I really don't like Pelosi. I can say that I voted against her (twice) and I don't regret it.

But I've been forced to support her for Speaker because of who is opposing her now.

Third Way corporate Dems are the ones fighting her, and it is just one part of a nationwide campaign.



A trade group representing corporate political action committees plans to push back on growing skepticism of big business’s influence by bashing the less-regulated super PACs, courting friendly politicians and journalists, and even demanding higher campaign contribution limits.

...

It highlights potential “champions” in Senate leaders Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and House leaders Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and Steny Hoyer (D-Md.). It also identifies a number of Capitol Hill journalists as targets for “education”: Kate Ackley and Cat Camilia of Roll Call; Scott Bland and Theo Meyer of Politico; Michelle Lee and Paul Kane of The Washington Post; Alex Burns and Carl Hulse of The New York Times; and Brody Mullins and Rebecca Ballhaus of The Wall Street Journal.

Note that Hoyer is at the center of this anti-Pelosi for Speaker group. It's not a coincidence.

The corporate world is starting to feel threatened by the growing progressive movement, and the fight over who would be Speaker has forced Pelosi (against her will?) to give progressives a real voice in policy.



One request to which Pelosi agreed was to give the Progressive Caucus proportional representation on what lawmakers call the “A committees”: the Appropriations, Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, Financial Services and Intelligence committees.

Proportional representation would be an earth-shaking change for progressives.



The caucus expects around 20 more to join for the next Congress, meaning that it will comprise roughly 40 percent of the entire Democratic caucus. Yet on the committees that control most domestic policy, progressives are more scarce. Currently, CPC members hold 27 percent of the seats on the House Financial Services Committee, 28 percent on the Energy and Commerce Committee, 31 percent on Ways and Means, and 36 percent on Appropriations. On the Intelligence Committee, it’s even worse: Just one of the nine Democrats on the panel, Andre Carson of Indiana, is a CPC member.

This has the potential of bottom-line consequences for the 1%.

Perhaps even more disturbing for corporate power is popular opinion, which is shifting against them.



Researchers from the Progressive Change Institute analyzed how every winning Democratic candidate for the House campaigned in 2018 - including their campaign ads, websites, social media and many debate performances. The resulting data shows that 65 percent of the incoming House freshman class embraced some version of Medicare-for-all or expanding Social Security benefits. Almost 80 percent embraced lowering prescription drug costs by challenging Big Pharma. And 82 percent favored challenging corporate power in our political system by rejecting corporate PAC money, passing a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United or passing campaign finance reform such as public financing of elections.

Corporation and the wealthy aren't stupid. They can read the tea leaves.

They know how this could snowball into a real challenge against corporate power, especially if the House starts passing popular progressive policies.

To get out ahead of this, the corporate media is starting to manage expectation downward.

For instance, consider these headlines from media outlets targeted for “education”.

Across South, Democrats Who Speak Boldly Risk Alienating Rural White Voters

There Is No Progressive Majority in America

“Anti-left” still beats “anti-Trump” in Texas, Georgia, and Florida, and in many other places besides.

A Lot of People Want Bernie Sanders to Run in 2020

Including the Republicans who believe there's no way he can beat Donald Trump.