There's an economic and socially progressive left and I'd put him on the socially progressive left. He hasn't said much about his economic views so I can't judge. The other thing to remember, is that politics in America has a centre that would be considered right wing anywhere else in the world.

I think if you go further into the theory you can see how it's evolved from these concepts and sort of taken from them ideas that have worked in activism... and not ideas that were actually philosophically sound. As a result you get a kind of bastardisation of the concepts as they are simplified and over-extended to meet political aims. E.g. deconstructing things in post-modernism. If you take the theory of deconstruction to it's logical conclusion then you end up deconstructing everything and there is no truth left— because everything we know can be linked back to culture or some other kind of meta narrative, so you get somewhere kind of like nhilism. Unfortunately, this isn't a great position if you are an activist becuase it doesn't allow you to push a certain ideology (we know nothing, and no one is right isn't going to win you political support lol). So activists take the post-modern idea that you can deconstruct systems of power (which is great for tearing down whoever is in power) and introduce the idea that you can't deconstruct oppression. Hence you get the meta-narrative that the only truth we have are the experiences of the oppressed, so therefore the oppressed group holds the truth, and should be able to dictate political policy. This is good for business if you happen to be an activist.