.

The magazine left the original essay in place on its site, but soon published a scathing rebuttal by two other Prospect writers. The act of distancing, naturally, invited a whole new barrage of incoming criticism from people who accused Dayen of cowering before the online rage.

They should have gotten a raise, Ruy Teixeira, the longtime progressive Washington think-tank figure, told me this week, referring to Harris and Goldstein. Instead they brought the hammer down. They got denounced by their own editor, denounced by their own comrades on their staff for what I actually thought was a pretty good article, the kind of article that wasnt completely predictable and made you think.

Harris declined comment; Goldstein did not respond to a message. Dayen, too, declined to be quoted, except to say that the writers werent reprimanded for the story, that their status at the magazine is unchanged and theyll keep writing about whatever interests them including on places where the right and left overlap. The magazine has in fact done a fair amount of that with no particular blowback, including putting Donald Trumps trade chief, Robert Lighthizer, on its cover for a largely laudatory feature in 2019.

Teixeira, of course, is no stranger to making this sort of allegation about intellectual narrowness in the progressive ecosystem. Last year, he left the Center for American Progress and took a perch at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, saying that his politics hadnt changed (he still refers to himself as a social democrat) but that he couldnt stand the narrow focus on identity that he said permeated his former world.

If you missed that saga, you can be forgiven. Theres a whole librarys worth of stories about the alienation of mostly older left-wing figures from post-collegiates in think tanks or advocacy groups, a divide that often involves disagreements over campus-style identity debates. (In one example, the Democratic Socialists of America canceled a speech by the celebrated left-wing academic Adolph Reed because some in the organization were upset that hed argued that the left must emphasize class over race.)

But that kind of incident feels different than what was going on last week.

In fact, for progressives, the debates like the fracas over the Carlson column could, perversely, be seen as a side-effect of good news. Instead of a furious argument over internal dissent against political tactics, it was a furious argument over (alleged) new external support for policy positions.

Even for folks who dont buy the idea that the market-skeptical bits of Carlsons schtick were at all genuine, its a situation thats presenting itself more frequently as elements of the GOP move beyond Reaganite positions and instead talk up things like opposition to monopolies, support for living family wages or protectionist treatment of embattled stateside manufacturing.

The challenge is that the rising GOP populists whose views on economic issues might appeal to progressives also often have social views that are way more extreme than the average Chamber of Commerce lifer. Sometimes, in fact, those social views may even be their motivator for their hostility to businesses. Witness the fulminations about woke capitalism.

One example of those complications popped up in POLITICO Magazines recent profile of antitrust advocate Matt Stoller. Stoller drew sharp criticism for his seeming warmth toward Republican Sen. Josh Hawley, who fist-pumped insurrectionists and led Senate efforts to overturn the 2020 election but has also lobbed grenades at monopolies. The stance has made Stoller a controversial figure on the left, even as his push for a crusade against monopoly has been embraced by the Biden administration.

Matt Stoller drew sharp criticism for his seeming warmth toward Republican Sen. Josh Hawley but has also lobbed grenades at monopolies.|Francis Chung/POLITICO

When we spoke this week, Stoller said it boils down to what politics is for.

They think politics is fundamentally a moral endeavor, he said when I asked him about people who disdain the idea of treating someone like Hawley as an acceptable partner. Theyre not shy about letting me know what they think. But I think that we have a lot more in common than a lot of people who are interested in politics assume. I have a different view of what politics is. For me, when I look at politics, I think about political economy as, like, the driving factor, and corporate power as the driving factor.

In a way, its an argument on the left that goes back to the popular front period of the 1930s, or further (in the Russian civil war, the Bolsheviks argued about making common cause with Islamic fighters from Central Asia, whose embrace of religion was distinctly non-Marxist).

Michael Kazin, the historian of American populism, says theres a long history of fuzziness about what constitutes left and right, which complicates the question of just who youll deem acceptable. Prominent opposition to big business in the Great Depression, he says, also included the likes of the antisemitic radio priest Charles Coughlin and the segregationist Louisiana Gov. Huey Long.

Kazin, whose newest book is a history of the Democratic Party, says hes sure Carlson is no fellow traveler and also thinks coming up with a standard for how people like Hawley should be embraced or rejected might also be a little premature given the political realities: Do you really think that Hawleys going to support anything Biden wants? Theres a wish to have a broad anti-corporate alliance, but in the end the constituencies are very different.

David Duhalde, chair for the Democratic Socialists of America Fund, told me that one way to slice it is a function of where you sit. A Senator like Bernie Sanders working with the libertarian Utah Republican Mike Lee to curb presidential war powers? With 100 voters in the Senate, he doesnt have much choice. A think tanker or essayist trying to be clever? Not so much. Im more sympathetic to what the pols are trying to do than to media figures trying to find nuance where there isnt any, he says.

And for at least some people closer to the grassroots, the tendency to police against associating with ideological undesirables is a sign of a bigger sickness in elite circles. Amber ALee Frost, a writer and longtime fixture of the far-left Chapo Trap House podcast, once wrote about giving a talk about the importance of union organizing before an audience of tech workers. During the question and answer session afterwards, a woman approached the mic to ask what they should do if someone from the alt-right wanted to join their union.

If that happens, Frost replied, it means youve won.

It was kind of a dead silence, she told me this week, a sign that shed said something deeply troubling.

Frost, unsurprisingly, was dismissive of both sides of the Carlson contretemps right wing populism is largely a cynical brand of lip service from a bunch of professional hucksters but says she finds the one tic in the debates about potential left-right overlap disappointingly familiar.

Theyre more invested in whos on their side than whats going on, she said of the people who take umbrage at the idea that left politics might someday lure people with dubious records. Theres this fear of contamination from the right, which betrays that these people are scared of the general population.

Read more:
The Right's Economic Populism Is Breaking Progressives' Brains - POLITICO