I've written before about how the Hillary Democrats are running against hope, and how the Sanders campaign have outed them as frank corporate shills and enemies of even mild social democracy. But now even nominal liberals, or progressives, or whatever we’re calling them these days, have gotten in on the act.

Not content with merely saying “No!” to new programs like single-payer health insurance and free college, they’re highlighting the worst aspects of the New Deal in an effort to . . . well, what exactly? Promote Hillary? Fight Trump? It’s hard to tell.

snip:

At first it seemed like the rightward, anti-social-democratic tilt was intended to lure moderate suburban voters who might have voted for a sane Republican (not that there was one among the initial Gang of Seventeen) but can’t bring themselves to vote for Trump. Bernie’s voters were expected either to shut up and fall in line or just go to hell.

But that strategy might not pan out. As Dave Weigel reports in the Washington Post, Trump is winning over a lot of those suburbanites that Democratic strategists were, just a few weeks ago, hoping to harvest in November.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/05/democrats-hillary-clinton-new-deal-sanders/

The Democratic Party continues to chase the Republicans ("Yes, we agree that austerity is needed and that "Islamic terrorism" is the greatest threat to "America", but let's not overdo it with the crazy demagoguery!") because they are desperate to be seen as the "respectable" Party of Capital. And the hapless "progressives", even as they promote Sanders, will have three options once the Establishment reasserts control over the Party (which they are already doing): (a) support Clinton ("At least she's better than Trump!"); (b) vote third-party ("Three cheers for Jill Stein! *slow clap*); or (c) stay home ("That'll show 'em!").

They want "Socialism", but only through polite electoral politics. Some "political revolution", indeed!