Thursday, June 28, 2018

The Tent Is Too Big-- It Makes The Democratic Party Meaningless And Damages The Brand... Stands For Nothing


Yesterday, after her astounding victory Tuesday, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, was interviewed on CNN, which had ignored her race until now. She said that she is "absolutely proud to be a Democrat but it also means that the Democratic Party is a big tent and there are so many ways to be a Democrat." Like Bernie, she calls herself a Democratic socialist. Remember there are congressional Democrats who are anti-gay, anti-Choice, who don't believe in Medicare-for-All, free public college, or Job Guarantee... some of the most important issues she campaigned on. Let's be real, what does Alexandria have in common with crap DCCC candidates like, for example, Jeff Van Drew (Blue Dog-NJ), Max Rose (Blue Dog, NY), or Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY) or with members of Congress from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party like Colin Peterson, Kyrsten Sinema, Josh Gottheimer (Blue Dog-NJ), Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX), Stephanie Murphy (Blue Dog-FL) or Jim Costa (Blue Dog-CA). She just finished a campaign against Joe Crowley based, in part, about how terrible he was. There are dozens of Democrats in Congress far more terrible-- and the DCCC is bringing in lots more just as bad.

Beltway pundits look at the moment and can't get beyond imagining more crap. "In the biggest surprise of 2018 so far," wrote Dave Wasserman the morning after the big earthquake, "House Democratic Caucus Chair Joe Crowley (NY-14) lost his primary to 28-year-old former Bernie Sanders organizer Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, 58 percent to 42 percent. Ocasio-Cortez, a Democratic Socialist who favors abolishing ICE, is now a lock to represent the Queens and Bronx seat. But more broadly, Crowley's loss reshuffles the next generation of House Democratic leadership... Ocasio-Cortez's insurgency from the left had impeccable timing: her grassroots push got her coverage in outlets like Splinter News and The Nation and allowed her to build appeal with a tiny, very liberal primary electorate (barely five percent of the 14th CD's eligible voters cast ballots). But it was late enough to avoid setting off alarm bells among groups who might have rallied to aid Crowley, who once headed the centrist New Democrat Coalition... Because the primary featured so many unique contrasts, don't expect the upset to set off a tsunami of Bernie-crats toppling House Democrats." God forbid.
It's no secret that Crowley had been angling for the Speaker's gavel in the event Democrats took back the House but Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi couldn't wrangle 218 commitments. However, the case for Crowley was already shaky. If Democrats took back the House by the margin of their female victors, could they have justified tossing the first female House Speaker and embracing two white New York men as their House and Senate leaders?

Crowley's exit begins the conversation about the next generation of House Democratic leadership anew. Less senior members likely to receive more attention include Reps. Cheri Bustos (IL-17), Joe Kennedy III (MA-04), Linda Sanchez (CA-38), Katherine Clark (MA-05), Seth Moulton (MA-06), Ruben Gallego (AZ-07) and others. And, any aspirants will need to be on good terms with the party's increasingly dominant progressive base.
Goal ThermometerWhere does he get these names? Bustos in a virulent Blue Dog with a horrible voting record-- much worse than Crowley's. His ProgressivePunch lifetime vote score is 85.75, a "C." Hers is a big fat "F" (50.80), worse than Illinois Blue Dogs' Dan Lipinski's and Brad Schneider's. Just what we need, a rotten right=wing Blue Dog-- and one in a district that is very vulnerable to GOP attack. Trump, in fact, won the district 47.4% to 46.7%. She would be constantly pulling the House Democrats right in order to save her own skin. TERRIBLE idea-- and something only a Beltway pundit could entertain. And all those junior members he also suggests... no one them are realistic. Kennedy is angling for Elizabeth Warren's Senate seat when she runs for vice president under Bernie. Moulton is too right-wing and no one likes him. Linda Sanchez is a joke, Ruben Gallego is probably going to run for McCain's Senate seat and Katherine Clark... interesting, but maybe she should do something first. Ted Lieu is a far better idea than any of them but Beltway pundits have probably never heard of him. This morning one asked me how to spell his name.

Might be difficult but worth the fight

The Washington Post's James Hohmann: was closer to the mark when he wrote about "the Democratic civil war" on Wednesday. "In many ways, Crowley’s defeat is analogous to then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s unexpected fall in a Virginia GOP primary four years ago this month. Republicans fared well in the midterms that year, just as Democrats almost certainly will this November, but Cantor’s downfall was a clear harbinger of the mass disruption to come, including Trump’s takeover of the GOP. Just like loathing of Barack Obama kept Republicans united in 2014, disgust with the president will keep Democrats together going into the fall elections. But make no mistake: The party’s identity crisis will be front and center after November, especially if Nancy Pelosi steps down or gets dislodged as the leader of House Democrats. The internecine conflict could become all-consuming in the free-for-all nominating contest to take on Trump in 2020 and cause a leftward lurch that helps the president win reelection." Or a leftward lurch that helps defeat Trump and clean out even more Republicans in Congress, especially in the Senate. This cycle gives the GOP every advantage. 2020 gives the GOP only one realistic Democratic target-- Doug Jones in Alabama-- but there are plenty of Republican targets: Cory Gardner (CO), Joni Ernst (IA), Mitch McConnell (KY), Susan Collins (ME), and Thom Tillis (NC) for starters.

Bernie/Warren v Trump/Pence may get Beltway pundits' bloomers all in a twist but it's exactly the kind real choice Americans are yearning for. Bernie will kick his ass in states where Hillary came up empty, like Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Florida, maybe even red bastions like Alaska and Montana. By then headline like this: U.S. cruises toward record-breaking debt on Trump's watchwill have sunk in no matter how many times Trumpanzee yells "socialist" and "Pocahontas."
The nation’s fiscal outlook looks ever bleaker, thanks in part to deficit spending during President Donald Trump’s first term, Congress’ nonpartisan budget scorekeeper projected Tuesday.

Within 16 years, the federal deficit is expected to be the largest in history, outpacing even the fiscal shortfalls that followed World War II, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates.

Congress’ recent tax and spending laws-- along with ballooning costs of programs like Social Security and Medicare-- also are driving up the amount the government pays in interest on money borrowed to make up for the gap in cash coming in and going out.

Indeed, those interest payments will exceed the cost of all Social Security spending within decades, CBO predicts. Interest costs also will be higher than discretionary spending, which amounts to all federal dollars Congress controls.

Debt is projected to reach 78 percent of gross domestic product by the end of this year-- the highest level since about 1950.

At this rate, that debt would actually exceed the size of the economy within a decade, breaking the historic record of 106 percent by 2034.

In drumming up support for their tax overhaul, congressional Republicans have said the new law would spur enough economic growth to offset a loss in revenue over the next decade.
They're lying. That's what they do. Voters are going to be pissed off-- and they'll know who to take it out on... if we still have a democratic form of government. And by the way, which Beltway pundit mentioned Alexandria Ocasio's campaign before Tuesday night? Right, none. Just ignore them.

Labels: , , ,


At 3:03 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The tent is actually very small. There are awnings going in every direction... but the tent itself is = .01% of the populace... the group who 'donate' 90% of all political money (read: buy government for themselves).

"...Crowley, who once headed the centrist New Democrat Coalition..."
bald faced lie. The new dems are far-right (though a bit less so than the Nazis) corrupt neofascists. Seriously people, if you are not wearing a swastika nor a white hood, that makes you a fucking CENTRIST?!?!?

"Crowley's exit begins the conversation about the next generation of House Democratic leadership anew. Less senior members likely to receive more attention include (-list of corrupt neofascists-) and others. And, any aspirants will need to be on good terms with the party's increasingly dominant progressive base. "

utter horseshit. first, DWT's retort on the lack of quality of that list is revealing... inasmuch as that list is probably CORRECT. So, Crowley is out, and that list of ill repute is in? Come on, DWT, there just HAS to be the epiphany now... right?
In addition, how can a list of the worst most corrupt neofascists ever be on good terms with the party's progressive base? Oh yeah... lefty voters are dumber than shit too. I would argue that the dominant part of the base is NOT progressive... but when progressive voters will eagerly vote for horrible corrupt neofascists... and then get a good night's sleep... I guess it doesn't matter what you call the dominant part of the base, except they're fucking morons.

Biggest whopper I've read in decades: "Debt is projected to reach 78 percent of gross domestic product by the end of this year-- the highest level since about 1950."

Debt is somewhere around $22 - 23 TRILLION. GDP is in the neighborhood of $17 Trillion. I know it's math-n-shit, but 22 is bigger than 17. always has been.

"At this rate, that debt would actually exceed the size of the economy within a decade, breaking the historic record of 106 percent by 2034."

First, these 2 declaratives are contrary. The size of the entire economy is guessed to be double or treble the gdp. Inflation has a noticeable effect here, but let's just say it's treble -- $51 trillion. That would mean that the annual deficit would have to be somewhere north of $1.8 Trillion per year. While that number might be reached for one year or even two, neither party of the money will stand idly by for it to be so for another decade and a half. The interest on that debt alone will almost equal the annual deficit... and our money parties aren't going to spend THAT kind of money on anything except war and more tax cuts.

If you use double as your number, the annual deficit will increase accordingly.

I'd ask what shit-for-brains writes this shit... but then I remember who reads it... and I understand.

An educated populace is required for a reasonably effective democratic government.

When the democratic government is the ocean of pig shit ours now is, you must presume that the populace is too fucking stupid to live.

At 3:23 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

With the radically reactionary SCOTUS locked in for the next 50 years, all this happy talk about "democratic" victories this fall are completely meaningless. Trump is only a couple of legal repeals and some new legislation away from ending small-d democracy in the US of A. It will be replaced by one party rule and there is no fixing this.

At 3:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

When you consider that there has been effective one-party rule ($$) for 4 decades, and the concentration of money means there are fewer and fewer "voices" every tax cut, AND nobody has demanded to even slow it down much less fix it for those 4 decades... yup... no fixing it.

Scotus has been affirming the primacy of money for 30 years. They've begun to reliably rule in favor of straight white (male) people and against all others now for several years.

trump can shriek 'national security' and permanently suspend democracy whenever it amuses him to do so... and nobody and nothing will say boo.

It's over.


Post a Comment

<< Home