In general the left-right divide in Egypt doesn't exist as we know it. In places like Latin America leftists are the champions of the poor against the right wing authoritarian elements. But Egypt its actually kind of the opposite; the more secular "progressive" types(relatively speaking, compared to the West they are most like mid 20th century cosmopolitans so still conservative by our standards) are anti-democracy because they know if they had to compete fair and square in elections they wouldn't stand a chance. They also support austerity because the countries finances are fucking trash due to corruption so not much money to spare for the mass in terms of welfare and subsidies and also the lite don't feel the squeeze so they have no reason to care; in other words, "let them eat cake".
Its the Islamists who represent the massive masses. They are the ones who run massive social welfare networks servicing the poor and run by middle class professionals(who als benefit from these services given the lack of a state social safety net)
You mean they took advantage of elections and won? That's...the point of democracy. I know people pretend like they went full Ayatollah as soon they won but that's not really true. Sure there was regressive stuff in their constitution but this is Egypt, not Norway. Of course its going to be very conservative, the
people are! Democracy should reflect the people's will should it not? People with moronic ideas like Obama's "I want the Google guy it win" seem to think Egypt only deserves democracy if they vote in someone who doesn't offend Western sensibilities.
Why shouldn't he have got rid of Mubarak's generals? He also tried to get rid of his judges and he was right about that too. Wtf sense does it make to oust Mubarak but keep the entire system he built over decades in tact? What kind of revolution is that?