Lest You Worry that Democrats Will Remain Clueless, . . .
they are telling you right now that they will.
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-03-22/democrats-big-don...
A group of wealthy progressive donors that wants to restore the Democratic Party’s clout plans to meet this week with groups that helped kick off protest marches and town-hall confrontations to oppose President Donald Trump’s agenda.
The Democracy Alliance,a group of 112 prolific political contributors that includes George Soros, Tom Steyer and Donald Sussman, is expected to draw more than 400 donors in all from 32 states to discuss how to turn the demonstrators’ enthusiasm into electoral success.
“The resistance work we’re seeing in town halls and elsewhere will be channeled into electoral activity,” said Gara LaMarche, president of Democracy Alliance.
Those demonstrators -- yeah, that's what the party was missing! Let's see if they'll be Democrats! Oh wait, they are. And Dems still lost.
But the Democracy Alliance (which is pretty much an oxymoron by definition) remains undeterred. They'll figure this out.
Major Democratic donors, strategists and activists suggested in interviews that a strategy is emerging for how to respond: First, argue relentlessly that Trump is betraying the economic interests of voters who elected him.
No one ever tried that before!
Jay Robert “J.B.” Pritzker, a Chicago-based investor and heir to the Hyatt Hotels Corp. empire, said Democrats need to highlight pocketbook policy that are “progressive and pragmatic” and contrast them with Republican proposals.
“To me that’s what missing,” said Pritzker, a top donor to groups backing Hillary Clinton last year. “I don’t know where we got away from that, but it does feel like we did."
I know when I want to hear about protecting my economic interests, I turn to billionaire venture capitalist (and national co-chair of Hillary's losing 2008 presidential campaign) Jay Robert Pritzker for advice. He's looking out for me, I just know it.
Some at this confab will simply go with fantasy.
The party can begin rebuilding its bench by electing governors in 2017 and 2018, said Greg Speed, executive director of America Votes, a Democracy Alliance grantee that works to get progressive voters to the polls. But he wouldn’t rule out the Democrats taking back the House. “There are certainly 24 seats to be won out there in a referendum on President Trump,” he said.
Others, like Pritzker, imagine they will understand and enlist all the little people if they just bring enough money.
The Democracy Alliance, whose members pledge to donate at least $200,000 to support recommended organizations, will devote the first two days of its meeting to rebuilding the party from the grassroots up, with a particular focus on taking on Republican governors.
No one in the Bloomberg article seemed to notice one little detail:
The donors’ four-day annual meeting behind closed doors in Washington is part of a larger conversation among liberals about how to resurrect a party that’s lost 12 governorships and more than 900 legislative seats in the last eight years.
Nothing, I mean NOTHING, says grassroots like a donors' four-day annual meeting behind closed doors in Washington.
That slight tilt you just felt in the universe was the simultaneous facepalm of all sentient life in it.
Comments
Normally now I'd just ignore articles about the Dems, . . .
. . . but this crew deserves more ridicule.
I wonder if Pritzger understands how much money
it would take to "enlist" me... he hasn't got that much.
These morons actually believe we'll fall for their crafted BS again, they'll soon see that huge numbers of people won't buy their lies, under any circumstances.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Buying votes is so icky.
Let's get together over hors d-oeuvres to discuss how we'll coax those votes without doing anything substantively different.
In my county,
roughly 70 years ago and more, they used to fill the beds of pick-up trucks with half-pints of whiskey, and pass them out to garner votes. That was a better idea than Prikzter's, because in the former case, at least the voter got some whiskey for their trouble.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Supposedly that's how G Washington got elected Burgess
back in 1758. Col. James Wood handed out whiskey to all and sundry, and Washington was duly elected Burgess from Frederick County. (Yes he got his start in politics in the boonies.)
So yeah, nothing new about buying votes with whatever currency is available.
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
@TheOtherMaven No, what's new is
No, what's new is buying votes with absolutely nothing.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@dervish Make it weed and I'll
Make it weed and I'll think about it.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@dervish It was 6 packs of
It was 6 packs of Budweiser beer in my county. Especially important to absentee voters.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
@dervish I hope so. It's quite
I hope so. It's quite possible that BUT TRUMP IS THE MOST TERRIBLE PERSON EVER!!! will actually work for them. I wouldn't have thought so before watching most of the Democrats, liberals, and even some of the leftists I know falling for this shit over the past three months, but...
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I think Trump is a horrible person and a disaster as president
Quite possibly the worst in history, certainty the worst in my lifetime, and I've lived through LBJ, Nixon, Raygun, Clinton, and Bush junior. I think Trump is worse by far than any of them.
That's a big part of why I'm so utterly disgusted with the democrats. Their useless, feckless flailing and inability to offer even a slightly decent alternative is beyond pathetic.
I promise you, I will not be casting a vote for the democrats just because Trump is a fucking train wreck. As long as their only offering is "he's even worse than us" -- NO SALE. The Dems lost me, finally and forever, in 2016. Trump is a train wreck, the republicans are sickening. The democrats are also a train wreck and are equally sickening.
We need a new party that actually represents the people. Until and unless that happens, I'm out. Both parties should DIAF as far as I'm concerned.
@CS in AZ Both parties need to
Both parties need to die yesterday.
Hopefully, more people are like you than the Democrats are counting on. But they certainly think they're going to ride the anti-Trump wagon to the stars.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
That would be Bing Bong’s wagon from the movie “Inside Out”
http://disneyinfinity.wikia.com/wiki/Bing_Bong%27s_Rocket_Cart
The mask has been dropped and we finally see them for what
they are--just another tentacle of the Vampire Squid. That won't stop them from keeping up the pretense that they care about the little guy.
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"
Well, it does seem to be the 80s all over again.
Although I must admit I much prefer Fleetwood Mac's version to the Democrats.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcjpags7JT8]
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
Lying is too much effort.
Better to pretend among friends that an expensive confab is going to be progressive or pragmatic. The only effort involved in that is to make sure you have an uncritical Bloomberg reporter to let everyone know you were there.
My lord, I come on the most urgent of business...
How can we co-opt the people's anger? It seems they aren't rioting against the right people!
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sztf4hcGrB4]
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
The Democrat party has gone batshit insane
I watched part of the Congressional hearing on wiretap/Russia/Trump. The Democrats on the panel have gone absolutely batshit insane. They are pissed that Trump won and want him executed for treason and the Mistress of the Dark returned to her rightful throne. It was a whole pile of unconvincing "gotcha"s. Do the American people care even the slightest about these Democrat manufactured issues? They are preaching only to the choir, down to about 25% of the voting population.
The party of FDR is now all about marketing. They have nothing else. The purpose of this closed meeting is to drum up the cash to begin a marketing campaign. The problem is that they have nothing to market. The American people want jobs, and the Democrat leadership sat by and watched while jobs ran out the door by the millions.
If you thought that the Republicans were playing obstructionist when Obama was elected, you now have an example of that on steroids. The Republican party played obstructionist to keep Obama to a single term presidency, remember? How well did that work? The entire Clinton strategy was to paint Trump as a wacko to get the Dark One elected. How well did that work? Every time Trump says "wouldn't it be nice if we could get along with Russia" the Democrats begin to uncontrollably salivate. "We've got him now!"
I can't believe how my eyes have been opened up to what a bunch of losers the Democrats are.
We need a Second Party in the US. We have a First Party- the Republicans and a Third Party, the Loser Democrats. We need a serious Second Party, the Party of FDR, of the people, of jobs, of the environment, of economic and social justice.
Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.
Amen and amen
That's it - short and sweet.
"Unhappy with the republicans?
Vote for Democrats!"
This is called coopting citizen's movements into the deadend electoral process. They want to "channel" citizen resistance into the "electoral activity".
This is when a counter movement against the duopoly should take place.
What makes me curious . . .
. . . is how this alters anything. The "citizens' resistance" that will be invited through those closed doors is already in the Dems' camp. The citizens who are really resisting anything almost certainly are not in attendance.
It's just posturing within a closed circle.
Good point.
No self respecting resistance member I know would meet with those assholes.
Remember how much they hated Occupy?
They will hate any genuine resistance movement with equal fervor.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
And NoDAPL. n/t
@Big Al That's why the anti-Trump
That's why the anti-Trump movement exists, to take up the space where a real challenge to the system would occur.
It's the silver lining in the recent loss for Clinton and her blood-soaked bullies. They get to generate support by simply screaming about Trump, which takes the people's eyes off them and their crap.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
You would think these clueless twits would figure out that...
they are the very type of person that the people are protesting against?
It really illustrates the point that one does not have to have a frigging clue about reality to be wealthy, in fact, being able to dismiss the shitty reality that they created for so many people in their efforts to obtain the levels of wealth and power they enjoy.
I am absolutely certain that if I was a scumbag I would be very wealthy right now. Had multiple chances over the years to profit off of fucking others over.
I was just too stupid to seize the moment apparently...
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
@Alphalop Are they? I hope so.
Are they? I hope so. Looks to me like the people's anger was pretty neatly co-opted into a "I Hate Trump" movement, which the Democrats can use.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
It is entirely possible to loathe Trump
with every fiber of one's being, AND also loathe democrats at the same time.
It is not necessary to imagine that Trump is anything other than an insane, vile, lying piece of shit. He IS. Honestly, I've been scratching my head in confusion for several months now as to why among people here -- ostensibly for the most part progressives or left leaning, liberals, anti war, anti capitalism, etc. -- so many have been defending Trump, or seem to hold a soft spot for this vile, disgusting president. I keep hearing variations of "Oh, come now, Trump is not so bad" or even that he's ok, on our side, really a man of the people, against the establishment, sincerely cares about the country or the people... blah blah ... and I'm thinking, are you fucking kidding me?!? I simply do not understand this, at all.
But I think I'm seeing the light a little bit - the idea seems to be that if you hate Trump, then you must support democrats instead. Therefore the need/desire to prop up Trump, in order to resist democrats. I have to say I think this is very misguided. They both suck shit. One does not need to be a dem or believe the democrats or support them to despise Trump. It is possible to despise both, and many people do. I don't think it helps anyone or anything to stick up in any way for the pig-man in the White House (my apologies to pigs, which are nice animals, especially compared to DT). I say tear him down, and the democrats with him, because neither deserves a thing from us.
"Big man, pig man; ha ha, charade you are..."
From hands down the most amazing show I've ever seen, the recent Roger Waters tour. Saw it in Palm Springs and am going again in NYC in September. The whole thing is one of the most powerful and unique concerts, unlike anything you've ever seen.
Here's what he did for "Pigs (Three Different Ones)", aiming squarely at narcissistic buffoon in the White House:
"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"
- Kurt Vonnegut
Wow - thanks!
Amazing video. Great minds...
I don't know what inspired me to call Trump pig-man, but it fits. I just had to put in my earbuds and rock out at my desk listening to this. Powerful.
The best concert I ever saw was Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon show. Closely followed by Dire Straits. My love of Mark Knopfler knows no bounds. Good times.
OK, so show up anyway
Everybody knows where they're going to be. Why not protest outside those locked doors in huge numbers? Because if no one does, it's going to continue to look like the DNC and its donors are the owners of and spokespeople for all left-leaning populism in this country. There's no need to protest as a Democrat, if people object to that. But there is a need to let people hear a voice that isn't dripping with corruption and elitism.
At this point, I think Lefty resistance to the DNC is now down to sitting with the nerds and heads and fatties in the corner of the caff while eyerolling and smirking at the jocks. I don't expect that strategy to have much effect on the world.
An excellent point and a correct target.
This Democracy Alliance is fucking us over just as surely as Republicans are. Both are making sure all the nice things are reserved for their approved sets.
@Cassandrus We need to build an
We need to build an alternative. That's what it comes down to.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
But Cassandrus is right that . . .
. . . that alternative you suggest needs to hold Dems and their supporters to account at least as much as Republicans. Both claim to be looking out for us. We always knew that was a lie from the Republicans, but now it's become all the more visibly a lie from the Dems. And if the Left is going to be attacked by Dems, it's just common sense that reciprocation is in order.
@dance you monster
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Here, this is a better one:
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Hey, my Dutch friend and I just sang “Messiah” a few weeks ago
She even got to sing a solo aria (“How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things” — Isaiah 52:7).
http://projectorkest.horringa.net/
@lotlizard I love that one!
I love that one!
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Republican overreach should have a boomerang effect
in the midterms at the very least. Although some Republican voters will see it as under-reach since their pols aren't being quite sociopathic enough. This will be Trumps "read my lips" moment since he promised better healthcare for less and is delivering either the opposite or nothing.
The Democrats should be able to benefit from this without too much effort on their part. Since Hillary had very short coattails, it might actually prove to be better for the long-term health of the Democrats that Trump won. Of course, the ability of the Democrats to call for another card when they are showing 20 cannot be underestimated.
" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "
@Phoebe Loosinhouse There's no doubt they are
There's no doubt they are counting on the boomerang effect. It's all they've got. On the other hand, their approval ratings are still absolutely in the toilet, both the Party and Clinton herself. It's hard to know whether there's going to be a big surge in the midterms in reaction to Trump, or the lowest turnout we've ever had, due to people being disgusted with, well, everything.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Now that they're openly admitting it,
can we admit the fact that these anti-Trump protests are Democratic campaign events? That the Democrats are using them to get back into power exactly the same way that the Republicans used the Tea Party movement? That this is the reason the anti-Trump rallies get so much coverage from the mainstream press, which has given coverage to, perhaps, three protest movements in the past 30 years?
The fact that some people who attend don't intend their protest that way doesn't matter much. Look at what happened in Wisconsin--a vibrant protest movement became an electoral strategy to elect Democrats, and died. And that was a movement I respected. But enough of the movement's leadership wanted to work with the Democrats and focus on electing them--and that was that. How much more is this anti-Trump movement going to be a tool of the Clinton Party?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
LMAO
I know when I want to hear about protecting my economic interests, I turn to billionaire venture capitalist (and national co-chair of Hillary's losing 2008 presidential campaign) Jay Robert Pritzker for advice. He's looking out for me, I just know it.
Or, as Joe once said, "Honey, the man in the 300-dollar suit says he wants to help me!"
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I've never had anyone in a $300 suit claim to want to
help me. The people who claim they want to help me spend more than that on a shirt. Maybe even a T shirt.
@HenryAWallace Take it up with Joe.
Take it up with Joe.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Take what up with Joe?
@HenryAWallace The suit prices
The suit prices among the political class.
It was Joe who first coined the "honey, the man in the 300-dollar suit...." comment.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I got that Joe coined it, but my point was that I did
not disagree with Joe.
Maybe the politicians who offer to help him have $300 suits and those who offer to help me have $5,000 suits.
Could happen.
@HenryAWallace Either way,
Either way, the man in the suit has just bought a new car with the profits he's made from our dreams.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
We're allowed to have dreams now?
USA! USA! USA!
No one in a $300 suit ever offered me help.
Three hundred bucks would not buy those who profess to want to help me a shirt, not even an ugly T-shirt reduced from $1550 to $925. http://www.neimanmarcus.com/Valentino-Tie-Dye-Short-Sleeve-T-Shirt-with-...
It will be a tool of the Clinton party as long as other people
let it!
This isn't the time to protect Trump against the Democrats. Let him fucking fall.
But it's also not the time to let the Democrats lead the charge. It's time to actually do something.
@Cassandrus Protect Trump? Is that
Protect Trump? Is that what you think I'm doing?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Most of this seems pretty stock arrogant to me
But this bit here... this is mockingly stupid.
So these guys watched that last election and then decided that their money would help woo the voters who chose someone other than Hillary? I, of course, can only speak for myself but every time I see a slick TV commercial I see money. Every time I hear a radio spot I hear money. Every time I read some editorial in a newspaper I'm reading about money. Money is not my friend.
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
It wasn't a lack of money
that cost Hillary the election. It was a lack of honesty.
native
How much is a sound cannon?
I'd like to aim it at every one of those Ds after they climb back out from under their piles of money to spew more platitudes. Dish a little back, see if they can take STFU for a change. Chumps. Thanks Jimmy Dore for that he started it I think, in the righteous rant about Ds and The Supremes, another wonderful day to look forward to.
How about just doing the thing that is right for the country?
I vote for sound cannons all around. Let's occupy D.C. with 'em, just one big STFU until service is restored. lol it's nice to have a dream.
Peace & Love
.
I just posted this on two other threads:
Also:
http://caucus99percent.com/content/its-not-rocket-science
And I'll repost my reply from one of those threads.
There's one element where I'll disagree with your post dismissing Democratic cluelessness. It's why I used that word specifically in my title here.
Greedy, fake, corrupt, yeah, all those are on full display. But. . . .
If Dems want to win any offices, and their power to become embedded in that corruption or increase it to their benefit might depend in part on winning offices, they are going about it the exact wrong way with their refusal to listen to voters, with their refusal to consider that anything needs changing. If they don't want to win offices, they are doing everything just dandy, but if they want office the decline in Dem representatives is just one of those factamajiggies that clearly shows they are doing it wrong. And this conclave of donors that's taking place now is proposing to spend money either needlessly (if no offices are sought) or misguidedly, dare I say cluelessly, if they think doing the same exact thing over again is going to win them seats of power it has consistently lost them for several election cycles.
Greedy, fake, corrupt motherfuckers can be blinkered on either side of the (diminishingly differentiated) political divide.
My prior post addressed that.
Especially the second part.
Their priority is taking care of Number 1, which they do extremely well, including by taking care of their patrons. They may want to win offices, but certainly not at the expense of taking care of Number 1.
If you think they didn't know Hillary's problems with both the right and the left better than the average message board poster, please explain why. Very low IQs--all of them? Don't read the papers or watch TV or youtube? Internal pollsters they can afford to--and do--hire lied to them? Not a single one of their professional political strategists got it right?
Losing an election isn't so bad if you stay neoliberal. You can get a big salary influence peddling or working in a think tank, giving speeches, etc. There's no money in becoming a leftist or populist, though. Neither Hillary nor Bill got rich by winning elections per se. They got rich influence peddling. Had they been preaching populism, economic justice, etc., how much would Goldman Sachs or any of the benefactors would have paid them for a speech?
ETA: Wait. You titled this thread because of a post I made on another thread?
Interesting take
I hadn't seen this before, so thanks for reposting it.
It seems logical to assume that democrats as a party would want to win elections, hold a majority in congress, and win the presidency. And that they would want to grow and increase, rather than shrink, their party. By those measures, they are obviously failing badly. So it's easy to assume that they are simply inept and clueless about why they are failing, how to win elections or attract party members or loyalty. Incompetent and stupid.
But I suppose it's possible you are right and they actually don't care about winning elections or having a majority or growing the party. Perhaps they are content to lose, as long as their bread continues to be buttered while they play the part of "the opposition party" on TV. If so, it looks like they will continue to succeed at failure.
.
http://caucus99percent.com/comment/251182#comment-251182
Pundits would get questioned on national TV about Democrats' being worried about losing the votes of the left and would reply,
"No, they're not worried."
"Why?"
"Because the left has nowhere else to go."
I think they knew better than that. For just one thing, the left could stay home, which is what they always accuse the left of doing anyway.
But, they don't care. I think that was evident from the left bashing we got from Obama, Rahm, Gibbs and Carney during Obama's first term. Hell, Obama even said "My friends on the left" to distinguish himself from us. Early in his second term, he identified his policies as those of a moderate Republican from the 1980s. Rahm called the "left of the left" retards and ended up apologizing only to Sarah Palin. Does any of that sound like they're worried about our votes more than they are worried about spreading the neoliberal gospel?
And, if you think Hillary Clinton was going to win the votes of any two Republicans, let alone two Republicans for every leftist vote lost, you must have had your head buried in the sand since 1992.
To me, this is not cluelessness. People that clueless can't find their way out of a paper bag, let alone win political debates, get high office or be President. It's a determination not to lose your personal meal ticket, your favorable tax structure or your big party donors. To me, people who insist they do what they do because they are clueless, or spineless or frightened are making excuses for them. I think no one is more calculated than politicians, especially Democratic politicians. Why? Republicans have long been very open that being good to the rich is their path. Democrats have had to get hypocritical about what they are doing. And, judging by way the Obama administration openly punched left, they may not even think they need to cover their tracks anymore.
Hum... I dunno HenryWallace
I hear what you're saying, but I just find it very hard to believe that the dems/Clintons actually planned to or wanted to lose to Trump. Influence peddling, which is of course the Clintons' core business, requires their donors to believe they are buying access to power - not to losers. When Hillary snarled "I WILL be the president!" in a TV interview, I'm pretty sure she believed it.
It seems to me that they actually did (do) think they don't need us (the so-called "left") or our votes. They thought Trump was completely unelectable and that his nomination essentially guaranteed Her Highness the coronation they had planned on and bought and paid for. They thought most of us would come around, because Trump, and they could do without those who didn't. They did think Trump was so unpalatable that even many regular republicans would vote for Her. Obama won the presidency twice running as a centrist neoliberal. The dem establishment appears to still believe that's the winning position.
But, like you said, they also have that position because $$$, and can't or wouldn't change even if they did grok why Bernie Sanders was so exceptionally popular. They can't turn against the money and power just to win, if winning means changing to policies that actually support the people. That won't do at all! They would rather lose in the short term, than actually change. Because like the comment below says, they know that as long as the duopoly remains, power will come back around to them eventually because that's all we do - switch out dems and republicans being in charge every few years or cycles, while nothing actually changes. It's sad.
I guess my takeaway now is that you are pretty much correct. They don't care about winning by being right or doing the right thing. They care about maintaining the status quo. I still don't think they planned or wanted to hand the White House to a Trump; that loss was due to basic ineptitude and incompetence, and the arrogant belief that She was inevitable. But the party has since demonstrated that they would rather lose than change. That seems undeniable at this point. No one can really be that stupid.
@CS in AZ Trump is different
Trump is different. I agree that he wasn't supposed to get in. He was supposed to be Hillary's jobber. Someone, possibly Trump, possibly someone else, but not Russia, decided to take the possible win instead of throwing the game to her. Whoops. Pawn not doing what he's supposed to, bad pawn, no dog biscuit, attacks from all sides.
The whole thing's pro wrestling, IMO, and the Democrats are supposed to mostly lose--in the states especially, with a couple havens in the big coastal cities; in Congress, definitely, where it's possible they'll never hold a majority again; they get to have the Presidency two out of every three times though, because Democrats are allowed to wage every war they want because they're automatically good guys. A Democrat waging a war is always FDR protecting the world from Nazism, and never Johnson engaging in scummy, partly-inherited cat-vomit colonial imperialism.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I recall thinking he was trying his best to lose
Who says things like this if they are trying to win an election - as President of the United States:
That's POTUS material, for sure, yeah? Gawd. It's just mind blowing.
They didn't realize the country so wasn't Ready for Hillary, voters would actually choose that thing instead. It's really not his fault he won. He was a genuinely horrible candidate who by all rights should have suffered a crushing defeat. It's not his fault that Her was so unbelievably bad she lost anyway, even to him.
BTW, in case it's not clear, I am at least partially joking around here. I honestly don't know if Trump tried to throw the election, or if he really wanted to win. It's a mystery. He certainly appeared to be doing his best to be unacceptable and unelectable. But then, he's also a narcissist egomaniac with extreme confidence in his own greatness and superiority, with years of experience getting rewarded for disgusting and outrageous behavior and being a swaggering bully and an asshole. So who knows? Not me. Either way, he absolutely deserves to be attacked from all sides. Kinda goes with the territory as POTUS, and he's ridiculous, embarrassing, and most important, truly dangerous. I don't feel even a tiny bit sorry for him, no matter what happens to his joke of a presidency. Impeachment? Bring it on. Please.
@CS in AZ Impeachment,
Impeachment, to me, doesn't have anything to do with giving Trump the punishment he deserves. It has to do with giving me the Mike Pence I don't deserve. Or the Paul Ryan. Either of whom would have all Trump's loathsome qualities with a couple more added on.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Impeaching Trump is not about "punishing" him
It's about protecting the world from a warmongering, needlessly aggressive bully and certifiable lunatic with the American military and nuclear arsenal at his disposal. Pence is awful, but he's not even close to as dangerous or deranged as Trump.
That's what we thought about Trump vs Her
and look how that has turned out!
Pence is a DOMINIONIST. Some of those fuckers are so crazy, they WANT to start World War III to force the End of the World and the Second Coming to happen on their schedule. Is Pence that crazy? We don't know - do you want to take the chance?
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Yes.
Pence might be crazy, his religion obviously is. But I've seen no signs that he would personally bring on Armageddon. He comes across as stable and reasonably intelligent, and he's not a megalomaniac with the mind of a 12-year-old schoolyard bully. And he can form a coherent paragraph of understandable English.
On the other hand, we KNOW that Trump is crazy, not just religious but completely out of touch with reality, and with his incoherent babbling and belligerent attitude he's already starting spats and breaking relationships with everyone, from Australia to Germany to England to Mexico. His strongman persona combined with delusional thinking runs a high risk of causing massive wars and destruction.
@CS in AZ He
He comes across as stable and reasonably intelligent, and he's not a megalomaniac with the mind of a 12-year-old schoolyard bully. And he can form a coherent paragraph of understandable English.
and that's the problem: we decide what we think of our politicians based on how they present themselves in front of the camera: not even their policy positions so much as their mannerisms.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@CS in AZ And
And anyway, if we've taken the "lesser of two evils" thing to the point where it makes us willing to support sexist, white supremacist, Dominionist Mike Pence because that enables us to get rid of Trump, we might as well hang it up and get a bottle of tequila and head for the beach.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Ha! Yes, let's go!
The beach and a bottle of tequila sounds great to me. I bet we'd have a great time and some interesting discussions.
Listen, don't worry. I have zero power to impeach Trump, obviously, no matter how much I want him impeached. I'm not gonna change my mind about him, but honestly it's irrelevant what I think anyway. He's not going to be impeached on my say-so. (Unfortunately; I wish I had that kind of power!)
I'll just say it makes little sense to me to oppose Pence for being sexist or white supremacist when Trump runs rings around him on both of those issues. Can you imagine Pence ever saying he wants to fuck his own daughter, or openly calling women pieces of ass? I can't. He knows little factoids like what month 9/11 occurred. He's not delusional. His religion is troubling, certainly, but compared to Trump's blatant mental illness and unrestrained bullying and threatening the entire world over imaginary issues that don't even exist, I think there's ample evidence he's better than Trumpolini. And obviously I agree that's a very low bar. It's not really about lesser of two evils for me. I just don't want to die in (or live through) a nuclear war because our president is insane. Pretty simple really.
Cheers!
@CS in AZ I see no
I see no evidence on which to base the idea that Mike Pence is better.
This is what Jeremy Scahill (of Dirty Wars fame) has to say about him:
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/15/mike-pence-will-be-the-most-powerful...
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I think the D Party estalishment is
reasonably confident that it will regain much if not most of its power, sooner or later. Because it represents the only practical alternative to Republican rule, it is more or less guaranteed a seat in the halls of power, whether it actually serves the public or not. The built-in dualism of the system limits political participation to a kind of see-saw, back-and-forth exchange of power between R and D candidates, so that either one or the other of them will necessarily prevail.
This continuing duopoly explains the seemingly unwarranted arrogance of D Party leaders and operatives. They know that they will be returned to power eventually, because voters will have no other choice, other than R leadership. Since there can be two, and only two items on the menu, neither of them needs to be particularly appetizing or nutritious.
The stability and intractability of this power-sharing agreement is monumental, and very much a collusion among the wealthy elites of both Parties. Both major Parties share the intention of blocking, obstructing, and excluding any and all efforts to break the stranglehold they currently maintain in tandem with one another, on the electoral process.
native
The "Washington Generals" should be their new name.
It fits because that basketball team may have lost every game to the Globetrotters they got paid well and consistently, as long as they helped draw crowds.
Pritzker: "I don't know where we got away from that"
for God's sake, who's this "we" you speak of there JB? Ya think you and your donor class had anything to do with killing off anything truly progressive? Ya think? I know, I know, the idiot HAS to say something as stupid as that and the really horrible part is there are more than enough suckers out there to believe this shit.
They think they can astroturf another Tea Party into being on the Left and sadly, they might just be right that they can.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
Soros on Soros
Democracy Alliance sounds good. "contributors that includes George Soros" not so much. This video is in constant take-down by cbs or whoever, but always resurfaces. It is himself saying we need to stop himself, and I won't ever forget seeing it. In his own words and Ds still worship him, that is sick.
George Soros (Resurfaced 60-Minutes Interview 1998)
Thanks
Proof that the Dem Puppet Masters differ very little from their
counterparts.
Sounds just like another version of the astro-turf Tea Party douchebags.
While there may or may not have been any legitimate populist rage on the Right (the "movement," which ultimately was an embarrassing collection of mostly older white men venting their racism at the first black president, can be traced back to getting its name from a CNBC financial pundit who I believe insisted on blaming the victims of predatory mortgage loans and not the criminal banks), whatever was there was quickly seized upon by scumbags looking to legitimize their "free market capitalism"/small gummint propaganda and monopoly ownership, such as the Koch Bros.
The Big Boy Oligarchy Elite just continue to volley back and forth in the game that this is to them, while we suffer the real life consequences of their unabated misdeeds, pillage and crime spree.
Thanks, dym.
"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"
- Kurt Vonnegut
How many confabs are rich donors having?
I think there was one held by Donna immediately after loss; Hillary threw a defeat party for them; Brock had one same time as Woman's March; CAP had or will have a prom with only the party elites; and now this one. Jess, the weight they must be gaining from all those lunches.
As for the messaging. I thought it was pretty much set now to follow Clinton's message that Trump=Putin and "We are not Trump", and variations on identity politics.
As I have referenced in other postings, democratic party leaders look to be concerned that the base will be radicalized by Trump and as a result, become disobedient.
Jimmy Dore take down.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZ2aQR6IZC4
Schiff afraid of radicalized base.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-trailguide-updates-rep-...
Typical marketing
Again folks, got to read the fine print:
Progressive and pragmatic. Sounds like Clinton. Anytime you see pragmatic, code word for mediocre garbage.
Another day, same tactics.
Remember, some Dem lawmakers are using their
own campaign funds to stage anti-Trump protests, as well.
As far as I can tell, this is their primary strategy for 2018. Also, I think the Centrist 'meeting' with Begich, etc., pretty much says it all.
Mollie
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."--Will Rogers
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.