The Times Brands Sanders and Warren as Far Left

[babylonsister]

https://prospect.org/blogs/tap/the-times-brands-sanders-and-warren-as-far-left/

The American Prospect
The Times Brands Sanders and Warren as Far Left
by Robert Kuttner
December 23, 2019


The sheer ideological bias of the mainstream press continues to astound. Today’s offender is a piece in The New York Times (page B2 of the Monday print edition) with the headline “Democrats Are Cautious About Ideas on the Far Left.”

The Times’ examples are Medicare for All and free public higher education. Call me old-fashioned, but I always thought “far left” referred to such ideas as nationalizing the means of production. You know: Lenin, Fidel, Chairman Mao.

Free public higher education is about as far left as Lincoln’s land grant colleges. For more than a century, it was the norm in America.

snip//

So, by the Times’ definition, 69 percent of Democrats are evidently “far left.” What gives? Could it be that respondents have inconsistent, context-dependent preferences, depending on how the question is asked?

Well, yes, as any competent pollster can tell you. That’s just Political Science 101. The Times betrays three bad habits: overwriting headlines and stories, misunderstanding the dark arts of polling, and a not-so-subtle bias favoring the political center.

[JoeOtterbein]

1. It's about time for the right ands politicians start...

...reaching out to the left!

For a change!

[ritapria]

2. The MSM suck off the teat

of Big Pharma , Big Insurance , The Big Banks , and the Military Industrial Complex …. 2/3 rds of the Country has less than 1,000 dollars in savings and they don't give a damn about them …..They want to keep the gravy train rolling along ..

[abqtommy]

3. As I remember my poli-sci classes, the far left referred to the communists who now are so

far left that they're far right...

[KPN]

29. Yep, it's just a fear-mongering label, a

dysphemism meant to brainwash the masses.

[abqtommy]

36. Labels can be useful and informative. It's a pity that there are those that subvert anything to use

for their own nefarious purposes.

[apcalc]

4. And as long as that attitude ' far-left' prevails, they will never win against Trump.

Imo, many independents and moderate R’s will never vote for them. Sad.

[NurseJackie]

8. Thank you.

[myohmy2]

11. or...

...the only way to prevail against trump...

...IMO, treating our citizens like the rest of the civilized world treats their citizens is not 'far-left', it's mainstream center...

...through the prism of far right-wing extremism that we live under, it only makes it appear 'far-left'...

...I hate fascists...

[Bradshaw3]

12. It doesn't "prevail", its a RW meme that is pushed on here by supporters of other candidates

Many independents and moderate Rs didn't vote for HRC, either. As the artivle pointed out, most voters agree with many of her plans. The term far left is used by opponents of Warren to smear - just like RWers use "liberal" as a perjorative. That is worse than sad.

[redqueen]

41. +1 nt

[apcalc]

43. It prevails in the media. And the media always portrays Warren and Sanders as far left.

[KPN]

31. So don't have or contribute to that attitude

by proclaiming its impossibility. Moderates could always promote and serve as public educators/spokespersons for the societal benefits of so-called “far left” goals instead. Attitude counts.

[NYMinute]

5. Stating the obvious

and the word "branded" is quite poignant because "far left" categorization is disliked by vast majorities.

[YOHABLO]

9. Well anyone that has a clue knows what they're up to.

They always are supporting the Dem who leans toward corporate initiatives which is to please their share holders.

[NYMinute]

14. I disagree

There are genuine liberals among the rich people. You may not want to believe it but that is driven by a messianic candidate. This class warfare was not present to this extent before 2016.

[David__77]

16. Class warfare? Like what? Unions? Living wage ordinances? Rent control?

Progressive taxation? Inheritance taxes? Wealth taxes?

Republicans would perhaps call this class warfare.

[NYMinute]

17. I support all those measures except rent control and wealth tax

However, what I am opposed to is demonizing all rich people as corrupt, evil and greedy. What is worse is demonizing our candidates because some of them get support from rich people.

It is a horrible tactic and only one or two candidates practice such divisive rhetoric.

[David__77]

18. I note that some characterize "redistributive" policies as "class warfare."

I understand the point about making generalizations about people having some level of assets. There are very wealthy people who support a progressive agenda including high taxation on the wealthy who should be united with, in my opinion.

[NYMinute]

19. The candidate you are supporting attacks ALL billionaires

There are actually two billionaires running for POTUS as Democrats and countless other billionaires support progressive causes and do a lot of philanthropy as well.

Warren Buffet has a group of billionaires who have pledged to donate at least half their wealth.

The "millionaires and billionaires" rhetoric in every one of Sanders' speeches is what exactly if not class warfare? Making people get angry at rich people and reinforcing a notion that they are all corrupt and greedy.

[David__77]

23. Ok.

I understand your perspective.

[YOHABLO]

30. Well obviously you are blessed enough financially to be a little biased about the subject.

Many many out here are really struggling.

[NYMinute]

34. Just because you are struggling doesn't mean you should demonize all rich people

and call them corrupt, evil and greedy.

There have been times when I have struggled as well but I did not begrudge other people's success.

Furthermore, it is the republican policies that have created inequality. It does not help to attack fellow Democrats, weakening them and helping republicans win.

Are you better off with Trump?

[YOHABLO]

40. Never said any of that. Question is: will we be better off with Biden?

[redqueen]

42. Wow nt

[KPN]

32. Too many don't have a clue. Some due to ignorance,

some due to personal philosophy/ideology, and some are just too comfortable personally to care.

[guillaumeb]

6. The rich own the media.

And naturally the rich hate policies that reduce their own power.

[YOHABLO]

7. It's those who never question their modus operandi

which is usually keeping the 'powers that be' happy with their editorial content.

[beastie boy]

10. I see nothing wrong with the Times. What is wrong is Robert Kuttner screaming "bias" in response to

the Times article. The Times article reports on the survey it conducted about Democratic candidates for President. In this well defined field, Warren and Sanders are indeed the far left, no matter how much support they claim. It would have been different if Lenin, Fidel and Chairman Mao were running for President together with Warren and Sanders, but they did not.

I am getting pretty tired of people getting hysterical over articles they completely misunderstand, or pretend to misunderstand.

[KPN]

33. Oh brother. Sounds far-rightish to me.

[beastie boy]

35. Doesn't it? I have to be careful not to lose my posting privileges on DU!

[msongs]

13. bias of the center where most people are lol instead of the 5% at each extreme nt

[NYMinute]

15. Tail getting pissed that it can't wag the dog nt

[highplainsdem]

20. If you have a candidate who's described himself as a socialist for decades, and another

candidate who's pushing very similar ideas, I don't see why calling them "far left" is inaccurate.

[betsuni]

21. I think the Far Left flavor comes not from policy but behavior.

Warren only does it occasionally, like during the debate, and she gets push back.

Medicare for All is just one plan, the idea's been around forever. But when it's put out there that it's the ONLY way and if it doesn't pass as-is, the Sanders version, millions will die and Big Pharma and Big Insurance will control everything, it's dramatic and scary. A health care plan is now a revolution and everyone who thinks there are better plans is an enemy. Anyone who thinks it'd be easier to first pass an ACA with a public option and 55-year-old Medicare eligibility (which Sanders said in 2017 was the best way to go when Republicans control the House) turns into a wealthy elite enemy to be hated. A member of your own party. THAT'S Far Left. Same thing with the Green New Deal (term first used by Thomas Freidman in 2007). Accusing your colleagues of being corrupt (immoral) because of fundraisers without a shred of evidence. Insisting there's a grand conspiracy to silence you by the press and establishment this and that because they are TERRIFIED of your stump speech: "The billionaire class is scared and they should be scared." It's all emotion.

It's the attitude. That's my opinion.

[Recursion]

25. Thank you.

Whoever decided that there was one and only one acceptable model of funding universal healthcare should be run out of town on a rail because it has cost us a decade of stupid internal fights.

[betsuni]

38. Yes!

[Scurrilous]

37. Yep. And the flavor also comes from their follower's rhetoric.

Leftists for Trump: What Is to Be Done About These Insufferable Nihilists?

"On Wednesday, Ketcham published a piece in the Daily Beast titled “Anarchists For Trump—Let the Empire Burn.” Ketcham, who writes that he donated hundreds of dollars to Bernie Sanders, now plans to support Donald Trump in the general election. “What’s needed now in American politics is consternation, confusion, dissension, disorder, chaos—and crisis, with possible resolution—and a Trump presidency is the best chance for this true progress,” he writes. “This is a politics of arson. I’d rather see the empire burn to the ground under Trump, opening up at least the possibility of radical change, than cruise on autopilot under Clinton.”

This is a more forceful rendition of the argument that Susan Sarandon floated on MSNBC in March, when she said, “Some people feel that Donald Trump will bring the revolution immediately if he gets in, things will really explode.” It’s a jejune version of the Bolshevik slogan “The worse, the better,” which meant that deteriorating social conditions would radicalize the populace and empower the left."

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/06/leftists-for-trump-what-is-to-be-done-about-these-insufferable-nihilists.html

Sanders and Warren aren't really far left - normally defined as communism and its subgroups - but the words of some of their followers echo that of the far left, here advocating for policy that Lenin - though denying he originated the concept or supported it - admitted played itself out during the revolution.

Don't want to be called far let? Quit having ice cream socials with dilettantes naively mouthing Bolshevik slogans.

[betsuni]

39. "Quit having ice cream socials with dilettantes naively mouthing Bolshevik slogans."

[Uncle Joe]

22. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread babylonsister.

[BeckyDem]

24. Good to know FDR ideals/policies and anti-corruption campaigns are "far left".

Not subtle bias, not at all.

[brutus smith]

26. Sanders and Warren are in good company. "They hate me and I welcome their hatred" - FDR

[lapucelle]

27. There are more than a few problems with the American Prospect editorial.

To begin with, it references a NYT story that appears in digital format with the headline:

Democrats Love Free College, Until You Offer Them More Options

A new survey finds that Democrats haven’t fully embraced progressive policy proposals like free college and Medicare for all.

In print, the headline reads:

Democrats Are Cautious About Ideas On Far Left

The NYT article doesn't "brand" either candidate as far left. Here's what it actually says:

Those results, from a survey conducted this month for The New York Times by the online research firm SurveyMonkey, are striking because past polls, including those from The Times, have shown broad-based support for progressive ideas among Democrats. Last month, 81 percent of Democrats said they approved of Medicare for all; in July, 82 percent said they supported making public colleges free for all.

But those earlier surveys asked simple yes-or-no questions. The most recent survey offered respondents more options to choose from. And it found that Democratic voters consistently preferred policies that were well to the left of current law, but were more moderate than those proposed by Mr. Sanders and Ms. Warren.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/business/economy/democratic-voters-free-college.html

[Hortensis]

28. Sanders? Far left, radical, extremist. Whatever the term: of course.

Some experts describe Sanders as a 1930s socialist. 1930s or 1980s, I couldn't say. But he himself says almost every day that he has trouble making out any difference between Biden and Trump, Pelosi and McCarthy, so I'm guessing his perspective's from pretty far out, radical in both personality and ideology. (Two different definitions of radical.)

We know he didn't bother voting during much of the civil rights era, and that is probably more of that distance problem. One party's running on segregation, the other calling out the National Guard to desegregate, one's trying to repeal the other's Social Security, the other's creating Medicare. Creating or fighting to stop the 1964 and 1965 voting rights acts? What's the difference, both are capitalist lackeys. Or "Tweedledum and Tweedledee" as Sanders put it in the mid 1980s when the Democrats were fighting for the environment and to get the global warming battle revved up and the Republicans were stopping it.

I really don't think buying the man some binoculars would help in the least, though. "I am not now, nor have I ever been, a liberal Democrat." Sanders, of course.

Warren's very different. She's a solid Democrat who was economically conservative into middle age and switched parties only after reaganism and when the GOP went full-out kleptocratic extreme. She's currently comparatively radical in economic goals. (Unnecessarily outlawing the right to purchase workplace insurance for 300,000,000 Americans and all future generations is the criterion I'm using. The rest of her policies are pretty mainstream waiting for their time to come.)

But, her ability to function and get along well with her mainstream liberal colleagues proves she was never and is not radical by personality. In 2015, both Biden and Clinton wanted and seriously wanted her for their running mate, proof positive in my mind.