Oh good the first of the centrist lukewarm takes in preparation for 2020.

Go away, Rachel.

I don't know if anyone has actually called Rachel pro-corporate. But for Clinton and other Democratic politicians to be called that when they accept 'contributions' from corporations seems eminently reasonable to me

"You can chose keep your hands clean."

First of all, the grammar of that sentence is shameful. Second of all, the condescension is palpable.

Let me be condescending right back. One of your heroes, Hillary Clinton, isn't just pro-corporate. She's also anti-privacy, pro-prison, anti-single-payer, and pro-war. For fucks sake, it seems tone deaf to include a sentence praising Hillary as your hero in the same week that people are, once again, remembering the passage from her book where she extols on the benefits of using prison slave labor just before she advocated for the crime bill to dramatically increase the prison population while calling black youth "superpredators."

Of course, that pales to your decrying any criticism of the Democrats. Don't call the Boeing tax breaks - incidentally, the largest single state tax breaks in American history - "pro-corporate"?! What the fuck planet are you living on? Those tax breaks are in the same system as the school system that we can't adequately fund. How about Frank Chopp's voting to tie the hands of our state unemployment office and cut corporate unemployment tax rates during our deepest recession in decades? I would say that's pretty damn pro-corporate.

If you don't want to be labeled as pro-corporate and a supporter of runaway free market capitalism, then tell your politicians to stop supporting runaway free market capitalist policies. Tell them to stand up to tax breaks as Boeing contemplates moving more jobs out of the state. Tell them to stop trying to cut corporate tax rates while figuring out how to fund the government using our backwards tax system.

And, for fuck's sake, don't be an apologist. At least admit that the Democrats make bad decisions. They're capable of making good ones, but they also make extraordinarily bad ones too...and they deserve to be dragged to fucking hell for it.

@bitchslap

The next time the book lobby demands a handout and Bernie supports it, I'll be the first to criticize him for it.

The Stranger editorial board is working really hard to make sure the Democrats lose again in 2020.

Hilarious that anyone thinks that any politician who becomes filthy rich while in office has the interest of the public in mind.

I hate to break it to you, but Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are in the same elitist club, and you aren't allowed in. They may not believe the same things, they may have drastically different plans, but none of their plans have you in mind. You aren't in the club. You aren't allowed in.

Don't forget it.

@6 AMEN!!!

Reading this piece of shit (and the subsequent comments) makes me almost wish and hope Trump gets a second term. The left has really gone full right-wing Christo-Fascist nut job at this point...

Rachel isn't the first Democrat to completely misread Sawant's op-ed. It was, quite clearly, an effort by Sawant to reach out to Democrats to work together on issues where they can find consensus. The Democrats who dismiss it as "dripping with disdain" protest too much, methinks.

Sitting around and complaining is easy. Accomplishing anything (well, anything in the public interest) in politics takes an investment of time and money, and it takes compromise.

The reason moneyed interests have their desires met in politics is, simply, they have money and can pay people for their time. You can sit and complain about this, or you can invest your own time and money. (If you have time to read these comments, you have time. If you're paying Comcast to read this, you have money.)

Ideological purity is for ISIS. Let's relate to each other as humans, please.

Why can't it be an effort to reach out dripping with disdain? Sawant isn't trying to be mean, but she doesn't succeed in hiding her conviction that she's the most virtuous.

@9: A long wait for an intelligent comment, but well worth it.

As the late Will Rogers lamented nearly 100 years ago "I'm not a member of an organized party - I'm a Democrat."

The Democratic Party's downfall won't be because it's "too corporate", it'll be because the Far-Left will continue to cut off their ideologically-upturned noses to spite anyone who doesn't fall in 100% lockstep with them; 95% or even 98% just won't cut it when it comes to their litmus test for purity. That and the fact that they want everyone to the right of them to move farther Left, but generally (as the OP notes) won't lift a pinky to effect the change they seek from within the Party's existing organizational structure. Seriously, getting appointed as a PCO, or even a member of an executive board on a Legislative District organization is pretty easy - there aren't exactly a lot of rank-and-file Dems banging down the doors to take those positions - and if you want to seriously change the direction of the Party, that's the place to start. But also means putting in the effort - and I get the impression many would rather sit back and complain about the state of things, rather than do the hard and necessary work required to bring about that change.

@3 lol I literally didn't mention Bernie, who I find conservative. Super great canned response!

Rachael, you're right there's no progress in a blanket condemnation. But you also can't make a blanket defense. You need to show everybody you can draw a line: some Democrats are in fact too pro-corporate in their actions.

Clinton lost for some important reasons. Do you know how not to repeat this yourself?

And nobody cares if your decision was difficult. If you make a dirty pragmatic decision, you need to be able to defend it on its own merits.

@12 It's not even necessarily the districts here. The PCO doesn't do much to effect the change of the party. They're little more than glorified cheerleaders. But, that doesn't matter because, at the district level, many of Seattle's Dems are not the problem. The poison infecting the DNC doesn't begin at the roots. Many of Seattle's Dems see the problems and try to change those problems, but face a machine that is engineered against grassroots organizers.

Many Democrats leave the party because they've been so thoroughly disenfranchised that they join a party more amenable to their preferences rather than face the dehumanizing task of changing a party that won't be changed and making politics another shitty job on top of the shitty job they're already working.

@5 Hmm, nah, it is you fringey cranks that are trying hard to make that happen. Let's spell this out: anyone who believes that the zombie hordes of middle America are just waiting for someone to have the courage to step up and propose raising their taxes and 'taking away their health care' is flat out crackpot.

I don't expect you will succeed, no matter how many ever more hyperbolic tantrums you throw. But if you did it would be a gift from the gods to the Republican party. They are working non-stop to set themselves up for a major implosion. About the only thing they can hope for now is for the Democratic party to take a hard left turn off the edge of reality.

@12 So the Democrats never give anything to the far left and we're supposed to support them... why?

It's a two-way street, and if they want our support, they can fight for some of the things we want. They do not. They actively fight us ON them. I'm not against people who are 90% aligned with my ideologies, I'm against people who repeatedly don't fight for me.

Why should I fight for them? So I can get lukewarm versions of all the things I want that backfire and send the center-left into a decade+ of losses?

Pass. But it's pretty fitting that you have to pull a century-old quote to describe the CURRENT Democratic party.

To sum up, the Author of this piece wants us to continue on the same path that have cost the Democrats to lose control of all branches of the Federal government and a substantial number of state legislatures and governor's offices.

Of course, we can push for crazy and widely popular ideas like Single Payer healthcare and higher taxes on the rich, but that would upset our corporate donors. I am sure if we court the Romney Republicans and veer more towards the center, we'll do just fine. Steady as she goes. That's the strategy we need!

The more people choose to split hairs, argue terms, bandy cute phrases, and parse the purity levels of others (the very environment this author is swimming in) the more the big opportunities will fly right over the arguing heads. Rhetoric parsing points only down the drain.

Sellout says what?

No, seriously, the right will always pretend to be left if it gets them in power.

Cue the super cut video of democrats saying they'd love to have single payer but we just don't have the votes and then count them up to winning single payer and then some.

Fucked up that you actually have to fight the party that wants (needs) your vote to actually fight for the things you want and most certainly can do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-pj3mBs…

Look, even Martin Shkreli tried to donate money to Bernie, so telling me you even voted for Sawant doesn't mean much.

Corporatist Democrats have a long history of selling out their constituents. These are the same people that backed slavery during and before the Civil War because the business interests in the South demanded it. Then, they favored segregation for the same reason. Your "wing" of the Democratic Party is famous for anti-labor policies such as Taft-Hartley and the repeal of Glass-Steagle. You've whined, "Evolution, not revolution!" or "Not so fast! Go slow!" in the face of everyone from Susan B Anthony to Martin Luther King, Jr and Harvey Milk. You told people who wanted to outlaw child labor that they were being unreasonable. You pretended to be sensibly in favor of the Clinton Crime Bill, and your President had such a steady hand when he signed the renewal of the PATRIOT ACT into law. You pretended to be the "adult in the room" when you voted to authorize the President to invade Iraq. It was the "best and the brightest" among you that told us the Gulf of Tonkin Incident wasn't a lie.

And here we are, the unruly, unreasonable mob that forced an end to the Vietnam War. We, the silly, childish and dangerous radicals that ended child labor, passed universal suffrage, and fought to end slavery. We're the nasty, crazy fuckers who fought for an eight hour work day, a minimum wage, workplace safety and the right to organize a union. We, the "loony left', who insisted so unreasonably on the repeal of DADT and DOMA.

You know what? I'd rather have the insanity of a country where everyone gets a fair shake, than the dull, 'sane', and orderly corporatist hell in which women, Blacks, Hispanics, LGBTs and non-christians are quietly shuffled off to the prisons and fields, domestic servitude and lesser status. I'd rather the swirling chaos of workplace democracy and socialism than the tick tock precision of fascism. You'd sell us all to Wall Street if you could, just like back in the day when you put human beings on the auction blocks of New Orleans. The people who backed slavery then called themselves Democrats, too.

If you'll excuse me, I've had quite enough of your 'mature' corporatist bullshit.

What utter piffle. Being too "corporate" is a real thing. The actions of conservative, neo-liberal Democrats like both Clintons, Obama, Pelosi, and the Democratic Party leadership, in the main, pursue policy that is clearly anti-middle and working class, in a very similar manner to Republicans. There is no point in arguing over feel-good vs. feel-bad language. There is only policy, and the need to have rich, productive and open discussions and decisions about them. Non-corporate Democrats have better policies for humanity. I will happily and politely discuss them with anyone.

@24 Oh let's discuss. Which Democrat meets your ludicrous standards of ideological purity?

You twits would now be screaming for Bernie Sander's head if he actually got elected and had to get into the messy compromises necessary to get anything done at all in the real world.

@25 You should probably stop randomly bringing up Bernie when people don't mention him at all. Not all leftists are pro-Bernie, and you're just arguing at someone who doesn't exist in this thread.

"I'm tired of "pro-corporate" being an unchallengeable and unforgivable assessment. Of course Democrats are. We all are. Or have you not participated in capitalism lately?"

OH FUUUUUUCK YOU, LADY

@16:

PCO's are the entry-level into the Party organization, and as-such collectively they actually hold quite a bit of influence, since they are the first line of elected constituency at the legislative district level: they in turn elect executive committee members, as well as vote on endorsements of candidates. They are also the main source of "boots on the ground" and are directly responsible for engaging their neighbors within their respective precincts. Effective PCO's can and do provide the backbone in terms of grass-roots organizing and outreach for every level of the Party above them; without them, the Party would literally not exist.

@18:

You want something FROM the Democratic Party, but what are you willing to GIVE in return? Aye, there's the rub. Because that's how politics works: you want something, you have to convince others to help you achieve it; if you can't achieve it on your own, you need help, but in order to receive support and assistance with YOUR program, you have to be willing to support and assist other people's programs in exchange. If you insist on "my way or the highway" and can't adopt a spirit of cooperation and compromise (the by-words of the political process), then you'll be shown the door and admonished not to let it swing against your posterior on the way out. Ideally, political engagement isn't a "you do for me FIRST, then I do for you", it's supposed to be more "let's see what we can achieve together", recognizing you aren't always going to get everything you want - and neither is anyone else. But too many on the Far-Left want their slice before they'll deign to dole out portions to everyone else, and it's that level of autocratic privilege, particularly coming from a faction that patently refuses to engage in the unglamorous grunt work that defines grass-roots political organizing, that rubs those who DO that work against the grain. You demand respect and power and position, but you don't want to EARN it by putting in the effort everyone else does to earn their place in the Party.

Shorter @27: "STOP POINTING OUT MY HYPOCRISY!"

So to all the people denouncing "pro-corporate" Democrats, ask yourself whether you would rather NOT have corporations like Facebook, Microsoft, Tesla, and many others saying "Screw Trump, we're going to live up to our commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement."

@30 this is the equivalent of saying "oh so you hate nazis but they decided to NOT kill puppies uncountable times today"

(no, i am not comparing those corps to fascists, but the comparison is just as stupid)

also hey lady, those boeing tax cuts to protect local jobs? here's where all your pro-corporate is getting us: http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/…

If you thought Kshama's op-ed was calling *you* pro-corporate, you didn't read it.

@28 Bingo

@31/32, no, it is acknowledging that they are participants in the political process and we need to look for times when our interests align toward a common goal. Then in the event that our interests don't align, how can we get the best value relative to what corporations are demanding.

Also, compromise is always necessary, but only with your political adversaries. You shouldn't be compromising on things like funding schools or mass transit within the left. This is the problem with the Democrats. They spend more time fighting progressives, attacking people for their identities, than fighting conservatives and corporate interests. This is what Kshama was talking about.

If the Democratic Party wants my help and my energy they can choose to appeal to me. I'm not that much of an idiot; I know compromise is important. But the democrats seem more willing than ever to run to the center. They apparently think they lost because they didn't appeal to pro life racists enough. Fuckem. I'll work with them if our interests align but I'm not going to spend time and money I can invest in organizations that actually reflect me on them.

Ms. Ludwick, the reason the "pro-corporate" label sticks oh-so-successfully to party leaders of both the Democrats and the Republicans, is because they consistently pass legislation preferred by corporate and wealthy-person interests. While not passing legislation that the clear majority of the country wants.

They are remarkably consistent in this behaviour. The evidence is unequivocal.

Ok, sure, politics requires compromises and is 'messy'. But the record shows that the only "side" receiving the positive end of compromises are the wealthy/corporate interests. Again, and again.

The machinery of our federal government was set up by and for rich, white, men. And they are fully intent on keeping it that way as long as possible -- with "rich" being the more important common denominator. As Wandering Stars points out, all major progressive change has come from the people, while the politicians of "both"-- (why only two? fix that first.) --parties acted overtly to constrain and/or ignore these efforts, until they couldn't ignore them any longer.

Apparently, the people need to go out and actually break things to get politicians' attentions. We certainly don't get much from either voting or holding "peaceful protests".

If you haven't already read it, I urge you to read Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States. That might provide useful insight into type of machinery by which you are choosing to be chewed up.
--
"Or have you not participated in capitalism lately? "

Yes, I have, and I find it remarkably lacking. It certainly does not provide for the basic needs of all people.

Have you not participated in a gift-economy lately?
How about a collective economy?
Or how about a mutual-credit economy?

Do you understand how the very mechanics of capitalism's "positive-interest" money system works on a social/ personal level to reward anti-social behaviour, short-term thinking, and the desire to liquidate things into money? Are you aware that corporations "act" in a way that is demonstrably sociopathic? Do you know why this is?

How do you plan to counter those effects? Surely giving the benefit of the doubt to corporations isn't a winning solution... for the people and the planet, at least.

@17- The Democrats are at their lowest point of power in 50 years, and you're saying "well we just have to keep on the same course because the only way things could get worse is if the Democrats turn Left."

You're just not connected to reality here. It is virtually certain Bernie would have won the general election. He polls better than Trump or Hillary still, and he did before the election. The idea that middle America doesn't want leftist policies isn't supported by reality. The people who are hard against progressive policies ARE NEVER VOTING FOR THE DEMOCRATS.

"corporations should obey the laws decided by the citizenry, not write those laws."
// David Korten

"Pro-corporate" and "neoliberal" have become the same shortcuts to foreclose thought that Orwell raged against in Language and Politics.

"Hillary Clinton is pro-corporate, and that is why I don't have to come up with reasons why won't support her, despite knowing that her agenda would do a lot of good for a lot of people. I don't have to be accountable for my role in sexism or for my own biases. I don't have to find anything in her policy papers or plans that I find objectionable to justify my loathing, because she's pro-corporate."

Seth MacFarlane has a good response to everyone who is deriding the editorial
https://twitter.com/SethMacFarlane/statu…

@29- That was longer than what @27 said. Which is just a way for me to point out that your being stupid in a lot of ways.

@42- Bernie almost certainly would have won, he was and remains more popular and trusted than Hillary or Trump. 80,000 votes in the rust belt was all the Democrats needed, and there were a lot of independents who did not vote but liked Bernie. Clinton certainly did campaign against him, the vaunted "GOP secret opposition research" file I've seen referenced was a collection of shit from the Clinton campaign that never really stuck. The big claim was that Clinton was "electable" and a lot of Democratic primary voters believed that.

They were wrong.

"...she was afraid of offending his easily butthurt supporters."

nice work uniting the party.

@44:

Not if you include the quotation they cited, which they needed in order to put their response into context.

Also, it's "you're being stupid", not "your being stupid". But then, stupid is, as stupid does...

If you're sick and tired of people criticizing you for supporting objectively corporate candidates, then stop supporting corporate candidates. Seems like a pretty obvious solution.

@46- Thanks for the pointing out my spelling error. Too bad you didn't acknowledge you own inability to fucking count the letters in what someone wrote. Refusing to acknowledge obvious mistakes of judgement is what your advocating, so I suppose I should expect nothing less.

@43 finally, we get to hear from the creator of family guy. this is truly an embarrassment of intellectual riches

I'm anti-corporate. That was easy!

The comments are giving you a lot of crap for it, but thanks for writing this. Well said.

@48:

Really? You're allowing yourself to get bent out of shape by objecting to a well-known and deliberately facetious trope because you COUNTED THE FUCKING LETTERS?? You need professional help. Seriously, you're going to have a stroke at this rate, and I can tell you, based on personal experience, that is something you should probably try to avoid at all costs. Take some deep breaths, find your calm center and remind yourself, "it's called 'humor' it's not supposed to be taken literally." And if that doesn't work, perhaps a Xanax or Vicodin would be in order.

FYI, while all of you faux-liberal dbags who don't pay state income tax are complaining about how corporate Democrats are, Republicans are -- this week -- busy gutting Doff-Frank and destroying the CFPB with something called the Financial CHOICE Act.

So...you know...fuck off!

As one of those "elite" liberals in corporate-life who's *only* $80K in debt, seriously...I'm going to start voting for my economic self interests if the left-wing coalition can't act like adults.

@28 That's precisely my point. PCOs vote on the rather useless stuff and get the thankless job of trying to rally the troops without having much support from the party or committees. The ship isn't steered by the districts - Seattle's 43rd district Democrats try really hard to push the party as far left as they can - but by the state and national party. The PCOs have expressed their feelings of futility in trying to change the party at large. And, I can feel it too. The Democrats are chained to their donors for their existence, in no small part because donating never comes with an increased demand in the party mechanics. The Democratic Party's shift toward corporate policies has allowed them to survive financially, but they've shed seats and influence along the way. Denying that shift, as this writer does, further alienates anybody with a functioning sense of reality who realize that Dems will push policies like NAFTA or destroy Glass Steagel or the Boeing tax cuts or the unemployment tax cuts (especially if the Dems think they can blame the Republicans for forcing their hands). That alienation - the one this writer is causing - makes the PCOs' job even harder, as more and more dedicated liberals are reluctant to call themselves Democrats.

@54 I can be critical of both Republicans AND Democrats!! I've never voted for a Republican in my life, nor would I ever. But, I'm done voting against Republicans while the Democrats are busy giving handouts and corporate tax cuts themselves (while "responsibly" raising regressive taxes).

Who called the taxpayer-funded special session to give the largest state tax cut to Boeing? Who voted for the cuts and signed the bill? Who pressured the unions to sign a contract that gutted their benefits? Democrats.

This OpEd is very dumb and racist and harmful to imagination. The "hands clean" bit is just too much. Shit is already bloody. We're out here cleaning up after this every day... out here bleeding thanks to lazy, out of touch, straight up brutal white supremacists respectability bs thinking like this.

@16 Tons of comments have piled up so not sure of someone else has brought this up but saying "The PCO doesn't do much to effect the change of the party. They're little more than glorified cheerleaders." is akin to saying "The Voter doesn't do much to effect the change of the country. They're little more than glorified cheerleaders." The election of every single level of party leader comes down to PCOs (or their equivalent in various states.) In WA, PCOs are the only people eligible to elect representatives to county and state committees. Those state committee members elected by PCOs are the only people eligible to elect the state party chair and representatives to the DNC. The DNC chair, vice chair (of voter participation, finance, etc) are elected by the DNC members. And also - PCOs are elected by voters, so really every level of Party leadership is elected by voters.

Outside of the Party positions, if an elected Democrat state legislator (e.g. Jessyn Farrell who is running for mayor and just resigned her House seat) steps down mid-term, the process to nominate replacements in run by the County organization with leaders and representatives elected by PCOs. Then, ONLY PCOs are eligible to vote to nominate people to replace the legislator. On Saturday, ~200 PCOs (not sure how many PCOs the 46th has but it's usually 150 - 250), will decide who to nominate to the King County Council to represent the more than 100,000 people living in the 46th LD for the remainder of Farrell's term. Given the incumbency rate in this city, that person could represent the 46th LD for decades. (You would be shocked to hear how many of the long standing politicians started out as appointees.)

Spreading the falsehood that PCOs don't do anything, cripples the ability of progressives to change the Party. Yes - they have to organize. You need to be more than one voice. That's the same with everything in a democracy though.

I didn't read through all these bullshit comments, but I think it's important to remember that the only reason the republicans have any federal health care policy to dismantle (obamacare) is due to the the long, hard work of the paragon of neoliberalism: HRC. I know you want single payer. Everybody that can think does (including such corporatists as BHO and HRC). It's not going to happen. Bernie and Sawant can spew about how treasonous it is to compromise and how you are evil if you only want to go 80% of the way to $15/hr instead of 100%, but they have not accomplished shit (Sawant is starting to build a legacy on the council). That shit certainly will not play well out in the hinterlands. If you fucking purists would have put the same energy into supporting the Dems in 2016 that you put into following Russian conspiracy theories and hating us moderates we would not be dealing with trump. Hell we might even have both houses of the state leg. and actually get some education funding. Not ready to meet us moderates halfway? Go fuck yourselves.

Moderate Democrats complaining about liberals not meeting them halfway is like Evangelical Christians complaining they are being oppressed.

Hi Rachael Ludwick,

It’s excellent that you voted for Socialist Alternative’s Kshama Sawant against the capitalists’ Republican/Democrat corporate catspaw candidates.

It’s absurd of you to have subsequently joined the capitalist enemy’s Democrat Party to become a corporate catspaw yourself.

A painting is not just a pile of paint-dots -- instead it's a pile of paint-dots collected into specific-and-unique brush-strokes.
Society is not just a pile of individuals -- instead it's a pile of individuals collected into specific-and-unique social classes.
We, and you, are the working-class, the 99%, the class which does absolutely all the work.
The enemy are the capitalist class, the 0.01%, (the banksters, the 150 gigantic corporate monopolies, etc.), who steal our surplus-labor and turn it into their filthy profits.

Every serious political party is an organ of exactly one social class:
We, Socialist Alternative, of the working-class.

Whereas in the USA, the ruling capitalist enemy has 2 parties -- the Republican and the Democrat.

It's time we the workers had a mass party of our own.
So, stop groveling before the beaten generals of the Democrat Party leadership who paved the way for Trump’s vile misogynist, racist, anti-worker presidency.
Take courage, break with the dirty Democrat leadership who don’t deserve you, and march with us as we combat the bosses’ and Trump’s despicable bigoted agenda.
Dump the Elephant, Dump the Ass! Build a Party of the Working-Class!

http://gingerjentzen.org/

http://socialiststudents.net/

https://www.socialistalternative.org/

Good piece, Rachael. Thank you for sharing your thoughtful perspective.

Rachael needs a haircut,