My strong reaction to the Brooks piece was that it's a one-sided appreciation of both Biden, and the Democratic Party.

Yeah, well, it's an opinion piece, you know written by an opinionated op-ed guy. ;)

And, I didn't post the link because the article intrigued me but, rather that it reiterated a point I've been trying to make around here. Which is to say that Biden's approach is from the center, as per usual, and progressives who have the gall to call him naive or to say that evil is lurking in the Democratic party need to get with the program or form their own party. I think you know who I'm talking about.

If Biden's approach doesn't work for your country, nothing will!

After the disappointment of "Hope and Change" Obama the Democratic Party has swung left. Joe would be a Trump, er, Joe would be an idiot not to swing with it. Especially because the more Joe actually achieves the better things will go in '22 and '24.

I guess I'd say I don't know if it's working, yet.

My strong reaction to the Brooks piece was that it's a one-sided appreciation of both Biden, and the Democratic Party. The progressive wing is not the enemy of the moderates. Both sides have plenty of "I want it now" attitude, and Biden being as smart as he is, knows he has to play to both sides to succeed, rather than take one side because it's the slightly larger one.

As I said, the more intriguing commentary has been to the effect that Biden has always had a pent-up New Deal liberal side to him, which has never had much chance to forward his career given the alignments in Congress and the country. Between Covid and the Republican rush over the cliff of right-wing craziness and even sedition, Biden may see a chance to preside over a real realignment of the electorate towards a more progressive and effective majority that can overcome the anti-voting and minority-rule aspects of our current system.

Again, I'm not sure this really describes him, and I'm not sure he can succeed at this. But I do think it's part of what's going on these days, and Brooks is aggressively ignoring it because it's too complicated and too liberal for his taste in punditry.

So, you guys don't believe that Biden's approach is working, then?

she was primaried last time, with significant money and power behind her challenger, and defeated said primary challenger by better than 70-30. unless she does something monumentally stupid, she's likely to keep her job for a good long time.

JL

Whoa ... careful there. :)

Yeah, you may be right. I just don't like it when she disrespects Biden. A little more deference on her part will go a long way toward her maturation.

Aww, I like AOC. I don't agree with all her positions, but she takes no crap from republicans and is starting to mature as a congress critter. I have high hopes for her.

That's what WE'RE here for - so address it!

In this case it's the article on the 'secret Congress', which he reposts in his own words, and then builds into a screed against all the "power" that the progressive Democratic wing wielded in the American government two years ago.

This kind of thing really just serves to balance all those think-pieces that declare Uncle Joe to be to the left of FDR in his late-in-life liberal instincts, such that the Biden administration's legacy may outweigh that of the New Deal in steering America permanently to the left of where it's been for a generation or three.

Brooks doesn't address the conflict between these two views of Biden's governance, of course. That would require thinking past whatever article or book got him through this week's requirement to produce a column with the requisite word count.

Sorry to be so cynical, but David Brooks? Really??

David Brooks is one of the few opinion columnists who has always understood who Biden is and what he is all about.

Here he explains why it is that Biden represents the base of the Democratic party, not the 'gimme what I want when I want it and how I want it' progressives are most decidedly not the base nor do they understand how to govern effectively.

The Biden Approach is Working

As I read the commentary on the two big bills, the so-called trillion dollar infrastructure bill and the whopping 3.5 trillion dollar budget, I keep trying to remember if these numbers represent spending in the single upcoming fiscal year, or if they are spread out over the upcoming ten years. I could look it up, but I could also ask here - with the point that, if the bills are ten-year programs, it would be good if more commentators would bring that to the public's attention. But if the numbers really are just for 2021-22, well, never mind and carry on!