Mediaboss Marketing

By Sara Fischer, CNN

updated 4:02 PM EST, Sun December 14, 2014

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Washington (CNN) -- One might think Democrats are in disarray, given the recent legislative battle that pitted the Obama administration and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid against top House Democrat Nancy Pelosi and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Not so, argue New York Sen. Chuck Schumer and outgoing Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick.

"The differences among Democrats are small compared to the huge chasm of Republicans," Schumer said to Candy Crowley on CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday. "You look on issues like minimum wage and equal pay and infrastructure construction, helping people pay for college -- the Democratic Party is unified."

READ: Democrats have a hypocrisy problem

Schumer called economic issues "the soul of the Democratic Party" and reiterated his belief that party members are on the same page -- name-checking Warren, a newly minted member of the Senate Democrats' leadership team.

"Elizabeth Warren is, even if people don't agree with her, she's constructive," he said of the senator who advocated for Democratic opposition to a spending measure because she felt it rolled by banking regulations. "She's not like Ted Cruz saying, 'Shut down the government or don't fund things if I don't get my way.'"

Patrick, in a separate interview with Crowley, said Democrats suffered heavy losses in the 2014 midterm elections because they lacked a resonating economic message, not because of an emerging rift.

Read more:
Top Dems deny there's a party rift

Alex Jones misleading his audience AGAIN about DEMOCRATS
Alex blames democrats for Glass Steagall act repeal , but the facts just do not add up to his narrative. STOP LISTENING TO THIS GUY He is a right wing think tank corporate shill poisoning your...

By: Ellie likeswater

See original here:
Alex Jones misleading his audience AGAIN about DEMOCRATS - Video

In the six weeks since their repudiation in the midterms, Democrats have seen the opening of fissures within their once-disciplined ranks, marking the start of an internal struggle between now and the 2016 election over the ideological identity and tactical direction of the party.

The tension shown in high relief during the messy final days of the congressional session is in some ways a mirror image of the stresses within the Republican Party, which has been divided between its tea party and establishment factions in recent years.

In the case of both parties, the argument pits the more populist, purist elements of the base against the more pragmatic center.

For Democrats, it is a conflict that was looking for an occasion, said William Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, who was a policy adviser to former President Bill Clinton. The election provided the occasion.

Having lost big in November, two wings within the party have been trading recriminations over which was more to blame while jostling for position to be the face of the Democrats going into 2016.

They are personified by former secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton, the presumptive presidential front-runner by virtue of her stature and fame, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the anti-Wall Street clarion favored by many on the left to challenge Clinton for the Democratic nomination.

If the loss of the Senate intensified strains within the party, the $1.1trillion spending bill that passed Saturday night raised two issues that acted as matches to gasoline. One was a provision rolling back portions of the 2010 financial regulatory law known as the Dodd-Frank Act. The other loosened campaign donation limits, allowing the wealthy to give three times the current maximum to the national political parties. That means even more clout for rich donors and the interests they represent.

In both instances, the question was not whether Democrats supported the individual provisions they generally do not. It was whether individual members considered them so egregious as to merit blowing up a wide-ranging deal to which Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) had been a party and for which President Obama was personally lobbying.

What we saw over the last couple of days is an example of a debate that is probably going to go on for a while in the party, said Jim Manley, a Democratic strategist and former aide to Reid.

Proponents of the legislation argued that they had succeeded in preventing even more provisions weakening Dodd-Frank from being inserted in the bill. And at any rate, they said, the legislation was far better than anything Democrats could expect should they allow the debate to continue into next year, when Republicans will be in control of the House and Senate.

Continue reading here:
Democrats divided on their path to 2016

By Sara Fischer, CNN

updated 4:02 PM EST, Sun December 14, 2014

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Washington (CNN) -- One might think Democrats are in disarray, given the recent legislative battle that pitted the Obama administration and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid against top House Democrat Nancy Pelosi and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Not so, argue New York Sen. Chuck Schumer and outgoing Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick.

"The differences among Democrats are small compared to the huge chasm of Republicans," Schumer said to Candy Crowley on CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday. "You look on issues like minimum wage and equal pay and infrastructure construction, helping people pay for college -- the Democratic Party is unified."

READ: Democrats have a hypocrisy problem

Schumer called economic issues "the soul of the Democratic Party" and reiterated his belief that party members are on the same page -- name-checking Warren, a newly minted member of the Senate Democrats' leadership team.

"Elizabeth Warren is, even if people don't agree with her, she's constructive," he said of the senator who advocated for Democratic opposition to a spending measure because she felt it rolled by banking regulations. "She's not like Ted Cruz saying, 'Shut down the government or don't fund things if I don't get my way.'"

Patrick, in a separate interview with Crowley, said Democrats suffered heavy losses in the 2014 midterm elections because they lacked a resonating economic message, not because of an emerging rift.

Read the original post:
Top Democrats: No party rift

The tension - shown in high relief during the messy final days of the congressional session - is in some ways a mirror image of the stresses within the Republican Party, which has been divided between its tea party and establishment factions in recent years.

In the case of both parties, the argument pits the more populist, purist elements of the base against the more pragmatic center.

For Democrats, "it is a conflict that was looking for an occasion," said William Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, who was a policy adviser to former President Bill Clinton. "The election provided the occasion."

They are personified by Hillary Rodham Clinton, the former secretary of state who is the presumptive presidential front-runner by virtue of her stature and fame, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the anti-Wall Street clarion favored by many on the left to challenge Clinton for the Democratic nomination.

If the loss of the Senate intensified strains within the party, the $1.1 trillion spending bill that passed Saturday night raised two issues that acted as matches to gasoline. One was a provision rolling back portions of the 2010 financial regulatory law known as the Dodd-Frank Act. The other loosened campaign donation limits, allowing the wealthy to give three times the current maximum to the national political parties. That means even more clout for rich donors and the interests they represent.

In both instances, the question was not whether Democrats supported the individual provisions - they generally do not. It was whether individual members considered them so egregious as to merit blowing up a wide-ranging deal to which Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada had been a party and for which President Obama was personally lobbying.

"What we saw over the last couple of days is an example of a debate that is probably going to go on for a while in the party," said Jim Manley, a Democratic strategist and former aide to Reid.

Proponents of the legislation argued that they had succeeded in preventing even more provisions weakening Dodd-Frank from being inserted in the bill. And at any rate, they said, the legislation was far better than anything Democrats could expect should they allow the debate to continue into next year, when Republicans will be in control of the House and Senate.

But Warren urged her colleagues to hold the line, particularly against the banks whose political influence she accused her own party of abetting.

Read this article:
Democrats divided on path to 2016