The Democrats Have Chosen Defeat

By | 2017-06-02T18:30:05+00:00 February 26, 2017|
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

It’s official. After a contentious election, the Democratic National Committee has chosen its next chairman, former Obama Labor Secretary Tom Perez.

With Perez, the Democrats indicated they will be abandoning their extreme left-wing base and, in so doing, relegating themselves to being the party of entrenched, wealthy special interests and preferred minority groups. The interests of workers have been abandoned. What’s more, the DNC leadership essentially have done what House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi indicated they would do: abandon the party’s socialist and social democratic wing. In essence, the Democrats have chosen to take their already small base of supporters and make it even smaller.

Remember, friends, the candidate that most resonated with the Democratic Party’s base was the independent socialist from Vermont, Bernie Sanders. Yet, throughout the 2016 primaries, the party’s leadership did everything in its power to tilt the the process to favor the elite’s preferred candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As Clinton’s campaign lurched through the primary season, helped along the way by the DNC apparatus, Sanders continued speaking in front of packed houses. He became a lovable, socialist curmudgeon in pop culture thanks to “Curb Your Enthusiasm” creator Larry David’s portrayal of him as such on “Saturday Night Live.” Hillary won the nomination anyway. In so doing, the Democrats killed the base’s morale. The Republican primaries of 2008 and 2012 proved that when a party denies its base a presidential nominee it can get behind, the opposition will likely win (particularly if it has a candidate worth rallying around).

During the 2016 DNC primary, Perez encouraged the Clinton campaign to paint Sanders as a “candidate of whites” in a pathetic attempt to turn off minority voters. That should give people an idea of where the Democratic Party is headed.

Truth is, notwithstanding the “days of rage” the Left has been living out since Trump’s election, it’s been clear that the Democratic Party’s leadership grasped it could not maintain its high dudgeon for another two years (especially not with 25 Democrat-controlled Senate seats up for grabs in the 2018 midterms). After nearly four months of protests, public vitriol, and personal attacks directed against Republicans, the Democratic leadership has chosen a run-of-the-mill Democrat to lead them.

Perez is no moderate. He is a conventional liberal. So, while it is unlikely that one will get a Scoop Jackson-type of Democrat to moderate the influences of the manic Leftist base, one can expect a more programmatic, less populist version of Leftism on display. The Democrats are shaping up to nominate a Joe Biden-type in 2020 (possibly with Elizabeth Warren as the running mate, in order to satisfy the base).

But, barring some catastrophic event in the Trump presidency, this tactic will not work. Elements of the Left recognize that populism has taken hold in the country. However, they cannot bring themselves to understand that the explosion of populism is far more likely to benefit the Right than the Left. The country has operated on the basic governing paradigm FDR implemented with the New Deal for more than a couple generations. The populist reaction in the United States (at least the kind that wins elections) is a response to the recent failures of the U.S. socio-political and economic systems. Since this system has been dominated and defined by the Democrats and this New Deal paradigm for so long, it is highly unlikely that the populist urges of Americans will move to the Left.

Nevertheless, the DNC risked losing even more than they already have lost by not electing leaders who could galvanize the most committed Leftists. By abandoning both the working class and the socialist elements of the Democratic base (a majority of the Bernie Sanders voters), the Democrats have become a party without enough voters to be effective.

As I used to tell my fellow Republicans who opposed the Tea Party movement, “you’ve gotta dance with the one who brung ya!” And if you don’t, you won’t go anywhere electorally. After the 2012 presidential election, with the exception of a handful of party elites, the GOP grasped this concept. Even without Donald Trump’s presence in the race, the candidates who stepped forward (other than Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, and John Kasich) were all decidedly more conservative (and therefore more friendly to the Republican base) than in 2008 and 2012. In fact, they better represented the base than any candidate since Ronald Reagan.

A similar battle has been raged between the grassroots segment of the Democratic base and the party’s elite. Except in this case, the elites have bested the base yet again.

By denying the groundswell from the 13 million disaffected Leftists who both voted for Bernie Sanders and wanted Keith Ellison to lead the party, the Democrats have solidified their place as a permanent minority party. In all likelihood, the real threat to President Trump’s agenda over the next four years will come from congressional Republicans, not the Democratic Party “resistance.”

About the Author:

Brandon J. Weichert
Brandon J. Weichert is a contributing editor to American Greatness. A former Republican congressional staffer and national security expert, he also runs "The Weichert Report" (www.theweichertreport.com), an online journal of geopolitics. He holds master's degree in statecraft and national security from the Institute of World Politics in Washington, D.C. He is also an associate member of New College at Oxford University and holds a B.A. in political science from DePaul University. He is currently completing a book on national security space policy due out next year.
  • tz1

    No, this is Business as usual, as in the Billionaire donors – Wall Street, Tech plutocrats, etc.
    The Democrats are now the punching bag opposition that will lose with grace, but keep their incomes via the (fake) opposition to Trump in the mailers, much as Cuckservative Inc has been for the last two decades. The cucks – neocons, social liberals, are likely to join with this brand of the Democrats.

    The wildcard is that the “Feel the Bern the city to the ground” democrats might start attacking their own even worse – Libertarians have had this problem for a generation. Heretics are considered far worse than pagans. Chamberlain will be seen as worse than Hitler.

  • Derek Pandamonium

    You have the last part right. The GOPe want to impeach President Trump.
    The dem party is counting on the fact that most whites are boomers and are passing on. They believe the ascendant demographics will win the day for them. Currently the dems have the globalists, media poodles and administrative state backing them and the administrative state has never been more powerful. Their globalist vision is for an unified Western hemisphere where Hispanics rule with their form of social justice.
    President Trump is our last best hope of maintaining America as a nation state.

    • Chester Malinowski

      And all the elite whities are jumping on the band-wagon to reduce their polulation… Where is Ayn Rand?

  • andrewp111

    Don’t worry. Ellison will get his chance to represent the Democrats – as their Presidential nominee in 2020, if he runs.

    • Cole Bachelor

      ROTFL…..and win 3 states + DC

      • Pat Wood

        Hey, at least he’ll win something…..that’s important right.
        California, Illinois, and New York………….their for ISIS.
        Do they hand out participation trophies for losing a general Presidential election……..?

        • Chester Malinowski

          They probably would if they can get over the obstruction from the right.

        • Cole Bachelor

          Poor people in rural Illinois, interior California, and upstate New York.

    • hamous

      From your fingertips to God’s ears. It’ll be 1972 all over again.

    • anotherworriedmom

      Hillary still owns the super delegates and the structure that was setup in 2008 to insure her election in 2016 is still in place. Perez is the new DNC chair and he is supported by the same base that supported Hillary. There is no way that they’re going to allow Ellison to be the Democrat nominee in 2020. It’s going to be Warren (if she survives re-election in 2018).

      • Bunky

        Gillibrand Booker or Booker Gillibrand.

      • Chester Malinowski

        Don’t you know they need another sweet talking Obama right now.

  • Mungo Park

    American citizens are the core of our representative government, not political parties. One of the major parties has been cleverly seized by an outsider who is attempting to “correct” the errors of a statist government that a significant percentage of the citizens see as flawed. There is no reason why a similar non-leftist outsider can’t seize the other party and compete for the populist power unleashed in this country. Domestic peace in this country depends on how well the citizens feel their interests and their sense of legitimate governance are represented, not the survival of one or both existing parties.

    • Chris706

      “There is no reason why a similar outsider can’t seize the other party and compete for the populist power unleashed in this country.” Actually, there are plenty of reasons, as this latest election for DNC chair reveals.

      The DNC has become a very autocratic, top-down organization. The GOP was the same until the TEA party showed up. But it took years and a good, simple and popular message. Along with hesitant and weak leadership from the establishment.

      Dem leadership is too good at hanging on to power, and they have no message that will work.

  • People [shrugs]

    You lost me when you demonstrated you don’t know the meaning of the word “socialist”.

    More silly partisan blather.

    And no I’m not a Democrat, but an independent. I just own a dictionary and hate partisan garbage.

    • redmanrt

      “I just own a dictionary and hate partisan garbage”

      That’s like being a soldier who hates bullets.

      • PhysicistVet

        “That’s like being a soldier who hates bullets.”

        TONS of soldiers who saw action HATE bullets.

        Even ones who are still quite up front about how absolutely necessary they are.

        Just so you know.

        • redmanrt

          They have a special place in their hearts for their own bullets.

    • moderate Guy

      A socialist is a proponent of socialism – a social, political and economical system of government ownership or control of means of production and distribution of goods; and government control of all forms of social interaction and non private activity.
      Which part of this does not apply to Sanders?

      • PhysicistVet

        Sanders does NOT advocate for the government to own the means of production.

        In fact, Sanders is a HUGE proponent of SMALL business.

        His whole “socialism” thing is not exactly the greatest label, imo.

        His POLITICAL platform is not even REMOTELY pure socialism. Not even CLOSE. It’s far more Nordic business model than actually socialist (which is more like long term reinvestment in future earnings a la Henry Ford pay your workers and drive up consumer capabilities and well-being mentality).

        Not to mention Sanders is probably the HUGEST fighter for individual privacy rights and individual freedoms in DC today (even more so than Paul). With a Congressional record to prove it.

        I’m NOT a fan of his USING that word to drum up extra support and attention, nor am I a fan of those USING that silly label as a weapon and cudgel to beat down others in a silly “socialism bad” silliness who don’t even bother BEGINNING to think for themselves because they are so convinced their own flavor of tribalism is so awesome or something.

        • Marshall Gill

          Didn’t he call himself a Socialist? Doesn’t he still? Pure Socialism? Because the Socialist knows that there must be a body from which to suck blood?

          “A silly socialism bad” Silly? Central planning in the 20th century caused the deaths of 100,000,000 people. Evil is not “silly”.

      • People [shrugs]

        You don’t know what it means either. LOL.

        • moderate Guy

          Yeees, only you are so unfortunate to know.

          • People [shrugs]

            Millions and millions know. Just not Americans.

          • Bunky

            Venezuelans and Cubans love their socialism.
            They keep escaping so they can bring it to US.

          • People [shrugs]

            err…

            Socialism can’t really work as the only organising principal of an economy.

            Cuban socialism, back when it tried, was largely a failure, though it still had better healthcare than many countries that were capitalist… so… nothing is ever completely black and white.

            Venezuela has been attacked on all sides and had something closer to a cult of personality style dictatorship then a socialist state.

            The problem with your simplistic understanding of these issues is that you’re forced to ignore a place like Bolivia, which is also a socialist state, sort of:

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2017/01/05/as-socialist-venezuela-collapses-socialist-bolivia-thrives-heres-why/

            Socialism didn’t ruin Venezuela as much as a dodgy dictator with dodgy policies and profligate spending.

            Words matter, and an understanding based on US propaganda just won’t cut it.

            Socialism, in the real sense, is practiced all over the world, including in America, and it hasn’t destroyed anything. On the other hand dictators claiming to be working for the people has destroyed plenty.

            Try and have a more nuanced approach and you’ll be less confused.

          • Bunky

            Hugo went to be treated in socialist medical utopia.
            He died.
            LOL at your pathetic reasoning.
            Even the well functioning European socialist countries are floundering.
            Yet you bring up basket cases like Bolivia to defend socialist absudities like Cuba and Venezuela.
            Simplistic thinking? You’re the definition of it.

          • People [shrugs]

            Let’s check your logic:

            Tens of thousand of people die in US hospitals a year ergo capitalism is a failed system.

            Use your brain. It’s in there.

            The fact that your understanding of mixed economies, variations in political and economic systems and the difference between reality and political propaganda, is so limited explains your confusion.

            You need to read more, maybe take a few courses at your local university.. Something. Because right now you’re just part of the problem.

            How can America ever reach it’s potential when it’s full of people like you, with a negligible grasp of the facts, but a world-sized mouth? It can’t.

            There’s a million ways to make America better, but aggressively spreading misinformation and ignorance isn’t one of them.

          • Bunky

            It’s because I need to take college courses.

            That’s why Venezuelans are eating Flamingos and fleeing to Columbia while Cubans are ecstatic with their rice cookers (courtesy of Fidel/Raul) and are fleeing to the USA.
            The USA could reach it’s potential if the truth about those failed countries wasn’t known … that is your logic?
            I have to laugh at you communist apologists.

          • People [shrugs]

            First off, you can’t define the word communism. And communism will never ever work and never has. For technical reasons.

            See, you get your “facts” from untrustworthy sources.

            Here’s socialism, at its most basic level:

            Two guys build a business in a capitalist country like America. They both work 40 hours a week, take action on only unanimously popular decisions and split the benefit equally.

            Sounds like a totalitarian nightmare huh? Ooh the social control.

            And of course they can end their business whenever a majority decides to do that.

            That’s the horror you’re sooooooooo terrified of.

            On a national level, as I have said, it doesn’t work. You can’t democratically control things like building roads, or how much to spend for new chairs at the local library in Duluth.

            That’s why we have representative government.

            Anyway, yes, if you actually learned about what you’re talking about, instead of being told what to think by political partisans, you’d see that ideological rigidity produces worse outcomes for citizenry. Europe is full of countries that use a different standard:

            Do what’s best for the population, no matter what ideology it may have arisen from.

            That’s not social control, that better representative democracy. It lets you freely choose things that make your life better.

            Unlike America, where you can only choose from the society popular options, to the detriment of the people you’re meant to represent.

            You can keep that failed bullshit.

          • Bunky

            In the real world, your two hypothetical guys will take action based on what’s best for them and not for some hypothetical social action that’s “better for the population”.
            You can have you enlightened Cuba and Venezuela, I’ll take the “failed bullshit” USA.
            We’ll see who lives best.

          • People [shrugs]

            I live – now – in Europe.

            I don’t have to choose between limited options, due to the population being scared of political propaganda and ignorant of reality, any more.

            As for the two guys, there’s LITERALLY NOTHING in socialism that stops people from being self-interested.

            You only think that because – yet again – you can’t define the word, and regress back to pushing tired propaganda.

            Educate yourself, and THEN decide what’s best.

            It’s amazing to me – though at this point I suppose I should be used to it – how many Americans aggressively embrace ignorance, and aggressively push propaganda as if they’ve had some brilliant idea themselves.

            YOU PERSONALLY don’t know what what communism or socialism mean. You don’t.

            But you insist – from a position of near absolute ignorance – to force your opinion about these things – thing again you don’t understand – down other people’s throat.

            Why?

            Do you think your aggressive ignorance will make you seem clever? It doesn’t.

            It makes you look like a tool. Like a useful idiot for US propaganda.

            Why is that ok to you?

            KNOWING what words mean isn’t a value judgement on the underlying concept.

            Let’s say you think the word “murder” means “ice cream cake”.

            If you went around saying you love murder, would it matter that you meant ice cream cake?

            No. People would just assume your a sociopath.

            And when you told people you meant ice cream cake, would people just accept that?

            No. They’d tell you that every time you open your mouth about murder you look like an ass.

            So don’t look like an ass.

            Knowledge is power. Embracing ignorance is weakness.

          • Bunky

            You wrote;
            “As for the two guys, there’s LITERALLY NOTHING in socialism that stops people from being self-interested.”
            The socialist state can and does stop peoples self interest.

            As for the rest of your comments they boil down to useless ad hominem attacks.

          • People [shrugs]

            You need to pay attention.

            I don’t think socialism WILL work on a state level. It’s a nonsense. Which is why – hey ho – it has never really been implemented.

            Socialism CAN AND DOES work on an individual level. I’ve illustrated that already.

            Pay attention.

          • Bunky

            Yikes!!!
            Socialism involves people … as in plural or maybe even many people.

          • People [shrugs]

            Yes.

          • Bunky

            So pay attention.

          • moderate Guy

            Those millions did know. But so many were murdered by socialist regimes that the knowledge might’ve been list.

      • People [shrugs]

        Here, I’ll put you out of your misery, as you obviously can’t afford a dictionary.

        Socialism:

        “Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production; as well as the political ideologies, theories, and movements that aim to establish them. Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership; to citizen ownership of equity; or to any combination of these. Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them, social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.”

        You decided it was about government control, because you’ve watched Red Dawn too many times I guess.

        But it’s not.

        From the definition:

        “democratic control of the means of production”

        Obamacare isn’t socialism Republicans, and Democrats, libraries and roads aren’t either.

        Socialism is this:

        Two guys own a business, they both work 40 hours a week at their part of the business, and they make decisions on the business together and share the profits.

        oooohhh scaaaaaary!!!!!!

        MANY small businesses operate like that… and guess what, the government doesn’t control everything.

        On top of that Sanders, despite his stupidity in calling himself a socialist (and if you paid any attention to serious journalism, you’d know he’s been mocked for that claim) is not a socialist. He has REPEATEDLY said he’s not for government control of the means of production.

        And without that there’s nothing socialist about his positions.

        Now save up your money and buy a dictionary, or better yet a set of encyclopedias. Stop just making up crazy crap or believing everything you hear some idiot say on YouTube.

        • Bunky

          Right.
          All the citizens get together and decide what production is going to be!
          /sarc

          • People [shrugs]

            Duh.

            This is why it doesn’t work on a state level.

            This is why calling Obamacare socialism is just a way to make you look like a total moron.

            The same goes for Dems calling libraries socialism.

            If you don’t know what a word means, and you’re simply repeating ignorant partisan propaganda, you are an idiot and your opinion is automatically suspect.

          • Bunky

            You simply can’t defend what you wrote.
            Explain the difference between social control and government control?

          • People [shrugs]

            You really don’t know the difference between democratic control and dictatorship?

            Really?

            That might explain a lot of your confusion.

          • Bunky

            Government does not equal dictatorship.
            However social control equals government.
            Otherwise you would be able to defend what you wrote.
            You already knew that.

          • People [shrugs]

            Man, what you wrote is nothing more than word salad.

            Socialism isn’t about social control. Unless you mean in the way that the US uses social control: work a job and earn money or be homeless.

            Socialism as a way to arrange management of and disperse benefits from a business in NO WAY implies social control in a unique way.

            And look, you were the first person to say “social control”. I literally was just quoting you.

          • Bunky

            Youn wrote this;
            “Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by
            social ownership and democratic control of the means of production; …”
            What does your word salad say?

          • People [shrugs]

            It’s not word salad.

            Democratic control. Nothing hard to understand there.

            Means of production is just another way to say businesses.

            Range because there’s a WIDE variety of ways it can exist.

            Again, you need to put aside all the propaganda you’ve been fed and actually red those words carefully.

            They – and the basic concept – aren’t scary.

            There’s no implied lack of freedom. No implied loss of control. No implied anything.

            The words are relatively simple. I’m sure of you try again you’ll be able to understand.

            And remember – you can understand it properly and use the word properly (and mock Dems who use it incorrectly, if you want) without supporting it.

            I can define Democracy and I can define dictatorship. But that doesn’t mean I support BOTH.

            You have to pull yourself out of the mindset that ignorance is somehow good, because knowledge is somehow a threat.

            Why are you so adamantly opposed to the truth?

            You really should take a breath and ask yourself if you actually value knowledge and honesty, or if you’d rather be a pawn.

            Right now, youre a pawn.

          • Bunky

            More word salad from you to laugh at.
            Democratic control, social control, representative democracy control, blah, blah, blah, … all mean the same thing.
            That is government control.
            Not some utopian ejaculation where everyone does what’s best for the general population.
            Keep stroking yourself … socially speaking of course.

          • People [shrugs]

            If you REALLY think Democracy means government control, then fine.

            VERY few people would think that, and expecting that to be the standard people use when discussing democracy is…. well, prepare to have a lot of annoying conversation.

            There’s NO version of society where you get to choose everything for yourself. That’s basically anarchy.

            Maybe you support anarchy and that’s fine, but I don’t.

            And finally, those terms you used don’t all mean the same thing. They all have unique definitions.

            You REALLY should take the time to LEARN what these words mean.

            Don’t be scared of knowledge.

          • Bunky

            I keep having to remind you what you wrote
            “Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production …”

            Furthermore you wrote;
            “Two guys own a business, they both work 40 hours a week at their part of the business, and they make decisions on the business together and share the profits.”
            The state makes them share the profits. It’s why they have the IRS.
            Is that anarchy or government control?
            Don’t be afraid of reality.

          • People [shrugs]

            Ugh.

            You’re utterly confusing things, because you don’t understand the basic concept.

            It’s like trying to explain algebra to someone that doesn’t know addition and subtraction.

            TAXES are a different thing to socialism. Some societies DON’T tax things like kibbutz in Israel, for example, which only started taxing members in 2016.

            So lumping them together is just overly simplistic.

            NONE of that has anything to do with anarchy.

            You want me to argue with you about this stuff, but I can’t because you don’t understand it well enough to have a meaningful debate.

            You need a remedial education on political philosophy and economic systems.

            Really, you do! You’d be a lot happier if you weren’t so ignorant.

          • Bunky

            Using your own example I showed you why socialism is just government forcing you to do what you otherwise would not.
            You come back with nothing but a kibbutz! That changed anyway!
            “Share their profits.”
            Talk about laugh out loud.

          • People [shrugs]

            You’re very confused.

            Kibbutzes are the MOST COMMON example of working socialism on the planet.

            Most of what you think is socialism, isn’t actually. Do you think Venezuelans had democratic control of their country?

            Without democratic control it is – guess what – by definition – not socialism. See this is why KNOWING what words mean ACTUALLY matters.

            Had you been able to understand what socialism means, you wouldn’t have confused a dictatorship – with no democratic control – with kibbutzes – with absolute democratic control.

            It’s bizarre, how your brain is so twisted around in on itself – thanks to years of propaganda, which your taxes paid for btw.

            Look at any system, ask if it’s democratically controlled. If it’s not then it’s not socialism. You need to pay a lot more attention.

            Saying all of that, if you have ANY curiosity about what ACTUALLY happened in Venezuela read this.

            http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/25/does-venezuelas-crisis-prove-socialism-doesnt-work/

            And I know how long that article is, so if you come back to me in 2 minutes and say it sucks, well, I know you haven’t read it.

            Oh and hey, the US is absolutely chock full of companies that share their profits. They do it in many ways, from profit sharing to giving employees stock options, to bonuses when the company does well, etc.

            You LOL’ing at a basic tenet of corporate behavior in a capitalist country, because you think it somehow means you’ve really got me on socialism, is actually the LOL thing happening.

            Profit sharing is not something exclusive to socialism.

            So LOL.

          • Bunky

            You couldn’t get more ridiculous.
            Profit sharing is simply compensation of employees based on performance of the company. The same of stock options etc.

            The end result of socialism is Venezuela, Cuba, China, Vietnam, Cambodia etc.
            To paraphrase a famous publisher.
            They had elections and voted for the good of the population!
            Now the population is getting it good and hard.

            Your kibbutzes are headed that way as well.

          • People [shrugs]

            You really have zero clue what you’re talking about.

          • Bunky

            Oh … I have a clue.
            You have no answers.

          • People [shrugs]

            BTW:

            word salad

            noun

            a confused or unintelligible mixture of seemingly random words and phrases

            Nothing I’ve posted is this….. I notice you’ve chosen to randomly through things back at me, but insults ALSO have to make sense or they just make you look… again… ignorant.

          • Bunky

            Thanks for clarifying social ownership because it’s so scary.

            “Social ownership refers to the various forms of ownership for the means
            of production in socialist economic systems; encompassing public
            ownership, employee ownership, cooperative ownership, citizen ownership
            of equity and common ownership.”

            Now is that the same as “Democratic control’?

          • People [shrugs]

            ALL socialism is based on the notion of DEMOCRATIC CONTROL of the means of production.

            As you know, democratic control means MANY things. In America it doesn’t mean direct democracy (google it) and it doesn’t mean parliamentary democracy (google it), but representative democracy, with a democratically elected President.

            Now, map those concepts onto the management structure of a business. Are they SOOOOO incredibly insane, that the employees should have a say, and share in the rewards?

            You’re arguing AGAINST more individual control, and FOR more centralized control.

            You’re really confused, and like so many times in history, you’ve been confused DELIBERATELY by government propaganda… decades of it… and that means you are LITERALLY arguing against your own beliefs.

            You want more control of things? That’s what socialism, on a small scale, can offer. It does NOT scale up though. Not to the level of a state.

            Here, read this:

            http://kibbutzprogramcenter.org/about-kibbutz/

            Then go and see if Israel is in the same shape as Venezuela.

            Ask why Americans support Israel, a country that actually has state sponsored socialism – i.e. kibbutzes – and attacking Venezuela.

            Don’t get me wrong, Venezuela is FAILED, but it’s basic underlying system isn’t different to Israel’s kibbutzes, they just scaled it up way too high, have a dictator, and spent all of their money.

            Think of it like this, a crazy pilot takes an airliner straight up as fast as he can go – straight up. the plane, which isn’t designed to do that – has a mechanical failure and crashes.

            You’re arguing that the pilot is innocent and the plane crashed due to a mechanical failure.

            In the right hands – again look at Israel – business level socialism doesn’t do anything but give workers more control and higher dividends. And sharing dividends is very common in capitalism, as an incentive.

            These systems coexist all over the world.. but you can only see that if you learn what they mean.

          • Bunky

            The people that control what companies do or don’t do are the owners and managers.
            In as much as employees are owners (shareholders) or managers they have a say.
            Other than that they are simply employees.

            Israel is a free market economy and a democratic state.
            Even if small settlements are run in socialist schemes as you claim they do not make Israel a socialist state.

          • People [shrugs]

            Dummy.

            I never said Israel was a socialist state.

            You’ve obviously been trying to understand what I’m talking about, but are still failing.

            Socialism – as you’ve just discovered – doesn’t mean government. Or even national economic system.

            I have repeatedly told you socialism can not work on a state level.

            As for who controls a company, it depends how the company is set up.

            A company with only an owner is controlled by the owner.

            One with owners and managers is controlled by both, to a degree.

            One’s with a corporate board are controlled by them.

            Ones like a kibbutz have NO MANAGERS AND NO SINGLE OWNER. They have no managerial hierarchy necessarily.

            The workers control it, democratically.

            And that happens all the time in democracies world wide, and in capitalist states.

            It happens in America.

            It’s not social control.

            It’s not a dictatorship.

            It’s a way to organize, and a way to decide what people earn.

            It’s MORE democratic than top down control, because all employees have a say.

            Which is why it can’t work on a state level.

            So you’re getting closer, but all that brainwashing you’ve been exposed to still makes it very hard for you to understand.

            Democratic control is not dictatorship. Nor is it social control.

            No one forces people to volunteer to work in a company that is arranged in a socialist way.

            You really need to understand what all of these words mean. And you need to make decisions for yourself instead of letting government propaganda decide what you believe.

          • Bunky

            My comment stands since I’m referring to socialist states not kibbutz’ or owner operator companies.There are no companies organized the way you suggest.
            You brought up profit sharing and stock options as a way to reinforce your socialism argument. That took all of a couple seconds to laugh away.

            Of all things I can expect from a progressives lying is the top one.

            “Day-to-day affairs are handled by elected committees,
            which deal with areas such as housing, finance,
            production planning, health, and
            culture. The chairpersons of some of
            these committees, together with the secretary (who holds
            the top position in the kibbutz) form the
            kibbutz executive. The positions of
            secretary, treasurer and work coordinator
            are, as a rule, full-time, while other members serve
            on committees in addition to their regular
            jobs.”
            http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/history-and-overview-of-the-kibbutz-movement

            So there are managers and a chief executive, as there must be, because otherwise it’s chaos.

          • People [shrugs]

            Of course there are companies organized the way I’m suggesting.

            Do you know what a co-op is?

            Really. You need to stop.

            People can read this thread and see you have literally no idea what you’re talking about.

            It’s embarassing for you.

            Go back and look at it from the beginning.

            Pretty poor.

          • Bunky

            Sure, there are so many co-ops in the S&P500 or in the Russel 2000
            or the Wilshire 5000.
            Get some experience.
            Oh I know … Manny’s lawn service is a co-op so there.

          • People [shrugs]

            There’s 30k coops in America alone. Your dishonesty is just sad

          • Bunky

            So?
            “Typically, an elected board of directors and officers run the
            cooperative while regular members have voting power to control the
            direction of the cooperative. Members can become part of the cooperative
            by purchasing shares ….”
            https://www.sba.gov/starting-business/choose-your-business-structure/cooperative
            Purchasing shares and taking profits.
            That’s real socialism!

            Sounds like a regular business to me … and you know why?
            Because it’s human nature.

          • People [shrugs]

            Dummy, profits are a part of socialism.

            And there’s a wide variety of implementations. You’ve listed one, but not all.

            Why don’t you Google: coop socialism

            You’ll see that that thing you just described as human nature is attacked by Republicans as a communist plot, repeatedly.

            This is what’s hilarious: you finally have some notion of what socialism is, though not a very good one, but enough to show you that the person who I initially responded to – who you were defending – can’t define socialism. And neither could you.

            You are now in that moment that people dread; a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.

            Looks at your shifting goalposts

            First, there’s no socialist styled business in capitalism.

            Then, there is but they’re not fortune 500 companies.

            Then, there is but they don’t really sound socialist.

            It’s because you can’t quite make the pieces fit.

            Keep trying though… Soon you’ll be telling people to buy a dictionary.

            Then you’ll ask why all the people who you used to agree with are using the term so dishonestly and incorrectly.

            Then maybe you’ll look back at this day and get it.

          • Bunky

            Socialism?
            Co-ops?
            I showed you that you’re fantasy socialism is just horse$hit.
            https://www.sba.gov/starting-business/choose-your-business-structure/cooperative

          • People [shrugs]

            Lol. The only thing you’ve shown me is that you’re dishonest and don’t know what you’re talking about.

          • Bunky

            Your comment confirms you don’t read.

          • People [shrugs]

            Let me say one more thing to you:

            I am not advocating anything to you except that you should use words correctly. That’s not an ideological position. It’s something I’d tell anyone. It’s something I lambast Dems for ALL THE TIME.

            You don’t have to use MY definitions, but if you use definitions that are incorrect you can’t even communicate properly.

            Why are you here except to communicate?

            And if you’ve hurt your ability to communicate, how is that a good thing?

            Basically, you’ll HELP yourself by using words in a meaningful way.

          • Bunky

            I don’t mean to be cruel but, you can’t stay on topic and you’re not making sense.
            My advice is get away from the dictionary and get some life experience.

          • People [shrugs]

            Social control and democratic control are not the same things. Government control – as it is usually defined – is a third thing altogether.

            Again, not knowing how to define things has confused you. It’s hard to dumb this down much more than I already have.

            And THEN you confuse consumer behave in a capitalist society – e.g. Israel – with the way a COMPANY is managed and how it shares ITS profits and dividends.

            A Israeli kibbutz produces tomatoes. That is a socialist business produces tomatoes.

            Then it SELLS those tomatoes on the FREE MARKET.

            A socialist business engaging in capitalism. It happens EVERY SINGLE DAY in dozens of countries around the world.

            Even in America, where collectives operate as socialist enterprises, then sell their products to you, a capitalist consumer.

            You’re so confused man, you really are.

            And you don’t seem to be understanding BASIC concepts. How can we even have a conversation when you conflate so many disparate things? When you can’t differentiate between a business and the government and economic system of a country?

            We may be done here… I don’t think you’re actually being serious, at least you’re not behaving is a serious fashion from my perspective.

          • Bunky

            Except in some socialist systems that doesn’t happen at all.
            The tomatoes go to the government which decides what to do with them.

          • People [shrugs]

            Again, your basic misunderstanding of the difference between socialism at a state level, and socialism as a way to organize a business, is making you look foolish.

          • Bunky

            Business is not socialism.
            It doesn’t exist to foster altruism or any other social busybody meme.
            It exists to make money.
            You know businesses fire employees!

          • People [shrugs]

            To restate the utterly obvious, you have no ideas what you’re talking about. Really.

            Ask an Israeli… Heck ask any small business owner that operates like this…. Including in America.

            You just fundamentally don’t understand what the world is actually like.

            This is an incredible waste of my time… Stick to your talking points and letting other people decide what you think. That seems to be your forte.

          • Bunky

            Sure, Israeli businesses are socialist.
            American businesses are socialist.
            You … on the other hand … are ridiculous.

          • Bunky

            Socialist free market businesses!
            Classic brain fart.
            The are in business to break even.

          • People [shrugs]

            Tell that to Israel – they’ve had them for decades.

            You really just understand.

            How old are you?

          • Bunky

            I hear they just started taxing them!
            They must not have shared enough then.

  • So the Dems have chosen to continue on with phony-progressive model, agitating the base with cheap identity-politics while they sell out to Wall Street.

    Neoliberalism uber alles!

    • Joel0903

      Well, to be fair, their other option was, as the author advocates for, a Socialist model – which will only relegate the party even more stridently to being a part of the West Coast coastal cities, Chicago, New York City, Vermont, and Washington DC an its suburbs. I agree that it would have been far better for the nation had they chosen that route, but the party was apparently smart enough to realize that they cannot yet openly embrace a movement which has been responsible for the degradation of the quality of life for hundreds of millions in Europe and a billion in SE Asia.

      (I’m discounting the third option of actually advocating for serving their nation and obeying the Constitution – it’s laughable that they would consider becoming a law-abiding Party).

      • Vincent Law

        That isn’t true at all. No one in those locations are fans of socialism. Its neo-liberalism, globalism and “free trade lifts all yachts” thinking among that crowd.

        Its the white working class and the youth that supports the socialist message, but its as Paul said, the Democrats would rather appeal virtue-signal about letting trannies into bathrooms while letting the country continue to get gutted.

  • mrdoug1

    I’m not sure I buy this, seems overly optimistic to me. Fact is our economy is in huge trouble with $20 trillion in fiscal operating debt, $200 trillion in unfunded mandates, and growing with no end in sight. Trump’s plans/proposals don’t appear to be anything like austerity or anything that will rein in those numbers. If, more likely when, one or more bubbles pop, likely not even Trump’s fault, he will be blamed and the country will swing hard left in reaction. At least, that’s a likely scenario I fear.

    • PhysicistVet

      “Fact is our economy is in huge trouble with $20 trillion in fiscal
      operating debt, $200 trillion in unfunded mandates, and growing with no
      end in sight.”

      That’s our GOVERNMENT, not our economy.

      They are not the same thing (though they ARE related and most definitely impact one another in a great many ways).

  • redmanrt

    “But, barring some catastrophic event in the Trump presidency, this tactic will not work.”

    All Trump’s administration has to do is get GDP over 3%. After Trump puts a 3rd conservative on the Supreme Court, he will be hailed as one of the great presidents.

    • mistermcfrugal

      Agree with the 3% figure. The leftists can riot all they want, but if the economy starts rolling with a 3% gain, no riot will put a leftist in the White House. Leftists should continue to try to destroy the economy as that is their only hope, LOL.

      • Deplorable_Timothy

        Your “tongue in cheek” comment is more accurate than you know. Every leftist politician knows that the key to consolidating power, is to keep “their people” ignorant, angry, and dependent.
        .
        Destroying the economy = more people depending on government for survival = more democrat voters. Don’t think for a second, that the ruling elite democrats don’t see this relationship.

        • Johannessen

          in my lifetime, i’ve never seen the Democrats do anything other than try and get more people dependent on government. The only one who wasn’t 100% on board with this was Billy Clinton, who at least understood that a bad economy was going to harm Democrats across the board.

          • Deplorable_Timothy

            BJ Clinton was too busy getting his knob polished to mess with the thriving economy he inherited. He was far from the typical democrat we see today. Much more concerned with physical gratification, than consolidating political power.
            .
            Honestly, a bad economy is almost always good for democrats, as more people turn to the government for survival. The democrat politicians give great speeches about “helping” poor people, but their actions just make more of them (poor people). It’s the ignorant democrat voter base, who can’t figure out this relationship.

          • Johannessen

            You are right about how they give speeches about helping, but don’t actually help. It’s amazing that when it’s a Democrat-proposed program, we can only talk about the intentions. When it’s a Republican-proposed program, suddenly we start to care about results. Just look at how the MSM talks about the economy generally; they called it a recession at 2.5% growth for Bush, but call it booming when it’s at 2% with Obama.

          • MickeyD69

            I’m not sure I could hate anybody more than what the disgusting dems have demonstrated themselves to be, especially Shrillary, Chucky Cheese, and Snarky Pelousy. But, regardless of his obsession with knob polishing, Bill Clinton was a consummate politician, and, other than letting Jamie Gorelick set up 9/11, wasn’t all that bad a President. He was aided mightily by the “Dot Com Boom”, and any President would have gotten the credit for being at the right place at the right time. And, as horrible as it is to contemplate, if the (thankfully) stupid Hillary Campaign had listened to him, she’d probably be completing the destruction of America from the Oval Office right now.

          • Deplorable_Timothy

            Glad to see that someone else recognizes the Jamie Gorelick and her “Gorelick Wall”, which prevented the CIA and FBI from communicating about the 9/11 terrorists. She was also heavily involved in the sub-prime/MBS crash. She is pretty much known as the “Mistress of Disaster”.
            .
            As a bonus, she was “field commander” in Waco, Texas, in 1993, leading to 80 killed (including 20 children). She was also involved in the IRS targeting of conservative non-profits.
            .
            Quite possibly, one of the most inept or evil (still not sure of which) people on the planet, almost up there with George Soros!

          • At least we don’t impeach knob jobs,

          • Galileo2

            ..but he as a DLC Democrat. Remember those guys? The Democrat Leadership Council — pro-business Democrats (gasp!) unlike we had seen since the Kennedy Administration?

        • The Demon Slick

          Trump could have blown up tpp and went golfing and I would call him one of the best Presidents.

          • Deplorable_Timothy

            Same thing with Gorsuch. I really didn’t think Trump would hold a conservative line, once in office, but he has been surprisingly consistent.
            .
            One “hot button” item, was Clinton’s desire to pass legislation that would allow firearm manufacturers to be sued as a result of firearm use. This would put the weapons manufacturers out of business & destroy the 2nd amendment. It would allow the family of any thug who was killed during the commission of a crime, to sue the manufacturer. Just think about the frivolous law suits, and the destruction of the industry? Clinton had to be stopped, and Trump making some good decisions is a bonus!

          • The Demon Slick

            Instead we dare hope for national reciprocity! Woo hoo!

    • Galileo2

      Yup. All Reagan had to do was restore decent economic growth rates and not only was he re-elected, but voters succeeded him with his veep too. (That his veep then blew it is an entirely different story).

  • Michael Chovich

    The Democrats have thrown away the half their base, Soviets, Communists, Stalinist, Maoists and North Koreans or should I just say Social Democrats.

    • Pat Wood

      That is their base.

  • ελευθερία

    The Globalist have a firm grip on their (bought and paid for) Democrat party…

    • Chester Malinowski

      So true. I just hope it’s beginning to burn their fingers. Soros controls the money so Soros owns the democrats. Can anyone figure how much he and his underlings including controlled agencies donate to the Democratic party? No wonder someone like Bernie doesn’t have a chance to raise a voice of discontent.

  • mistermcfrugal

    Whoa! The leftists said Trump would quickly destroy the economy, hang blacks in the street and start a nuclear war. Democrats should easily win in 2018 and 2020.

    • Chris706

      LOL. Only if he actually does that. And maybe if he tries to take the vote away from women, after he bombs Israel…

    • PhysicistVet

      They couldn’t have set the bar for him much lower, eh? All he has to do is trip over his own ego and he still makes it over the bar they’ve set for him.

      If he manages to not drool on himself all day long every day between now and November 2020 and the earth doesn’t crash into the sun, he’s probably going to snag an absolute bare minimum of a third of the vote come re-election at this point even if he DOES get us into into a nuclear war and the bottom falls out of the economy, thanks to so many EXPECTING that to happen at this point.

  • Radiant Studio

    I think the Democrat party needs to go the way of the Whigs.

    • PhysicistVet

      The Modern Whig Party is just getting started. And they are the best thing this country has going for it, imo.

      But they’ll probably go nowhere, considering they don’t take cash from anyone except individual citizens (not even unions) and push to reform government back into REPRESENTATIVE government, meaning EVERYONE currently in power would try to kill them if they thought they ever had a chance.

    • JustData

      I’d say they’re well on their way, although clearly they’re as inefficient and incompetent at that as they are every thing else.

    • regretfulbutnotsorry

      I’d prefer they go the way of Sacco and Vanzetti, or Nicolae Ceaușescu.

  • The Democratic Party has always been the party of defeat. Economically, their philosophy has always been one of redistributing a constant-size pie–by force–rather than growing the pie. Socially, they’ve always assumed that people can do nothing for themselves and have to have “help” from government in order to survive. Theirs is the party of surrender.

    • Pat Wood

      DONKEY-JACKASS PARTY OF HUMAN SEWAGE………is their party.
      A party of losers.

  • BrooklynNow

    Perez is not a “conventional liberal.” Liberals are supposed to defend free speech above all else. Perez refused to defend the freedom to criticize a certain religion when given a clear forum to do so.

    https://pjmedia.com/blog/doj-official-refuses-to-promise-that-doj-will-never-advance-an-anti-blasphemy-law

    For Perez identity politics trumps free speech.

    • Chris706

      There is a YUGE difference between the meaning of the word “liberal” and the philosophy of those who call themselves “liberals.” Don’t even try to conflate the two. Cognitive dissonance would ensue.

      • BrooklynNow

        Sad but true. I still feel like a liberal in the classic sense and used to vote Dem but they lost me in the last few years with “open borders” and refusing to defend free speech.

        • Chester Malinowski

          Let’s see, No borders, world court, single payer healthcare…
          Everybody marches in step to the same drummer. and who might that drummer be?

  • Chris706

    Seriously, folks, there was no good choice here. Ellison and Perez were both bad choices, just for different reasons. There were no good choices at all. Dems are in serious trouble.

    • altster76

      If there were still any Democrats in the party like Zell Miller, you’d have a shot at winning elections again sometime in the future. But there isn’t. All commie rags from hell like Ellison and Pelosi. Not a chance.

    • PhysicistVet

      Buttigieg was their only realistic hope.

      Not offensive to any of the major factions (other than not being “their” guy, but not “on the other team” compared to any). And the only one realistically poised to bridge any gaps between the various factions, expand their ever shrinking tent, and TRY to make inroads with the working class and middle America that the Dems have more or less abandoned.

      But the Democrats don’t care how it plays in Peoria any longer. These days if you ask them “how will it play in Peoria?” the answer you receive is generally something along the lines of, “F those flyover racist pieces of white trash; we don’t need ’em!”

  • Birdfish

    WRONG!

    THE DEMOCRATS WILL INDEED BE VICTORY!!!!!

    HILLARY REALLY DID WIN SHE HAD 3 MILLION MORE VOTES!!!!!!

    THE DEMOCRATS GIVE

    FREE HEALTHCARE
    FREE PROGRAMS
    AND MANY GOOD THINGS FOR THE PEOPLE

    THE REPUBLICANS ARE HATEFUL AND ONLY HELP THE GREEDY RICH!

    POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    NOTE: I HAVE A HATEFUL CYBER STALKER. SOMEHOW HE CAN EVEN POST WITH MY SAME NAME. I DONT KNOW HOW. HE WILL MOCK ME AND POST VERY HATEFUL MOCKINGS. I JUST GOT OUT OF THE HOSPITAL AFTER 17 DAYS OF INTENSIVE CARES! BUT HE WAS STILL WAITING FOR ME!!!! PLEASE IGNORE THE CYBER STALKER!!!!

    • Birdfish

      BUT TRUE THAT EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW THAT I HAVE NEVER WORKED A JOB IN MY LIFE OR PAID ANY TAXES

      I AM A FATTY FAKER THAT GOT FAT TO GET THE WELFARES

      THIS IS MY BUSINESS

      • Birdfish

        HERE ARE THE FACTS FAKE BIRDFISH:

        FACT SET ONE:

        I SUFFER THE TEN DISCRIMINATIONS:

        -RACISM
        -AGEISM
        -ELITISM
        -EX CON DISCRIMINATION
        -HOUSING DISCRIMINATION
        -FOOD DISCRIMINATION
        -UNION SUPPORTER DISCRIMINATION
        -MEDICAL DISCRIMINATION
        -MOBILITY DISCRIMINATION
        -JOB ACCOMODATION DISCRIMINATION
        -EDUCATION DISCRIMINATION
        -OBESITY DISCRIMINATION
        -DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
        -MEDICAL CARD/MEDICADE DISCRIMINATION
        -POVERTY DISCRIMINATION

        AND YES THERE ARE MORE THAN TEN! THE LIST GOES ON AND ON!!!!!!

        FACT SET TWO:
        I DO NOT GET “WELFARE”

        -I DO NOT GET FREE HOUSING: I PAY $38 A MONTH! SECTION 8 NOT ENOUGH!
        -I DO NOT GET FREE FOOD: LINK IS ONLY A LITTLE OVER $200 A MONTH
        -I DO NOT GET FREE UTILITIES: THE COMPANIES GIVE IT FREE IN A PROGRAM
        -I DO NOT GET A FREE PHONE. IT’S JUST A PLAIN OLD PHONE NOT A SMART PHONE.
        -I DO NOT GET FREE INTERNET MY KIDS PAY FOR IT
        -I DO NOT GET FREE COMPUTERS ONLY FREE GIFT COMPUTER FROM GRAND BABY
        -AND I DID NOT GET A FREE TOLIET. YES A CHARITY PUT IN A HANDICAP ACCESSABLE BATHROOM AS THE LAW REQUIRES IN A RENTAL-THE LAW!-BUT IT IS THE LANDLORD WHO GOT IT FREE NOT ME! I DONT OWN THE PLACE! (SO THERE!)
        -I DO NOT GET FREE PILLS THE DRUG COMPANY GIVES THEM OUT
        -I DO NOT GET WELFARES SSI IS FOR OLD POOR FOLKS LIKE ME DISABLED
        -I DO NOT GET FREE DENTISTS IT WAS A PROGRAM
        -I DO NOT GET FREE HEALTH CARE WITH MEDICARE THEY SEND ME A BILL. SO IT IS NOT FREE. RIGHT IN THE TRASH GOES THE BILL!
        -I DID NOT GET A WELFARE COUCH IT WAS A PROGRAM FROM THE FURNITURE STORE
        -MEALS ON WHEELS IS NOT WELFARES -FOOD BANKS IS NOT WELFARES

        FACT SET THREE:

        I AM DISABLED! I NOW GET SSI BECAUSE I AM SERIOUSLY DISABLED!
        -HEART FAILINGS
        -KIDNEY FAILINGS . AND NOW DIALYSIS 3 TIMES A WEEK!
        -REQUIRED WHIRLPOOL BATHS FOR OPEN WOUNDS ON LEGS FROM WATERY BUILDUPS!
        -DIABETES WITH A SUGAR TO 800
        -WATER BUILDUP
        -OBESITY A MEDICAL CONDITION FROM THE GOITERS
        -BAD KNEES
        -BAD BACK
        -THE SLEEP APNEAS WHICH CAUSES SNORING AND REQUIRES NAPS. IT ALSO REQUIRES A SPECIAL MACHINE CALLED A SEAPAPS THAT PUMPS AIR IN YOUR LUNGS WHEN YOU ARE SLEEPING. IF YOU GET IT THE ELECTRIC COMPANY CANT TURN OFF YOUR POWER EVEN IF YOU ARE POOR AND DO NOT PAY YOUR BILL!
        -CHRONIC FATIGUE SYNDROME WHICH MAKES YOU VERY TIRED
        -DUCK STONES: FROM THE GALL BLADDER STONES COME DOWN INTO THE DUCKS OF YOUR STOMACH AND BLOCK IT UP. THEY EVEN HAD TO SEND A SPECIAL EXPERT TO GO INSIDE TO REMOVE THE STONES!!!!
        YES, A SPECIAL EXPERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        FACT SET FOUR:

        I WORK AND HAVE ALWAYS-YES ALWAYS-WORKED.

        FOR YEARS I CLEANED UP AROUND THE CHURCH AS A JOB. NOW I CANT GET AROUND TO DO THAT BUT I BABY SIT ACROSS THE WAY.

        THESE ARE FACTS FAKE BIRDFISH!

        SO THERE!!!!!

        • Birdfish

          I FORGOT FAKISM

          • Birdfish

            THAT IS NOT A TRUE AND PROPER ISM

          • Birdfish

            SISTER X IS ALSO ME

          • Birdfish

            ERROR
            INCORRECT
            DOES NOT COMPUTER
            THIS DISCUSSION TERMINATED

          • Birdfish

            I AM ALSO SISTER X

          • Birdfish

            THIS IS NOT TRUE
            IT IS VERY HATEFUL

          • Birdfish

            OK IT’S IS TRUE

          • Birdfish

            FALSE

          • Birdfish

            OK I AM JOKING

            IT’S TRUE

          • Birdfish

            IT IS A HATEFUL FALSE MOCKING

          • Birdfish

            I MOCK THE INTERNET WITH SEVERAL LOG IN NAMES

            INCLUDING SISTER X

          • Birdfish

            NO

    • SISTER X

      ALSO I POST AS SISTER X

      • Birdfish

        THIS IS NOT TRUE.
        IT IS A HATEFUL LIE

        • SISTER X

          BUT YES I AM A HATEFUL FAKER

  • Fat Hubie

    Everything will be fine if they just get the “messaging” right. Doesn’t matter that the agenda is unacceptable.

  • AnoneemousOne

    Trump has only one main purposed in his four year term: To load the USSC with conservatives.
    If he gets to keeping his other promises, great.

  • Cali K

    This guy looks and sounds like a Marxist. He actually bears some physical resemblance to Lenin.

  • erichwalker

    Good job Democrats. Keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result. And don’t listen to working guys like me, what do we know. I used to vote for you guys, by the way.

    • Cali K

      Well, if you were a transgendered person of color they’d still be listening to you so it’s your fault.

      • erichwalker

        Zactly.

      • Johannessen

        Only if it’s a transgendered POC would they be listening to you.

  • rwisrael

    The Democrats Have gone with their base. Their true financial base is the billionaire internationalists led by Soros and the Silicon Valley crowd.They have decided to trade in their old foot soldier group, students and Occupy types for a new army, Blacks, Latinos, Muslims and feminists, probably the weirdest attempted coalition in history.

  • Groty1

    The identity politics was always stupid. Showing minorities how much you love them by calling everybody else racist, homophobic, misogynistic bigots comes off as Anglophobic – that you hate white people. Pretty dumb strategy when something like 70% of the country is white. So I think they abandon that and go back to the New Deal class warfare crap. Except they pretty much ceded that ground to Trump. I’m not sure how they retake it, but it seems like their only play.

  • wheezer

    Its time the DNC flips off the SJW’s. The self victimizers gain no allies. No one wants to identify with the pathetic whiners.

  • Hugh Shakeshaft

    Democrats are doing the heavy lifting for Trump. Trump is so good at doing this sort of thing. He presses China to bridle North Korea as a good will gesture and China stops buying North Korean Coal. Jobs are returning because corporations fear Trump tweets. Trump has a way of affecting things without lifting a finger. Wait until you see what he can do when he decides to get directly involved. If Democrats lose big in 2018, we could see things way beyond bills and instead Constitutional amendments.

    • Oddz&Endz

      Fingers crossed!

    • Chester Malinowski

      So far that is a secret well kept by the media. Let’s continue on.

  • John C

    Jill Stein will run again, or some other far left nut..Siphoning off enough of the dem vote to give Pres. Trump a landslide in 2020.

  • RPDC

    Dem’s best choice, and the candidate that’s likely to be a force in the future, was Pete Buttigieg. It’s honestly like he was created in a DNC lab: Afghan War Vet (as a Naval Intelligence Officer), magna at Harvard, then Rhodes Scholar at Oxford, and now the Mayor of South Bend.

    He’s also attractive, gay, and only 35.

    Oh, and in 2003, he was already calling out Democrats for being boring, cowardly neoliberals. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2003/10/27/hollywood-hypocrisy-vs-neo-liberal-neurosis-if/

  • John C

    It was a choice between Far Left and Far, Far Left.
    Considering liberalism has been rejected wholesale by the popular vote since 2009 giving the GOP Congress and State seats the dems are doomed.

  • ggm281

    I thought the Democrats made this pretty clear after the last election. If they had to win by courting white working class, they would rather lose. Entertainingly enough, both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama made reference to how naive a plan this was and how winning majority within that demographic is WHY they won their elections.
    And you’re right, they cannot win just promising to be the next Hugo Chavez. Even their own loyal voters over age 25 understand that NOTHING that the government provides is free. It is just a matter of WHEN you pay for it, not if you pay for it. “Free” college means those who successfully complete a rigorous STEM degree will pay for their own education and that of the Sociology major (regardless of if they graduate). Paid family leave means you will work harder to cover other people’s paid leave periods in exchange for your own time off. And don’t even get me started on the idiocy of importing some 15 million dependent foreign nationals ahead of the biggest financial crisis government will face – full retirement of the baby boomers. Allowing so many nearly illiterate foreign born (90% of the people without high school completion in the US are foreign born) to take up residence, justifying it with “they’ll help fund SS/Medicare” is perhaps the biggest policy fail in US history!

  • Orwell21

    Wrong. He named Ellison as Deputy Chair. What kind of message is that? They think they are pacifying Bernine and extreme portion of base. That portion will never be satisfied with more standard liberalism. They already have distrust and if their primary rules don’t gat changed and they don’t maintain a far left platform, there will be utter chaos.

  • anyone2

    With the Perez win Wall Street is celebrating saying yahoo we still have both parties in our hip pocket

  • mudslidejoe

    “Democrats Have Chosen Defeat” — Yeah but they still aren’t very good at living with it….oh well, maybe with a little more practice….

    • Paul Rhino-Freddie Freeloader

      Most of us prefer that they had a lot more practice, I intend to help them out, BIGLY.

      • mudslidejoe

        With ya’!

  • heypaisano

    President Trump has taken on the Left Controlled media and has them on the ropes, I’m hoping he takes an interest in going after the liberal Judiciary and puts them on notice that their only job is to interpret the laws and not create them.

    Who knows maybe he will give those in Congress enough cajones to bring up these activits judges up for judicial review and impeach when necessary!

    • Bunky

      Start with that “judge” in Washington state.

  • Ricardo Montalbon

    they were f$cked either way. if the Bernie/Keith X wing had won they lose even more white voters, with the Obama/Clinton wing in power they lose enthusiasm.

  • GreenShinobiX

    This is the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. The Democratic base includes more Clinton voters than Sanders voters. Most of us would not have been happy to see the nomination handed to a person who got far fewer votes just to placate the far left. Many of us don’t even want to go as far left as the Sanders wing advocates.

    • LionHeart0712

      Good to hear!
      But this is the hiding Socialists stopping the in your face Socialists.

      You might want to get on the Train before you get run over. ;

    • Kekchanistan

      The Clinton v Sanders primary was artificial; Sanders never intended to deny Hillary the coronation.
      The Dems needed a fake contest to gin up enthusiasm for Hillary by having a fake primary between Hillary the socialist and Bernie the communist. At no point did Sanders veer from his role, the whole thing was a sham. And he got a beach house and a snazzy new car out of the deal too.
      Gotta love how the nomenklatura running the Democrat party are all multi-millionaire communists.

  • Mary Berg

    It’s like deja vous all over again for these ditsy dem’s.
    Gotta love it!!

  • XSANDIEGOCA

    RESIST !! Trump 2020 !!

  • LionHeart0712

    A dream come true!

    The Dems. are trying to cut out the Socialist cancer. Yeah!

    Bye Bye Socialist…

    But the Dem. party still suc ks!

    The Train is Rollin over um. They thought playing on the tracks is what they were told they could do. ;

  • America First

    Time to start referring to them as the “Democrat” Party – nothing ‘democratic’ about them.

  • mw006

    I couldn’t agree more that the main threat to Trump are careerist, establishment Republican politicians, henpecked by the mainstream media and unwilling or unable to recognize the threat the left poses to the country, how late into the game we are, and fight accordingly.

  • davidhouston

    Progressivism is fundamentally a populist movement that has consistently failed to deliver on it’s promises.
    That is why they currently stand for nothing. Only against everything.