Jump to content

New Democrats (United States)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bill Clinton, the 42nd president (1993–2001)
Barack Obama, the 44th president (2009–2017)
The first inauguration of Bill Clinton on 20 January 1993. Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign ushered in the "golden age" of New Democrats, which subsequently gave birth to the name "Clinton Democrat"

New Democrats, also known as centrist Democrats, Clinton Democrats or moderate Democrats, are a centrist ideological faction within the Democratic Party in the United States. As the Third Way faction of the party, they are seen as culturally liberal on social issues while being moderate or fiscally conservative on economic issues.[1] New Democrats dominated the party from the late 1980s through the early-2010s,[2] and continue to be a large coalition in the modern Democratic Party.[3][4]

However, with the rise of progressivism in 2016 and 2020, [5] and the right-wing populism of Donald Trump,[6] New Democrats began to change and update their ideological positions.[7][8][9] For example, New Democrat candidates have shifted from focusing on "defense of marriage" platforms to casting "the issue of transgender rights" as contentious.[10][11] Similarly, debates over tax cuts on capital gains have been reconfigured to removing caps on state and local tax deduction.[12]

Despite expansion of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, even with stricter criteria for "Progressive" representation in Congress, the New Democrats' Progressive Policy Institute (established in 1989) persists into the present day, recently sponsoring "young pragmatists" at the rechristened Center for New Liberalism[13] (formerly known as the Neoliberal Project) to "modernize progressive politics."[14]

In 2024, the Congressional Progressive Caucus lost approximately eight members, but gained seven. At least two of the Progressive Caucus freshmen plan to hold seats in the New Democrat Coalition as well, joining Sara Jacobs. The NDC lost approximately five members, but gained twenty-three, reestablishing the coalition as the leading Democratic partisan caucus in Congress.[15][16] One week after the election, multiple news outlets reported that leaders from both caucuses blamed each other for Democratic Party losses in 2024.[17][18][19]

History

[edit]

Origins

[edit]

During the 1970s energy crisis, the United States faced stagflation, that is both increasing inflation and decreasing economic growth.[20] The 1974 midterm elections, according to historian Brent Cebul, "are remembered for the arrival of the 'Watergate babies' in the House of Representatives, but the New Democrats’ first electoral wave was broader and deeper still...some western and northeastern officials like [Michael] Dukakis were dubbed Atari Democrats thanks to their veneration of new, entrepreneurial, high-technology sectors of the economy. This group, which included [Gary] Hart and California Governor Jerry Brown, also sometimes called themselves 'New Liberals' in an effort to signal their support for traditional liberal social values even as they pursued market-oriented and perhaps less bureaucratic ways of governing." Another "primary strand" could be found in "the South, often as self-consciously 'centrist' Democrats. Led by politicians like Georgia Senator Sam Nunn, the southern centrists echoed southern Democrats of the past in their skepticism for targeted welfare or antipoverty programs, and they also looked forward to stimulating the region's post-industrial and 'post-racial' future."[21]

The Watergate Babies and Atari Democrats found a common thread in supply-side progressivism. Ideas stemming from consultation with "southern centrists" became "supply-side liberalism" that, according to Cebul, ultimately proved a fiscal illusion.[22] Michael Dukakis and Jerry Brown, for instance, both appropriated property taxes to subsidize a given startup company in depressed industrial sectors. This subsidization transformed state tax revenue for public finance into venture capital. Once the first wave of startups achieved normal profit, then the tax burden for additional start-ups would shift from real estate investors and homeowners to the initial companies. Brown and Dukakis also planned to use revenue from the new taxable capital for "infrastructure and education." During the Carter and Reagan Administrations, voter tax revolts and the Volcker recession, coupled with uneven profit thresholds for taxing scaled-up companies, hastened the shift in tax burden to the entire first wave.[23][24][25][26][27][28][29]

Even if absent from partisan politics for one or more election cycles, "supply-side liberals" could and did campaign to reconcile "job and tax generation with the market-oriented ethos of the 1980s" during reelection bids. Once back in office during the early 1980s recession in the United States, Dukakis and his cohort incrementally diverged from "supply-side liberalism" as it operated prior to the tax revolts. Beginning in 1982, for instance, Dukakis altered the role of his Massachusetts Technology Development Corporation (1978) from tax revenue distribution to "broker[ing] deals" between "high-tech companies and Boston-based venture capital firms." This gradual change diminished his own role in the ensuing Massachusetts Miracle, a cornerstone of his campaign during the 1988 United States presidential election. Conversely, 1980s changes later became key tenets of New Democrat platforms.[30][31][32]

The Democratic Leadership Council and Progressive Policy Institute

[edit]

After the landslide defeats to the Republican Party led by Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, a group of prominent Democrats began to believe their party was out of touch and in need of a radical shift in economic policy and ideas of governance.[33][34] The Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) was founded in 1985 by Al From and a group of like-minded politicians and strategists.[35] Prominent Democratic politicians such as Senators Al Gore and Joe Biden (both future vice presidents, and Biden, a future president) participated in DLC affairs prior to their candidacies for the 1988 Democratic Party nomination.[36] The DLC did not want the Democratic Party to be "simply posturing in the middle", and instead framed its ideas as "progressive" and as a "Third Way" to address the problems of its era. Examples of the DLC's policy initiatives can be found in The New American Choice Resolutions.[36][37]

In 1989, the "New Democrat" label was briefly used by a progressive reformist group including Gary Hart and Eugene McCarthy.[38] That same year, Will Marshall founded the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) as a think tank to formulate a new common platform for Yellow Dogs, Atari Democrats, and Watergate Babies. In 1990, the DLC renamed its bi-monthly magazine from The Mainstream Democrat to The New Democrat.[39] The PPI, in conjunction with Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton and the DLC, subsequently introduced tentative precepts collected in a New Orleans Declaration. By 1992, "New Democrats" had become more widely associated with this Declaration as well as Democratic partisans who entwined presidential hopeful Jesse Jackson's variant of Rainbow/PUSH with the Sister Souljah moment.[40][41]

Aspirations for "supply-side liberalism" had been rebuffed by voters and state auditors alike. According to Cebul, the rechristened "New Democrats" espoused "a reflexive veneration of the market as the essential underwriter of social progress." They first sought to accelerate capital and money coursing through a post-industrial economy. The PPI and DLC forecasted financial deregulation and tax cuts as avenues to facilitate the expansion of scaleup companies invested in computational and internet technology. These companies would provide the venture capital necessary to pave over ailing industrial regions with post-industrial start-ups. The role of government was to remove any perceived obstacles. Heeding the lessons of tax resistance, the New Democrat think tank and leadership council also aimed to reduce the federal deficit and interest rates, while expanding the mortgage-backed security industry and credit market for a real estate sector that had roundly rejected property taxes. The voters who had stymied "supply side liberalism" would become a New Democrat vanguard.[42] [43]

Bill Clinton, the DLC chairman who referred to the PPI as his "idea mill", faced a peculiar dilemma. He had to somehow circumvent voter preconceptions of financial deregulatory laws and capital gains tax reductions as antithetical to "social progress", while concurrently accepting the duty of the largest party plurality, namely to advance the mid- to late twentieth-century Democratic partisan goal of "social progress." Cebul and additional scholars conclude that the DLC as well as PPI, and Clinton more specifically, offered a possible solution: cast "the poor as unrealized entrepreneurs and impoverished communities as untapped 'new markets' ", ostensibly combining financial deregulation with claims for "social progress" in syncretic politics. After the 1988 elections that perpetuated the Reagan era, this did not seem such a controversial goal for a new national Democratic Party leader.[44]

Clinton needed new frameworks for political economy, society, and culture, both to implement and sustain his proposed solution. He sought de jure and de facto advisors that would, in turn, move beyond syncretic politics to accomplish aspects of this vision. First he had to run for President and New Democrats had to take seats in Congress. Clinton stepped down as DLC chairman and prepared for a campaign.[45] The 1992 presidential election occurred shortly after the end of the Cold War, at a time when faith in capitalism and internationalism were at their height, providing an opportunity for Bill Clinton to focus on domestic policy.[46]

Presidency of Bill Clinton

[edit]
Bill Clinton in 1993 signing NAFTA agreements

Bill Clinton became the Democratic politician most identified with the New Democrats due to his promise of welfare reform in the 1992 United States presidential campaign, his 1992 promise of a middle-class tax cut and his 1993 expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit for the working poor.[34] New Democrat successes under Clinton, underpinned by the writings of Anthony Giddens on the duality of structure, maintained a unity of opposites that became the hallmark of the Third Way. New Democrats subsequently aligned with Joseph Schumpeter's innovation economics and creative destruction as revolution in order to sustain their budding framework for a post-industrial political economy.[47]

New Democrats are often regarded to have inspired Tony Blair in the United Kingdom and his policies within the Labour Party as New Labour, as well as prompting the continental conflation of Third Way approaches to social democracy with previous notions of democratic socialism. The two were often used interchangeably by political scientists and fostered popular conceptions of democratic socialism as a social democratic variant of libertarian socialism.[48]

The Electoral College results for the 1992 presidential election. Clinton's New Democrat strategy of running as a centrist won over a considerable number of rural, white voters in both the Midwest and the South.

Clinton presented himself as a centrist candidate to draw White middle-class voters who had left the Democratic Party for the Republican Party. Until 2016 and even after, the Third Way defined and dominated notions of centrism in U.S. partisan politics. In 1990, Clinton became the DLC chair. Under his leadership, the DLC founded two-dozen chapters and created a base of support.[36] Running as a New Democrat, Clinton won the 1992 and 1996 presidential elections.[49] Some political analysts like Kenneth Baer contended the DLC embodied the spirit of Truman-Kennedy era Democrats and were vital to the Democratic party's resurgence after the presidential election losses of liberals George McGovern, Walter Mondale, and Michael Dukakis.[50][51]

Legislation signed into domestic law with bipartisan support under President Clinton includes:

New Democrats dialectically adopted GOP proposals and platforms during the campaigns for the 1992 congressional/state elections and 1992 United States presidential election. Below are subsequent congressional legislative authorships and voting percentages. Please note that both the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act and 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act became law three months before the 1996 congressional/state elections and 1996 United States presidential election.

Legislative Authorship

Congressional Democrat Voting Percentages

The Clinton administration, supported by congressional New Democrats, was responsible for proposing and passing the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, which increased Medicare taxes for taxpayers with annual incomes over $135,000, yet also reduced Medicare spending and benefits across all tax brackets. Congressional Republicans demanded even deeper cuts to Medicare, but Clinton twice vetoed their bills. The Clinton administration in turn taxed individuals earning annual incomes over $115,000, but also defined taxable "small business" earnings as less than approximately $10 million in annual gross revenue, with tax brackets for high-gross incorporated businesses beginning at that number. According to the Clinton Foundation, the revised brackets and categories increased taxes on the wealthiest 1.2% of taxpayers within these new brackets,[53] while cutting taxes on 15 million low-income families and making tax cuts available to 90% of small businesses. "Small businesses" and taxpayer classifications were reconfigured by these new tax brackets.[54] Again, according to the Clinton Foundation, these brackets raised the top marginal tax rate from 31% to 40%. Additionally, it mandated that the budget be balanced over a number of years through the implementation of spending restraints.

Bill Clinton's promise of welfare reform was passed in the form of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996. Prior to 2018, critics such as Yascha Mounk contended that Clinton's arguments for the virtues of "negative" notions of "personal responsibility [New Orleans Declaration: 'individual responsibility']," propounded within DLC circles during the 1980s, stemmed more from Ronald Reagan's specific conception of "accountability" than any "positive notion of responsibility."[55][6]: 116  Additional critics distinguish the New Democrat idea of "personal responsibility" from arguments over the extent of limitations on government, if any, in platforms that advance social responsibility. The 1996 United States presidential election, the temporary relegation of Hillary Clinton to the global promotion of microcredit (argued by Claremont McKenna College historian Lily Geismer),[56] partisan compromises over this act, conflicts within the Democratic Party, as well as the act's multivalent consequences, all contributed to deliberations over passage and execution of the PRWORA.[57]

Democratic partisan criticism of the first Clinton administration as well as the formation of the Blue Dog Coalition, particularly in response to proposals and actions by the First Lady, followed 1994 congressional New Democrat losses in the southeast and west coast.[58] Bill Clinton's reassertion as a New Democrat during the 1996 presidential elections, and passage of the PRWORA, contributed to the founding of the New Democrat Coalition, reaffirming Clintonian Democrats as New Democrats.[42] As of August 2023, 23% of the New Democrat Coalition have become simultaneous members of, or declared an intention to vote for more proposals by, the Congressional Progressive Caucus. A number of these delegates, most notably Shri Thanedar, faced backlash from pundits and constituents alike, as evidence surfaced of alleged involvement in post-2016 attempts to rally neoconservatism.[59]

Presidency of Barack Obama

[edit]
Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, 2012

In March 2009, Barack Obama, said in a meeting with the New Democrat Coalition that he was a "New Democrat" and a "pro-growth Democrat", that he "supports free and fair trade" and that he was "very concerned about a return to protectionism."[60]

The Obama Administration espoused "free and fair trade" ideas. Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) proponents postponed TPP drafting after Obama became President, only to commence "formal" Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations in 2010, after Executive Office (EO) disclosure of an endorsement, albeit with Obama's proposed revisions on, for instance, intellectual property. Early drafts of Executive Order 13609, "Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation", buttressed the TPP deliberations with the premise that "inadequate cooperation and consultation" had been caused by "excessive red tape" for "businesses, particularly small- and medium-sized enterprises operating near the border."[61] In the final draft, Obama regulatory advisors applied the Executive Order to all such "enterprises", in the absence of regional and tax bracket classifications, operating within "North America and beyond."[62][63] Three years later, the Obama EO released 'The Economic Benefits of U.S. Trade' (2015), a signatory framework for prospective drafts of the TPP and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). According to the Obama EO, free trade "help[s] developing countries lift people out of poverty" and "expand[s] markets for U.S. exports."[64]

Throughout Obama's tenure, approximately 1,000 Democrats lost their seats across all levels of government.[65] Specifically, 958 state legislature seats, 62 house seats, 11 Senate seats, and 12 governorships,[66] with a majority of these elected officials identifying as New Democrats. Some analysts such as Harry Enten at FiveThirtyEight, believe this was due to the changing demographic shift, as more Democrats identified as liberal in 2016 than moderate.[67] Consequently, many pundits believed that Obama's tenure marked an end of the New Democrats' dominance in the party, although the faction still remains an important part of the party's big tent.[3] Obama signed the draft Trans-Pacific Partnership, yet subsequently declared his "Economic Benefits of Free Trade" framework as "dead" prior to the lame-duck session of Congress, in anticipation of bipartisan opposition to TPP ratification.[68]

Decline in recent years

[edit]

Historian Gary Gerstle argues that support for neoliberalism declined in the United States in both parties in 2016, with both Trumpism and progressivism opposing central tenets of neoliberalism. For example, Trump and Sanders both opposed the Transatlantic Pacific Partnership during the 2016 United States presidential election. President Trump then refused to sign any draft TPP, precluding further revisions to garner U.S. participation.[6] In contrast, Trump initially indicated willingness to continue TTIP negotiations with substantial changes.[69] On the eve of the COVID-19 pandemic, the TTIP dissolved into trade disputes between the European Union (EU) and the Trump Administration. Trump's approach to curbing the pandemic became the focus of EU delegate concerns, superseding the unresolved trade conflicts.[70]

Despite this, New Democrats have continued to be a large coalition within the big tent of the Democratic Party.[71] The New Democrat Coalition had 103 members after the 2018 House elections, and has maintained at least 90 members as of 2023.[72]

John Podesta served as an advisor to all three U.S. Presidents who led the New Democrats

Hillary Clinton presidential campaign

[edit]

Ahead of the 2016 Democratic Party presidential primaries, many New Democrats were backing the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton, the wife of former New Democrat president, Bill Clinton who served as a senator from New York during the 2000s and as Barack Obama's Secretary of State during the early 2010s. Originally considered to be an expected nominee, Clinton faced an unexpected challenge from Vermont Senator, Bernie Sanders, whose campaign garnered the support of progressive and younger Democrats. Ultimately, Clinton won 34 of the 57[a] contests, compared to Sanders' 23, and garnered about 55 percent of the vote. Nevertheless, commentators saw the primary as a decline in the strength of New Democrats in the party, and an increasing influence of progressive Democrats within the party.

Ahead of the formal announcement of the 2016 Democratic National Convention, WikiLeaks published the Democratic National Committee email leak, in which DNC operatives, many of whom were New Democrats, seemed to deride Bernie Sanders' campaign[73] and discuss ways to advance Clinton's nomination,[74] leading to the resignation of DNC chair, and New Democrat member, Debbie Wasserman Schultz and other implicated officials. The leak was allegedly part of an operation by the Russian government to undermine Hillary Clinton.[75][76]

Although the ensuing controversy initially focused on emails that dated from relatively late in the primary, when Clinton was nearing the party's nomination,[74] the emails cast doubt on the DNC's neutrality towards progressive and moderate candidates.[77][78][79][80][81] This was evidenced by alleged bias in the scheduling and conduct of the debates,[b] as well as controversial DNC–Clinton agreements regarding financial arrangements and control over policy and hiring decisions.[c] Other media commentators have disputed the significance of the emails, arguing that the DNC's internal preference for Clinton was not historically unusual and didn't affect the primary enough to sway the outcome.[89][90][91][92] The controversies ultimately led to the formation of a DNC "unity" commission to recommend reforms in the party's primary process.[93][94]

Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer, 2021

Presidency of Joe Biden

[edit]
Joe Biden, the 46th president (2021–present)

The winner of the 2020 United States presidential election was Joe Biden, who served as vice president under Barack Obama. Although Biden has not explicitly self-identified as a New Democrat, Biden identifies as a moderate Democrat and opposes some progressive positions.[95] During his presidency, Biden has broken with New Democrat policies on some issues, such as spending and free trade.[96]

In the 2020 United States House of Representatives elections, 13 Democrats lost their seats. All thirteen Democrats that lost their seats had won in the 2018 mid-term elections. Of those 13 members, 10 of them were New Democrats. During the 117th United States Congress, the New Democrat Coalition lost its status as the largest ideological coalition in favor of the more left leaning Congressional Progressive Caucus. The CPC was founded in 1991, but only began catching up and eventually surpassed the New Democrat Coalition in the 2010s.[97][9]

The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine has been characterized by some as the end of the Post–Cold War era and internationalism.[98] Bill Clinton was elected in 1992 shortly after the Dissolution of the Soviet Union, when New Democrats were at the peak of their influence.

As of December 2023, Biden has largely maintained Trump's protectionist trade policies, and has not negotiated any new free trade agreements. Labor unions, an important constituency for Biden’s re-election, opposed removing Trump's tariffs.[99] The PPI pressured the Biden Administration to revoke Obama's "dead" position and join the TPP.[100] Instead, the Biden Executive Office negotiated and initiated the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF). The 2024 United States presidential election, as well as partisan dissent in participating member-states, forestalled further implementation and ratification of the IPEF.[101]

Biden withdrew from the 2024 United States presidential election on July 21, 2024.[102][103]

2020s

[edit]

The defeat of Kamala Harris in the 2024 United States presidential election occasioned a variety of responses from think tanks and political journals. William Galston of the Brookings Institution, for example, argued that "by refusing to explain why she had abandoned the progressive positions on crime, immigration, health care, and climate change, she blurred the public’s perception of her", while, conversely, opening "the door to the Trump campaign’s charge that she was a closet radical."[104] According to D. D. Guttenplan, writers for The Nation had forecasted the results. For example, "cozily campaigning with the Cheneys, we warned, was likely to alienate as least as many potential voters as it attracted." Contributors noted that Gaza had additionally given the Trump campaign an antiwar veneer. Likewise, John Nichols, again writing in The Nation, observed both Bernie Sanders and Shawn Fain, despite outward appearances, desperately attempting to persuade the Harris campaign "to return to the economic populism—and clear appeal to working-class voters—they had embraced in Chicago (only to abandon it in favor of attacks on Trump’s character once the big donors weighed in)."[105]

Politico found a common thread for Democrats who won swing districts as well. These candidates, contributors maintained, all elucidated their respective platforms on economics, labor, abortion rights, and gun control, rather than solely engaging in Trump resistance politics during their campaigns. The same report also indicated that "centrists have urged the party to de-emphasize cultural issues after Trump successfully ran TV ads knocking Harris over transgender policies that after-action reports found helped persuade working-class voters." Pundits distinguished the " 'cultural estrangement between a lot of voters out there and the Democrats' " from the "economic concerns" that Democratic Party candidates should have explicated for voters without access to college education. In this assessment, then, the "centrist" critique rested on a deemphasis of "cultural issues" and a reemphasis on " 'working-class voters.' " However, with the change in electoral coalitions of both parties, new ideological positions may appear.[106]

Politico subsequently reported that the Progressive Caucus fully supported the fulfillment of Trump's campaign promises on Social Security, taxes on tips, and ten-percent limits to credit card interest rates. But if these promises weren't fulfilled, the Progressive Caucus planned to seize the opportunity.[107] The Indivisible movement concurrently introduced their new "Trump 2.0" guide, which called for civic activism to "blunt the damage" from the 2024 elections, rather than "Trump 1.0" resistance, tout court.[108]

Ideology

[edit]

According to Dylan Loewe, New Democrats tend to identify as fiscally moderate-to-conservative and socially liberal.[1]

Columnist Michael Lind argued that neoliberalism for New Democrats was the "highest stage" of left liberalism. The counterculture youth of the 1960s became more fiscally conservative in the 1970s and 1980s but retained their cultural liberalism. Many leading New Democrats, including Bill Clinton, and Gary Hart, started out in the George McGovern wing of the Democratic Party and gradually moved toward the right on economic and military policy.[109] According to historian Walter Scheidel, both major political parties shifted towards promoting free-market capitalism in the 1970s, with Republicans moving further to the political right than Democrats to the political left. He noted that Democrats played a significant role in the financial deregulation of the 1990s.[110] Gerstle and anthropologist Jason Hickel contended that the neoliberal policies of the Reagan era were carried forward by the Clinton administration, forming a new economic consensus which crossed party lines.[111][6]: 137–138, 155–157  According to Gerstle, "across his two terms, Clinton may have done more to free markets from regulation than even Reagan himself had done."[6]: 137–138, 155–157 

Historian Michael Kazin argues that New Democrat fiscal and monetary ideas marked a divergence from U.S. fiscal variants of Keynesian public spending. Keynesian economics aimed to stimulate individual and group consumption of goods and services in a given economic sector, until monetary circulation crossed a predetermined sector threshold for contraction in economic liberalism. This U.S. iteration of Keynesianism, coupled with budget deficits, began during the latter half of the Second New Deal and became a hallmark of early Cold War liberalism.[112]

In contrast, Clinton's "the era of big government is over" marked a more global shift to a new neoclassical synthesis, culminating in the post-war displacement of Keynesianism with creative destruction and various approaches to the service-commodity goods continuum in a post-industrial economy.[113] New Democrat monetary ideas aligned with easy money policy and the Greenspan put from the Reagan Administration, resulting in Clinton's reappointment of Alan Greenspan as Chair of the Federal Reserve. For "moral capitalism", Kazin favored U.S interpretations of New Keynesian economics in Progressive Caucus platforms, albeit with a more diversified consumer base.[114]

The 2008–2009 Keynesian resurgence, as well as Barack Obama's 2010 endorsement of the Volcker Rule, evinced a trend away from this New Democrat shift and concomitant tax brackets. During the COVID-19 pandemic and everything bubble, fiscal and monetary stimuli, as well as targeting in monetary policy to curb inflation, came under public and scholarly scrutiny. Debates focused on whether pandemic policymaking should be regarded solely as "COVID-Keynesianism", with more flexibility in deficit spending, or an advancement in the connected, yet distinct, trend. The latter would add a sustained expansion of financial regulatory authority to address any adverse effects of windfall profits, substantial price gouging, and artificial scarcity on the US economy.[115][116][117] The 2021–2023 inflation surge has called called into question the efficacy of increased federal spending and deficits.[118][119][120]

Criticism

[edit]

New Democrats have faced criticism from those further to the left. In a 2017 BBC interview, Noam Chomsky said that "the Democrats gave up on the working class forty years ago".[121][122] In the aftermath of his 2020 presidential campaign, Bernie Sanders stated that "the Democratic Party has become a party of the coastal elites,[123] folks who have a lot of money, upper-middle-class people".[124]

Political analyst Thomas Frank asserted that the Democratic Party began to represent the interests of the professional class rather than the working class.[125]

The Democratic Leadership Council, the organization that produced such figures as Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Joe Lieberman and Terry McAuliffe, has long been pushing the party to forget blue-collar voters and concentrate instead on recruiting affluent, white-collar professionals who are liberal on social issues. The larger interests that the DLC wants desperately to court are corporations, capable of generating campaign contributions far outweighing anything raised by organized labor. The way to collect the votes and -- more important -- the money of these coveted constituencies, "New Democrats" think, is to stand rock-solid on, say, the pro-choice position while making endless concessions on economic issues, on welfare, NAFTA, Social Security, labor law, privatization, deregulation and the rest of it.

— Thomas Frank, What's the Matter with Kansas? (2004), p. 243

In Listen, Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People? (2016), Frank was one of the few analysts who foresaw that Donald Trump could win the 2016 United States presidential election, attributing it to New Democrats alienating working class voters.[126][127]

Elected to public office

[edit]

Presidents

[edit]
  1. Bill Clinton[128] (former)
  2. Barack Obama[129] (former)
  3. Joe Biden[130][131]

Vice presidents

[edit]
  1. Al Gore[36] (former)
  2. Joe Biden[132] (former)

Senate

[edit]

House of Representatives

[edit]
  1. Pete Aguilar[154]
  2. Colin Allred[155]
  3. Jason Altmire[156]
  4. Brad Ashford[154] (former)
  5. Cindy Axne[155]
  6. Ami Bera[154]
  7. Don Beyer[154]
  8. Lisa Blunt Rochester[155]
  9. Brendan Boyle[155]
  10. Anthony Brindisi[155] (former)
  11. Anthony Brown[155]
  12. Shontel Brown[157]
  13. Julia Brownley[155]
  14. Cheri Bustos[155]
  15. Lois Capps[154] (former)
  16. Salud Carbajal[155]
  17. Tony Cardenas[154]
  18. André Carson[154]
  19. Troy Carter[158]
  20. Sean Casten[155]
  21. Joaquin Castro[154]
  22. Gerry Connolly[154]
  23. Jim Cooper[154]
  24. Lou Correa[155]
  25. Jim Costa[155]
  26. Joe Courtney[154]
  27. Angie Craig[155]
  28. Charlie Crist[155]
  29. Jason Crow[155]
  30. Joe Crowley[159]
  31. Henry Cuellar[155]
  32. Sharice Davids[155]
  33. Susan Davis[154] (former)
  34. Madeleine Dean[155]
  35. John Delaney[154] (former)
  36. Suzan DelBene[154]
  37. Val Demings[155]
  38. Eliot L. Engel[154] (former)
  39. Veronica Escobar[155]
  40. Elizabeth Esty[154] (former)
  41. Lizzie Fletcher[154]
  42. Bill Foster[154]
  43. Vicente Gonzalez[154]
  44. Josh Gottheimer[155]
  45. Gwen Graham[154] (former)
  46. Josh Harder[155]
  47. Denny Heck[154] (former)
  48. Jim Himes[154]
  49. Steven Horsford[155]
  50. Chrissy Houlahan[155]
  51. Sara Jacobs[155]
  52. Bill Keating[155]
  53. Derek Kilmer[154]
  54. Ron Kind[154]
  55. Ann Kirkpatrick[154]
  56. Raja Krishnamoorthi[155]
  57. Ann McLane Kuster[154]
  58. Rick Larsen[154]
  59. Brenda Lawrence[155]
  60. Al Lawson[155]
  61. Susie Lee[155]
  62. Elaine Luria[155]
  63. Tom Malinowski[155]
  64. Sean Patrick Maloney[154] (former)
  65. Kathy Manning[155]
  66. Lucy McBath[155]
  67. Gregory Meeks[154]
  68. Joe Morelle[155]
  69. Seth Moulton[154]
  70. Patrick Murphy[154]
  71. Donald Norcross[155]
  72. Beto O'Rourke[154] (former)
  73. Jimmy Panetta[155]
  74. Chris Pappas[155]
  75. Scott Peters[154][155]
  76. Ed Perlmutter[154]
  77. Dean Phillips[155]
  78. Pedro Pierluisi[154] (former)
  79. Mike Quigley[154][155]
  80. Kathleen Rice[154]
  81. Laura Richardson[160]
  82. Cedric Richmond[154] (former)
  83. Deborah K. Ross[155]
  84. Raul Ruiz[155]
  85. Loretta Sanchez[154] (former)
  86. Adam Schiff[154]
  87. Brad Schneider[155]
  88. Kurt Schrader[154]
  89. David Scott[154]
  90. Kim Schrier[155]
  91. Debbie Wasserman Schultz[154]
  92. Terri Sewell[154]
  93. Mikie Sherrill[155]
  94. Elissa Slotkin[155]
  95. Adam Smith[154]
  96. Darren Soto[155]
  97. Greg Stanton[155]
  98. Haley Stevens[155]
  99. Marilyn Strickland[155]
  100. Norma Torres[154]
  101. Lori Trahan[155]
  102. David Trone[155]
  103. Juan Vargas[154]
  104. Marc Veasey[155]
  105. Filemon Vela Jr.[154] (former)
  106. Jennifer Wexton[155]
  107. Susan Wild[155]
  108. Nikema Williams[157]

Governors

[edit]

Incumbent governors

[edit]
  1. Andy Beshear[161]
  2. John Carney[154]
  3. Roy Cooper[162]
  4. Laura Kelly[163]
  5. Janet Mills[164][165]
  6. Gavin Newsom[166]
  7. Josh Shapiro[167]

Former governors

[edit]

See also

[edit]

Explanatory notes

[edit]
  1. ^ Although there are 50 states, the Democratic primaries include contests in six U.S. territories, and one contest of Democrats Abroad, who are American expatriates.
  2. ^ As far back as 2015, the sharp reduction of the debate schedule, as well as the days and times, had been criticized by multiple rivals as biased in Clinton's favor.[82] The DNC denied bias, claiming to be cracking down on the non-sanctioned debates that proliferated in recent cycles, while leaving the number of officially sanctioned debates the same as in 2004 and 2008.[83][84] Donna Brazile, who succeeded Debbie Wasserman Schultz as DNC chair after the first batch of leaks,[85] was shown in the emails leaking primary debate questions to the Clinton campaign before the debates were held, although a senior aide to Sanders came to Brazile's defense and tried to downplay the issue.[86]
  3. ^ Brazile went on to write a book about the primary and what she called "unethical" behavior in which the DNC (after its debt from 2012 was resolved by the Clinton campaign) gave the Clinton campaign control over hirings and press releases, and allegedly helped it circumvent campaign finance regulation.[87] Several Democratic leaders responded that the joint-fundraising agreement was standard, was for the purpose of the general election, and was also offered to the Sanders campaign. Another agreement that came to light gave the Clinton campaign powers over the DNC well before the primary was decided. Some media commentators noted that the Clinton campaign's level of influence on staffing decisions was indeed unusual and could have ultimately influenced factors such as the debate schedule.[88][89]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b Loewe, Dylan (September 7, 2010). Permanently Blue: How Democrats Can End the Republican Party and Rule the Next Generation. Crown/Archetype. ISBN 9780307718006 – via Google Books.
  2. ^ Kane, Paul (January 15, 2014). "Blue Dog Democrats, whittled down in number, are trying to regroup". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on January 16, 2014. Retrieved July 23, 2014. Four years ago, they were the most influential voting bloc on Capitol Hill, more than 50 House Democrats pulling their liberal colleagues to a more centrist, fiscally conservative vision on issues such as health care and Wall Street reforms.
  3. ^ a b Yglesias, Matthew (July 26, 2016). "Bill Clinton is still a star, but today's Democrats are dramatically more liberal than his party". Vox. Retrieved May 31, 2022.
  4. ^ Graham, David A. (November 5, 2018). "How Far Have the Democrats Moved to the Left?". The Atlantic. Retrieved January 4, 2019.
  5. ^ Grim, Ryan (October 26, 2020). "Congressional Progressives Are Revamping Their Caucus With an Eye Toward 2021". The Intercept.
  6. ^ a b c d e Gerstle, Gary (2022). The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order: America and the World in the Free Market Era. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0197519646.
  7. ^ Steinhauer, Jennifer (October 8, 2012). "Weighing the Effect of an Exit of Centrists". The New York Times. Retrieved January 5, 2019.
  8. ^ Podkul, Alexander R.; Kamarck, Elaine (September 14, 2018). "What's happening to the Democratic Party?". Brookings Institution. Retrieved January 4, 2019.
  9. ^ a b Marans, Daniel (November 27, 2018). "The Progressive Caucus Has A Chance To Be More Influential Than Ever". The Huffington Post. That would bring the caucus' total to 96 members, or about 40 percent of the House Democratic Caucus ― by far the largest bloc in the party.
  10. ^ Fandos, Nicholas (November 6, 2024). "New York Delivers Key House Wins, but Warning Bells Sound for Democrats". New York Times.
  11. ^ Lillis, Mike (November 9, 2024). "Democrats' election reckoning pits liberals against centrists". The Hill.
  12. ^ Rubin, Richard (November 4, 2024). "The SALT Deduction Fight Is Coming Back—Whoever Wins the Election". Wall Street Journal.
  13. ^ "Center for New Liberalism". Center for New Liberalism.
  14. ^ Mortimer, Colin (February 10, 2020). "RELEASE: Young Neoliberals Link Up With PPI". Progressive Policy Institute.
  15. ^ "New Democrat Coalition Elects New Leadership and Inducts 23 New Members Ahead of 119th Congress | New Democrat Coalition". newdemocratcoalition.house.gov.
  16. ^ "Congressional Progressive Caucus Welcomes New Members-Elect to Washington Ahead of 119th Congress". Congressional Progressive Caucus. November 11, 2024.
  17. ^ Otterbein, Holly; Messerly, Megan (November 10, 2024). "More Democrats fear the party's image isn't just damaged – it's broken". POLITICO.
  18. ^ Kornfield, Meryl (November 16, 2024). "Democrats, reeling from election losses, cast blame on each other". Washington Post.
  19. ^ Lillis, Mike (November 9, 2024). "Democrats' election reckoning pits liberals against centrists". The Hill.
  20. ^ Helliwell, John (March 1988). "Comparative Macroeconomics of Stagflation". Journal of Economic Literature. 26 (1). Nashville, Tennessee: American Economic Association: 4.
  21. ^ Cebul, Brent (July 16, 2019). "Supply-Side Liberalism: Fiscal Crisis, Post-Industrial Policy, and the Rise of the New Democrats" (PDF). Modern American History. 2 (02): 139–164. doi:10.1017/mah.2019.9.
  22. ^ Cebul, Brent (March 14, 2023). Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century. University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 1–24. ISBN 978-1-5128-2382-0.
  23. ^ Fleegler, Robert L. (2023). Brutal campaign: how the 1988 election set the stage for twenty-first-century American politics. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press. ISBN 978-1-4696-7337-0.
  24. ^ Geismer, Lily. "Michael Dukakis Was Bill Clinton Before Bill Clinton". jacobin.com.
  25. ^ Martin, Isaac William (March 5, 2008). The Permanent Tax Revolt: How the Property Tax Transformed American Politics. Stanford University Press. pp. 50–97. ISBN 978-0-8047-6317-2.
  26. ^ Cebul, Brent; Geismer, Lily; Williams, Mason B.; Kahrl, Andrew (February 21, 2019). "The Short End of Both Sticks: Property Assessments and Black Taxpayer Disadvantage in Urban America". Shaped by the State: Toward a New Political History of the Twentieth Century. University of Chicago Press: 189–217.
  27. ^ Scribner, Campbell F. (May 12, 2016). The Fight for Local Control: Schools, Suburbs, and American Democracy. Cornell University Press. pp. 117–37. ISBN 978-1-5017-0411-6.
  28. ^ Mound, Josh (April 2020). "Stirrings of Revolt: Regressive Levies, the Pocketbook Squeeze, and the 1960s Roots of the 1970s Tax Revolt". Journal of Policy History. 32 (2): 105–150. doi:10.1017/S0898030620000019. ISSN 0898-0306.
  29. ^ Cebul, Brent (March 14, 2023). Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century. University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 240–266.
  30. ^ Geismer, Lily (2017). Don't Blame Us: Suburban Liberals and the Transformation of the Democratic Party. Princeton University Press. pp. 251–280. ISBN 978-0-691-17623-9.
  31. ^ Geismer, Lily (2016). "Atari Democrats". Jacobin.
  32. ^ Geismer, Lily (2023). "Michael Dukakis Was Bill Clinton Before Bill Clinton". Jacobin.
  33. ^ Wayne LeMieux, The Democrats' New Path, 2006, ISBN 978-1-4196-3872-5
  34. ^ a b John F Harris, The Survivor:Bill Clinton in the White House, Random House, 2005, ISBN 978-0-375-50847-9
  35. ^ "ndol.org". Archived from the original on June 7, 2007. Retrieved May 13, 2007.
  36. ^ a b c d e Hale, Jon F. "The Making of the New Democrats." Political Science Quarterly 110, no. 2 (1995): 207-221.
  37. ^ "DLC: The New American Choice Resolutions". Democratic Leadership Council. Archived from the original on January 11, 2014. Retrieved February 25, 2013.
  38. ^ Herman, Steven L. (December 4, 1989). "The "New Democrats" are Liberals and Proud of It". Associated Press.
  39. ^ Rae, Nicol C. (1994). Southern Democrats. Oxford University Press. p. 117. ISBN 0-19-508709-7.
  40. ^ Toner, Robin (March 1990). "Eyes to Left, Democrats Edge Toward the Center". The New York Times.
  41. ^ Edsall, Thomas B. (June 14, 1992). "CLINTON STUNS RAINBOW COALITION". Washington Post.
  42. ^ a b Cebul, Brent (March 14, 2023). Illusions of Progress: Business, Poverty, and Liberalism in the American Century. University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 90–95 and 265–290. ISBN 978-1-5128-2382-0.
  43. ^ Cebul, Brent (July 16, 2019). "Supply-Side Liberalism: Fiscal Crisis, Post-Industrial Policy, and the Rise of the New Democrats" (PDF). Modern American History. 2 (02): 139–164. doi:10.1017/mah.2019.9.
  44. ^ Cebul, Brent (July 16, 2019). "Supply-Side Liberalism: Fiscal Crisis, Post-Industrial Policy, and the Rise of the New Democrats" (PDF). Modern American History. 2 (02): 139–164. doi:10.1017/mah.2019.9.
  45. ^ Kelly, Michael (September 28, 1992). "The 1992 Campaign: The Democrats; Clinton Uses Farm Speech to Begin New Offensive". New York Times.
  46. ^ Toner, Robin (November 11, 1992), "The Republicans; Looking to the Future, Party Sifts Through Past", The New York Times
  47. ^ Atkinson, Robert D. (October 24, 2006). Supply-Side Follies: Why Conservative Economics Fails, Liberal Economics Falters, and Innovation Economics is the Answer. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. pp. 56–58 and 207–210. ISBN 978-1-4616-4273-2.
  48. ^ Sidney Blumenthal, The Clinton Wars, 2003, ISBN 0-374-12502-3
  49. ^ Alvarez, R. Michael, and Jonathan Nagler. "Economics, Entitlements, and Social Issues: Voter Choice in the 1996 Presidential Election." American Journal of Political Science 42, no. 4 (1998): 1361.
  50. ^ Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report. Vol. 48. Congressional Quarterly Inc. 1990. Retrieved December 4, 2016 – via Google Books.
  51. ^ Keller, Morton (September 26, 2007). America's Three Regimes: A New Political History. USA: Oxford University Press (published September 27, 2007). p. 227. ISBN 9780198043577. Retrieved December 4, 2016 – via Google Books.
  52. ^ "HR 3355 - Omnibus Crime Bill - Key Vote". votesmart.org. Retrieved October 21, 2016.
  53. ^ 1994 State of the Union Address Archived 2007-09-28 at the Wayback Machine
  54. ^ Presidential Press Conference - 08/03/1993 Archived 2007-09-27 at the Wayback Machine
  55. ^ Barker, Vanessa (August 26, 2009). The Politics of Imprisonment: How the Democratic Process Shapes the Way America Punishes Offenders. Oxford University Press. p. 66. ISBN 978-0-19-970846-8.
  56. ^ Geismer, Lily (June 2020). "Agents of Change: Microenterprise, Welfare Reform, the Clintons, and Liberal Forms of Neoliberalism". Journal of American History. 107 (1): 107–131. doi:10.1093/jahist/jaaa010.
  57. ^ Mounk, Yascha (January 3, 2017). "Responsibility Redefined". Democracy: A Journal of Ideas.
  58. ^ Lind, Michael (October 30, 2012). "Obama: Last of the "New Democrats"?".
  59. ^ Friess, Steve (June 24, 2018). "The Bizarro-World Trump Storming Michigan Politics". POLITICO Magazine.
  60. ^ "Obama: 'I am a New Democrat'". Politico. March 10, 2009.
  61. ^ Sunstein, Cass. "Eliminating Red Tape Through International Regulatory Cooperation" (PDF). Obama White House.
  62. ^ Sunstein, Cass (May 1, 2012). "Reducing Red Tape: Regulatory Reform Goes International". whitehouse.gov.
  63. ^ Sunstein, Cass (May 1, 2012). "The White House vs. Red Tape". Wall Street Journal.
  64. ^ "The Economic Benefits of U.S. Trade" (PDF). May 2015.
  65. ^ "Under Obama, Democrats suffer largest loss in power since Eisenhower". Quorum. Retrieved April 13, 2021.
  66. ^ Yglesias, Matthew (January 10, 2017). "The Democratic Party's down-ballot collapse, explained". Vox. Retrieved April 14, 2021.
  67. ^ Malone, Clare; Enten, Harry (January 19, 2017). "Barack Obama Won The White House, But Democrats Lost The Country". FiveThirtyEight. Retrieved April 13, 2021. In 2001, most Democrats — 47 percent — identified themselves as "moderate," while only 30 percent said they were "liberal." By 2016, the proportions were reversed, with 44 percent of people within the party calling themselves "liberal" and 41 percent calling themselves "moderate."
  68. ^ "Obama administration acknowledges Pacific trade deal is dead". PBS News. November 11, 2016.
  69. ^ Dullien, Sebastian (April 28, 2017). "Trump's poisoned TTIP chalice". ECFR.
  70. ^ Herszenhorn, David (2020). "Trump's relationship with Europe goes from bad to nothingness". Politico.
  71. ^ Brenes, Michael (July 12, 2018). "Ocasio-Cortez shows the Democrats are moving left. But liberal centrists are still necessary". Vox.
  72. ^ "25th Anniversary". New Democrat Coalition. Retrieved January 7, 2023.
  73. ^ a b Shear, Michael D.; Rosenberg, Matthew (July 23, 2016). "Released Emails Suggest the D.N.C. Derided the Sanders Campaign". The New York Times. Retrieved November 6, 2018.
  74. ^ a b Blake, Aaron (July 25, 2016). "Here are the latest, most damaging things in the DNC's leaked emails". The Washington Post. Retrieved November 6, 2018.
  75. ^ Adam Entous, Ellen Nakashima and Greg Miller (December 9, 2016). "Secret CIA assessment says Russia was trying to help Trump win White House". The Washington Post. Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  76. ^ Shane Harris, Ellen Nakashima and Craig Timberg (April 18, 2019). "Through email leaks and propaganda, Russians sought to elect Trump, Mueller finds". The Washington Post. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
  77. ^ "Elizabeth Warren agrees Democratic race 'rigged' for Clinton". BBC News. November 3, 2017. Retrieved November 21, 2018.
  78. ^ Schleifer, Theodore (July 25, 2016). "What was in the DNC email leak?". CNN. Retrieved November 21, 2018.
  79. ^ Chan, Melissa (July 24, 2016). "Bernie Sanders Calls for Debbie Wasserman Schultz to Resign After Email Leak". Time. Retrieved November 21, 2018.
  80. ^ Yuhas, Alan (July 24, 2016). "Hillary Clinton campaign blames leaked DNC emails about Sanders on Russia". The Guardian. Retrieved November 21, 2018.
  81. ^ Flaherty, Anne (July 24, 2016). "Sanders Calls for DNC Chair's Resignation as Hacked Emails Overshadow Convention". Haaretz. Retrieved November 21, 2018.
  82. ^ "Democratic primary debate schedule criticized as Clinton 'coronation'". The Guardian. August 6, 2015.
  83. ^ Andrew Prokop (August 6, 2015). "The Democrats just released their debate schedule, and it's great news for Hillary Clinton". Vox. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
  84. ^ Harry Enten (May 6, 2016). "Is Six Democratic Debates Too Few?". FiveThirtyEight. Retrieved September 7, 2017.
  85. ^ Caputo, Marc (July 24, 2016). "Wasserman Schultz steps down as DNC chair". Politico. Retrieved November 21, 2018.
  86. ^ "www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-former-senior-aide-to-bernie-sanders-1476297181-htmlstory.html". A Times. October 12, 2016.
  87. ^ Brazile, Donna (November 2, 2017). "Inside Hillary Clinton's Secret Takeover of the DNC". Politico. Retrieved November 10, 2017.
  88. ^ Stein, Jeff (November 2, 2017). "Donna Brazile's bombshell about the DNC and Hillary Clinton, explained". Vox. Retrieved June 10, 2019.
  89. ^ a b Heersink, Boris (November 4, 2017). "No, the DNC didn’t 'rig' the Democratic primary for Hillary Clinton". The Washington Post. Retrieved March 8, 2018.
  90. ^ Houle, Dana (July 25, 2016). "No, the DNC Didn’t Rig the Primary in Favor of Hillary". The New Republic. Retrieved March 8, 2018.
  91. ^ Holland, Joshua (July 29, 2016). "What the Leaked E-mails Do and Don’t Tell Us About the DNC and Bernie Sanders" Archived December 5, 2019, at the Wayback Machine. The Nation. Retrieved March 8, 2018.
  92. ^ Gaughan, Anthony J. (August 27, 2019). "Was the Democratic Nomination Rigged? A Reexamination of the Clinton-Sanders Presidential Race". University of Florida Journal of Law & Public Policy (29). SSRN 3443916. Retrieved October 29, 2020. This article ... contends that the overwhelming weight of evidence makes clear the 2016 Democratic nomination process was not rigged in favor of Hillary Clinton. Second, this article argues that the Democratic Party rules and state election laws actually hurt Clinton and benefited Sanders.
  93. ^ Robillard, Kevin (December 9, 2017). "DNC 'unity' panel recommends huge cut in superdelegates". Politico. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
  94. ^ Seitz-Wald, Alex (August 25, 2018). "Democrats strip superdelegates of power and reform caucuses in 'historic' move". NBC News. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
  95. ^ Nagle, Molly. "Jill Biden calls husband Joe 'a moderate'". ABC News. Retrieved June 26, 2021.
  96. ^ Garofoli, Joe (April 29, 2021). "Joe Biden is no progressive, but progressives like him - so far". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved June 26, 2021.
  97. ^ Zengerle, Jason; Metz, Justin (June 29, 2022). "The Vanishing Moderate Democrat". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved July 20, 2022. Over the last decade, the Democratic Party has moved significantly to the left on almost every salient political issue ... on social, cultural and religious issues, particularly those related to criminal justice, race, abortion and gender identity, the Democrats have taken up ideological stances that many of the college-educated voters who now make up a sizable portion of the party's base cheer ... .
  98. ^ Plokhy, Serhii (May 16, 2023). The Russo-Ukrainian War: From the bestselling author of Chernobyl. Penguin Books. ISBN 978-1-80206-179-6. ... If the collapse of the USSR was sudden and largely bloodless, growing strains between its two largest successors would develop into limited fighting in the Donbas in 2014 and then into all-out warfare in 2022, causing death, destruction, and a refugee crisis on a scale not seen in Europe since the Second World War.
  99. ^ Hayashi, Yuka (December 28, 2023). "Biden Struggles to Push Trade Deals with Allies as Election Approaches". The Wall Street Journal.
  100. ^ Swanson, Ana (May 27, 2023). "Biden Administration Announces Indo-Pacific Deal, Clashing With Industry Groups". The New York Times.
  101. ^ Tong, Kurt; Yap, Chuin Wei (March 9, 2024). "The next steps for Biden's Indo-Pacific Economic Framework". The Hill.
  102. ^ Klassen, Thomas (July 21, 2024). "Biden steps aside, setting in motion an unprecedented period in American politics". The Conversation. Archived from the original on July 22, 2024. Retrieved July 24, 2024.
  103. ^ Kenning, Chris; Samuelsohn, Darren. "'It's unprecedented': Biden's exit is a history-making moment in the American presidency". USA Today. Archived from the original on July 25, 2024. Retrieved July 23, 2024.
  104. ^ Galson, William. "Why Donald Trump won and Kamala Harris lost: An early analysis of the results". Brookings.
  105. ^ Guttenplan, D. D. (November 26, 2024). "Reckoning With the Election Results".
  106. ^ Reisman, Nick; Kapos, Shia; Otterbein, Holly (November 24, 2024). "From despair to action: Democrats plot their comeback". Politco.
  107. ^ Otterbein, Holly; Gibson, Brittany; Hill, Meredith Lee. "This is the new progressive strategy for warring with Trump". Politico.
  108. ^ Greenberg, Leah; Levin, Ezra (November 17, 2024). "Opinion | The guide to fighting back against Trump 2.0". MSNBC.com.
  109. ^ Lind, Michael (August 6, 2013). Up from Conservatism. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 9781476761152 – via Google Books.
  110. ^ Scheidel, Walter (2017). The Great Leveler: Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century. Princeton University Press. p. 416. ISBN 978-0691165028.
  111. ^ Hickel, Jason (2016). "Neoliberalism and the End of Democracy". In Springer, Simon; Birch, Kean; MacLeavy, Julie (eds.). The Handbook of Neoliberalism. Routledge. p. 144. ISBN 978-1138844001.
  112. ^ Kazin, Michael (March 1, 2022). What It Took to Win: A History of the Democratic Party. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. p. 203. ISBN 978-0-374-71779-7.
  113. ^ Kazin, Michael (March 1, 2022). What It Took to Win: A History of the Democratic Party. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. p. 290. ISBN 978-0-374-71779-7.
  114. ^ Arjini, Nawal; Kazin, Michael (May 15, 2021). "The Enduring Promise of Moral Capitalism". The New York Review of Books.
  115. ^ Montgomerie, Johanna (March 2023). "COVID Keynesianism: Locating Inequality in the Anglo-American Crisis Response". Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society. 16 (1): 211–223. doi:10.1093/cjres/rsad003.
  116. ^ Krawiec, Kimberly; Liu, Guangya (January 1, 2015). "The Volcker Rule: A Brief Political History". Capital Markets Law Journal. 10 (4): 507–522. doi:10.1093/cmlj/kmv036.
  117. ^ Wood, James (September 28, 2022). "'COVID-Keynesianism' was a short-term crisis management tactic. Neoliberal policymaking is back". British Politics and Policy at LSE.
  118. ^ Enten, Harry (December 21, 2021). "Biden's economic ratings are worse than Carter's". CNN. Archived from the original on December 25, 2021.
  119. ^ Chohan, Usman (March 2022). "The return of Keynesianism? Exploring path dependency and ideational change in post-covid fiscal policy". Policy and Society. 41 (1): 68–82. doi:10.1093/polsoc/puab013.
  120. ^ "Fed raises interest rates to highest in 22 years". BBC News. July 26, 2023. Retrieved August 4, 2023.
  121. ^ "Noam Chomsky: The Most Remarkable Thing About 2016 Election Was Bernie Sanders, Not Trump (Video)". Truthdig. May 15, 2017. 3:19 minutes in. Retrieved May 26, 2017.
  122. ^ Bouie, Jamelle (November 14, 2014). "Why Democrats Can't Win Over White Working-Class Voters". Slate.
  123. ^ "Coastal Elite". Cambridge Dictionary. Retrieved July 20, 2024. the group of educated, professional people living mainly in cities on the western or northeastern coasts of the US who have liberal political views and are often considered to have advantages that most ordinary Americans do not have
  124. ^ Niall Stanage (October 12, 2020). "The Memo: Democrats grapple with 'elite' tag". thehill.com. Archived from the original on December 10, 2020.
  125. ^ Nicholas Lemann (October 13, 2016). "Can We Have a 'Party of the People'?". nybooks.com. The New York Review of Books. Retrieved October 4, 2016. review of Exit Right: The People Who Left the Left and Reshaped the American Century
  126. ^ Taibbi, Matt (August 2, 2020). "Kansas Should Go F--- Itself". Substack. Retrieved November 8, 2020.
  127. ^ Cohn, Nate (November 9, 2016). "Why Trump Won: Working-Class". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved March 10, 2017.
  128. ^ Hale, Jon F. (January 1, 1995). "The Making of the New Democrats". Political Science Quarterly. 110 (2): 207–232. doi:10.2307/2152360. JSTOR 2152360.
  129. ^ a b "Obama: 'I am a New Democrat'". Politico. March 10, 2009.
  130. ^ Garofoli, Joe (April 29, 2021). "Joe Biden is no progressive, but progressives like him - so far". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved June 26, 2021.
  131. ^ Nagle, Molly. "Jill Biden calls husband Joe 'a moderate'". ABC News. Retrieved June 26, 2021.
  132. ^ Washington, District of Columbia 1100 Connecticut Ave NW Suite 1300B; Dc 20036. "PolitiFact - Joe Biden claims he was a staunch liberal in the Senate. He wasn't". @politifact. Retrieved February 4, 2021.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  133. ^ a b Matthews, Dylan (July 11, 2016). "Evan Bayh is running for Senate, significantly boosting Democrats' odds of retaking it". Vox. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  134. ^ "The quiet war on Social Security: Meet the dark side of MyRA". Salon. February 5, 2014. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  135. ^ a b c d e f NDN: Senate New Democrat Coalition Members (August 2002)
  136. ^ "NEW DSCC AD: Senator Toomey Looks Out for Wall Street, Not Pennsylvania Seniors". DSCC: Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. September 6, 2016. Retrieved February 12, 2021.
  137. ^ ""The president ought to be ashamed"". Salon. November 22, 2003. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  138. ^ "AD: Kent Conrad on the issues". OnTheIssues. November 4, 2014. Retrieved September 4, 2021.
  139. ^ The Editorial Board (June 25, 2020). "Opinion | The Filibuster Is Going, Going . . ". Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  140. ^ "Moderate Democrats like Joe Donnelly are a throwback". The Economist. August 18, 2018. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  141. ^ "Byron L. Dorgan". bipartisanpolicy.org.
  142. ^ a b "Maggie Hassan on the Issues". ontheissues.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  143. ^ "Outgoing Sen. Heidi Heitkamp Discusses Tariffs And Their Impact On North Dakota". NPR.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  144. ^ a b Whitesides, John (July 1, 2020). "Hickenlooper wins Democratic primary for key U.S. Senate seat in Colorado". Reuters. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  145. ^ "Sen. Tim Johnson's Second Chance at Life and Work". ABC News. Retrieved February 12, 2021.
  146. ^ "Morning News Brief". NPR.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  147. ^ "Ted Kaufman on the Issues". www.ontheissues.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  148. ^ "Georgia runoffs crown new power brokers in Washington". WKTV News. Archived from the original on January 28, 2021. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  149. ^ Stack, Liam (October 30, 2018). "Claire McCaskill, a Democrat, Slams 'Crazy Democrats' on Fox News (Published 2018)". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  150. ^ "As Florida recount ends, Sen. Nelson concedes race to Scott". AP NEWS. November 19, 2018. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  151. ^ "Mark Pryor on the Issues". www.ontheissues.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  152. ^ "SALAZAR, Kenneth Lee". Retrieved September 29, 2021.
  153. ^ Robillard, Kevin (April 18, 2018). "'I don't think they can beat who I am'". POLITICO. Retrieved January 27, 2021.
  154. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae af ag ah ai aj ak al am an ao ap aq ar as at au av aw "Membership | New Democrat Coalition". Newdemocratcoalition-kind.house.gov. Archived from the original on September 27, 2017. Retrieved April 15, 2014.
  155. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae af ag ah ai aj ak al am an ao ap aq ar as at au av aw ax ay az ba bb bc bd "Members". newdemocratcoalition.house.gov. Retrieved February 11, 2020.
  156. ^ "New Dems Task Force press release" (PDF). January 2011.
  157. ^ a b "Democrat New Democrat Coalition Celebrates Addition of New Members Reps. Shontel Brown and Nikema Williams". newdemocratcoalition.house.gov. Retrieved November 9, 2021.
  158. ^ "Democrat Troy Carter wins New Orleans-based US House seat". apnews.com. April 24, 2021. Retrieved July 19, 2021.
  159. ^ "New Dems Task Force press release" (PDF). January 2011.
  160. ^ "New Dems Task Force press release" (PDF). January 2011.
  161. ^ "Democrat challenging Mitch McConnell raises $10.7 million in third quarter". www.cbsnews.com. October 10, 2019. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  162. ^ Martin, Nick (September 10, 2019). "Two Dans, Two Elections, and No Winners". The New Republic. ISSN 0028-6583. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  163. ^ "'I've been there, done that': Laura Kelly navigates GOP skepticism to score early wins". Retrieved January 30, 2021.
  164. ^ "Maine governor vetoes bill to shutter youth detention center". Associated Press. June 24, 2021. Retrieved June 26, 2021.
  165. ^ Andrews, Caitlin (June 17, 2021). "Maine Legislature bucks Janet Mills, police in voting to decriminalize drug possession". Bangor Daily News. Retrieved June 20, 2021.
  166. ^ Christopher, Ben (October 22, 2019). "Gov. Newsom the moderate? On this spectrum, almost every Democratic legislator is further left". Calmatters. Archived from the original on December 3, 2021. Retrieved December 3, 2021. Based on an analysis of the 1,042 bills that the governor signed or vetoed this year, Gavin Newsom is more moderate than any other Democratic state senator and sits to the left of only two Democrats in the Assembly.
  167. ^ Picciotto, Rebecca (July 30, 2024). "Shapiro backs 'aggressive' corporate tax cuts in Pennsylvania as Harris campaign vets him for VP". CNBC. Retrieved July 31, 2024.
  168. ^ "Most Rookie Governors Are Off to a Good Start". www.governing.com. October 6, 2015. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  169. ^ "Facing a pro-Trump candidate in a red state, Tennessee's Bredesen thinks he knows how to win". NBC News. November 5, 2018. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  170. ^ Dan, Merica (December 2, 2019). "Steve Bullock ends presidential campaign, will not run for Senate". CNN. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  171. ^ Raju, Manu (November 13, 2014). "How Harry Reid kept his job". POLITICO. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  172. ^ "Jim Doyle on the Issues". www.ontheissues.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  173. ^ Sack, Kevin (May 4, 2000). "THE 2000 CAMPAIGN: THE PRIMARIES; North Carolina's Race For Governor Begins With Focus on Schools (Published 2000)". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  174. ^ "Dave Freudenthal on the Issues". www.ontheissues.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  175. ^ "Christine Gregoire on the Issues". ontheissues.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  176. ^ "Brad Henry on the Issues". www.ontheissues.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  177. ^ "John Kitzhaber on the Issues". www.ontheissues.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  178. ^ Burns, Alexander (November 8, 2012). "Politico blog". Politico. Archived from the original on November 11, 2012. Retrieved November 9, 2012.
  179. ^ "Ronnie Musgrove on the Issues". www.ontheissues.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  180. ^ "Arizona's drift to the left". The Economist. May 13, 2004. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  181. ^ Nagourney, Adam; Ember, Sydney; Mazzei, Patricia (November 7, 2018). "Democrats Oust Walker in Wisconsin and Kobach in Kansas but Fall Short in Florida and Ohio (Published 2018)". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  182. ^ "Brian Schweitzer on the Issues". www.ontheissues.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  183. ^ Kilgore, Ed (September 4, 2018). "Former GOP Governor of Kansas Endorses Kobach's Democratic Opponent". Intelligencer. Retrieved February 11, 2021.
  184. ^ "Earl Ray Tomblin on the Issues". www.ontheissues.org. Retrieved February 11, 2021.

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]