Becoming a far right party has not hurt the Republicans at the polls so far. We don't see many hand-wringing stories from the media and centerist Rs (are there any left?) about the right wing extremists. The party seems to be moving even further to the right each day.
And yet the media and centerist Ds focus on some issues within the Democratic party.
As I just posted the Trump-endorsed Senate candidate in NC is losing by 14 points to the Democrat. The extremism and incompetence of the Republican Party is definitely catching up to them. Also Republicans’ perceived strength is amplified by their heavy gerrymandering and by our unfair electoral college rules. Never forget Hillary beat Trump by nearly 2.9 million votes.
I won't forget that Clinton won the popular vote by more than Nixon's margin over Humphrey or Bush's margin over Gore, but I also won't ever forget that Trump beat Harris by almost 2,300,000 votes. That tells me that our biggest problem is the quality of our electorate and its willingness to vote for a convicted criminal, sexual predator, and insurrection out of a mindless belief that a man who was and is totally unfit and unqualified to be president promised them cheaper eggs and gasoline. That is not an electorate that we can expect to reliably support democracy in the future. Today, their disapproval of Trump centers more on inflation than any of his criminal behavior, disdain for the rule of law, violent racism, or obvious stupidity and ignorance. What that means is that if Trump weren't such and idiot, he could have avoided his trade war and the recent and ongoing war with Iran and today he might even have a net positive approval rating. His use of the violent deportation hit squads could have also been easily modified. Had he done those three things, he might well be sitting pretty today with the majority of Americans completely ignoring his ongoing crime spree. In this country, attention spans are short and priorities twisted among the majority of voters.
I tend to agree. Democracies are all about the electorate. Trump, for eaxample, is just one man with gargantuan flaws. But there are others just as bad as Trump. As long as they don't aspire to the presidency, they do relatively little harm. It is only when voters elect them to positions of power and influence that the harm is done.
Partha, that is true, but we only have two viable political parties. That means it will either be a Republican or a Democrat, which too often now means the lesser evil. I don't consider most Democrats to be evil, but a few are others are simply worthless. Fetterman is both evil and worthless. Yes, he caucuses with the Democrats, but on many important issues, especially confirmations, he votes with Trump. If he were simply ignoring partisanship and voting for competent nominees that would be one thing, but Trump doesn't appoint competent people, he appoints corrupt sycophants. If I manage to live until 2028, I will do whatever I can to unseat Fetterman. No, I won't support replacing him with a Republican, because I can't honestly identify a single Republican today that I believe should hold elective office. It's been a long time, but I have voted for a Republican candidate in the past. One year, the Democrats nominated an undistinguished candidate for Secretary of State, but the incumbent, a Republican, whom I did not vote for in the previous election, but had, in the state's closest gubernatorial election in state history, been entirely fair and professional and showed himself to be worthy of the job. The most important job of the secretary of State was to oversee free and fair elections. No one could have done a better job than the incumbent did, so I split my ballot and voted for that one Republican. He didn't seek re-election in the future and that was the last time I voted for any Republican -- more than 20 yeas ago.
However, if this is what you meant, I disagree with your statement that implies that if a person is not president, that is, in a position of power, he or she can’t do any harm. When I speak with people today about whom to vote for, I emphasize that ideally we would study the candidates, including third party candidates, and choose the one we have reason to believe is the best one for the job. With rare exceptions, such as the one I mentioned above, I don’t believe anyone today should vote for any Republican. At best, there have been a few recent Republicans who are right on one or two issues, but overall are bad for the country. An example would be Thomas Massie, who was a major force in trying to get the Epstein files released in their entirety with responsible redactions. I respect him for that. However, his overall voting record is very bad and since he caucuses with the GOP, he is (or was) an obstacle to Democratic control of the House. I tell people that whereas once the idea was to choose the best candidate, today it is just as important which party a candidate is in, since every elected official is a vote for control and control is where the real power is in the legislature. As bad as I think, know, Fetterman is, he is better than any Republican, because although he will cast a lot of terrible votes, the one vote that counts is which party he caucuses with. Any Republican is almost certain to cast worse votes for virtually everything, with the possibility that on one or two issues they might vote in a way that helps Democrats. As bad as Fetterman’s record is, it is still better than any member of GOP.
In 2028, that means opposing Fetterman in the primary. I don’t live in Pennsylvania so I won’t have a vote, but I can donate and make calls for his primary opponent. If he runs and gets the nomination, I will be glad that I don’t have a vote for or against him in the election and it will be up to Pennsylvanians to decide what to do. I would not, however, waste my time or money on him, since there are always other candidates to support who deserve it. Right now, it is hard for me to imagine Fetterman winning renomination.
With everything the Republicans are doing the Democratic centrists have nothing better to do than complain about whom the voters in Democratic primaries are choosing. I remember the centrists wanted sex pest Andrew Cuomo even when Cuomo was becoming a Trump friend. The centrists are more worried about 3-4 Democratic Socialists being picked by voters than Republicans wanting to disenfranchise citizens or the corruption. They are cool with National Socialists ruling by dictat. They are horrified by Democratic Socialists being selected instead of reactionary centrists.
Centrists really are reactionaries everyday they convince more Democrats, leftists and liberals there really isn't much there of any value. It would be great if the country looks forward from their moral bankruptcy and fash-curiosity.
Oh, Jared, I so loved your post this morning, thank you, thank you, thank you! I so agree that the use of the words 'left' and/or 'socialism' should not scare anyone away from reading policies of both parties and individual candidates. Rs and Ds alike have, or should have, policies to focus on the social well-being of individuals of a society!! The fascist right-wing mentality and shameful measures of this incompetent, crazy and cruel government in the White House should be pushed back. The pendulum must swing to the left to bring it to the centre of what I have always understood as the American culture: opportunity, equality and freedom to all in the land. Am I misreading what the majority of Americans want? I hope not! I so hope the next 250 years of your Declaration of Independence will be fairer and more democratic than we see now. 💗🙏🏻 On a personal note: I must go to a reply of mine where I misspelt Alex Pretti and Renée Good's names on Bluesky - thanks, Jared, for correctly adding them to this post!! Thanks for everything you do and say, Jared.
I don't think the "democratic socialism" label helps. Why not just concentrate on policies that improve the social safety net, restrains the excesses of unconstrained capitalism (see anti-trust), and supports labor unions? Using "democratic socialism" only confuses people, and is beside the point. I'm not sure that even Bernie Sanders is a real "democratic socialist', since the conventional definition includes "social ownership of the economy", and an eventual transition to true socialism.
Adam Smith saw a need for regulations to keep capitalism in check, or it would result harmful monopolies, and control of politics by oligarchs.
I view Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and most of Europe to be "social democracies". I also view FDR as "social democrat", although he probably wouldn't agree.
And remember, the rich have been calling policies they don't like "socialism" and "communism" since the 1890's. Name calling is not policy debate.
Americans under the age of 40 on average have a POSITIVE attitude toward socialism. Those of us over 40 generally have a negative view of it. So, I support your conclusion, in that these ideological labels are somewhat meaningless except as right wing propaganda, but for a different reason; it’s not because they’re net-negative, it’s because they’re meaningless.
You don't need to go to Europe to find a country much better than the USA. Look up North. Most Canadian provinces don't have rent freeze but a rental board that checks on unjustified rent increases. All provinces have public health care somewhat equivalent to what "Medicare for All" would be in the states. Mark Carney, possibly the most popular Prime Minister of the last 60 years (and not a dictator), acts for the good of the country (yes, he is wealthy, so?). We have more than 2 political parties (Liberals (yes, I know!), Conservatives (of which a small minority is socially conservative), NDP (once affiliated to the international socialists), BQ (who purposely limits itself to the province of Quebec), even the small Green Party has had Members of Parlement). Several provinces have subsidized day care centers and all have pregnancy leaves (you would be happy to have the leanest one, never mind the best one (12 months paid leave that can be split between the parents)). And then there's the diversity and inclusion that existed before.
Oh! You'll say, the taxes! Look first at the services we get compared to yours. Second, look at the huge debt you're piling up for the next generations. Third, lets compare tax fairness.
I could go on and on...
Btw, I'm a snowbird, I've spend 4 months in Florida every winter for 6 years up until 2025. I'm selling my home in Florida next winter, the one I bougth when Obama was president.
Regarding your comment on justice for Good and Pretti, Minnesota authorities are still fighting for access to evidence in the shootings:
Renee Nicole Good was shot and killed at point-blank range by Jonathan Ross on 1-7-26 when neither Ross nor any federal agents were in the path of Good's vehicle. Ross's cellphone video that shows he saw Good back her car up and turn her wheels sharply away from Ross was released on 1-9-26.
On 1-18-26, now Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche was interviewed about the investigation:
"BREAM: Is the FBI conducting an investigation into the ICE agent who shot Renee Good?
BLANCHE: What happened that day has been reviewed by millions of Americans because it was recorded. We investigate when it's appropriate to investigate. That is not the case here. We are not going to bow to pressure. So no, we are not investigating."
"Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty released a statement Friday in response to the federal government's written responses to Touhy demands:
“The federal government’s written responses to our demands for evidence in the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, as well as the non-fatal shooting of Julio Sosa-Celis, indicates that they will continue withholding evidence related to the conduct of their agents in those incidents.
It was obstruction in January and it is obstruction in June.”
Blanche should answer questions about what he knows about the obstruction of the Good, Pretti, and Julio Sosa-Celis cases during his confirmation hearing for attorney general next month.
Last week on June 25, regarding Minnesota authorities seeking evidence in the cases:
"HCAO/State will file a Motion for Summary Judgment. DOJ/DHS will also file a Motion to Dismiss."
So now the evidence to get justice for Good and Pretti is up for a ruling by a federal judge.
I keep thinking about how Scott Pelley accused Bari Weiss of trying to get him to falsely report that Renee Good was driving toward the ICE officer who shot her.
I agree. We boomers were taught that socialism supported the public, not private, ownership of the means of production just like communism does. Using that term sends up red flags (pun intended) for a lot of people. Using it is as counterproductive as advocating for defunding the police, but claiming you don’t literally mean the police should be defunded. Why not use the term social democrat? That is a term used by many political parties and it indicates they support a capitalist society but with a strong safety net to promote social equality. Labels matter.
Thank you for your insightful article. The point you made about the issue regarding rent freezes, landlords being stretched and a potential for the two issues to result in deferred maintenance is a good one. I think investor real estate prices have been pushed up by investors buying up properties using excessive leverage with the assumption that rents can go up forever. If an investor sets his leverage based on financial projections that assume rents will always rise at recent rates, he has taken on too much debt. The incentive is to maximize leverage because it juices ROI. However, too much debt service squeezes cash flow when rent rate increases slow or vacancy rises.
Have you ever looked at ESOPs as a way to help “correct” the trend toward employer income rising and employee income falling as a percent of GDP or national income?
I’m on the board of an ESOP and it has created tens of millions of dollars of net worth for its employees. It’s like capitalistic socialism.
I've written numerous papers on precisely that re ESOPs! Google them if you want a look. One asks why don't we have more ESOPS and other types of employee ownership. More to come on this, esp because it's gaining a bit of momentum with various advocates and policy groups. EG, see American Ownership and Resilience Act (AORA).
Thanks for the pointer. The papers are interesting. In my opinion the biggest risk facing ESOPs is the requirement to buy stock back from employees at various trigger points. The demand on cash flow, in certain circumstances, can be meaningful and can limit spending on investment. This could put the ESOP at a competitive disadvantage to traditional firms. Overall, converting to an ESOP has been very beneficial to everyone involved.
Why not use some sort of GI bill for rent subsidies - instead of for veterans / it would be for urban dwellers on a gradually decreasing scale as their income rises - and for the poor
The new Federal housing bill includes a provision for home repair assistance similar to a PA state plan. I don’t know enough about the needs of landlords to comment, but theoretically something like this could offset loss of rental revenue in the event of a freeze.
As a left-of-center Democrat I have no problem with the Democratic Socialists on policy, but I cringe when I see some of them (such as one of the NYC Congressional candidates who just won her primary) put out posts about using the American flag for toilet paper (that IS literally what she said) or talk about eliminating the police. Such stupid statements are of course an immense help to the GOP's campaign ads, and in those ads all Democrats get blamed. We can all agree on higher taxes for the very rich, Medicare for all, etc., but I hope these newcomers can learn to focus on socioeconomic policy and keep quiet on the culture war issues.
I'm reminded of the blues song line that goes "been down so long it looks like up to me." In this case Republicans have gone so far tight the left look like center right. I don't see much difference between a mainstream Democratic agenda and Socialist Democrat agenda. Certainly not when you compare it to how far right Republicans have gone: Slash everything except defense and give huge tax cuts to the wealthy. Anyone who thinks social democrats are "socialist" or "communist" have no idea what those things actually are.
I think Democrats need to stop worrying, restart defending principles that most everyone supported, show some leadership and keep this country from turning into a Russian style oligarchy.
The right wins by creating division but even more so by incessant lying. For decades they have done everything they can to oppose affordable healthcare programs and turn them over to for-profit entities but they always claim to be the party that will get us affordable health care.
And it’s not just the right that is sewing division. I don’t follow right wing media but recently I have seen plenty of discussions of the media’s long time favorite storyline, “Democrats in Disarray”. In fact I just heard a respected political pundit call this the Dems’ “Tea Party Moment” as if the far right financed and led Tea Party is in comparable to the disagreements among Dems that they hype.
For years the media has entertained themselves by platforming the most extreme voices. They also obsess over NYC politics, ignoring other critical races like the race for Senate here in North Carolina. Roy Cooper, the popular two term ex-governor, is leading Trump-endorsed crackpot Michael Whately by 14 points according to a recent YouGov poll. That race is getting little to no coverage because Cooper is a mild mannered, moderate Dem — even though he leads state that is definitely turning purple but is heavily gerrymandered. North Carolina is a fast growing state which is now 9th largest in population so it has a significant number of electoral votes, yet the national media is so obsessed with NYC and (sometimes) California that they ignore places like this — and then they have the nerve to blame Dems for ignoring everyday Americans who live in flyover land.
I am a card carrying democratic socialist and I appreciate your respect for that part of the coalition. Though I can not say we feel the same for those in power who have failed us for decades and lied to us about countless issues from Iraq, Palestine, health care, civil rights, and so on.
In reality though, as you said, it’s often more a brand label, given we are functionally social democrats. No one serious is arguing to nationalize the entire economy. We think we should guarantee universal healthcare like every other country and that the economy should work for society, the people, not the powerful and the rich. My socialism is an American inheritance of little r republicanism to not just politics but to economics.
Bravo. This is excellent. I found this post by Arin Dube very interesting because he shows how sectoral bargaining in Sweden leads to less inequality, less redistribution because people are overall better off, and higher productivity.
I appreciate your comment -it’s important to turn down the heat. With Trump’s thumb on the electoral scale. It is going to take a wide range of voters and politics working in collaboration to beat MAGA in November and again in 2028.
That said, in Virginia, where we both live, unregulated landlords have actively priced working and poor people out of huge swaths of the state. There is no political appetite for publicly owned (or supported) housing. Since COVID, rents have far exceeded the rate of inflation. Is there no limit to what landlords can charge? Is there no limit to their rate of return? In terms of housing creation and preservation without a massive infusion of public capital for ‘social’ housing AND limits on rent increases we are stuck with the barbarism of the ‘Status Quo’.
Definitely hear you re VA rents...and those in many places across the country. I think caps on rate of increase can be more responsive to the very real issue you raise vs. freezes.
“I challenge you to find a D of any stripe who doesn’t want to provide “more services to working Americans,” and the majority, left and center-left, would raise taxes on the wealthy to offset the costs.”
Clearly, someone has no idea whatsoever of the positions and policies of the national Democratic Party.
“And I do think it expresses a frustration with current day, U.S.-style capitalism, a system that is currently and massively rewarding tech oligopolists who blithely pronounce that their latest and greatest invention is going to dis-employ large swaths of the workforce.”
“US-style capitalism” is in fact a thoroughly corrupted system. Maybe that’s the problem for voters.
‘“Remember what Roosevelt said in 1932, another period when capitalism’s flaws were blatantly transparent: ‘The country needs and, unless I mistake its temper, the country demands bold, persistent experimentation. It is common sense to take a method and try it: If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.’”
That was then. The current version of the party is an alt-Republican with far too many major donors shared by both parties. It will never, ever do anything major that bothers those donors in the least. Donors before the nation and its people, always. (Yes, I remember the short-lived crumbs from the Biden administration. If you think all the nation needs to halt the extraction and further decline is the occasional crumb…)
The bottom line is that voters are (rightly) upset and proper messaging is needed.
To the contrary, what the nation *needs* is the pre-Clinton national party: One that delivers for the American people. The post-Clinton party believes in delivering only for the donors — the raison d’etre for Clinton’s DLC — and delivering to the nation’s people *only* empty promises, lip service.
And since 23 June the message to those of us who want more than that to fuck off and leave the party. You know, like 2024 but more so.
"The Right" has done a surprisingly good job of brainwashing lazy thinkers into believing that anyone who challenges the current status quo (like Mandani) is a socialist and worse. They have managed to shift the Overton window and leave it stuck at a position that is favorable to them, and will fight tooth and nail against any attempt to budge it.
Democrats need to run on the four Cs: Chaos, Cruelty, Corruption, and Cost.
Grace, you could add "cowardice" to the mix. The entire GOP is spineless and refuses to stand up for democracy, decency, and against depravity.
Becoming a far right party has not hurt the Republicans at the polls so far. We don't see many hand-wringing stories from the media and centerist Rs (are there any left?) about the right wing extremists. The party seems to be moving even further to the right each day.
And yet the media and centerist Ds focus on some issues within the Democratic party.
As I just posted the Trump-endorsed Senate candidate in NC is losing by 14 points to the Democrat. The extremism and incompetence of the Republican Party is definitely catching up to them. Also Republicans’ perceived strength is amplified by their heavy gerrymandering and by our unfair electoral college rules. Never forget Hillary beat Trump by nearly 2.9 million votes.
I won't forget that Clinton won the popular vote by more than Nixon's margin over Humphrey or Bush's margin over Gore, but I also won't ever forget that Trump beat Harris by almost 2,300,000 votes. That tells me that our biggest problem is the quality of our electorate and its willingness to vote for a convicted criminal, sexual predator, and insurrection out of a mindless belief that a man who was and is totally unfit and unqualified to be president promised them cheaper eggs and gasoline. That is not an electorate that we can expect to reliably support democracy in the future. Today, their disapproval of Trump centers more on inflation than any of his criminal behavior, disdain for the rule of law, violent racism, or obvious stupidity and ignorance. What that means is that if Trump weren't such and idiot, he could have avoided his trade war and the recent and ongoing war with Iran and today he might even have a net positive approval rating. His use of the violent deportation hit squads could have also been easily modified. Had he done those three things, he might well be sitting pretty today with the majority of Americans completely ignoring his ongoing crime spree. In this country, attention spans are short and priorities twisted among the majority of voters.
I tend to agree. Democracies are all about the electorate. Trump, for eaxample, is just one man with gargantuan flaws. But there are others just as bad as Trump. As long as they don't aspire to the presidency, they do relatively little harm. It is only when voters elect them to positions of power and influence that the harm is done.
Partha, that is true, but we only have two viable political parties. That means it will either be a Republican or a Democrat, which too often now means the lesser evil. I don't consider most Democrats to be evil, but a few are others are simply worthless. Fetterman is both evil and worthless. Yes, he caucuses with the Democrats, but on many important issues, especially confirmations, he votes with Trump. If he were simply ignoring partisanship and voting for competent nominees that would be one thing, but Trump doesn't appoint competent people, he appoints corrupt sycophants. If I manage to live until 2028, I will do whatever I can to unseat Fetterman. No, I won't support replacing him with a Republican, because I can't honestly identify a single Republican today that I believe should hold elective office. It's been a long time, but I have voted for a Republican candidate in the past. One year, the Democrats nominated an undistinguished candidate for Secretary of State, but the incumbent, a Republican, whom I did not vote for in the previous election, but had, in the state's closest gubernatorial election in state history, been entirely fair and professional and showed himself to be worthy of the job. The most important job of the secretary of State was to oversee free and fair elections. No one could have done a better job than the incumbent did, so I split my ballot and voted for that one Republican. He didn't seek re-election in the future and that was the last time I voted for any Republican -- more than 20 yeas ago.
However, if this is what you meant, I disagree with your statement that implies that if a person is not president, that is, in a position of power, he or she can’t do any harm. When I speak with people today about whom to vote for, I emphasize that ideally we would study the candidates, including third party candidates, and choose the one we have reason to believe is the best one for the job. With rare exceptions, such as the one I mentioned above, I don’t believe anyone today should vote for any Republican. At best, there have been a few recent Republicans who are right on one or two issues, but overall are bad for the country. An example would be Thomas Massie, who was a major force in trying to get the Epstein files released in their entirety with responsible redactions. I respect him for that. However, his overall voting record is very bad and since he caucuses with the GOP, he is (or was) an obstacle to Democratic control of the House. I tell people that whereas once the idea was to choose the best candidate, today it is just as important which party a candidate is in, since every elected official is a vote for control and control is where the real power is in the legislature. As bad as I think, know, Fetterman is, he is better than any Republican, because although he will cast a lot of terrible votes, the one vote that counts is which party he caucuses with. Any Republican is almost certain to cast worse votes for virtually everything, with the possibility that on one or two issues they might vote in a way that helps Democrats. As bad as Fetterman’s record is, it is still better than any member of GOP.
In 2028, that means opposing Fetterman in the primary. I don’t live in Pennsylvania so I won’t have a vote, but I can donate and make calls for his primary opponent. If he runs and gets the nomination, I will be glad that I don’t have a vote for or against him in the election and it will be up to Pennsylvanians to decide what to do. I would not, however, waste my time or money on him, since there are always other candidates to support who deserve it. Right now, it is hard for me to imagine Fetterman winning renomination.
Be well.
With everything the Republicans are doing the Democratic centrists have nothing better to do than complain about whom the voters in Democratic primaries are choosing. I remember the centrists wanted sex pest Andrew Cuomo even when Cuomo was becoming a Trump friend. The centrists are more worried about 3-4 Democratic Socialists being picked by voters than Republicans wanting to disenfranchise citizens or the corruption. They are cool with National Socialists ruling by dictat. They are horrified by Democratic Socialists being selected instead of reactionary centrists.
Centrists really are reactionaries everyday they convince more Democrats, leftists and liberals there really isn't much there of any value. It would be great if the country looks forward from their moral bankruptcy and fash-curiosity.
Oh, Jared, I so loved your post this morning, thank you, thank you, thank you! I so agree that the use of the words 'left' and/or 'socialism' should not scare anyone away from reading policies of both parties and individual candidates. Rs and Ds alike have, or should have, policies to focus on the social well-being of individuals of a society!! The fascist right-wing mentality and shameful measures of this incompetent, crazy and cruel government in the White House should be pushed back. The pendulum must swing to the left to bring it to the centre of what I have always understood as the American culture: opportunity, equality and freedom to all in the land. Am I misreading what the majority of Americans want? I hope not! I so hope the next 250 years of your Declaration of Independence will be fairer and more democratic than we see now. 💗🙏🏻 On a personal note: I must go to a reply of mine where I misspelt Alex Pretti and Renée Good's names on Bluesky - thanks, Jared, for correctly adding them to this post!! Thanks for everything you do and say, Jared.
I don't think the "democratic socialism" label helps. Why not just concentrate on policies that improve the social safety net, restrains the excesses of unconstrained capitalism (see anti-trust), and supports labor unions? Using "democratic socialism" only confuses people, and is beside the point. I'm not sure that even Bernie Sanders is a real "democratic socialist', since the conventional definition includes "social ownership of the economy", and an eventual transition to true socialism.
Adam Smith saw a need for regulations to keep capitalism in check, or it would result harmful monopolies, and control of politics by oligarchs.
I view Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and most of Europe to be "social democracies". I also view FDR as "social democrat", although he probably wouldn't agree.
And remember, the rich have been calling policies they don't like "socialism" and "communism" since the 1890's. Name calling is not policy debate.
Americans under the age of 40 on average have a POSITIVE attitude toward socialism. Those of us over 40 generally have a negative view of it. So, I support your conclusion, in that these ideological labels are somewhat meaningless except as right wing propaganda, but for a different reason; it’s not because they’re net-negative, it’s because they’re meaningless.
You don't need to go to Europe to find a country much better than the USA. Look up North. Most Canadian provinces don't have rent freeze but a rental board that checks on unjustified rent increases. All provinces have public health care somewhat equivalent to what "Medicare for All" would be in the states. Mark Carney, possibly the most popular Prime Minister of the last 60 years (and not a dictator), acts for the good of the country (yes, he is wealthy, so?). We have more than 2 political parties (Liberals (yes, I know!), Conservatives (of which a small minority is socially conservative), NDP (once affiliated to the international socialists), BQ (who purposely limits itself to the province of Quebec), even the small Green Party has had Members of Parlement). Several provinces have subsidized day care centers and all have pregnancy leaves (you would be happy to have the leanest one, never mind the best one (12 months paid leave that can be split between the parents)). And then there's the diversity and inclusion that existed before.
Oh! You'll say, the taxes! Look first at the services we get compared to yours. Second, look at the huge debt you're piling up for the next generations. Third, lets compare tax fairness.
I could go on and on...
Btw, I'm a snowbird, I've spend 4 months in Florida every winter for 6 years up until 2025. I'm selling my home in Florida next winter, the one I bougth when Obama was president.
Regarding your comment on justice for Good and Pretti, Minnesota authorities are still fighting for access to evidence in the shootings:
Renee Nicole Good was shot and killed at point-blank range by Jonathan Ross on 1-7-26 when neither Ross nor any federal agents were in the path of Good's vehicle. Ross's cellphone video that shows he saw Good back her car up and turn her wheels sharply away from Ross was released on 1-9-26.
On 1-18-26, now Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche was interviewed about the investigation:
"BREAM: Is the FBI conducting an investigation into the ICE agent who shot Renee Good?
BLANCHE: What happened that day has been reviewed by millions of Americans because it was recorded. We investigate when it's appropriate to investigate. That is not the case here. We are not going to bow to pressure. So no, we are not investigating."
"Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty released a statement Friday in response to the federal government's written responses to Touhy demands:
“The federal government’s written responses to our demands for evidence in the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, as well as the non-fatal shooting of Julio Sosa-Celis, indicates that they will continue withholding evidence related to the conduct of their agents in those incidents.
It was obstruction in January and it is obstruction in June.”
Blanche should answer questions about what he knows about the obstruction of the Good, Pretti, and Julio Sosa-Celis cases during his confirmation hearing for attorney general next month.
Last week on June 25, regarding Minnesota authorities seeking evidence in the cases:
"HCAO/State will file a Motion for Summary Judgment. DOJ/DHS will also file a Motion to Dismiss."
So now the evidence to get justice for Good and Pretti is up for a ruling by a federal judge.
https://www.hennepinattorney.org/news/news/2026/June/fed-response
https://www.hennepinattorney.org/news/news/2026/May/federal-order
I keep thinking about how Scott Pelley accused Bari Weiss of trying to get him to falsely report that Renee Good was driving toward the ICE officer who shot her.
I agree. We boomers were taught that socialism supported the public, not private, ownership of the means of production just like communism does. Using that term sends up red flags (pun intended) for a lot of people. Using it is as counterproductive as advocating for defunding the police, but claiming you don’t literally mean the police should be defunded. Why not use the term social democrat? That is a term used by many political parties and it indicates they support a capitalist society but with a strong safety net to promote social equality. Labels matter.
Thank you for your insightful article. The point you made about the issue regarding rent freezes, landlords being stretched and a potential for the two issues to result in deferred maintenance is a good one. I think investor real estate prices have been pushed up by investors buying up properties using excessive leverage with the assumption that rents can go up forever. If an investor sets his leverage based on financial projections that assume rents will always rise at recent rates, he has taken on too much debt. The incentive is to maximize leverage because it juices ROI. However, too much debt service squeezes cash flow when rent rate increases slow or vacancy rises.
Have you ever looked at ESOPs as a way to help “correct” the trend toward employer income rising and employee income falling as a percent of GDP or national income?
I’m on the board of an ESOP and it has created tens of millions of dollars of net worth for its employees. It’s like capitalistic socialism.
I've written numerous papers on precisely that re ESOPs! Google them if you want a look. One asks why don't we have more ESOPS and other types of employee ownership. More to come on this, esp because it's gaining a bit of momentum with various advocates and policy groups. EG, see American Ownership and Resilience Act (AORA).
Thanks for the pointer. The papers are interesting. In my opinion the biggest risk facing ESOPs is the requirement to buy stock back from employees at various trigger points. The demand on cash flow, in certain circumstances, can be meaningful and can limit spending on investment. This could put the ESOP at a competitive disadvantage to traditional firms. Overall, converting to an ESOP has been very beneficial to everyone involved.
Why not use some sort of GI bill for rent subsidies - instead of for veterans / it would be for urban dwellers on a gradually decreasing scale as their income rises - and for the poor
- it would allow for time to construct sec .
8 housing .
The new Federal housing bill includes a provision for home repair assistance similar to a PA state plan. I don’t know enough about the needs of landlords to comment, but theoretically something like this could offset loss of rental revenue in the event of a freeze.
As a left-of-center Democrat I have no problem with the Democratic Socialists on policy, but I cringe when I see some of them (such as one of the NYC Congressional candidates who just won her primary) put out posts about using the American flag for toilet paper (that IS literally what she said) or talk about eliminating the police. Such stupid statements are of course an immense help to the GOP's campaign ads, and in those ads all Democrats get blamed. We can all agree on higher taxes for the very rich, Medicare for all, etc., but I hope these newcomers can learn to focus on socioeconomic policy and keep quiet on the culture war issues.
I'm reminded of the blues song line that goes "been down so long it looks like up to me." In this case Republicans have gone so far tight the left look like center right. I don't see much difference between a mainstream Democratic agenda and Socialist Democrat agenda. Certainly not when you compare it to how far right Republicans have gone: Slash everything except defense and give huge tax cuts to the wealthy. Anyone who thinks social democrats are "socialist" or "communist" have no idea what those things actually are.
I think Democrats need to stop worrying, restart defending principles that most everyone supported, show some leadership and keep this country from turning into a Russian style oligarchy.
The right wins by creating division but even more so by incessant lying. For decades they have done everything they can to oppose affordable healthcare programs and turn them over to for-profit entities but they always claim to be the party that will get us affordable health care.
And it’s not just the right that is sewing division. I don’t follow right wing media but recently I have seen plenty of discussions of the media’s long time favorite storyline, “Democrats in Disarray”. In fact I just heard a respected political pundit call this the Dems’ “Tea Party Moment” as if the far right financed and led Tea Party is in comparable to the disagreements among Dems that they hype.
For years the media has entertained themselves by platforming the most extreme voices. They also obsess over NYC politics, ignoring other critical races like the race for Senate here in North Carolina. Roy Cooper, the popular two term ex-governor, is leading Trump-endorsed crackpot Michael Whately by 14 points according to a recent YouGov poll. That race is getting little to no coverage because Cooper is a mild mannered, moderate Dem — even though he leads state that is definitely turning purple but is heavily gerrymandered. North Carolina is a fast growing state which is now 9th largest in population so it has a significant number of electoral votes, yet the national media is so obsessed with NYC and (sometimes) California that they ignore places like this — and then they have the nerve to blame Dems for ignoring everyday Americans who live in flyover land.
I am a card carrying democratic socialist and I appreciate your respect for that part of the coalition. Though I can not say we feel the same for those in power who have failed us for decades and lied to us about countless issues from Iraq, Palestine, health care, civil rights, and so on.
In reality though, as you said, it’s often more a brand label, given we are functionally social democrats. No one serious is arguing to nationalize the entire economy. We think we should guarantee universal healthcare like every other country and that the economy should work for society, the people, not the powerful and the rich. My socialism is an American inheritance of little r republicanism to not just politics but to economics.
Democrats…
It’s OK to be working for Working Class Americans…
That doesn’t make you a Socialist…
It makes you a Democrat…
Bravo. This is excellent. I found this post by Arin Dube very interesting because he shows how sectoral bargaining in Sweden leads to less inequality, less redistribution because people are overall better off, and higher productivity.
https://arindube.substack.com/p/the-secret-sauce-of-swedish-equality?r=zsk0&utm_medium=ios
Republicans are throwing outdated labels around, because they haven’t got anything else. There’s mixed market economies everywhere.
I appreciate your comment -it’s important to turn down the heat. With Trump’s thumb on the electoral scale. It is going to take a wide range of voters and politics working in collaboration to beat MAGA in November and again in 2028.
That said, in Virginia, where we both live, unregulated landlords have actively priced working and poor people out of huge swaths of the state. There is no political appetite for publicly owned (or supported) housing. Since COVID, rents have far exceeded the rate of inflation. Is there no limit to what landlords can charge? Is there no limit to their rate of return? In terms of housing creation and preservation without a massive infusion of public capital for ‘social’ housing AND limits on rent increases we are stuck with the barbarism of the ‘Status Quo’.
Definitely hear you re VA rents...and those in many places across the country. I think caps on rate of increase can be more responsive to the very real issue you raise vs. freezes.
“I challenge you to find a D of any stripe who doesn’t want to provide “more services to working Americans,” and the majority, left and center-left, would raise taxes on the wealthy to offset the costs.”
Clearly, someone has no idea whatsoever of the positions and policies of the national Democratic Party.
“And I do think it expresses a frustration with current day, U.S.-style capitalism, a system that is currently and massively rewarding tech oligopolists who blithely pronounce that their latest and greatest invention is going to dis-employ large swaths of the workforce.”
“US-style capitalism” is in fact a thoroughly corrupted system. Maybe that’s the problem for voters.
‘“Remember what Roosevelt said in 1932, another period when capitalism’s flaws were blatantly transparent: ‘The country needs and, unless I mistake its temper, the country demands bold, persistent experimentation. It is common sense to take a method and try it: If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.’”
That was then. The current version of the party is an alt-Republican with far too many major donors shared by both parties. It will never, ever do anything major that bothers those donors in the least. Donors before the nation and its people, always. (Yes, I remember the short-lived crumbs from the Biden administration. If you think all the nation needs to halt the extraction and further decline is the occasional crumb…)
The bottom line is that voters are (rightly) upset and proper messaging is needed.
To the contrary, what the nation *needs* is the pre-Clinton national party: One that delivers for the American people. The post-Clinton party believes in delivering only for the donors — the raison d’etre for Clinton’s DLC — and delivering to the nation’s people *only* empty promises, lip service.
And since 23 June the message to those of us who want more than that to fuck off and leave the party. You know, like 2024 but more so.
These are not socialists, FDR Democrats. To paraphrase Howard Dean, they’re here to represent the Democratic wing of the Democrat Party.
"The Right" has done a surprisingly good job of brainwashing lazy thinkers into believing that anyone who challenges the current status quo (like Mandani) is a socialist and worse. They have managed to shift the Overton window and leave it stuck at a position that is favorable to them, and will fight tooth and nail against any attempt to budge it.