Democratic Party Now -- Stupid or Crooked?
Of course one possible answer to the title of this essay is, "both." Nevertheless I submit that this question is extremely important. A recent superb essay on this board focused on how to talk with lesser-evil voting folks, and cited the infamous Chuck Shumer line about picking up suburban moderate Republicans while losing traditional lunch pail Democrats. Obviously, Shumer and company do not care to accomplish anything that would benefit those traditional supporters of their party -- so why should they try to win their votes? Thus they are just Republicans now. I certainly agree.
However, I think the Democratic leadership is even more corrupt than that. These people are not stupid at all. They live the lives they have chosen to lead which is to be professional fundraisers. It is not the interest of "moderate" republican voters that they care about. It is the interest of the people who donate money to their campaigns that they care about.
Chuck's glib comment was a toss off -- to explain his own prostitution as though it were an electoral strategy. It is indeed an electoral strategy for the donors -- to own both parties to make sure that they get the government they buy.
This is not a subtle distinction. In support of my interpretation I point to the collapse of the number of Democrats in office over the last decade. The leaders of this party are content to dominate the big cities while blowing off the rest of the country. This keeps enough Democratic politicians in office for it to be a "national" party -- but guarantees that it will never be in power.
The Republican Party concentrates on those exurban and rural voters. The Constitution gives more political power to lower population states in the Electoral College and the Senate. So the Democrats have settled into a stalemate with the Republicans, that locks the status quo in place.
Instead of contending over policy, the two parties put all their public advocacy into accusing the other side of illegitimacy, criminality and treason. Investigations galore! This unprecedented duel of cheap propaganda totally devoid of practical consequence has the effect of discrediting government itself. That of course has been the primary political project of neoliberalism since the days of Thatcher and Reagan.
Hard to give any credit to government today, isn't it?
Simultaneously, the main news outlets of the 21st Century sensationalize the accusations flying back and forth, with Fox News and Talk Radio revving up the Red Shirts and the Legacy Media serving up the bile to the Blue Shirts. There is no significant difference between Rachel Maddow and Sean Hannity. They are both entertainers with a particular schtick.
When I see a wide variety of advocacy on the internet that includes the thought that the Dems are too stupid to understand why they keep losing, I just shake my head in wonder.
Any other thoughts on this?
Comments
Well said
We can recall the panic the Dems went through when they had the Presidency, a large majority in the House and 60 Senators. And still refused to enact what we'd consider Democratic legislation.
Then they did their best to become a minority party.
they succeeded. /nt
https://www.euronews.com/live
Well...
You said what I tried to but with fewer words and much more succinctly.
Good job.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Crooked and Clueless
They only look stupid because they can't see outside their bubble. If the world worked the way they think it does, President Hillary would have a Democratic supermajority to ram down whatever austerity to us grateful plebes. Anyone outside of DC knew the "gain two Republicans for every Democrat lost" (which I thought came from Podesta, not Schumer) was a ridiculous idea, especially with the loathed HRC on as their candidate. But inside the bubble, I'm sure it made perfect sense.
EDIT: also worth mentioning, they face no consequences, so they have no impetus to change. Even when they are wrong, they will only fall up.
Thomas Frank's "Listen, Liberal" covers this thought really well, if you haven't read it.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Not stupid
Corrupt? Obviously
Incompetent? Maybe
But not stupid. They are extremely effective at blocking the Left and that takes some talent.
The Democratic leadership is crooked.
Shumer, Pelosi, Clyburn, etc. are corporate tools. They are not the brightest people in the world, but I think they know what they are doing. They are greedy and amoral. Obama is in the same camp (although smarter), as is Biden (although senile). There are a lot of stupid (or at least overly trusting) Democrats as well. Bernie is on the periphery of this camp. He is too trusting on foreign policy and doesn't seem to believe that the leadership of the Democratic Party is evil. Then there are people like Bob Shrum and Donna Brazille who are both crooked and stupid.
This is a very strong perspective
...and it does reveal the facts on the ground. The Independents continue to grow in size, larger than either private Party. And that's logical, too, since neither party represents or benefits the people. Neither can see past their own personal greed, for the moment. Neither has a shred of vision for the future.
.
As to "stupid" or "clueless" that is a subjective view.
We see Democratic Leaders make statements that demonstrate they have no idea what the US population, at large, is thinking, and have no idea what the People need and expect. That makes them look pretty stupid, since it is their job to know these things.
But to me, the people who participate in the fake democracy "that locks the status quo in place" are the ones who look like fools.
The intelligent people are organizing to create a government that works for the American People. They are not trying to reform the Duopoly bag of criminals or vote in their elections.
Now the people may fail to form a decent government or to take over control of the current rogue government. But that just means that they didn't have the right stuff to work together for the betterment of all. They were never ready to become a nation. It was forced on them, but that's not at all what they really want. They mostly hate people they don't know, who live outside of their geographical area, and they don't want to help them or hear about their problems. In that case, the best thing that can happen is for the US to break up into several cooperative autonomous regions and defund the national military that is robbing them blind and destroying their environment via neglect and exploitation.
People will be much happier when they are no longer tax slaves for the elite and Wall Street.
The EU was supposed to become the “United States of Europe”
This elite globalist vision is faltering now, as the common people now can see how dysfunctional the U.S. monetary-and-military federal union model truly is …
How unresponsive, opaque, and condescending federal-level financial and political cliques can be towards voters and the concept of popular will …
How little real net benefit an entrenched, centralized power structure bestows upon (= allows to trickle down to) ordinary citizens …
How unrealistic and elusive the mirage of a harmonious, conflict-free multicultural melting pot can be when it comes to patching together people of diverse ethnicities and historical backgrounds …
Europe is of course already broken up into separate nations. Seriously now, wouldn’t the peoples of Europe probably be better off staying that way?
When the EU formed, I imagined a utopia.
...a continental theme park (I was young) of very different lands and cultures to explore and celebrate. However, I also liked the idea of expanding individual sovereignty from only being a German or a Dutch citizen to identifying as a European citizen. To that end, I thought the Erasmus Programme was a brilliant utopian plan for identity transformation — educating young Europeans in different member states so they would grow up to regard the different parts of Europe as a whole, and would form life-long friendships across cultural boundaries. In a generation or two, I thought, European citizens would be a sovereign force.
Looking back, the only thing I would change would be the currency. I understand the importance of the Euro, but I would not replace each country's national currency and central banks. Monetary centralization should have come much, much later. (I'm older now and I know the hazards and the monsters.) Europe would be a better place if Member nations had been empowered to manage their own currencies and financial leveraging — and thus avoid any interaction at all with the World Bank and the IMF. Then, once the block chain developed, they could enter into a centralized financial common if they wish, with the kind of autonomy they need to fulfill their unique local aspirations.
Hindsight. It's a wonderful thing.
This might be in jeopardy
Not at the local levels, but if the republicans lose the senate. Don’t you find it a bit convenient that democrats kept the house and the republicans kept the senate? This happened of cops during Obama’s tenure and he and democrats used it as an excuse for why they couldn’t pass the things Obama ran on. "Obama would have passed..... but republicans blocked him every time." Just forget that there were many ways to get McConnell to either do his job or keep him from doing something democrats didn’t want him to do. I’m seeing people saying that 3 years after Obama exited the WH. Poor old most powerful man in the world who couldn’t get his agendas passed because McConnell was mean to him. Waaaa.
But now some of the polls are showing that democrats have a good chance of winning the senate and oh won’t that put them in a pickle? Especially if Biden wins. This time they won’t have the excuse of not really having everyone in place like they did when Franklin's race was tied up in court. I think I’m remembering it right. But democrats would much rather have republicans in charge of the senate so they can keep up their fake opposition to republicans.
One more thing. There is a new super pac being funded by long time republicans that want Biden in the WH. Many centrists think that is good news for them because they think it reflects badly on Trump’s presidency. Nope. Most of them are the same people who supported Hillary over Trump because they thought she would take us to war more than Trump would. I’m betting that they are backing Biden because they know he will work with them and especially McConnell to screw us. I just don’t get how people can be so ignorant of reality and miss the big picture. But then they welcomed Mueller back into their fold because he went after Trump. Could you ever imagine people protecting the person who lied the country into war? Oh yeah...they are supporting Biden and worshipped Herheinous. Never mind.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Biden will complete the Obama
agenda. Get that Grand Bargain through Congress, restore the Cold War that Trump's waffling on NATO slowed down, and complete the "pivot to Asia" through TPP. No mystery why the owners want Biden.
Well then Biden has help lined up
30 'blue dawg' democrats who are really just republicans have signed on to going after social security. Why? Because of budget deficits of course. Golly gee why not rescind this numerous tax cuts that have happened over many decades? Oh no our donors will not accept that.
I’m curious to see what the kids do when Biden does go after it? They insist that the numerous videos of him saying that he wanted to were fake. Again how can once intelligent people become so damn dumb? It’s like people got their brains flipped when Obama became president and continued doing what Bush did.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
I'm sorry
but I have a hard time believing that Biden would do anything. I would be surprised if he still remembers how to wipe his own butt. Maybe Biden's VP or Biden's cabinet or Biden's wife.
Yeah there is that huh?
Biden is not up to actually being in charge of his own presidency so as you point out it will be run by those who he puts in his cabinet. Gee what could go wrong with letting people such as Bloomberg and Jaimie Dimon run his economic policies? Add in Larry Summers of the cat food commission and there is the good hint at what would be in store for us.
Who will be his national security advisor. I think that is the department I am thinking of. Anywho it is the one that sets our foreign policies. Probably another republican because for some reason one has been in that roll going back many administrations. Obama kept Gates on after he was Bush's.
We will just get a rerun of Meet the New Boss who is the same as the Old Boss because the same bad turds keep coming through the revolving door of serving the country and serving their pockets in the private industry. Obama's attorney general, Eric Holder came from a bank that helped write the bailout bill and lo and behold they held his job open for him until he was ready to go back.
The oligarchy will not allow anything to change here until every last asset has been stripped from the country and people are left to wallow in poverty and more. I am working on an essay about what is in store for us. Hint: It's not going to be pretty, but I doubt I am telling you anything you don't know.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
On cutting social security
it’s not going to be a direct cut on benefits, but it’s coming through payroll tax cuts. Trump, McConnell and Romney as well as the 30 democrats want to let companies stop paying them to help them recover from whatever reason they cook up. I’m wondering how many of them put their hands out for money that were meant for small businesses?
Democrats are acting surprised that companies that didn’t need the loans took them anyway and now they are upset that Trump won’t let them see who did it.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Heh, remember the Romney speech when he said this,
I could be wrong, but, think a lot of the Repub and Dem Establishment are still deadly serious about enacting and implementing a Grand Bargain.
Actually, I wondered if the Dem Leadership would 'bargain' with DT pre-impeachment, to let him off--if he would agree to a GB (under the table, of course). Obviously, that didn't happen. Still, don't think we're out of the woods, by any means, regardless of which neoliberal Party holds the most power next year.
It's all so depressing.
Mollie
"The leaders of this new movement are replacing traditional liberal beliefs about tolerance, free inquiry, and even racial harmony with ideas so toxic and unattractive that they eschew debate, moving straight to shaming, threats, and intimidation."
~~Matt Taibbi, The American Press Is Destroying Itself, June 12, 2020
"I know, I know. All passion; no street smarts."
~~Captain West, 1992 Rob Reiner/Aaron Sorkin Movie, A Few Good Men
“If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die, I want to go where they went.”
~~Will Rogers, Actor & Social Commentator (1856-1950)
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
The system creates both parties as corrupt without wisdom
They aren't stupid, just corrupt and devoid of any evidence of wisdom. The founding fathers, with lots of experience, knew that you can't trust politicians. So they created a system requiring continuous competition amongst the worst elements of society. The goal was to use competition to guarantee that there would be little cooperation, and the worst of men/women would have little impact on the nation. For the most part it has worked, our nation is remarkably unable to rise to any occasion, save war.
We have a monopoly of two parties, each appealing to slightly different aspects of human nature. For the most part a politician selects a party, like putting on a team car jacket. You need to sign up for one or the other, whichever advances your opportunities the most, essentially regional monopolies. What does a modern US politician want? They want to be successful. That means status and power and today wealth. And they want to stay in office. Whatever mechanism achieves that they will sign up. It should be obvious why there are so few principled voices with a higher purpose. In fact, there has been a constant diminishing of the number of those so inclined. The other factor is that there is very little commitment to building a better society and a better world-there is little global vision. That's one of the reason that the professional sector, military and financial, dominate. They are here for the long run and do have a vision, but it's not for the welfare of the society or the world, just their narrow sector.
I think that the people understand this and that is why they are ready to support an independent thinking candidate like Ross Perot or Donald trump. They seem incredibly refreshing compared to the political pablum that we always get. The mainstream politicians hate this.
Monopolies are always bad even if it's a duopoly. That's why capitalism sucks. The people always wind up getting drained by the capitalists through the mechanism of corruption and economic rent, of which monopoly is one form of that.
The US succeeded because it had a frontier economy, resources and emerging technology. That has changed drastically. Which now places the emphasis on government, and as I said, ours sucks. I'm an engineer. I take a look at an opportunity, I want to analyze it and come up with a consensus of how to build something to use that opportunity. Our system is designed to ensure that nothing of that sort happens on a regular basis. Take a look at China compared to the US. They build their government on consensus, cooperation and a clear vision of the future. We wonder how they can do this without Western "values", and believe that they of course will eventually fail. Facts continue to prove that our system doesn't work, decade after decade. But if you don't believe in our values of capitalism and representative democracy then how can you justify our political system? My conclusion is that we have to throw it out and design something that works. This can't happen unless the people wake up or the system entirely fails. In the meanwhile our politicians of both parties will continue to be useless, corrupt, unwise, but not stupid- they are playing the game as it is.
Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.
Take a look at China compared to the US.
The "best healthcare system in the world" is being pummeled by a novel coronavirus that China has managed to reduce to a fraction of the cases and deaths that continue to rise in the US.
Today - new cases & deaths:
China: 44 cases & 0 deaths
US: 26,071 cases & 809 deaths.
And China Mobilizes to beat those 44 infections
...back down to zero
China has zero tolerance for the virus. They have what it takes to stop it.
[edit=typos]
Tolerance is much higher in 'democracies'
like the US than in dictatorships like China. It's 'just a flu' and not like the scary, violent antifa,
"And they want to stay in office."
Engel has been in congress for 16 terms. Biden served for 40 years. Feinstein? Pelosi? Schumer? How many others have made it a career to just suck off the government’s teat? They are isolated from what we normal folks struggle through daily because of their positions of power, etc. Ask any one of them what the price of gas, milk, diapers, etc is and they would just look dumbfounded.
Unable or unwilling? They know that they have passed legislation that has made it harder for us to live with any type of dignity because they keep stealing our money for their wars and to give it to people who have more than they can possibly spend in their lifetimes.
But how do we get people to wake up and see that both parties work against our interests? What woke us up to see this? For me it was Obama’s betrayals of everything he ran on to wake me up and then when the DNC screwed Bernie and us I became even more awake. But others saw the same things and said we were wrong. Huh?
Good comment.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Succumbing to obvious propaganda
...again and again, really does result in physical brain damage.
The lower 90 percent of the people pay a much larger share of their income in taxes than the top 10 percent do. And certainly a much larger share than the corporations pay on their profits.
And they can live with that and vote for that.
Their minds are debased.
Personal computers and the Web are gonna be super emancipatory!!
Or so I believed for years. Did that ever turn out to be a delusion!
When I was little, in Hawaii TV didn’t even exist. I witnessed the whole thing with TV evolve, from strange new sci-fi-like apparatus, to living-room cabinet fixture, to ubiquitous, advertising-driven, mind-rotting swamp (FCC chairman Newton Minow’s “vast wasteland”) …
I shoulda known that — with venture capital and Wall Street investment banks in the driver’s seat — personal computing and the Web would take exactly the same path …
Hollywood and TV have long been tools the powerful use to script the narratives we’re supposed to subscribe to. Google and Facebook are just the most recent additions to the arsenal …
https://www.unz.com/announcement/what-google-and-facebook-are-hiding/