I agree we need to get out the economic side of the progressive argument more; we need to reign in the Wall Street plutocrats, companies like Goldman Sachs (for which Steve Bannon worked for) and JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, take on big ag like Monsanto (or whoever is taking them over), because people all over are hurting from the effects of free trade, globalization, etc.
The Democratic Party needs an economic fighter and populist. However, they also need to fight the perception that Democrats are weak on terrorism and want to just let anyone into the country. How do I know this? Simple: its the exit polls on terrorism, stupid!
Keith Ellison fits the economic bill. However, he does not fit the second part of the bill: (start video at 29 seconds)
Even for the flaws of Bush Co’s domestic agenda Iraq War, the excesses of Abu Ghraib, NO, 9/11 WAS NOT A PRETEXT FOR CONCENTRATION AND EXTERMINATION CAMPS FOR LARGE AMOUNTS OF MEMBERS OF ETHNIC GROUPS AND POLITICAL ENEMIES! BUSH DID NOT USE 9/11 TO START A WORLD WAR WITH MAJOR POWERS THAT TOOK 50 MILLION LIVES! And no, the Iraq War is not comparable to a World War, just no! That a guy could put 9/11 and Reichstag Fire in the same sentence is offensive to many people and just historically inaccurate.
We progressives made a big mistake comparing Bush and Romney to fascists, yelling racist, etc. as it made people innocuous to our current POTUS elect, and fanboy organizations like American Renaissance, Daily Stormer, you know, REAL fascists.
This rhetoric is not what should be the face of the Democratic Party. Its no better than Alex Jones types, Michael Savage types, etc. leading the GOP. Its out of touch with most Americans. It has no place as the head of a major political party. Democrats cannot continue to be seen as not caring about people’s genuine fears of terrorism. Some could say Ellison borders on 9/11 Trutherism, Trivialization, what have you, but its not what should be leading the party.