Another falsehood from the WaPo. Here’s highlights to the lead-up to their misleading framing of the debate. Most of the article is well written and factual:
“Democrats want and need… outside groups to inject money and organization into their grass roots. There are signs it is happening: The thousands of activists who protested at a series of raucous town halls hosted by Republican congressmen over the past week were urged to action in part by sophisticated publicity campaigns run by such professional liberal enterprises as the Indivisible Guide, a blueprint for lobbying Congress written by former congressional staffers, and Planned Parenthood Action.
”What is less clear is whether such energy and resources will remain united with Democratic leaders — or will be turned on them, as happened with the tea party and the Republican establishment, if the activist base grows frustrated with the pace of progress.
“But there are two key differences between the conservative and liberal movements: their funding, and their origins. Some anti-establishment liberal groups have feuded with leaders, but they are poorly funded compared with their conservative counterparts. And the tea party came of age in reaction not only to Obama but, before that, to what the movement considered a betrayal by George W. Bush’s White House and a majority of congressional Republicans when they supported the 2008 Wall Street bailout.
“There is no similar original sin for Democrats, as the liberal protests have grown as a reaction to Trump, not some failing by Schumer and Pelosi.”
Any comparison between the “tea party” and liberal activism is dangerous at best, but Kane handled it well to this point. In fact there are plenty of “original sins” among establishment Democrats that American voters are fully aware of. Grand Bargains? Lack of Wall Street prosecutions? It seems to me that the entire purpose of this WaPo piece is to try to soft-sell the very real failings of the Democratic party.
Which is their role, as the mouth-piece of the establishment.