This ideological encirclement chart explains why we lost Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Back in March, I published a diary: Pivoting to the center doesn't help if you've been surrounded. It got some play back then, but I had sort of forgotten that piece. Eight month feels like a lifetime ago.

Some of it was prescient so I will quote, in part, what I wrote:

The median voter strategy is effective when competing against candidates who play on the left/right axis and when the views of voters follow a normal distribution along this axis. But that is not the case in this cycle, because we have an unconventional candidate in Trump. Trump isn’t following the strategy in the conventional sense. He is looking at a different map, a map that looks like the one headlining this article.

And his views are not a fixed range on this map either. I had a tough time situating his tax plan which calls for no income taxes on any married couple earning less than $50,000. I ended up creating a separate circle for him near progressive taxation. The same goes for his critique of pay-to-play politics. It’s almost as if he plays hopscotch with ideological categories (which feeds into his narrative of independence). On this two dimensional ideological map, he encircles the center. If the center is weak because the electorate is polarized, the middle might be as empty as a doughnut hole. If the electorate is skewed towards the left, then a clear left candidate can fend off encirclement there and that might be the optimal strategy.

Trump iterates positions rapidly, picking and discarding ideas as he goes. Unlike conventional Republican politicians, he is permitted to do this because:

  1. He has no ideological debts to the conservative movement
  2. He claims to strive for effectiveness (that’s what "make a great deal" means)
  3. Voters have low expectations and allow him to learn as he goes along

When his positions are evaluated, Drumpf does not sit on the conventional left/right divide. Quite literally, he spans the left/right divide on economic policies, with some that are populist (protectionist trade policies, progressive taxation, universal health-care) and others that have traditionally been on the right (deregulation, cutting Federal agencies). But he is careful not to take stances that directly penalize the poor and middle-class.

To those accustomed to conventional American politics it looks as if Trump hopscotches around the map, picking positions seemingly at random. He expresses socially liberal views (planned parenthood does great work), extreme authoritarian views on law and order (go after terrorist’s families), protectionist sentiment on trade (force companies to produce goods here), 2nd amendment rights and forced decryption in terrorism cases. The authoritarian bent is clearly evident, but there are a number of outlier positions.

His protectionist trade policy is what seems to have cut through and made an impact in the Mid-Western states, which is why we lost.

If Bernie’s candidacy fails, I suspect in some eyes, the mantle of authenticity (no political correctness), competence (great deals) and independence (I didn’t take millions from donors) will pass to Trump. Worse, his ideological encirclement of Hillary may see voters on the economic left head towards Trump. And that is truly as frightening as MB laid out.

To many ears, his claims that he will “make the best deals”, playing fast and loose with ideology (“I’m my own man”) sound like independence and pragmatism, and they’re coupled with claims of competence (at making deals apparently). Playing the pivot to center game and assuming that will bag the median voters is a risk with a candidate who spans left and right. Especially if he can find the self-control to moderate his tone in the general election.

Remember how back in August we heard about the Clinton team’s elaborately thought out plan to recruit GOP voters?

This is an anti-establishment, anti-pay-to-play cycle with an opponent who does not play along the customary ideological map. For a conventional candidate to succeed, they have to be extraordinarily talented. By her own admission, Hillary is not a “natural”. Democrats ignore the risks at our peril.

I really don’t know what to say.

Share
up
11 users have voted.

Comments

WindDancer13's picture

there is no "we" here.

up
12 users have voted.

We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass

I'm really not understanding this focus on the "we" word. There's a lot of great content in this post and, if the Democrats can learn anything from the elections, Subir is providing them information to do it. I'm not going to trust Democrats anytime soon, but I'm still going to encourage them to do better.

Thanks, Subir.

up
18 users have voted.
Amanda Matthews's picture

that 'they' didn't need us maybe? And I don't mean just TOP, but by the 'Democratic' Party itself. Maybe you should go through Wikileaks and read all about it.

How soon some forget.

up
7 users have voted.

I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks

Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa

I have forgotten nothing.

Instead of responding to the substance of the blog, people somehow feel the need to separate themselves. We may have not caused it, but aren't we all in this mess together? Are we just going to stomp our feet now and refuse to participate? If (and it's a big IF) the Democrats can show sincere understanding of their faults, apologize for them, and make positive change, do we still abandon them forever? I'm not saying you have to trust them. I don't. But *if* we can get them to listen, why not try?

I'm still angry at Democrats. I'm still angry at the GOS. Maybe you need some more time to process it. That's okay.

up
6 users have voted.
Amanda Matthews's picture

There's no redeeming that bunch of liars, grifters, and cheats. They can change the DNC leadership a thousand times and they'll still be on their knees fellating the 1%. And don't you dare accuse me of stomping my feet and refusing to participate. I will ALWAYS participate. I've been a voter for 40+ years and I've NEVER missed an election although I did give some thought to sitting this one out. But instead I voted for the Party that doesn't have it lips planted on Wall Street's collective ass. The Green Party. You really need to adjust your attitude AND your mindset. Just because someone doesn't support the 'New' Democratic Party does NOT mean that they are not participating. It just means that most of us have found out that they aren't worth it and are not one damn bit concerned what happens to us, so 'we' have moved on.

I've watched for a good long time and I KNOW there's no redeeming that political garbage dump. Bill Clinton and his handlers absolutely destroyed it. Once something becomes as rotten as the 'New' Democratic Party there is no saving it, no trying to find bits and pieces to salvage. Eight years of Obama makes it obvious that they don't give a fat rat's ass about those of us who are out here struggling. They arrogantly LIE about how good everything is like if they say it enough, it will suddenly become reality. That liar in the White House put the safety net up for cuts. He had no qualms about giving bankers billions and giving us Austerity. What got cut when Wall Street blew up half the world's economies? Fucking WIC and Head Start, but the Fed gave those same bankers bonus money for what they did. THINK ABOUT THAT FOR A MINUTE. And then tell me that bunch of greedy, self-serving bastids are going to change. And I'll tell you about a bridge and some swamp land in Florida.

No more Democrats. Burn that dump to the ground.

EDIT: Deleted the word 'on'

up
9 users have voted.

I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks

Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa

I also voted Green. I've also never missed a national or statewide election since I have been voting age.

I fail to see how reviewing the good data that Subir has provided means you have to support the Democratic Party in any way. It could be useful to minority partys.

I won't shun or ignore any postings on this site solely because someone still identifies as a Democrat and/or still thinks they have a chance to improve it. I have friends who voted for Clinton. They voted their conscience. Some of them still think the Democratic Party is worth saving. I have incredibly serious doubts about that. I'm not willing to cut off my friends or stop listening to them because they're Democrats. Fortunately, most of my friends are not the delusional sort of folks over at the GOS and, while I don't personally know Subir, I think his/her intentions are good.

I look forward to more from Subir so WE (they, I, and anyone else who is interested) can learn from this election and try to take our country back from both the neo-liberals and the Rethuglicans.

up
3 users have voted.
Amanda Matthews's picture

"If the Democrats can show sincere understanding of their faults, apologize for them, and make positive change, do we still abandon them forever? I'm not saying you have to trust them. I don't. But *if* we can get them to listen, why not try?"

Don't go putting this off on someone else's post. That was directed to what YOU said. And I answered you. The Democratic Party is beyond redemption.

As for Subir, sure is singing a different tune from last week. And no, I'm not interested in what he/she has to say either.

up
4 users have voted.

I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks

Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa

The original comment that you replied to was about me not understanding why people are having such a hard time with Subir using the word "we" in the title of this diary and another. If the subject of our comment thread was changed, you did so without notification and did not quote what you were referring to in your prior comment.

I remember Subir writing a respectful diary encouraging people to vote for Hillary, if that's what you're referring to. I also remember a comment in that diary from Subir where he/she said they didn't have a problem with people voting for Jill. I don't have a problem at all with that or this kind of diary.

I've said my piece and find no value in continuing this discussion/argument.

I understand from another comment that you're re-reading Shogun. Enjoy. (And I mean that).

up
1 user has voted.
Amanda Matthews's picture

And there is really no discussion to be had. That person came here trying to recruit for the Clinton creature two days last week. That's not a problem. BUT they also posted that crap at TOP to make sure all his friends knew that he was over here in No-Shillary-Land doing his/her best and takiing one for the cause. THAT is where the dishonesty lies. For two days last week he/was was the political equivalent of Father Damien (or Mother Theresa or Albert Schweitzer) trying to cure us diseased lepers. NOW he/she is some big Progressive who's going to tell everybody what is wrong with the 'New' Democratic Party and what 'Progressives' should do and how to fix everything and blah blah blah. I went over there and read his/her post. I saw the name calling and the shit flung at this place and the people here. And I saw no defense from your friend. Why should anyone listen to someone who plays both sides against the middle?

up
4 users have voted.

I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks

Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa

lunachickie's picture

It was more than that, IIRC. And yeah, this is the same old shit. Isn't it? Isn't this the part where they start sounding like the abusive husband, trying to promise that he'll never hurt me again? Do I really have to remind them that "No means NO"??

Go die and stay dead, already, Democratic Party. Put yourself out of our misery, don't drag this shit out...

up
0 users have voted.
Amanda Matthews's picture

"If the Democrats can show sincere understanding of their faults, apologize for them, and make positive change, do we still abandon them forever? I'm not saying you have to trust them. I don't. But *if* we can get them to listen, why not try?"

Don't go putting this off on someone else's post. That was directed to what YOU said. And I answered you. The Democratic Party is beyond redemption.

As for Subir, sure is singing a different tune from last week. And no, I'm not interested in what he/she has to say either.

up
1 user has voted.

I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks

Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa

Cachola's picture

"I fail to see how reviewing the good data that Subir has provided means you have to support the Democratic Party in any way. It could be useful to minority partys. [sic]"

I began by studying the nice little graphic and when I saw interventionism was outside Ms. Regime Change pretty circle I figured whatever data was presented or discussed in the essay would be suspect.

Maybe I missed something good but I am so tired of lies, half-truths and whitewashing that I have no "benefits of doubt" left.

up
4 users have voted.

Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.

amen! amen!

up
2 users have voted.

Sure, I'll respond to the substance of this blog. Subir, it's rather absurd to think that you can explain this election with any sort of graph that can't match the flip-flops and lies of a sociopath and a psychopath... This election can't be broken down into a neat analysis, giving some magic answer that will NOT put the blame squarely where it belongs. The Elites have been pushing The People into a tighter and tighter corner. We are consequently pissed off and ready for change. Real change. -Redistribution of wealth. Government Of, By, and For The People. An end to lies and corruption. This blog is casting about for a way to "unite the Party again" without addressing ANY of that. Why oh why are we on the Left not "coming home"?

It's simply that this time, the Dems have gone too far. Hillary didn't win the nomination, she cheated. MILLIONS of our fellow citizens were disenfranchised, the New New-Dealer that this country NEEDED and WANTED was cheated out of the nomination, we on the Left got spit on for trying to save our Nation, and we on the Left FINALLY acquired the gumption to stop voting for "less evil" fascists.

Chaddiwicker, I'm never completely close-minded, but for me to consider the Dems again, they would have to do an about-face that I frankly think they are incapable of. They have been captured by money, and influence. Their very name has become totally ironic.

And now their pin-headed incompetence has given us Trump / Pence, and probably four years of Hell. Or maybe indefinite Hell, if Trump gets himself declared President for Life, backed up by our bloated military-police-state, and the Republicans who are swiftly getting over their staunch moral repugnance of Trump, now that he has become their Power Worship Object.

And as much as I hate and loath what is coming, and those who will bring it, I breathed a heavy sigh of relief when I heard that Her Royal Clinton had lost. It bought us time. Nuclear annihilation or its economic equivalent (the TPP) is postponed for a few weeks, anyway.

Yes we are all in this mess now, OF THE DEMOCRATS' CREATION, but strangely, I don't remember voting to let THEM lead us out of THEIR mess! Did I sleep through that vote? Honestly, Chaddiwicker, your questions are phrased like a servant. The DNC are not our "Betters", and they have just proven it for all time. They had damned well better learn to speak to us as equals. How about this instead?

If the Dems apologize and acknowledge that there was a fraudulent primary, publicly, and then punish, expel, or prosecute those responsible for the disenfranchisement and fraud, vow publicly to help create a completely audit-able and transparent election system that can be checked for fraud by anybody, agree to work tirelessly to get money and corruption out of politics, SHOW US actual positive change instead of just talking about it, stop stomping THEIR feet, and agree to participate FULLY in the Revolution, with all that entails, would we consider working with them again?

If those were the questions, I might think about it. But I'm sure that what I suggest "isn't pragmatic" or "is too extreme" or "won't win enough voters" or "is disrespectful" or or or... I have been down this road with the Dems plenty of times already. -And I am so beyond tired of them peeing on FDR's grave.

I have had DECADES to "process" it. I don't need more time. I already have a carefully considered final position. I am officially sick of the Democratic Party, and the DNC's elitist, inbred, drooling, roadkill-screwing-fascist bullshit, probably for good. "Angry" doesn't even scratch the surface.

Thanks to the Third Way Dems, we are now facing the real threat of living in a permanent dictatorship. They have been working towards this for many years, but unfortunately for them, got the "wrong" dictator. I can't speak for everyone here, but if they want ME "back in the fold", I would first need to see a housecleaning. A purge. A Party willing to entirely cleanse itself of Fascism and corruption. Tell them that, Subir, and see what they say. Maybe THEN you will begin to see what REALLY happened, and why THEY lost.

Oh, and Cassandrus - the narcissism and juvenile responses are mostly coming from the Democratic Party. Stop apologizing FOR us. Anyone here that wants to apologize for anything can do so. Contrary to your opinion, we are grownups here. I don't remember deputizing you to apologize for me, and I have nothing to apologize for regarding this debacle of an election. This sort of slantwise insult is a real TOS move.

up
5 users have voted.

"Capitalism is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest of men for the nastiest of motives will somehow work for the benefit of all."
- John Maynard Keynes

PriceRip's picture

          society, or something. You write much better than I as I run out of patients and the words get all jumbled. I really like that last 'graph.

          I have discerned a large number of individuals at c99% (unlike at TOP) that seem to have a deep understanding of the situation. But comments like yours are scattered about and linking them together to form a coherent whole is a daunting task . . . Or, I am doing it wrong.

          That last bit is probably the truest thought I have had to date.

up
3 users have voted.

"I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."
Robert J. McCloskey, U.S. State Department spokesman. From a press briefing during the Vietnam war.

I really don't understand how I got turned into a Democratic Party sympathizer. I don't trust them. I'm angry at them. I'm not one of them. Am I guilty of being an optimist (a word none of my friends would use to describe me)?

My ultimate point was that "we" are now all in this mess together, regardless of who caused it. We need less enemies and more allies. We need to listen more, not less. All of us. I'm not going to shut myself off from any ideas (except illegal, immoral ones). If we're going to start a new party or build on a current minority party, I don't think "I hate Democrats" is a winning argument.

I haven't read all of Subir's diaries. Maybe there's something there that I've missed. Maybe I defended the wrong person. I've just seen no evidence that Subir is my enemy.

This election has sucked for many reasons. One of them being that I lost my previous political community (the GOS) and I don't feel yet like I've found a replacement. I'm just lost.

up
0 users have voted.
Centaurea's picture

I agree completely with that. We need to work with allies. But I think we need to do our alliance-building intelligently. That means looking at each hand offered to us and saying, "Is this truly our ally? What are their goals and objectives? What are our goals and objectives? Is there a match? Do we have something to offer each other, and if so, what?"

Just because someone tries to create a "we" with us, it doesn't automatically mean there is a "we", at least not in the way the other person or group defines it. We get to define who we are and what we stand for. We get to decide what our goals are. We have the right and responsibility to look at the proffered "we" and ask whether -- and in what ways -- an alliance with them would be constructive for us in reaching our objectives.

You know, in interpersonal relationships, the best way to create a relationship is for each person to know herself well, and for each person to honor who the other person is. It's the synergy of the two individuals, recognizing and respecting (and celebrating!) their differences, that creates a good relationship.

This involves healthy boundaries. Part of healthy boundaries is recognizing the difference between self and other, not projecting one's own thoughts, feelings, and desires onto the other person. Not telling the other person who he is, or what he is thinking or feeling. Not assuming he is thinking or feeling the same things you are.

I can't speak for anyone else here, but I think that's what put me off about the OP's use of the word "we". He/she was bringing us into his/her own story, creating a mutuality of thought and worldview that was not necessarily there, without asking us to confirm the accuracy of that mutuality.

So when I ask "who's this 'we' you're speaking of?", I'm not trying to be uncooperative or make anyone my enemy. I'm saying, "Whoa, hold on now, let's set some boundaries here. I am not you."

up
2 users have voted.

"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi

"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone

Not Henry Kissinger's picture

Righteous RANT!

I am officially sick of the Democratic Party, and the DNC's elitist, inbred, drooling, roadkill-screwing-fascist bullshit, probably for good.

What do you mean 'probably'?

up
2 users have voted.

Peace Sells

lunachickie's picture

Are we just going to stomp our feet now and refuse to participate?

Anybody that still wants to call themselves a Democrat can keep right on doing that. They can do whatever they want. Some of WE are moving the fuck on from them. I am not obligated to kiss and make up with anybody, and neither are you. The end. I do not give a shit anymore what those "leaders" have to say AS DEMOCRATS. They can have their precious Center, for all the good that will do them. I am not meeting anybody in their idea of The Middle anymore.

Go left or go home.

up
1 user has voted.

Sorry for the narcissistic, juvenile responses.

This is the kind of market map any new or alternative party needs to study to figure out what to study.

up
6 users have voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

what a soon to be out of work Dem consultant would say:

This is the kind of market map any new or alternative party needs to study to figure out what to study.

I don't know if you are one, but you've got the patter down pat.

I especially appreciated the insufferably pompous tone. Well done!

up
1 user has voted.

Peace Sells

lunachickie's picture

Exactly what a soon to be out of work Dem consultant would say

Ain't that the truth? Seems to me that we have some new blood here since Tuesday. Maybe they've fanned out from Loser Orange Central, to try to prey on what they look at as "the weak-minded" and bring them back to the fold, so they can get back to their Prescribed Narratives.

Wow. Authoritarianism, pomposity and patronizing ass-wipery, all in one post. I'm glad I'm not the only one that caught it...

up
1 user has voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

needs to study to figure out what to study

They think if they stir us up long enough they'll find the magic mushroom that unlocks the secret to Progressive obsequience.

I say let them keep trying. It's at least entertaining to watch people with such inflated opinions of their own superiority so cluelessly flailing.

up
1 user has voted.

Peace Sells

lunachickie's picture

doing it for so long, I doubt they'd know "not clueless anymore" if it walked up to them and smacked them one in the chops.

up
1 user has voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

And you're right: they still don't have a clue.

up
0 users have voted.

Peace Sells

lunachickie's picture

What in the hell possessed you to apologize on behalf of other responses YOU find to be "narcissistic" or "juvenile" here? You say this like you own the place and some rabble jumped the turnstiles and shit all over your special blogger guest.

Sorry for the narcissistic, juvenile responses.

Wow. That's just rude.

up
1 user has voted.
Big Al's picture

helping it out is not really conducive to trying to destroy it.

up
4 users have voted.

your "cycles" and your "ideological categories" have become hopelessly scrambled. Though I do applaud your efforts to try and sort them out.

up
3 users have voted.

native

And part of it is what someone pointed out above, Trump just jumps around and lies. I framed it as iterating through positions to see what would stick during the campaign.

But the broader point was that he found a weakness of Dem's own creation in their coalition and exploited it in a way that a traditional GOP nominee would not have been able to. That's why I felt he was a risk back in March.

up
2 users have voted.

@subirgrewal

Not Henry Kissinger's picture

needs to be shifted down and to the right.

up
17 users have voted.

Peace Sells

Centaurea's picture

I'm looking at those words to the lower right. The ones that say things like "interventionist foreign policy", "support fossil fuels", "deportations", and "torture POWs". (I don't see one that says "torture American citizens who are protesting Wall Street and pipelines", or "allow law enforcement to kill black citizens", but those would fit in there, too.)

Those are all happening already. They're happening under the watch of a Democratic president, the one whose legacy Hillary said she was going to continue. Heck, Clinton herself is responsible for many of those things, and for others she's said and done nothing against them.

I'm also looking at the items to the left that are in or near the oval drawn for Hillary: Social Security, Citizens United amendment, living wage, and even dealing with climate change. There is no evidence that Clinton would support or protect those things, and plenty to show that she would not.

up
14 users have voted.

"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi

"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone

SnappleBC's picture

I think it was flat out character and credibility. I know I started neutral towards her. It wasn't long into the primaries where I concluded that anything coming out of Camp Hillary is a lie and I just need to figure out how.

Now... I might have been right about that or I might have been wrong. But either way it obviates any policy positions she espouses because I simply do not believe her.

up
8 users have voted.

A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard

Thaumlord-Exelbirth's picture

I can't really think of any other than "I'm not Trump" and "Be afraid of Russia!"

up
13 users have voted.

up
10 users have voted.
Hillbilly Dem's picture

up
7 users have voted.

"Just call me Hillbilly Dem(exit)."
-H/T to Wavey Davey

Why did you leave the Democratic Party and refuse to support Hillary? If she had been honest about her positions and trusted to fight for them would you have voted for her? Not me.

I think we need to stop with "we are not Democrats" schtick. At this point, we are all fucked. We have a two-party system, and the percent of third parties voters this election sends a clear message that a third party isn't going to happen. So "we" need to help kill the existing Democratic Party, beating Clinton was a start, and "we" need to help to build a replacement.

up
4 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

lunachickie's picture

I'm sorry, I'm getting whiplash between your sentences there. I think I get what you're trying to say, though Wink

the percent of third parties voters this election sends a clear message that a third party isn't going to happen.

That depends on whether or not you believe the reported percentages were accurate. I sure as hell don't. Still, that's not my real point...

So "we" need to help kill the existing Democratic Party, beating Clinton was a start, and "we" need to help to build a replacement.

We damn sure do. I only say all this the way I do because "Building a replacement party" will result in a "third party". Why? Because the Existing Democratic Party clearly hasn't learned a goddamned thing. And already, they seem to think we're all going to come running back to them. They're not going anywhere. Isn't that obvious?

Do I really have to point out that myself (and you, iirc) along with so many others kept trying to tell them they were in for a rude awakening on Election Day? They're still not listening.

Where I come from, the only word for that is "obstinate". Or, if you prefer, "thick as a brick". Overall, though, I think we are pretty much in agreement...

up
0 users have voted.
Aardvark's picture

The Democratic Party is the party of bourgeois, upper-middle-class aspirants to the parasites who are killing people through economic and military action.

Its leaders are either very naive or bad agents. It represents the billionaire class.

On the wreckage of the political landscape of the near future the concerns of those who want to live and let live, in peace and harmony with each other and with the material conditions of this planet, must be constructed.

Everything else must yield, and shall yield.

Peace and love be with you, reader.

up
10 users have voted.
Aardvark's picture

The Democratic Party has no ideology.

They would not be able to articulate one in a thousand years.

The culture in which they live hates something so lofty, it is the provenance of "intellectuals" who have been suspect in US history since the beginning.

No, this party, like the Republican Party, are just tools of the oligarchs who have twisted the capitalist system of enterprise into something that serves only themselves, leaving nothing for the rest.

That is not an ideology. It is a CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE.

Peace and love be with you, reader.

up
10 users have voted.
Centaurea's picture

I can name that tune in one note: NAFTA.

As someone once said, "It's the economy, stupid."

(I always winced at Bill Clinton using a campaign slogan that called the American citizenry "stupid", but that's the Clintons for you. Bill was like teflon, able to charm his way through just about anything. Hillary's not non-stick, although I'm not sure she and Dems realize that fact even now.)

up
8 users have voted.

"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi

"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone

Amanda Matthews's picture

of Bill Clinton. The words that always came to miind whenever he opened his mouth were 'slick' and oily'. That guy gave me the creeps. Of course it didn't help that one of the first real interviews on television was the one below. After that he always turned my stomach because I didn't believe a word of it. But being a good little 'Democrat' I got my head straight and got in line and voted for him anyway. Twice.

up
3 users have voted.

I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks

Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa

Since you've given me the opening here. I'd like to proudly state once again that I didn't vote for Bill Clinton. Twice!
I knew he couldn't keep it in his pants. I knew he could not be trusted to tell the truth. I knew he would damage the Presidency, the party and the nation through his dishonest actions and inability to keep his pee-pee in his pants.

It flabbergasts me that people say that Bill and Hill have weathered 30 years of wingnut persecution and come out clean, smelling like a rose. Anyone that lived through those times and watched the interviews knew they were lying, both of them.
Flowers, Travelgate, Whitewater, Monica. Plausible deniability and protests of no proof ring hollow when everyone watching you on TV knows you are lying. They didn't weather anything cleanly, they just weren't convicted in a court of law.

up
7 users have voted.

With their hearts they turned to each others heart for refuge
In troubled years that came before the deluge
*Jackson Browne, 1974, Before the Deluge https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SX-HFcSIoU

Amanda Matthews's picture

I couldn't stand the guy, but I was a loyal Democrat, so I voted for him both times.

AS was said before:

up
1 user has voted.

I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks

Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa

and they knew him best.

stein - baraka
2020

edit.

up
3 users have voted.
Amanda Matthews's picture

for the night. I'm rereading Shogun so maybe a chapter or two of that and I'll be able to fall asleep.

Good night all. Sweet dreams.

up
3 users have voted.

I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks

Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa

good faith attempt to make us see the light. Desperate and futile, but possibly good faith. However, at this point, it's hard to see all these "'we' lost" threads as anything but trolling.

up
2 users have voted.