Democrats split on whether to go harder left or move back to the middle

NY Times:

The Democrats’ widespread losses last week have revived a debate inside the party about its fundamental identity, a long-running feud between center and left that has taken on new urgency in the aftermath of a disastrous election and in a time of deeply felt economic anxiety.

The discussion is taking place in post-election meetings, conference calls and dueling memos from liberals and moderates. But it will soon grow louder, shaping the actions of congressional Democrats in President Obama’s final two years and, more notably, defining the party’s presidential primary in 2016.

“The debate will ultimately play out in a battle for the soul of the Clinton campaign,” said Matt Bennett, a senior official at Third Way, the centrist political group.

Hillary Rodham Clinton, should she run, will face tension between the business-friendly wing of the party that was ascendant in the economic boom during her husband’s administration and the populism of SenatorElizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, that has gained currency of late.

“I want her to run on a raising wages agenda and not cater to Wall Street but to everyday people,” Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, said of his expectations for Mrs. Clinton.

Straddling the two blocs could prove difficult. Progressives have been emboldened to criticize party leaders after the Republican rout, particularly given a lack of a coherent Democratic message to address the problem of stagnant wages.

Sifting through returns showing that lower-income voters either supported Republicans or did not vote, liberals argue that without a more robust message about economic fairness, the party will continue to suffer among working class voters, particularly in the South and Midwest.
...

We just had an election where the voters said in no uncertain terms they do not like the left wing policies of Obama and Reid, so what to liberals want to do?  Go further left.   While such a move would certainly please Republicans because it would make it easier to run against Democrats in 2016 it is most likely to make their minority position shrink further.

Look, Democrats were swept into office in 2006 by trying to appear moderate in swing districts and by what looked at the time like a failure of Bush's Iraq policy.  Now we have a failed Obama Iraq policy that is worse than the perceived failure of Bush's and their signature legislation is hanging by a thread and is looking more like a massive fraud on the voters.

The Democrats on the left remind me of radical Islamist who think their failure is because they are not radical enough.  I am not saying Democrats are terrorist by their reaction to failure appears the same.