Новые демократы: идеологическое течение в Демократической партии США.

Ideological faction within the Democratic Party

New Democrats, also known as centrist Democrats, Clinton Democrats, or moderate Democrats, are a centrist ideological faction within the Democratic Party in the United States. As the Third Way faction of the party, they are seen as culturally liberal on social issues while being moderate or fiscally conservative on economic issues.

In 1974, the Yellow Dog, Atari, and Watergate Baby factions within the Democratic Party found a common thread in "liberal" iterations of "illusory" supply side progressivism, advancing their mutual conceptions of "centrism" and post industrial society. Michael Dukakis, for instance, was a Watergate Baby who, after establishing the Massachusetts Technology Development Corporation (1978), increasingly garnered attention from "private" start up investors and, conversely, state auditors, as an Atari Democrat. Democratic voter "tax revolts" that began in the Carter administration, and continued into the first Reagan administration, unraveled this common thread. After the landslide defeats to the Republican Party led by Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush in the 1980s, a group of prominent Democrats began to believe their party was out of touch and in need of a radical shift in economic policy and ideas of governance. The Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) was founded in 1985 by Al From and a group of like minded politicians and strategists. They advocated a political Third Way as an antidote to the electoral successes of Reaganism. The DLC did not want the Democratic Party to be "simply posturing in the middle", and instead framed its ideas as "progressive" and as a "Third Way" to address the problems of its era. Examples of the DLC's policy initiatives can be found in The New American Choice Resolutions. Although the New Democrat label was briefly used by a progressive reformist group including Gary Hart and Eugene McCarthy in 1989, the term became more widely associated with the New Orleans Declaration, Bill Clinton's subsequent criticism of Democratic Presidential hopeful Jesse Jackson's variant of Rainbow/PUSH, and policies of the DLC which in 1990 renamed its bi monthly magazine from The Mainstream Democrat to The New Democrat. When then Governor Clinton stepped down as DLC chairman to run for the presidency in the 1992 United States presidential election, he presented himself as a New Democrat.

In March 2009, Barack Obama, said in a meeting with the New Democrat Coalition that he was a "New Democrat" and a "pro growth Democrat", that he "supports free and fair trade" and that he was "very concerned about a return to protectionism". Throughout the Obama administration, a "free and fair trade" attitude was espoused, including in a 2015 trade report entitled The Economic Benefits of U. S. Trade that noted that free trade "help[s] developing countries lift people out of poverty" and "expand[s] markets for U. S. exports". Throughout Obama's tenure, approximately 1,000 Democrats lost their seats across all levels of government. Specifically, 958 state legislature seats, 62 house seats, 11 Senate seats, and 12 governorships, with a majority of these elected officials identifying as New Democrats. Some analysts such as Henry Eten at FiveThirtyEight, believe this was due to the changing demographic shift, as more Democrats identified as liberal in 2016 than moderate. Consequently, many pundits believed that Obama's tenure marked an end of the New Democrats' dominance in the party, although the faction still remains an important part of the party's big tent. and discuss ways to advance Clinton's nomination, leading to the resignation of DNC chair, and New Democrat member, Debbie Wasserman Schultz and other implicated officials. The leak was allegedly part of an operation by the Russian government to undermine Hillary Clinton. Although the ensuing controversy initially focused on emails that dated from relatively late in the primary, when Clinton was nearing the party's nomination, This was evidenced by alleged bias in the scheduling and conduct of the debates, as well as controversial DNC–Clinton agreements regarding financial arrangements and control over policy and hiring decisions.