RJ Eskow: The differences between the college financing plans offered by Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are important – both for their impact on the middle class, and for what they tell us about the candidates and their governing philosophies.
Richard Eskow: If you’re going to cut a program that affects the lives of most Americans, the least you can do is get the facts right. Jeb didn’t.
RJ Eskow: After a week spent tracking the independent left’s political progress, I’ve become even more convinced that politicians should seek the soul of the country instead. Tap into that, and the rest will follow.
RJ Eskow: Some centrist Democrats like to say they’d govern more liberally, but the United States is a “center-right” country. There is very little truth in this.
RJ Eskow: There is more than a hint of cynicism in Obama’s attempts to characterize Warren, not just as a self-promoting “politician,” but as a law professor baffling the public with legalese.
View image | gettyimages.com n 2005 President George W. Bush and his fellow Republicans were hard at work trying to privatize Social Security. Their proposal would have replaced much of this guaranteed-benefit program with a plan that would have invested its funds in privately managed accounts instead. That would have been a massive payday for […]
RJ Eskow: Police officers in urban America, like correctional officers, are themselves often struggling to escape economic hardship.
Richard Eskow: The Fight for $15 is a fine cause on its own merits. But its greatest importance may lie in the fact that it represents the return of the “vanishing worker” – which in the end means the return of our friends, our families, and our neighbors – to the American political stage.
RJ Eskow: The Indiana Toll Road is more than a highway. It is an infinite loop through the neoliberal world order, the mirror of a recursive economy in which every step toward corporatization creates more hardship – and every increase in hardship calls for more corporatization.
RJ Eskow: They’ve cheated customers and defrauded investors. Now they want to use our legalized system of campaign-cash corruption to protect themselves from the very government which rescued them.
RJ Eskow: Voters can sense an absence of conviction from a political party. The absence of a unifying core may help explain the Democrats’ devastating 2014 performance. The electorate may have concluded that, to paraphrase Gertrude Stein, there was no there there.
RJ Eskow: It has been suggested that the Democratic Party can run and win on social issues in 2016, but that seems less likely after this year’s results. If voters can reject a personhood amendment and elect a far-right Republican on the same ballot, social issues aren’t likely to be the cure-all some Democrats are seeking.
RJ Eskow: Rather than letting themselves be kept on the defensive – about President Obama, the Affordable Care Act, Ebola, or the Middle East – Democrats would be wise to pick one or two key issues and keep hammering away at them.