We predicted this would happen. As the conservative/libertarian coalition has expanded the neocons have looked for new friends in the Democratic Paty. (Really they are just reuniting.)
The Neoconservatives – actual conservatives MUST understand – are not conservatives at all. They are a small but powerful group of big government (both domestic and abroad) “Republicans” (they originally were Democrats) lodged in Washington who believe that for there to be “progress” the USA must have some sort of foil. After the death of the Soviet Union the cult members searched for meaning and found the “Global War on Terror.” Now that that effort has run its course the focus again is on Russia. Because, well, Russia is a challenge to Europe and the neocons love NATO and the European Union.
The neocons are the nosy homeowner association members of the world. But the neocons don’t send nasty letters about uncut grass. They send (in our name of course) drone strikes and God knows what else. And they actually think they are JUST in doing it.
The neocons have no interest in a smaller government. They have no interest in expanding liberty and keeping alive the spirit of The American Revolution. “Don’t Tread on Me” means nothing to them. In fact the mantra which embodies the very spirit of this country, is anti-neocon. The neocons want to tread all over everyone. And they seem to have a particular contempt for the serfs in the hinterlands (both here and abroad) who dare assert their natural rights.
The Church of the Neocons is a foolish and dangerous foreign policy cult that deserves to be tossed deep into the cold intellectual wilderness. (And ideally forgotten.) They blew up the Middle East. Thousands of American soldiers (soldiers that would never have been considered for the colleges attended by the scions of the neocon establishment of course) died because of their aggressive philosophy. Thousands more suffer post-war. Hundreds of thousands of innocent people in the Middle East have probably died due to neocon actions and policies. And still after failure upon failure the neocons still think they have some sort of claim on the direction of this country?
Please. Your chance has passed neocons. You failed and failed this country.
(From The Intercept)
But Democrats and neocons share far more than revulsion toward Trump; particularly once Hillary Clinton became the party’s standard-bearer, they share the same fundamental beliefs about the U.S. role in the world and how to assert U.S. power. In other words, this alliance is explained by far more than antipathy to Trump.
Indeed, the likelihood of a neocon/Democrat reunion long predates Trump. Back in the summer of 2014 — almost a year before Trump announced his intent to run for president — longtime neocon-watcher Jacob Heilbrunn, writing in the New York Times, predictedthat “the neocons may be preparing a more brazen feat: aligning themselves with Hillary Rodham Clinton and her nascent presidential campaign, in a bid to return to the driver’s seat of American foreign policy.”
Noting the Democratic Party’s decades-long embrace of the Cold War belligerence that neocons love most — from Truman and JFK to LBJ and Scoop Jackson — Heilbrunn documented the prominent neocons who, throughout Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, were heaping praise on her and moving to align with her. Heilbrunn explained the natural ideological affinity between neocons and establishment Democrats: “And the thing is, these neocons have a point,” he wrote. “Mrs. Clinton voted for the Iraq war; supported sending arms to Syrian rebels; likened Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, to Adolf Hitler; wholeheartedly backs Israel; and stresses the importance of promoting democracy.”
One finds evidence of this alliance long before the emergence of Trump. Victoria Nuland, for instance, served as one of Dick Cheney’s top foreign policy advisers during the Bush years. Married to one of the most influential neocons, Robert Kagan, Nuland then seamlessly shifted into the Obama State Department and then became a top foreign policy adviser to the Clinton campaign.
As anti-war sentiment grew among some GOP precincts — as evidenced by the success of the Ron Paul candidacies of 2008 and 2012, and then Trump’s early posturing as an opponent of U.S. interventions — neocons started to conclude that their agenda, which never changed, would be better advanced by realignment back into the Democratic Party. Writing in The Nation in early 2016, Matt Duss detailed how the neocon mentality was losing traction within the GOP, and predicted:
Yet another possibility is that the neocons will start to migrate back to the Democratic Party, which they exited in the 1970s in response to Vietnam-inspired anti-interventionism. That’s what earned their faction the “neo” prefix in the first place. As Nation contributor James Carden recently observed, there are signs that prominent neocons have started gravitating toward Hillary Clinton’s campaign. But the question is, Now that the neocons has been revealed as having no real grassroots to deliver, and that their actual constituency consists almost entirely of a handful of donors subsidizing a few dozen think tankers, journalists, and letterheads, why would Democrats want them back?
The answer to that question — “why would Democrats want them back?” — is clear: because, as this new group demonstrates, Democrats find large amounts of common cause with neocons when it comes to foreign policy.