2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumClinton-style centrist economics rests on a surprisingly shaky foundation
The center-left economic policy consensus that dominated the administrations of Barack Obama and Bill Clinton now rests on surprisingly shaky electoral foundations. Not only is Clinton relying on older voters to beat Sanders, she's relying specifically on African-American votes and the institutional support of labor unions. Both groups have their reasons for backing Clinton in 2016, but neither is a reliable supporter of centrist economics.
Black Democrats have more populist economic views
This is a winning formula for Hillary Clinton, but it's very much a personal formula tied to the specific circumstances of the 2016 race. Future candidates can't count on the same thing to work, since Clinton is fundamentally not representing the views of her coalition.
Labor unions mostly backed Clinton
That strategic thinking will be second-guessed by more ideological activists for years to come, but it was what it was. This is, however, another example of a pillar of Clinton's strength that Clintonism can't count on for the future. Unions will tend to use their influence to shift the party to the left (as they in fact have done in 2016) and may be more eager to back left-wing insurgents in the future.
Young people are very left-wing
Beyond all this, when you consider the 2024 or 2028 election cycles, a striking reality is that many of today's 70-somethings will be dead and most of today's 20-somethings will be 30-somethings. In that context, the breadth and depth of support for Sanders among the youngest cohort is striking.
http://www.vox.com/2016/3/21/11273978/clinton-shaky-foundation
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)huh?
w4rma
(31,700 posts)Promoting fracking, throughout the world, is not progressive. Imperialistic wars are not progressive. Blocking Glass-Steagall is not progressive. Huge Wall-Street donations are not progressive.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)on those issues.