Nothing can save the Democratic Party unless it is able to rid itself of the pushers of identity politics, escape from its bi-coastal bubble and re-enter maintstream America. Until then, it will remain what it has become -- regional and marginalized...
34
The proper goal should be giving back the people an honest democracy.
Trying to undo just Donald Trump as President won't achieve that. Rather it would transfer to the republican party of the rich and the big corporations, total control under their ideal "nice" VP. In fact the party would cooperate in undoing Donald for that reason at their first opportunity, when the electorate quickly becomes disillusioned. And Donald will do that himself.
The real battle should be to first make Ryan and Mc'Connell the true scapegoats for the Ayn Rand corruption and privatized horrors that are soon to come. Only when the Party of Pure and Selfish Greed gets the blame it deserves, will anything improve.
Trying to undo just Donald Trump as President won't achieve that. Rather it would transfer to the republican party of the rich and the big corporations, total control under their ideal "nice" VP. In fact the party would cooperate in undoing Donald for that reason at their first opportunity, when the electorate quickly becomes disillusioned. And Donald will do that himself.
The real battle should be to first make Ryan and Mc'Connell the true scapegoats for the Ayn Rand corruption and privatized horrors that are soon to come. Only when the Party of Pure and Selfish Greed gets the blame it deserves, will anything improve.
28
Thank you. While everyone seemed to love Mr. Blows article, his plan is a one way streer to losing 10 more senate seats in 2018.
Look, blue collar workers are not all white. 30% of Latinos voted Trump, and many of them are blue collar. If rich priviledged people from coasts stay on their ivory tower and keep telling the rest of America that the only future is one where they are all sitting in cubicles inventing apps and working for giant corporations, then they will continue to lose.
They need to realize that 90% of America will never be computer programmers. They need to realize that America has ignored the economic sectors like agriculture and manufacturing for too long. They need to realize area between NYC and LA is never going to be one giant wind farm to supply their cities with power. Most of all, they need to realize that not all Americans want to live in a city.
I am a MIT-educated transgender woman, and I live in the mountains. More liberals need to get out of their echo chambers, get into the rural lands, and change minds from within. Most of the time, changing minds should start with creating good opportunities to work. For example, we dont need more illegal immigrants to pick lettuce for $8/hr. We need to employ more people of all races with worker protections picking lettuce for $18/hr. If that means lettuce costs a few cents more per head, then so be it.
So follow Mr. Blow if your goal is to lose righteously. Do something postive if you want real change
Look, blue collar workers are not all white. 30% of Latinos voted Trump, and many of them are blue collar. If rich priviledged people from coasts stay on their ivory tower and keep telling the rest of America that the only future is one where they are all sitting in cubicles inventing apps and working for giant corporations, then they will continue to lose.
They need to realize that 90% of America will never be computer programmers. They need to realize that America has ignored the economic sectors like agriculture and manufacturing for too long. They need to realize area between NYC and LA is never going to be one giant wind farm to supply their cities with power. Most of all, they need to realize that not all Americans want to live in a city.
I am a MIT-educated transgender woman, and I live in the mountains. More liberals need to get out of their echo chambers, get into the rural lands, and change minds from within. Most of the time, changing minds should start with creating good opportunities to work. For example, we dont need more illegal immigrants to pick lettuce for $8/hr. We need to employ more people of all races with worker protections picking lettuce for $18/hr. If that means lettuce costs a few cents more per head, then so be it.
So follow Mr. Blow if your goal is to lose righteously. Do something postive if you want real change
36
I was happy with the direction of the Democratic Party for the last 8 years. Maybe they should learn to be as obstreperous and lie a little more like the republicans
16
Absolutely NOT!! The Senate Democrats have been a spineless lot for the past two decades. They have lived by the mantra: "Go along to get along". And so they have! they have gone along with the GOP for so long now that you can't tell the difference between a Democrat and a Republican. Over the past several decades they have become lobbyist fodder. They have no core beliefs anymore. They have abandoned the working class, Middle America, and play only to those living in major coastal cities. Hah!
Give me a break! If you truly want change, and surely we do, you have get rid of the whole lot. That also includes many Republican Senators. Both the Democrats and Republicans want to preserve the status quo. After all, they have pretty spiffy jobs there. When eventually they leave, they go to the really high paying jobs as consultants or lobbyists.
Give me a break! If you truly want change, and surely we do, you have get rid of the whole lot. That also includes many Republican Senators. Both the Democrats and Republicans want to preserve the status quo. After all, they have pretty spiffy jobs there. When eventually they leave, they go to the really high paying jobs as consultants or lobbyists.
20
I don't understand why Clinton's "deplorables" remark had a hand in dooming her (us), while Trump's continually insulting just about every swath of electorate except angry white guys was met with a resounding "meh" on election day.
I get the whole Fox News thing where they'll beat a Democrat's tiniest slip up to death and give a pass to their guy EVERY TIME. But the New York Times? Please. We expect better from you than handwringing over one out of context comment, which, by the way, was on point.
I get the whole Fox News thing where they'll beat a Democrat's tiniest slip up to death and give a pass to their guy EVERY TIME. But the New York Times? Please. We expect better from you than handwringing over one out of context comment, which, by the way, was on point.
33
I can cut trump some slack if he makes a grand plan /deal with the various factions for health care reform, infrastructure, tax reduction, Supreme Court, and repatriating offshore trillions in one fell swoop. If each peace-meal, I fear for the worst.
4
November 27 2016
The stick and the carrot must work together - lessons learned surely the Democratic message never failed the carrots appetites and sorry to say the hope and audacity of the Obama urging is meaningful but the masses in the heartland didn't bite and felt more the lashings enticed and flaunted by eight years of the Republican whippings - then the Trump brand hoodwinked the working and middle class and in rage galloped off to media salvation -so saving the Party is all about reality politics and doing the work that is in every district in the land.
To quote:
MacLeish, Oppenheimer, and "The Conquest of America" pg 287
As early as 1942, MacLeish was arguing that victory against the Germans and Japanese must not result in the "misery, the economic dislocation, the inane prosperity followed by the meaningless hunger of the victory we won before [in World War I]."18
After our victory in World War I, wrote MacLeish,
"we left the future to the laws of economics to construct.
And we ... recall a future that should have been peace and freedom
and became the radio, the auto- mobile, and the depression of 1929 . . .
you do not fight a war for the privilege of ... becoming the world's most numerous - consumers and thereafter the world's most numerous unemployed...
( in today's world - internet - and the great recession of 2008 etc..)
JJA Manhattan, N. Y.
The stick and the carrot must work together - lessons learned surely the Democratic message never failed the carrots appetites and sorry to say the hope and audacity of the Obama urging is meaningful but the masses in the heartland didn't bite and felt more the lashings enticed and flaunted by eight years of the Republican whippings - then the Trump brand hoodwinked the working and middle class and in rage galloped off to media salvation -so saving the Party is all about reality politics and doing the work that is in every district in the land.
To quote:
MacLeish, Oppenheimer, and "The Conquest of America" pg 287
As early as 1942, MacLeish was arguing that victory against the Germans and Japanese must not result in the "misery, the economic dislocation, the inane prosperity followed by the meaningless hunger of the victory we won before [in World War I]."18
After our victory in World War I, wrote MacLeish,
"we left the future to the laws of economics to construct.
And we ... recall a future that should have been peace and freedom
and became the radio, the auto- mobile, and the depression of 1929 . . .
you do not fight a war for the privilege of ... becoming the world's most numerous - consumers and thereafter the world's most numerous unemployed...
( in today's world - internet - and the great recession of 2008 etc..)
JJA Manhattan, N. Y.
4
As incoming Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer is off to a good start by pledging cooperation with the Trump administration in areas where they agree. There’s potential for collaboration on infrastructure spending and at least some aspects of tax reform, criminal justice reform and middle class entitlements.
Schumer is also on solid ground in saying Senate Democrats will stand by their principles for areas where don’t agree with Trump, Ryan, and McConnell. They’ll play the part of the loyal opposition not to be contrarian, but because they honestly disagree.
This is a refreshing break from what Schumer’s counterpart Mitch McConnell did eight years ago. He pushed his Republican cohorts to agree to a pact of non-cooperation with the incoming Obama administration. McConnell’s Machiavellian political game of sticking it to Obama included opposing the administration even in areas such as infrastructure spending that they’ve traditionally supported.
Unlike the Republicans, it’s imperative for Senate Democrats to show that they’re the party that wants to get things done in Washington -- to actually do the peoples' business! If Hillary Clinton had made this case louder and clearer in her campaign, she might well be President-elect today.
One area where Schumer should demand a pound of flesh is with respect to Supreme Court nominees. In exchange for a promise to not filibuster reasonably moderate Trump SCOTUS nominees, he should demand an up-or-down vote on Merrick Garland.
Schumer is also on solid ground in saying Senate Democrats will stand by their principles for areas where don’t agree with Trump, Ryan, and McConnell. They’ll play the part of the loyal opposition not to be contrarian, but because they honestly disagree.
This is a refreshing break from what Schumer’s counterpart Mitch McConnell did eight years ago. He pushed his Republican cohorts to agree to a pact of non-cooperation with the incoming Obama administration. McConnell’s Machiavellian political game of sticking it to Obama included opposing the administration even in areas such as infrastructure spending that they’ve traditionally supported.
Unlike the Republicans, it’s imperative for Senate Democrats to show that they’re the party that wants to get things done in Washington -- to actually do the peoples' business! If Hillary Clinton had made this case louder and clearer in her campaign, she might well be President-elect today.
One area where Schumer should demand a pound of flesh is with respect to Supreme Court nominees. In exchange for a promise to not filibuster reasonably moderate Trump SCOTUS nominees, he should demand an up-or-down vote on Merrick Garland.
9
Blocking Trimps efforts to repair or replace Obamacare will continue a health care plan that has hurt almost everyone except those with pre existing conditions. It is way too expensive and has too high deductibles. Why would democrats fight to keep it?
9
What party? Where is it? When do you see one, feel one? What do they look like? Do you mean a party constituted of stumbling hacks like the laughable ethicist Andrew Cuomo? Is it true that all politicians actually, at close quarters, give off a smell that scientists have detected in perjurers, seedy matrimonial lawyers, and pool room hustlers? Do you know of any child who wants to grow up to be a politician? I knew of one. The other kids never wanted to play with him. He grew up to become a District Leader.
11
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat." Really? Where is the evidence for that? Other than in your progressive imagination.
How about she was a crummy candidate, no charisma, no vision, and she insulted at least 25% of the country. Not to mention her various scandals and lies.
And re the popular vote. What is it with you guys? The election wasn't run to win the popular vote. The rule is the electoral college determines the next president. If we were running under the rule that the winner of the popular vote wins the presidency, then campaign strategies and voter turnout would also change. The difference in the popular vote really means nothing, particularly in the context of repubs winning house, senate, state governorships and legislatures.
And so it's ok for the dems to block Trump's programs if they can, but the Repubs were obstructionist if they don't go along with Obama.
No wonder progressives lost.
How about she was a crummy candidate, no charisma, no vision, and she insulted at least 25% of the country. Not to mention her various scandals and lies.
And re the popular vote. What is it with you guys? The election wasn't run to win the popular vote. The rule is the electoral college determines the next president. If we were running under the rule that the winner of the popular vote wins the presidency, then campaign strategies and voter turnout would also change. The difference in the popular vote really means nothing, particularly in the context of repubs winning house, senate, state governorships and legislatures.
And so it's ok for the dems to block Trump's programs if they can, but the Repubs were obstructionist if they don't go along with Obama.
No wonder progressives lost.
24
Dignified stance's do not win fights. Tough people do. Strengthen leadership to defend the weak and disadvantaged.
12
The Clinton's campaign was ignorant and aloof. She failed to reach out to working class and yes middle class voters in the States that were a challenge. If "50% of Trump supporters" were the whacko crazies she stated her own way then she had to reach out and say to the other 50% "I hear you", "I want to hear more and be there for you" or at least some words to put her arm around them and get some of their support. Then her aloof condescending personal style and the feeling that her coronation and first female presidency was a done deal really separated her from reality. The feminism aspect was less important than a great President. The lack of head on candor "yes I was sloppy and careless with emails but not with national security emails. The no press conferences at all. The perception that she was The Hollywood Exec and Hollywood and music biz choice was never balanced with a reach to the middle and working class. She should feel bad. She's talented but wasn't good enough a person.
Her daughters best friendship with Trumps daughter further propelled the rich are above us all. Like the old song line "the rich get richer and the poor stay poor". The fact is Biden could have reached out more effectively, dealt with Trump and won. Obama waited for him but the loss of his son was too great. The honesty of candidates is always a question. Not one could state like Shirley Chisholm whose book "Unbought and unbossed" reflected her integrity. Sanders has that.
Her daughters best friendship with Trumps daughter further propelled the rich are above us all. Like the old song line "the rich get richer and the poor stay poor". The fact is Biden could have reached out more effectively, dealt with Trump and won. Obama waited for him but the loss of his son was too great. The honesty of candidates is always a question. Not one could state like Shirley Chisholm whose book "Unbought and unbossed" reflected her integrity. Sanders has that.
20
According to a report from the World Economic Forum, America will lose 5 million jobs by 2020. The exponential growth of technologies that combine digital capabilities with other technologies are moving us rapidly toward a Fourth Industrial Revolution of cyber-physical systems. This future will belong to the highly skilled who will prosper, while the low skilled will likely continue to suffer economic displacement.
Mr. Trump's base consists of many low educated, low skilled voters who are not going to see their circumstances improve to anywhere near bygone days. There's no going back to any good old days. Mr. Trump's rearview mirror approach to progress will be self-defeated, if he persists in his chosen direction.
The Dems must envision a new understanding of the value of all humans within an increasingly unequal society, where physical needs and services will become cheaper, but social disenfranchisement increased. This vision must make clear that America, indeed all of humanity, is made stronger, wiser, more compassionate, and economically more powerful by providing each and every citizen with their basic needs. Universal health care, universal education, and most likely a guaranteed basic income are the direction they must champion.
This vision's meme is about the unity in diversity of all humanity.
The next four years must not be about the survival of a political party, but the survival and continuation of an advancing civilization, for us all to be saved
Mr. Trump's base consists of many low educated, low skilled voters who are not going to see their circumstances improve to anywhere near bygone days. There's no going back to any good old days. Mr. Trump's rearview mirror approach to progress will be self-defeated, if he persists in his chosen direction.
The Dems must envision a new understanding of the value of all humans within an increasingly unequal society, where physical needs and services will become cheaper, but social disenfranchisement increased. This vision must make clear that America, indeed all of humanity, is made stronger, wiser, more compassionate, and economically more powerful by providing each and every citizen with their basic needs. Universal health care, universal education, and most likely a guaranteed basic income are the direction they must champion.
This vision's meme is about the unity in diversity of all humanity.
The next four years must not be about the survival of a political party, but the survival and continuation of an advancing civilization, for us all to be saved
13
I'm not "humiliated" and I don't believe Senate Democrats are "desperate." This is the kind of hysterical language that is used to mischaracterize the Democratic message of social and economic justice and undermine policies that serve the common good.
We suffered a loss, yes. But the loss will be felt most poignantly in the years to come as Trump's more ambivalent supporters are confronted by the fact that he's been playing them. It won't take long and we need to be ready to embrace them when it happens. I'd suggest a simple message of fairness, which is what I think people are truly desperate for right now.
We suffered a loss, yes. But the loss will be felt most poignantly in the years to come as Trump's more ambivalent supporters are confronted by the fact that he's been playing them. It won't take long and we need to be ready to embrace them when it happens. I'd suggest a simple message of fairness, which is what I think people are truly desperate for right now.
15
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat. " - what planet are you all on? She and her supporters ran around imploring women to vote for her, because she is a woman. Mothers ran around imploring their daughters to vote for her, because she is a woman.
You should say "Sexism kept Hillary Clinton close, otherwise it would have been a popular vote blow out also!".
You should say "Sexism kept Hillary Clinton close, otherwise it would have been a popular vote blow out also!".
23
not too long ago, the media was writing about the demise of the republican party. now they're talking about the survival of democrats and encouraging democrats to be obstructionists.
12
I agree with the editorialist and Senator Schumer that the Democratic defeat was due to a vague econ comic message and a flawed messenger who made unfortunate comments like "deploarables to describe the entire opposition. You can't walk back a stinging insult like that. I take issue with the charges of racism and sexism. There were gender gaps (more men voted for Trump, more women voted for Clinton) but that does not equate to sexism. Clinton got 92% of African-American voters and more whites voted for Trump as they had for Romney but that does not establish race as a factor in the election. Jews and African-Americans have been Democrats for generations while white voters are more likely to be Republican. Racism exists in this nation, without a doubt, but we should be careful before assigning it as a cause of an electoral debacle.
6
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat."
You dems will never figure it out. Here is a hint. America care about jobs and the economy, whereas dems think about the above.
You dems will never figure it out. Here is a hint. America care about jobs and the economy, whereas dems think about the above.
21
What is happening here today? Is Correct the Record having a day off, restrategizing among themselves, so the bots are not upvoting today?
Did they finally disband, calling it a day?
How long will it take, before the Breitbart bots are here?
Did they finally disband, calling it a day?
How long will it take, before the Breitbart bots are here?
6
Trump raving about voting recounts.
Afraid that his & Russian rigging of the election will be exposed?
Afraid that his & Russian rigging of the election will be exposed?
15
The Electoral College is archaic the filibuster is anti-democratic. Democracy is thwarted repeatedly. It was stated that the Senate is the most unfair distribution of power that can be imagined in a democracy. Rural voters, who basically vote Republican rule the House through gerrymandering. The Senate Democrats were less than stalwart in supporting President Obama in 2009. Demanding special consideration before enacting important legislation on the stimulus, bank reform and health care. Watering them down and giving special interests the ability to make their interests the most important interests. The Senate Democrats are hoping that Trump will rule like Eisenhower end running radical right wing Republicans and work with the Democrats.
4
Step 1) Do whatever it takes to get McCain, Graham, Hatch, Collins, Flake and other disaffected Republican senators to guarantee the filibuster isn't lost.
Step 2) Convince President Obama to recess appoint Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court and fill the Federal Court vacancies as well. Make the Republicans REMOVE Judges and a Justice AFTER they have shown how fair they are.
Step 3) Consider any legislation Trump supports to be a Trojan Horse that has a hidden, self-serving and damaging agenda, such as his fake infrastructure plan that borrows a trillian on the tax payer's back and will simply turn it over to billionaires, and, undoubtedly, himself.
Step 4) Don't talk impeachment...just remember you'll only need 67 votes for a conviction and that's just 19 more than you have. Just wait: Sooner or later Trump will tick off the Tea Party and religious Fundies in the House and they'll do the job for you.
Step 5) Don't even HESITATE to filibuster extremist appointments. If you can't get enough Republicans to vote down a maniac like Jeff Sessions, then just filibuster him. But try to get 51 "No" votes first.
Step 6) Don't hesitate to support REASONABLE appointments, but push for experience.
Step 7) Look at and for EVERYTHING you do automatically and/or traditionally and question if it will help or hurt turning the party's popularity and effectiveness around. Discard the bad. Don't be afraid to learn from successful GOP tactics...this is a street fight, not a bridge game.
Step 2) Convince President Obama to recess appoint Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court and fill the Federal Court vacancies as well. Make the Republicans REMOVE Judges and a Justice AFTER they have shown how fair they are.
Step 3) Consider any legislation Trump supports to be a Trojan Horse that has a hidden, self-serving and damaging agenda, such as his fake infrastructure plan that borrows a trillian on the tax payer's back and will simply turn it over to billionaires, and, undoubtedly, himself.
Step 4) Don't talk impeachment...just remember you'll only need 67 votes for a conviction and that's just 19 more than you have. Just wait: Sooner or later Trump will tick off the Tea Party and religious Fundies in the House and they'll do the job for you.
Step 5) Don't even HESITATE to filibuster extremist appointments. If you can't get enough Republicans to vote down a maniac like Jeff Sessions, then just filibuster him. But try to get 51 "No" votes first.
Step 6) Don't hesitate to support REASONABLE appointments, but push for experience.
Step 7) Look at and for EVERYTHING you do automatically and/or traditionally and question if it will help or hurt turning the party's popularity and effectiveness around. Discard the bad. Don't be afraid to learn from successful GOP tactics...this is a street fight, not a bridge game.
11
"Everybody knows the war is over. Everybody knows the good guys lost." (Leonard Cohen). It's the part of EVIL that won. That doesn't mean there's much wrong with the Dem Party that a huge media empire couldn't fix.
2
CBill Clinton From and the rest of the "New Democrat Coillition" had it right. Bill Clinton ton correctly linked that centrist Democratic philosophy to Robert Kennedy and a third way of thinking:
" In the 1968 Indiana primary, Bobby Kennedy became the first New Democrat. He believed in civil rights for all and special privileges for none, in giving poor people a hand up rather than a handout: work was better than welfare. He understood in a visceral way that progressive politics requires the advocacy of both new policies and fundamental values, both far-reaching change and social stability. If he had become President, America's journey through the rest of the twentieth century would have been very different."
" In the 1968 Indiana primary, Bobby Kennedy became the first New Democrat. He believed in civil rights for all and special privileges for none, in giving poor people a hand up rather than a handout: work was better than welfare. He understood in a visceral way that progressive politics requires the advocacy of both new policies and fundamental values, both far-reaching change and social stability. If he had become President, America's journey through the rest of the twentieth century would have been very different."
2
Both Democrats and Republicans, in Congress and in the states, need to take a hard look at the electoral process, too. The Electoral College has become something quite different from, and contrary to, the purposes for its inclusion in the Constitutuion. Electors should be representing districts, not states. The practice of winner-take-all in the states can (and in this case did) make the popular vote completely irrelevant--not because independent electors, using their own judgment, chose to override the popular vote, but on the basis of a purely mechanized process. Then, of course, there is the gerrymandering of districts, the demise of the VRA, the voter suppression, and the fake news. The Republicans probably have no interest in these last named problems, but they should take an interest in the electoral college issue: this perversion of frree and fair elections could happen to them too.
6
The biggest mistake the Democrats made was appointing someone who did not resemble the values of new voters. Hillary was not the right choice as the front-runner for the Democratic Party. Perhaps things would have turned out differently if Bernie Sanders was the front-runner for the Democratic party, however this clearly isn't a solution anymore.
In the upcoming years the Democratic Party needs to focus more on its demographic and listen to what their members are saying. We need change and it all starts by just listening to one another, which ultimately was the biggest Democratic Party downfall in this election.
In the upcoming years the Democratic Party needs to focus more on its demographic and listen to what their members are saying. We need change and it all starts by just listening to one another, which ultimately was the biggest Democratic Party downfall in this election.
9
Now who are the ones planning to obstruct the President and progress? I guess it's Ok when you are the minority.
7
No, it's okay when the next president is a fascist who's sole purpose of running is to enrich himself.
12
Forget about looking to the Senate for leadership. Look to cities for new leadership. Cities right now are the incubators for progressive policies. And that's where Democratic votes are. Look at the electoral map; the blue areas are urban.
8
Cities right now are the incubators for progressive policies. And that's where Democratic votes are.
===============
Democratic run cities are known for their high crime rates, high poverty rates, and have the highest rates of income inequality. Detroit is a great incubator
===============
Democratic run cities are known for their high crime rates, high poverty rates, and have the highest rates of income inequality. Detroit is a great incubator
7
Yes, the Democrats can save our nation- only if....
- they are united (please for the sake of 60 million voters, no fight for DNC leadership please. Please digest your ego and ambition for us the people and to save our great nation from the destruction by the elected tyrant with no substance)
- Please start grass root campaign in every city promoting the concern of the people
- Messaging is important (learn how Con Don stole the election by rhetoric winning working class voters despite the fact that the Grand Obstruction Party destroyed organized labor)
- Con Don is thin skinned arrogant bully with no substance- he will make many mistakes. This is where the party can make a big difference. Let thousands march in every city to show how wrong he is
- Play the same game played by Con Don- use the media before he does
- Bring new young passionate and articulate leadership at every level (they may not be known now- but they will be in four years)- time for a revolutionary change in the party
- Please for the sake of us the people, there is no time for fighting between left or right or central ideology. Find a common ground and learn to work with each other. The country is at great danger- all sides must digest there ego and work together instead of promotion of own ideology
- Grass root level work must start now at all Congressional and Senate openings in 2018. We cannot afford to loss a single one- with unified leadership we can grab more seats in 2018
- Expose every misstep
- they are united (please for the sake of 60 million voters, no fight for DNC leadership please. Please digest your ego and ambition for us the people and to save our great nation from the destruction by the elected tyrant with no substance)
- Please start grass root campaign in every city promoting the concern of the people
- Messaging is important (learn how Con Don stole the election by rhetoric winning working class voters despite the fact that the Grand Obstruction Party destroyed organized labor)
- Con Don is thin skinned arrogant bully with no substance- he will make many mistakes. This is where the party can make a big difference. Let thousands march in every city to show how wrong he is
- Play the same game played by Con Don- use the media before he does
- Bring new young passionate and articulate leadership at every level (they may not be known now- but they will be in four years)- time for a revolutionary change in the party
- Please for the sake of us the people, there is no time for fighting between left or right or central ideology. Find a common ground and learn to work with each other. The country is at great danger- all sides must digest there ego and work together instead of promotion of own ideology
- Grass root level work must start now at all Congressional and Senate openings in 2018. We cannot afford to loss a single one- with unified leadership we can grab more seats in 2018
- Expose every misstep
8
At this point I have lost all confidence in the Democratic party. I have voted Dem. all my life and they have accomplished little and allowed the Republicans to stomp this country into a corporate sponsored congress, supreme court, and now, white house. They have been complicit, by calling it compromise. So very few of the complex and daunting problems facing our country are being addressed with any sensible reason. I have been convinced that the Democratic party is either inept, corrupt, or they don't have the backbone to truly stand up to the Republicans. Likely a combination of all three.
The entire congressional delegation from Connecticut are Democrats, house and senate. Each will be receiving letters stating "do your job or I will not vote for you, or donate more money to the Democrats any longer." I know they all work very hard, but they accomplish nothing. I know for a fact, that I would be fired if I had no results to show for my work.
The entire congressional delegation from Connecticut are Democrats, house and senate. Each will be receiving letters stating "do your job or I will not vote for you, or donate more money to the Democrats any longer." I know they all work very hard, but they accomplish nothing. I know for a fact, that I would be fired if I had no results to show for my work.
9
There are many of us who are loyal Democrats and whose first priority at this time of national crisis is to save our democracy. Saving the Democratic Party is secondary, although it probably will take a strong, unified party to fend off the marauding Trump opportunists.
Looking for help in the Senate has the drawback of the phony gentility which both sides of the aisle are supposed to show the other. It’s time for strong words from Democratic Senators. Harry Reid may have had some shortcomings, but a lack of feistiness wasn’t one of them.
Every Republican senator must be made to believe that marching in lockstep with the Trump extremists will never be forgotten or forgiven.
Looking for help in the Senate has the drawback of the phony gentility which both sides of the aisle are supposed to show the other. It’s time for strong words from Democratic Senators. Harry Reid may have had some shortcomings, but a lack of feistiness wasn’t one of them.
Every Republican senator must be made to believe that marching in lockstep with the Trump extremists will never be forgotten or forgiven.
10
I think bipartisanship and compromise are dead for a few generations. Republicans wouldn't compromise on Obama's Supreme Court nomination and it got them (almost cerainly) control of the Court for decades. In the spirit of bipartisanship, Democrats made some Republican appointments and it got them -- James Comey.
Unilateral disarmament is surrender.
Unilateral disarmament is surrender.
15
Democrats didn't lose this election because their was something wrong with their vision for the United States. They lost it because, 1) they don't know how to share it in a way that all Americans can understand what it means to them and, 2) they don't know how to stand up to bullies and liars who will do anything including get an FBI director to spread propaganda in the final days of an election.
8
If the Democrats had a unifying message, or knew what it should be, they would have won the election. That was a giant two steps backwards that might just extend the weak economic recovery by another five years beyond my ten-year target of 2018. They should have run on a massive redistribution of this nation's wealth, the starting point of which was the Affordable Care Act. Instead, they allowed the Republicans to define the ACA as an enemy.
Republicans don't have a jobs plan, and don't have any experience creating them or helping to redistribute wealth. Tax cuts for the wealthy certainly won't create any jobs where they are needed, or feed and cloth the needy, either.
Republicans don't have a jobs plan, and don't have any experience creating them or helping to redistribute wealth. Tax cuts for the wealthy certainly won't create any jobs where they are needed, or feed and cloth the needy, either.
5
One way for the Democrats to get traction may be to stop wallowing in our own righteousness.The Times asserts (off handedly - sometimes wrong but never in doubt): "Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat." I think sex-based biases and shallow thinking about what it means to work for a more enlightened society is what got Hillary as far as she got. A male with the same baggage wouldn't have made the general election. The Times and her party decided it was time to elect a woman - and in fact it is past time - but they failed to find and support a quality candidate and it caught up with them. Sure she won the popular vote - So what? - time to drop the shallow thinking and self absorbed accusations about gender and race. And correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Hillary a white one-percenter? How does "racial bigotry" work here?.
13
Sexism and bigotry but also FBI interference played a huge role in Clinton's defeat. That needs to be mentioned as well and I would say examined in much greater detail before we move on.
11
Senate democrats will have to fight a strategic rear guard action as the HRC coalition decamps to .... where? It's extremely important we remember the historic combination of factors at play before considering a new Democratic platform.
First, she achieved a historic popular vote margin for a candidate losing the electoral college. She also had historically high negatives, systematically reinforced by a decades-long right wing smear campaign and endless congressional 'investigations'. Her message was broad and detailed but lacked punch. And lastly (and likely determinatively), she faced unprecedented interference by Putin and thrice by Comey (not to mention FBI renegades in NY).
Unfortunately, polling predicted a comfortable HRC win and gave cover to a small but critical portion of disaffected Bernie supporters (and maybe some moderate Republicans), allowing them to 'vote their conscience' and not play a meaningful role in the election. Unless you consider its catastrophic negative impact.
So, that's how we lost. The message I get isn't that the Democratic Party needs to move hard left. It's less about the overall message, and more about tactics we use on offense and defense and where resources are deployed.
Senate Democrats might be tempted to seek bipartisan compromise on selected issues, but Republicans have proved it's more productive to be obstructionists right out of the gate. It's a sad testament to the state of our democracy, but that's where we are.
First, she achieved a historic popular vote margin for a candidate losing the electoral college. She also had historically high negatives, systematically reinforced by a decades-long right wing smear campaign and endless congressional 'investigations'. Her message was broad and detailed but lacked punch. And lastly (and likely determinatively), she faced unprecedented interference by Putin and thrice by Comey (not to mention FBI renegades in NY).
Unfortunately, polling predicted a comfortable HRC win and gave cover to a small but critical portion of disaffected Bernie supporters (and maybe some moderate Republicans), allowing them to 'vote their conscience' and not play a meaningful role in the election. Unless you consider its catastrophic negative impact.
So, that's how we lost. The message I get isn't that the Democratic Party needs to move hard left. It's less about the overall message, and more about tactics we use on offense and defense and where resources are deployed.
Senate Democrats might be tempted to seek bipartisan compromise on selected issues, but Republicans have proved it's more productive to be obstructionists right out of the gate. It's a sad testament to the state of our democracy, but that's where we are.
3
We've got the beginning of a three party system forming. Republicans on one side Democrats on the other and Trumps party in power. It's the billionaires party and they couldn't have planned it better if they had tried. Wouldn't surprise me if they did.
Trump pulled in questionable but successful business oriented people that knew how to win and they did. Now he's filling out his cabinet with more of the same one billionaire at a time.
Both parties are trying to figure out how to contain him.
They won't, as they've found out when discussing his business interests. There's no legal reason he needs too.
These people are not republicans or democrats, the ideology is money not morals. Those on the lower rungs of society are disparaged and only good for buying what they're selling.
Welcome to the new three party system of America.
Trump pulled in questionable but successful business oriented people that knew how to win and they did. Now he's filling out his cabinet with more of the same one billionaire at a time.
Both parties are trying to figure out how to contain him.
They won't, as they've found out when discussing his business interests. There's no legal reason he needs too.
These people are not republicans or democrats, the ideology is money not morals. Those on the lower rungs of society are disparaged and only good for buying what they're selling.
Welcome to the new three party system of America.
3
No, they can't!
4
The Democrats don't transcend race and class, at least not in the way they imaginre. It's a party that loves minorities as long as they're poor, and loves whites as long as they are rich and live on either coast. Congratulations.
11
If the Democratic Party wants to be viable again, you must first REMOVE the corporatists who have dominated the party since Bill Clinton and friends came to town with the Third Way agenda. But even after getting scalped Nov 8th (as well as the catastrophic losses across the states over the last few elections), the corporatists in the Party STILL refuse to give up power to the Progressives. They elect Schumer minority leader, Obama tries to taint Ellison as he runs for DNC Chair, Howard Dean is all over the tv interviewing for DNC Chair because all of a sudden, the position needs a full time chairperson (they weren't saying this when Wasserman Shultz was the Chairperson). It is the Wall Street Democrats who have destroyed the Democratic Party.
10
For all students of history: this is true autocracy on its way to fascism. The Democrats have to become the party of no. No to fascism, no to billionaire plutocrats trying to destroy what is left of our democracy, no to bending reality, no to further stratification of our society. They have to become the party of yes to the ideas of Bernie Sanders and the progressive wing. The pandering to donors and the elite has to stop. Back by popular demand: we the people.
15
Focus on issues important to the majority of voters (jobs, the economy) and Democrats will do just fine. Make issues like the rights of the transgendered or undocumented immigrants the most visible of your priorities, and enjoy more years in the electoral wilderness.
For those mistakenly posting that Republicans allowed nothing to pass while Obama was president, the White House has a Web site featuring legislation signed by President Obama. It runs 124 pages:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/signed-legislation
For those mistakenly posting that Republicans allowed nothing to pass while Obama was president, the White House has a Web site featuring legislation signed by President Obama. It runs 124 pages:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/signed-legislation
5
Who cares about the party? The question is can the senate democrats save the country from excesses of a Trump administration? The mistake last time was to allow Alito to be confirmed, there will be a lot more mistakes like that. Senate Democrats don't have the backbone for a real fight!
7
Bernie Sanders and his grass roots, broad based, coalition building, emphasis on important issues facing and supported by the vast majority of the American People is the future of the DNC.
Organizations, such as the NYT's, not supportive of this movement, increasing trying to "shape" news instead of reporting news, relentlessly focusing on personalities and amplifying situations to engineer petty outbursts of outraged emotion that the facts do not support, will be shown again and again to be less and less relevant. Just like it wasn't enough that HRC was not the Donald for her to get elected, it's not enough that the NYT's isn't Fox New's for it to be considered a "news" organization. Hey New York Times, anyone home, is anyone there listening??? Donald Trump being elected is a wake up call for your organization as well, Hello? Anyone there?
Organizations, such as the NYT's, not supportive of this movement, increasing trying to "shape" news instead of reporting news, relentlessly focusing on personalities and amplifying situations to engineer petty outbursts of outraged emotion that the facts do not support, will be shown again and again to be less and less relevant. Just like it wasn't enough that HRC was not the Donald for her to get elected, it's not enough that the NYT's isn't Fox New's for it to be considered a "news" organization. Hey New York Times, anyone home, is anyone there listening??? Donald Trump being elected is a wake up call for your organization as well, Hello? Anyone there?
14
Once again, Americans by the millions voted for the person they would like to engage with socially. As shallow as this seems to those of us who take policy, history and competence seriously, we have to realize this the is the actual depth of the American electorate.
Yes, we have to work on electing people at local levels, honing our message, etc., but we also have to work on finding another national leader with some charisma.
Yes, we have to work on electing people at local levels, honing our message, etc., but we also have to work on finding another national leader with some charisma.
4
Clinton was defeated because she was the weakest possible candidate, quintessential establishment when people wanted change; a Wall Street Hillary who wanted changes to social security and a Main Street Hillary who didn't. Which Hillary should be believed?
The Clinton camp expected everyone to forget the Clinton welfare "reform" of 1994. People didn't. The Clintons made America the home of the deepest and widest child poverty among wealthy democracies.
The Clinton camp expected everyone to forget the Clinton welfare "reform" of 1994. People didn't. The Clintons made America the home of the deepest and widest child poverty among wealthy democracies.
11
Again and again pundits said that Hillary Cliinton needed a message. But one never came forth, just wanky position papers posted on line as if the average voter would actually seek those positions out. We are facing four horrific years with a president who is mentally ill. He is even though apparently no psychiatrist has had the opportunity to actually make that assessment. Yes, indeed, the Senate must obstruct as much as possible of the nasty we-don't-care-about-the-people-we-are-here-to-legislate-for Republicans efforts, in both houses, to rip apart anything with our current President's footprint on it. But more than that, where are the potential candidates in 2020 coming from? We need a younger version of Bernie Sanders. And we need to see him/her now. Unfortunately probably Senator Elizabeth Warren will consider herself to old in 2020 to run for President. Alas, alack for that.
3
Can't they send in more professional cowards to voice doublespeak to get us into the war with Russia you want to get us into? War makes Americans happy! How's your yellowcake taste today, NYTs editorial board?
6
Nowhere in this editorial do I read any references to Mussolini, the corporate state, nuclear diplomacy, America Firsters, Birthers, the KKK's endorsement, the Bundy raids... and... racism. I wouldn't complain of this if not for the fact that The Times avoided drawing attention to those instances of fascism so evident during the campaigning. We can't any longer pretend that the good stands a chance against a con job by a real estate scoundrel. The country is burning and The Times can't even smell the flames.
5
The Dems, esp, the experienced, have to stop pulling their punches. They have to go toe-to-toe with the GOP. Mostly they have to go on the attack. Stop being the party of reaction - be the party of action and severe push-back! Push back against the scripted Republican propaganda shows, be it direct from their own mouths, or their TV/radio mouthpieces. Stop letting the Republicans, and now Trump, get away with their alternate sets of facts and then expect the electorate to do the research to figure it out - PROVIDE the electorate with the counter factuals!
Stop standing there "tsk, tsking" at their lies, and rude behaviors, like HRC did in the debates - and push-back! HRC looked like a beaten mom of a unruly child whenever Trump interrupted, rolling her eyes instead of taking him to task. While his fans at home screamed "Lock her up!" at their TV screens.
The Dems must fight like not only their careers are at stake, but like the very life of the Republic is at stake - and IT IS! They need to fight like true patriots, like resolute men and women sent to do a job for all citizens, not a few of a certain skin color, or income bracket!
The Dems need to become the PARTY of choice, not present another personality to woe and seduce the more lefty base. It doesn't matter what color, or gender their next candidate is, rather their ability to sell the PARTY, over their one-man-woman dog and pony show!
They must stay right in there with every bad idea the GOP tries to force thru.
Stop standing there "tsk, tsking" at their lies, and rude behaviors, like HRC did in the debates - and push-back! HRC looked like a beaten mom of a unruly child whenever Trump interrupted, rolling her eyes instead of taking him to task. While his fans at home screamed "Lock her up!" at their TV screens.
The Dems must fight like not only their careers are at stake, but like the very life of the Republic is at stake - and IT IS! They need to fight like true patriots, like resolute men and women sent to do a job for all citizens, not a few of a certain skin color, or income bracket!
The Dems need to become the PARTY of choice, not present another personality to woe and seduce the more lefty base. It doesn't matter what color, or gender their next candidate is, rather their ability to sell the PARTY, over their one-man-woman dog and pony show!
They must stay right in there with every bad idea the GOP tries to force thru.
5
In an environment where people are demanding outsiders, we need more fresh faces. We need more strident leaders, and less insulated establishment.
Brainy wonks are fine, but ever since the days of Theodore Roosevelt, voters have demanded excitement. Embrace it. The Democrat Party needs to consider promoting some fiery populists. Not saying Bernie is necessarily the way forward, but it's times to give some dark horse actors a chance. We also need some "BIG" personalities. It's Donald's world now.
Brainy wonks are fine, but ever since the days of Theodore Roosevelt, voters have demanded excitement. Embrace it. The Democrat Party needs to consider promoting some fiery populists. Not saying Bernie is necessarily the way forward, but it's times to give some dark horse actors a chance. We also need some "BIG" personalities. It's Donald's world now.
5
Last of my agenda:
13. We are pro universal basic income (UBI). No more welfare. Every citizen receives a basic income sufficient to meet the cost of living. Those who don’t need it or want it can turn it back in. In the face of continuing automation and foreign competition, UBI gives Americans strength and security, the ability to follow their dreams, the ability to be entrepreneurs. UBI will grow the economy.
14. We are pro fair taxes. Corporations need to pay taxes on the wealth they generate in America rather than hiding money offshore. No loopholes for billionaires. The wealthy need to pay their fair share.
13. We are pro universal basic income (UBI). No more welfare. Every citizen receives a basic income sufficient to meet the cost of living. Those who don’t need it or want it can turn it back in. In the face of continuing automation and foreign competition, UBI gives Americans strength and security, the ability to follow their dreams, the ability to be entrepreneurs. UBI will grow the economy.
14. We are pro fair taxes. Corporations need to pay taxes on the wealth they generate in America rather than hiding money offshore. No loopholes for billionaires. The wealthy need to pay their fair share.
3
Left is not the way forward. The Labour Party governed Great Britain from 1997 through 2010 from the center. They lost general elections in 2010 and 2015 and, following the most recent loss, veered sharply left under Jeremy Corbyn. They have now lost most of their former voters to the Tories (Conservatives)(sound familiar?), and will likely be out of power (if Tony Blair won't return to rescue them) for another 10-15 years. If US Democrats get behind Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders they will find themselves wiped out even in Blue States.
3
As someone that didn't vote for HRC, I would support and honest to god progressive like Warren or Sanders than a Republican-lite Democrat (they usually possess the worst of both idealogies in my opinion).
11
We have not elected a centrist. Did that escape notice?
1
Incorrect, what are deemed conservatives in Britain is definitely NOT comparable to Republicans in America. The fact is if you had bothered to investigate, Americans are quite progressive in their attitudes about, healthcare, minimum wage, trade, money in politics etc., etc. Americans now have NO political/ideological left that can speak to their issues. Trump did but, it was telling people wanted they wanted to hear, not what he REALLY was going to deliver.
2
We are a nation of ill-informed, biased, poorly educated consumers who would rather scapegoat immigrants and turn away from poor people than deal with complex issues with complex solutions. The causes and inter-connectivity of pollution are ignored in the name of jobs. Patterns of social ills are well entrenched; change requires community building and political action from the grassroots level to state legislatures, where reforms are needed to undo crass gerrymandering. Democracy requires a committed, well-informed and engaged citizenry.
5
Editorial Board (and by extension, NYTimes official position):
You mention "her failure to crystallize a broad economic vision" and yet in that very paragraph you FAIL, once again, to even mention Bernie Sanders. Yes, didn't he lay out and GALVANIZE (more than crystallize) voters with a "broad economic vision"?
Heaven help us! Don't you get it, even now? Admit the mistake (and it was colossal) of "this page" (as you often refer to yourself). Admit the mistake of not supporting and backing Bernie Sanders.
You mention "her failure to crystallize a broad economic vision" and yet in that very paragraph you FAIL, once again, to even mention Bernie Sanders. Yes, didn't he lay out and GALVANIZE (more than crystallize) voters with a "broad economic vision"?
Heaven help us! Don't you get it, even now? Admit the mistake (and it was colossal) of "this page" (as you often refer to yourself). Admit the mistake of not supporting and backing Bernie Sanders.
10
Yes. We should always, always, always go with a white man.
Now that we're in the terrible and huge pickle we're in, with an uninformed, unscrupulous and disturbed demagogue as our President-elect, the Times intones that "Above all, our economic message was not sharp enough, was not bold enough, was not strong enough. All those blue collar voters who voted for Donald Trump, even many who had voted for Obama, they thought he was the change agent." Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Thomas Frank Michael Moore and many others were warning us that this would happen if the Democratic Party didn't pay attention to the crises produced by globalization and rising economic disparities. Instead, the Times relentlessly bashed Sanders, after months of ignoring him. I agree with everything in your editorial, but you should have written it a year ago. Now we have to fogure out a way of getting out of this mess.
2
Democrats will focus on incomes and wealth--who has what.
The NYTimes sneering, supercilious attitude to Bernie hurts only yourself.
The NYTimes sneering, supercilious attitude to Bernie hurts only yourself.
4
Ultimately, one always has to remind themselves that, among several other issues, with his revised tax policies for the wealthy and Wall Street types, and stopping the financing of endless wars, Sanders represented a direct threat to this group that, over the years, has spent millions financing the campaigns of both parties members of whom wish to maintain the status quo and the usual outdated snail pace incremental approach to legislation, a failed approach that in the last 35 years in America has created the highest inequality and worst child poverty rate of any western industrialized nation along with 60,000 manufacturing plants closed or moved to offshore low wage nations. It is pretty evident now that, for the most part the one-percenters in America have little or no concern at all about these important issues, just their pocketbook.
Media is owned by large corporate conglomerates whom, were doing everything in their power to marginilize Sanders and his policies and under no circumstances did they want him elected. Trump was and will be better copy for the media anyway that has never really wanted to discuss the issues and problems within the country.
Media is owned by large corporate conglomerates whom, were doing everything in their power to marginilize Sanders and his policies and under no circumstances did they want him elected. Trump was and will be better copy for the media anyway that has never really wanted to discuss the issues and problems within the country.
7
The talk of Kamala Harris as a future star of the Democratic party is laughable. She was a terrible district attorney. She was too liberal even for Diane Feinstein! From wikepedia:
In April 2004, San Francisco Police Department Officer Isaac Espinoza was shot and killed in the line of duty.[18] Three days later D.A. Harris announced she would not seek the death penalty, infuriating the San Francisco Police Officers Association.[18] During Officer Espinoza’s funeral at St. Mary’s Cathedral U.S. Senator and former San Francisco mayor Dianne Feinstein rose to the pulpit and called on Harris, who was sitting in the front pew, to secure the death penalty, prompting a standing ovation from the 2,000 uniformed police officers in attendance.[18] Harris still refused.
In April 2004, San Francisco Police Department Officer Isaac Espinoza was shot and killed in the line of duty.[18] Three days later D.A. Harris announced she would not seek the death penalty, infuriating the San Francisco Police Officers Association.[18] During Officer Espinoza’s funeral at St. Mary’s Cathedral U.S. Senator and former San Francisco mayor Dianne Feinstein rose to the pulpit and called on Harris, who was sitting in the front pew, to secure the death penalty, prompting a standing ovation from the 2,000 uniformed police officers in attendance.[18] Harris still refused.
2
Senator Schumer would do American democracy a great service by sitting down with the Senate Republican leadership and talk them down from their implicit vow never to allow a Democratic president to fill a Supreme Court seat now held by a Republican appointee. The Garland episode has already done damage to the Court, the Senate, and the presidency. Had Clinton won the election Republicans would have crossed a line that would have been far worse. Schumer and Senate Democrats need to take advantage of Republicans' current position of strength, and what I hope is a sense of magnanimity, to reach agreement on fundamental principles.
The main question is not how to save the Democratic or Republican Party, but how to break the two-party oligarchy, where only one replaces the other every four to eight years.
Given the personalities of the runners for the Presidential candidacy in the latest elections, all people of good will and of sound mind can only see black in the country's future.
Given the personalities of the runners for the Presidential candidacy in the latest elections, all people of good will and of sound mind can only see black in the country's future.
3
The President of Hope and Change did not tie a single condition to the Wall Street Bailout. Goldman Sachs et all were not required to write low interest loans or fund public work projects in exchange for the people's money. President Obama offered to compromise on Big Pharma and on Medicare and Social Security. President Obama most certainly did not don comfortable shoes and march for workers. President Obama remains uninspiring about Trade and Standing Rock. The people want a left with guts, what is the point of having a Democratic Party if they simply offer a polite alternative to Republicans?
15
As it stands right now, by collecting money from corporate donors, the democrats are no longer even polite alternative to Republicans. They are essentially the same and are NO alternative.
9
The problem was with feckless Obama supporters who turned out in 2008 and 2012, but not in the midterms. Left Obama neutered and their hopes quashed.
6
Excellent. Schumer is an adult and is behaving like an adult. Best to follow his lead. All this screaming and yelling and behaving like Trump will not win the day.
Schumer is an adult, but, also an establishment shill for Wall Street donors, hence, the continuing of incrementalism and the status quo. Once the democratic party started accepting serious money from corporate donors and under the current attitudes in a considerable part of the country, this is exactly why someone like Trump got elected because, in their eyes now, to many voters, the democrats no longer offer a viable alternative to the Republicans.
4
The Board is right.
Hell hath no wrath like a person/demographic class scorned.
In classic understatement the Board mentioned, it didn't help Hillary to trash talk those "irredeemables", but far more damaging was that during the entire campaign Democratic pride made a painfully obvious point of not even alluding to their existence. At their peril it turned out.
"Judge not" are also political words to live or die by.
Hell hath no wrath like a person/demographic class scorned.
In classic understatement the Board mentioned, it didn't help Hillary to trash talk those "irredeemables", but far more damaging was that during the entire campaign Democratic pride made a painfully obvious point of not even alluding to their existence. At their peril it turned out.
"Judge not" are also political words to live or die by.
1
The parable from the Bible about King Solomon judging which of the two women, claiming to be the mother of a baby, was the true mother, comes to mind. King Solomon said the baby should be cut in half, knowing that the true mother would give up the baby rather than go with the judgment. The Democrats are like the true mother, in many ways. Unlike the crash and burn, scorched earth policies of the Republicans, many senior Democrats have said they will work with Trump to save the policies they worked so hard to establish, rather than do what the Republicans did to Obama, which was to obstruct everything well knowing that the country and people would suffer. It is hard to be a Democrat, compared to being the Republican of today. But it is the Democratic policies that will triumph in the long run, even though the Democratic congress folks will have to twist and turn and bend to accommodate the perverse indignities forced on the nation by Trump and his minions.
4
People want a change and Peolsi and Schumer are not the face of change. We need Brown, Warren, Sanders to be the lead . The message needs to be a simple one. Stress Infrastructure, tax reform, correcting ACA, decrease our involvement in the middle east wars, and emphasize the good of World trade and the corrections needed. Show the jobs created by Green energy and reduce education costs. Promote child care for workers. Stay on message.
3
Next part of my agenda:
6. We are pro-health. A healthy nation is a productive and prosperous nation. All Americans, rural or urban should have quality health care. We need to stop the big corporations, insurance companies, and drug companies from making health care unaffordable.
7. We are pro-country. It’s time for America to get busy rebuilding itself—roads, bridges, water and waste management facilities, and the like.
8. We are pro transportation and communication; all Americans should be connected, and all should be able to move quickly and affordably around the country and from home to work.
9. We are pro environment. It’s time to reclaim our fields and forests, our lakes and rivers, from polluters and exploiters. Americans deserve clean air and water, good places to hunt and fish. We, and our children and grandchildren deserve a planet that is safe from overheating.
10. We are pro jobs, and think that investment in education and training, health care, infrastructure, transportation, communication, and clean energy will create many well-paying opportunities.
11. We are pro secure borders and sensible immigration policies, and believe those living, working and paying taxes in this county should have a path to citizenship.
12. We are pro defense and pro service. America needs a strong and efficient military. All young people should have a two-year service requirement, either military or civilian (such as the Civilian Conservation Corps).
(Balance to follow)
6. We are pro-health. A healthy nation is a productive and prosperous nation. All Americans, rural or urban should have quality health care. We need to stop the big corporations, insurance companies, and drug companies from making health care unaffordable.
7. We are pro-country. It’s time for America to get busy rebuilding itself—roads, bridges, water and waste management facilities, and the like.
8. We are pro transportation and communication; all Americans should be connected, and all should be able to move quickly and affordably around the country and from home to work.
9. We are pro environment. It’s time to reclaim our fields and forests, our lakes and rivers, from polluters and exploiters. Americans deserve clean air and water, good places to hunt and fish. We, and our children and grandchildren deserve a planet that is safe from overheating.
10. We are pro jobs, and think that investment in education and training, health care, infrastructure, transportation, communication, and clean energy will create many well-paying opportunities.
11. We are pro secure borders and sensible immigration policies, and believe those living, working and paying taxes in this county should have a path to citizenship.
12. We are pro defense and pro service. America needs a strong and efficient military. All young people should have a two-year service requirement, either military or civilian (such as the Civilian Conservation Corps).
(Balance to follow)
4
Yes, Frank M of Raleigh hit the nail on the head. If I see or hear the word "messaging" one more time I am going to stab myself in the eye with a fork. For those who voted for Trump, if he does nothing more than successfully lobby businesses to prevent them from outsourcing any more jobs by camping out in their board rooms, focus on strengthening border defenses, deport illegal immigrants with criminal records, get us out of Iraq and Syria for good, appoint a conservative justice to fill Scalia's seat on SCOTUS, shut down Paul Ryan's effort to screw up Medicare, promote law and order, and reverse Obama's more onerous administrative orders, then he will be considered a raging triumph to those that voted for him. Then, the Democrats can defend their 10 Senate seats in "red" states in two years. Contrary to the media's view, Trump doesn't have to do much, as for all his flaws and inconsistencies, he was perceived as authentic--a flesh and blood person. Trump went and saw and physically touched the politically untouchable--the people of the hinterland.
6
Exactly right.
That 2005 tape described exactly what and where Trump touched.
It is a sad commentary on the voters that many simply did not care about a candidate who believes it acceptable to shove his hand up a woman's skirt and touch her private parts.
That 2005 tape described exactly what and where Trump touched.
It is a sad commentary on the voters that many simply did not care about a candidate who believes it acceptable to shove his hand up a woman's skirt and touch her private parts.
3
You guys keep electing career politicians like Pelosi and Schumer et al - and every term they serve the Democrats grow weaker in numbers. The bench of the party is never strengthened. One only needs to look at the consternation and utter disbelief on Pelosi's face when the mere mention of her stepping down is brought to her! If looks could kill- half the press pool would be dead. We are so desperate for leadership- they are already looking at Kamala Harris to be the new Democratic savior. As a Californian, all I can tell you she spent her entire time as State Attorney General campaigning for her Senate seat. She's not even sworn in and they are calling her to run in 2020. That is pretty sad state of affairs if you ask me. People who are 60 YO and over need to be forced out of House and Senate all together. You guys have your tax payer funded golden parachutes and lifetime of free healthcare - It's your egos and craven need for power that keeps you there- you guys could care less about middle America- that's why you lost and deservedly so.
18
Dear Aaron - It looks suspiciously to me that you are engaging in age discrimination. Just replace "60 YO and over" with Black, or Female, or Hispanic - got it?
2
Republicans s care for the Middle Class?
Republicans blocked Obama proposed American Job's Act that would have created jobs re infrastructure. Republicans will take healthcare insurance from 22 million Americans; many will die many more will suffer. 50% of tax cuts will go to richest 1%.
Republicans blocked Obama proposed American Job's Act that would have created jobs re infrastructure. Republicans will take healthcare insurance from 22 million Americans; many will die many more will suffer. 50% of tax cuts will go to richest 1%.
2
I use to chastise the GOP for playing a brilliant shell of talking values on social issues but really engaging in the concentration of wealth, and it is apparent that the Democrats are playing the same game. The biggest disappointment was that after the financial meltdown in 2008, in spite of so many plainly visible culprits who feed the orgy of greed, so few were held accountable. This was in spite of Democrats having not only the White House but both chambers of Congress. Taxpayers were left to clean up the mess from the Great Recession while among all of the main players in the crisis only one was indicted, one. When we needed a effort not unlike the 'trust busting' of Teddy Roosevelt we ended up lapdogs in both parties, but especially among the Democrats as they were in charge.
If Democrats continue playing the values card they will continue to lose, as they have in state governments and the as the federal government. FDR sent the best people that he could find across the land to deal with the problems affecting the land, while a majority of Democrats appear content to hiss at people who are not urbanites. If you can't anything in common with people across the country don't expect to lead it.
If Democrats continue playing the values card they will continue to lose, as they have in state governments and the as the federal government. FDR sent the best people that he could find across the land to deal with the problems affecting the land, while a majority of Democrats appear content to hiss at people who are not urbanites. If you can't anything in common with people across the country don't expect to lead it.
11
As a middle-class poor person with a PhD, I am one of the great examples of the white working-class, and I will be 78 years-old next month. No longer can march or campaign. There are people like me who can give $3 a month to progressive causes, and feel empowered mainly by signing petitions to voice what I cannot abide for my country. The message from Democrats is to assure all of us that corporatized interests in big-pharma, medicine, and for-profit healthcare entities do not murder the values of this country and we working "poor" as well. Senator Schumer is not the only shill...
10
Yes, now is the perfect time for Democrats to figure out who they are - After the election is over.
We need a new word that means funny and sad at the same time, something stronger than "wry" and punchier than "tragicomedy."
We need a new word that means funny and sad at the same time, something stronger than "wry" and punchier than "tragicomedy."
6
It is obvious that the way to win is to LIE LIE LIE. There was Trump lying every time he opened his mouth, and Sanders lying about how free education and health care was on its way because Mitch McConnell would look out his window and see all the kids chanting that they want it. He, said Sanders, would fear for his re-election and give them what they want.
This is obviously what the pubic...a big portion on the right and a smaller but influential voter wise on the left want.
So that is the take away. Make up whatever you want, promise whatever you want, and a gullible public will be eating out of your hand. That a large part of the public cares more about what you SAY you are going to do than what you can do, take note. Keep it simple, stupid. Find some good slogans, some good buzzwords, lie about your opponent, and pander. Nuance is out. Take no positions that take explaining. Public has no time for that.
This is obviously what the pubic...a big portion on the right and a smaller but influential voter wise on the left want.
So that is the take away. Make up whatever you want, promise whatever you want, and a gullible public will be eating out of your hand. That a large part of the public cares more about what you SAY you are going to do than what you can do, take note. Keep it simple, stupid. Find some good slogans, some good buzzwords, lie about your opponent, and pander. Nuance is out. Take no positions that take explaining. Public has no time for that.
5
I don't think you are aware of the over 200 economists that ran the numbers
and found Bernie Sanders proposals to be not only doable but would have helped all Americans.In the 1950's the tax rate for millionaires was more than 50%.
as far as "lying about your opponent ", how about the Clinton spin machine
controlling the media with ",Bernie Bro's and SOCIALIST athiest Jew ".
To the commenter that wrote we need civics in our educational system
well that is absolutely necessary .
and found Bernie Sanders proposals to be not only doable but would have helped all Americans.In the 1950's the tax rate for millionaires was more than 50%.
as far as "lying about your opponent ", how about the Clinton spin machine
controlling the media with ",Bernie Bro's and SOCIALIST athiest Jew ".
To the commenter that wrote we need civics in our educational system
well that is absolutely necessary .
4
Democrats will need a real plan to reverse inequality and preserve incentivized capitalism. The hardest part will be to offer a plan that can succeed and that wealthy democrats will accept.
1
Democrats are not going to win back what they've lost as long as they continue to act like losers. Trump won by overwhelming the country with his message, while undermining the validity of Clinton's. Republicans have been honing this strategy for a long time but democrats don't seem to recognize it's effectiveness in the political arena. Indeed, Rumsfeld once said that the problem with the Iraq war wasn't what was happening, but that the administration wasn't using the right public relations to shape public opinion. That was a stunning admission. Democrats suffer from the conceit that the truth is self evident, and the public will recognize it. They haven't. Instead of complaining about the "overwhelming victory" achieved by Trump Democrats ought to be reminding the media and the public that more people voted for Clinton. Instead of validating Trump by being so congenial, Obama should be using his remaining days in office to emphatically remind and inform the public of what his administration has accomplished, how it has benefited the country, and how the country stands to lose if Trump does what he says he'll do. Passivity never won the hearts and minds of the electorate, and it won't help the Democrats win back the senate or the support of those that abandoned it.
7
Too bad the media provided Trump with more airtime then any other candidates, allowing him to "overwhelm" the nation, all because of the medias obsession with focusing on his Tweeting and other nonsensical rants. They were transfixed that he kept going the distance, instead of trying to figure out WHY? And to also present a counter argument for him, other then he's rude, he's a disruptor, etc.
The MSM pretty much fell right into his tiny-hands and let him run a non-conventional campaign, all without having to pay for the airtime. It was Trump News 24/7 over at CNN. While most of the talking heads just let the data come to them via their clearly weak polling systems, instead of going out and figuring out that contrary to their claims that Trump was not building his initial base enough to be a threat - that he'd already had a big enough base to win!
The MSM pretty much fell right into his tiny-hands and let him run a non-conventional campaign, all without having to pay for the airtime. It was Trump News 24/7 over at CNN. While most of the talking heads just let the data come to them via their clearly weak polling systems, instead of going out and figuring out that contrary to their claims that Trump was not building his initial base enough to be a threat - that he'd already had a big enough base to win!
2
The other question is, Can Republicans save the country? but... excuse a question of privilege: Can we continue to relieve the voters of the burden of Trump? They were angry. disillusioned. they wanted change. to poke the country in the eye. and we let them.
these primal screamers screwed up. in their fit of pique, they put a cartoon strongman with behavioral issues in charge of our national wealth and security.
Trump prevailed because of voters' abysmal civic ignorance. We don't know how government works, who is responsible or what to do about our problems. Enter Trump to everything. Pitiful.
The clarion call goes out to public school administrators and media outlets: Teach civics.
these primal screamers screwed up. in their fit of pique, they put a cartoon strongman with behavioral issues in charge of our national wealth and security.
Trump prevailed because of voters' abysmal civic ignorance. We don't know how government works, who is responsible or what to do about our problems. Enter Trump to everything. Pitiful.
The clarion call goes out to public school administrators and media outlets: Teach civics.
11
The Democrat's electoral problems date back to Bill Clinton veering the party to the right, which he heralded from the outset, "the era of big government is over" - in other words, "time to abandon the New Deal and become more like the Republicans". Clinton's gutting of the already meager welfare program (less than 3% of federal outlays) along with commodities and banking deregulation (which played a part in the '08 meltdown) showed that he was determined to end an era of genuine concern for working Americans economic well-being.
Aside from an unusually high voter turnout spurred by the novelty of a black presidential candidate, the Democratic party's electoral fortunes have been in significant decline, ever since. Economic centrism (often center-right, as we saw with Obama's capitulation to Republican austerity demands and proposals to curtail Social Security COLA increases) wrapped in a veneer of populist rhetoric and social issue liberalism isn't working out so well.
And so far, there is little indication that the Democratic leadership understands their electoral problem, and with near zero political power now at either the state or national level, even if they did, all they have now are promises to "do better" next time.
Aside from an unusually high voter turnout spurred by the novelty of a black presidential candidate, the Democratic party's electoral fortunes have been in significant decline, ever since. Economic centrism (often center-right, as we saw with Obama's capitulation to Republican austerity demands and proposals to curtail Social Security COLA increases) wrapped in a veneer of populist rhetoric and social issue liberalism isn't working out so well.
And so far, there is little indication that the Democratic leadership understands their electoral problem, and with near zero political power now at either the state or national level, even if they did, all they have now are promises to "do better" next time.
17
Ed Watters - You're right in many ways but the deductive conclusion that we should turn back to the New Deal/Ted Kennedy liberalism of the mid-20th century us flawed. Those big-government ideas have been tried. If there had been a real enemy in the "war on poverty" they'd have clearly declared victory a long time ago and had we set any real metrics on the great society initiatives we would surely recognized defeat, as we do if we ever visit a public housing project, VA hospital, or university in the Cal State system - big government buerocracy and "free to those who need it" social programs simply do not work - they're well meaning and make sense in sophomore sociology but they do not work - and victimhood politics that evoke the civil rights movement's passion for trivial issues and percieves wrongs also do not work. The Democratic party and America need a third way to ameliorate the condition of the least amongst us while encouraging innovation and prosperity.
3
The day the private email server became known the Dems should have dumped her. But they decided to double down and stick with Queen Hillary. The Dems simply picked a very very back candidate. Sexism is the only reason she did not do worse than she did.
20
very very BAD candidate. Pre coffee posting.
2
Boy, I'd like to know how these editorials are written and decided upon. How does the "Editorial Board" which is a person writer an opinion column as stupid as this one is.
The editor's are as tone deaf to what this country is like as the leaders of the Democratic party are!
The editor's are as tone deaf to what this country is like as the leaders of the Democratic party are!
21
Editorial Board:
What is "amorphous" is this editorial.
Why don't you just admit that you made a mistake, that you missed the boat in not backing Bernie Sanders.
What is "amorphous" is this editorial.
Why don't you just admit that you made a mistake, that you missed the boat in not backing Bernie Sanders.
20
AMEN to that .
4
Who is the party of "no?"
5
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat."
You guys REALLY want to lose the mid-terms too I guess.
You guys REALLY want to lose the mid-terms too I guess.
20
Dems, do NOT underestimate the role sexism and racial bigotry played in Trump's electoral college win. Those who voted for him didn't care about his sexist and racially bigoted comments. In fact, they liked him for it. What Dems need to win are Joe Biden-type candidates up and down all legislative positions. White liberal men like Biden who also appeal to the huge sexist and racially bigoted voters. Don't turn your back away from this phenom. People vote on how they feel. They voted for Obama in 2008 because he made them feel good to vote in a black man. At that time the Dems had 60 Senators in the Senate. Now 48. Don't underestimate how many white people feel threatened by "other." The 2016 election was all about irrational feelings. Don't ignore them.
2
Simply not true. While Hillary's strategy was to demonize Trump and play identity politics, Trump's message was to reach out to the forgotten working class, which was totally on point. Clinton's message did not resonate with enough voters in the necessary places. It's as simple as that.
9
The Democrats, the Democratic Party, lost this election through sheer ineptitude. Trump apparently had some very, very clever campaign strategists. That's how he handily won the Electoral College but lost the popular vote. I don't believe most of his voters really thought about his ideas, his offensive presentation or his lack of policy proposals. His voters were overwhelmed by social media, mainstream media and false news propaganda. They voted from the gut. And I don't doubt that there was some Clinton fatigue as well.
The Democratic Party leaders need to dissect their electoral loss. They need to develop effective strategies for promoting progressive ideas. They lost the Presidency, the Congress, many state legislatures and governorships. No amount of moaning about how Trump voters are all racist bigots will give them cover. They need to destroy the Republican gerrymander at the state level. They need to effectively remove the Electoral College or change the way electoral votes are allocated. They need to put energetic people in charge who will begin to work on these changes immediately. And both parties need to work on eliminating the stranglehold of those at the top of party power. That would require publicly funded elections. We need reasonable, sane, honest candidates. But the Democratic Party ran an incompetent election. And they lost. Big time.
The Democratic Party leaders need to dissect their electoral loss. They need to develop effective strategies for promoting progressive ideas. They lost the Presidency, the Congress, many state legislatures and governorships. No amount of moaning about how Trump voters are all racist bigots will give them cover. They need to destroy the Republican gerrymander at the state level. They need to effectively remove the Electoral College or change the way electoral votes are allocated. They need to put energetic people in charge who will begin to work on these changes immediately. And both parties need to work on eliminating the stranglehold of those at the top of party power. That would require publicly funded elections. We need reasonable, sane, honest candidates. But the Democratic Party ran an incompetent election. And they lost. Big time.
2
Honestly, whatever you think about Trump -- he did not have "clever strategists". He's one of those guys who shoots from the hip. That's why he sometimes says crude or stupid things. But they are HIS real thoughts and ideas, and not micro-managed and massaged by a committee -- which was HIllary's problem.
4
Schumer has been in Congress for 36 years. He is part of the Democrats problem, not the solution. I'm tired of these Senators and their pontificating. He's nothing more than a tool for the oligarchy. I no more see him as my leader of the Democratic party as I see Trump as my President. At least Trump has the excuse of stupidity.
As a major figure in his party Schumer had a lot to say about Clinton's campaign and the overall strategy of the party in the election. Why would someone so tone deaf and out of touch with the people of this country be the one to "save" us Democrats?
As a Sanders and Warren supporter, I say we need to get back to the progressive roots of the party, play as hardball as the Republicans do and have a strategy of winning in the states and the state offices as a priority.
As a major figure in his party Schumer had a lot to say about Clinton's campaign and the overall strategy of the party in the election. Why would someone so tone deaf and out of touch with the people of this country be the one to "save" us Democrats?
As a Sanders and Warren supporter, I say we need to get back to the progressive roots of the party, play as hardball as the Republicans do and have a strategy of winning in the states and the state offices as a priority.
12
Many of us were saying it for months: Clinton can't beat Trump, and Trump can't beat Sanders. The Democratic Party refused to listen, they had the winning ticket winning (as big a fraud as HE is) but were determined to lose (as befits any party run by Debbie Wasserman Schultz). They are that out of touch, they have about as much chance of staging a comeback as do the Whigs.
19
Let's not forget that Hillary Clinton lost those four rust belt states by only a very small amount and she won the popular vote by a very large amount - around 2 million votes . So is it fair or realistic to hinge the entire Democratic Party demise on that small group relative to the entire population ? It's not like she got creamed.
Other points need to be seen as well and that is for instance that in Wisconsin 300,00 people could not vote due to insufficient ID - which usually affects those in cities who may not have driver's license . And we can surmise that many of those would be Democratic voters .
If she had pulled it out we wouldn't be having this conversation even though the same situations may have existed . We would be exalted that once again the Democrats reflect the will of the people which if you use the popular vote that is the case .
I do believe as Democrats we need to speak the working class . But let's not overreact . Many other factors played into this anomaly of an election .
Other points need to be seen as well and that is for instance that in Wisconsin 300,00 people could not vote due to insufficient ID - which usually affects those in cities who may not have driver's license . And we can surmise that many of those would be Democratic voters .
If she had pulled it out we wouldn't be having this conversation even though the same situations may have existed . We would be exalted that once again the Democrats reflect the will of the people which if you use the popular vote that is the case .
I do believe as Democrats we need to speak the working class . But let's not overreact . Many other factors played into this anomaly of an election .
9
Both campaigns were run to secure 270 electoral votes. Clinton won the popular vote by accident. If it was her intent to win the popular vote, she is more senile than any of us thought.
4
Democrats= Marxism and total control. The American voters rejected this political philosophy. Vote for a Democrat,same as voting for a communist,same party,same ideology. Democrats should be banned from any elected office.
7
Sounds pretty undemocratic to me.
1
What country do you suppose your living in ?Let's see, how about we abandon our postal service and after that public education and while we're at it let's privatize our library's ....I could go on but won't .
1
The Democrats are always guilty of eating their own...no more so in this election. I can never forgive Sanders for his unrelenting Clinton attacks, even after it was certain he would not get the nomination. Instead of teaching his naïve acolytes that 3/4 or 5/6 of a loaf may be better than none, he maliciously continued to attack her on bogus charges, leading them, in their naivite to go to all the right wing sites. Especially when all of his pie in the sky promises were not achievable in the current climate. When all was said and done they ended up staying home or voting 3rd party. These children who had no sense of logic or civics or history gave the race to Trump. Sanders, won't be hurt with his cushy salary pension and health care. But they will. Cynical and devious in the extreme.
7
" UNRELENTING ATTACKS ", give me a break .This is a so called Democracy
and he was running against an opponent that was fatally flawed .Let's see ,
Hillary's famous line that she went to the banks and told them to" CUT IT OUT ".
Please .Bernie sanders should have won this election as he was the one that
could have cleaned Trumps clock .The DNC showed the electorate what an elite
sham it was and without progressive inclusion ,it will never pull itself out of it's present hole .
and he was running against an opponent that was fatally flawed .Let's see ,
Hillary's famous line that she went to the banks and told them to" CUT IT OUT ".
Please .Bernie sanders should have won this election as he was the one that
could have cleaned Trumps clock .The DNC showed the electorate what an elite
sham it was and without progressive inclusion ,it will never pull itself out of it's present hole .
5
Neither candidate was running for votes by the American people. They were running for the votes of the electoral college. Contrast this latest campaign with that of Obama's first, where he campaigned in all 50 states. That is what the Democratic strategy should be, no matter what their message--in short, Democrats for democracy.
4
My concern is that the "deplorables" that put this man in office now feel empowered to continue showing up at the polls having realized concrete results.
The Dems in Congress have their hands full, are they (and by that I mean we) up to the task? It is going to take a Herculean effort to change this course.
The Dems in Congress have their hands full, are they (and by that I mean we) up to the task? It is going to take a Herculean effort to change this course.
2
Senate Democrats may be able to save their party if they accept capitalism, refrain from political correctness, cease promoting diversity, respect the unborn, and start letting the truth. Thank you.
4
You do realize that in order to run the table on Republicans that the Democrats junked many of parliamentary tools they will need now that they are in the minority. And paybacks will be, well, you know ...
7
The house Democrats could help by dumping Pelosi. She has only been effective at raising money pretty much nothing else. Money is nice but is not enough.
13
Democrats in the Senate are in position to advance the interests of the Party. They should, but they should also be mindful of the Party's unmatched, historic record of success, which rests on a nobler objective: advancing the interests of the nation. Partisan politics can be part of their Senate strategy, but not the chief part and not the most obvious part.
1
It's amazing that after a shalacking and the simple fact that poll after poll had Bernie beating Trump by 10-15 points the NYT continues to write such middle of the road editorials.
The times and Krugman hammered Sanders although the primary. It was her turn! And now look where we are!
Thank you for nothing.
The times and Krugman hammered Sanders although the primary. It was her turn! And now look where we are!
Thank you for nothing.
12
We Democrats worry about the right-wing GOP gains in many states, for governor and state legislatures. How many have read Jane Mayer's "Dark Money" or "Sons of Wichita" by Daniel Schulman? There are billionaires' who are funding the state races, influencing universities etc. You need to read these well documented books - and the New York Times needs to report more on this.
We're being bought and paid for by a few oligarchs, and now we have one almost in the White House!
We're being bought and paid for by a few oligarchs, and now we have one almost in the White House!
1
Trump took voters out of their COMFORT zones, Clinton did not.
Trump was threatening, and bold, but Clinton was boring and blah.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Democrats have to learn from Trump and his campaign to become exciting and hopeful with their ideas and their messaging.
Time to wake up the Senate, with new media and new ideas, now?
And perhaps what Democrats need is a War on (Trump) Error!
==================================================
Trump was threatening, and bold, but Clinton was boring and blah.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Democrats have to learn from Trump and his campaign to become exciting and hopeful with their ideas and their messaging.
Time to wake up the Senate, with new media and new ideas, now?
And perhaps what Democrats need is a War on (Trump) Error!
==================================================
2
Block bad laws, people and policies and support good ones using any legal means available, forming temporary alliances as needed with anyone who supports the goal at hand. Pragmatism over a dogmatic approach.
The Democrats are not going to Save the Party with the likes of Pelosi. You would think that this traumatic loss to Trump would show the Democrats that it is time for new leadership and new ideas. Time for new commitment and time to offer something to the voters but a winsome Nancy smile, after smile, after smile.
8
What can really save the Democratic Party is the cities, which voted overwhelmingly for Clinton and where wealth, population, and educated voters will continue to be concentrated.
Watch for urbanized Blue States to sponsor ballot initiatives that favor liberal causes: minimum wage, marijuana legalization, gun control, soda and tobacco taxes. Watch for cities---even those in deep Red States---to pass similar ordinances and to declare themselves Sanctuary Cities. These will have the effect of negating bad federal laws and bad supreme court decisions, which---given the fact that Republicans will soon be in control of all three branches---are sure to proliferate.
Watch for urbanized Blue States to sponsor ballot initiatives that favor liberal causes: minimum wage, marijuana legalization, gun control, soda and tobacco taxes. Watch for cities---even those in deep Red States---to pass similar ordinances and to declare themselves Sanctuary Cities. These will have the effect of negating bad federal laws and bad supreme court decisions, which---given the fact that Republicans will soon be in control of all three branches---are sure to proliferate.
The Dems need to realign themselves with majority sentiment across the board, and put aside special interest "causes". If they're smart, they'll hue very closely to public issues polls, and work to put through legislation on every issue where the public is > 66%-33% on the issue. Elitist control over major policies and governing processes is over. If they want to start winning again, Dems have to do the bidding of the public majority, without exception.
4
RE: Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat.
NYT you just don't get it. As long as the Dems focus on identity politics they will continue to shrink as party. Hillary was too stupid or lazy or arrogant to visit Wisconsin even one time after the Dem primary and visited Michigan only one time - the Monday before the election. The loss had nothing to do with sexism. By bigotry do you mean punishing whites and males with discrimination and calling it "affirmative action?"
NYT you just don't get it. As long as the Dems focus on identity politics they will continue to shrink as party. Hillary was too stupid or lazy or arrogant to visit Wisconsin even one time after the Dem primary and visited Michigan only one time - the Monday before the election. The loss had nothing to do with sexism. By bigotry do you mean punishing whites and males with discrimination and calling it "affirmative action?"
9
The Democratic party should not be saved. The party so dominated by the Clinton family that it was a foregone conclusion eight years ago Hillary would get the nomination - should not be saved. The party that put Donald Trump in the White House - should not be saved.
The voters have spoken. We have seen a repudiation of both parties at their (our) hands. Before the election Democrats smugly watched the implosion of the Republican party from a safe distance. Now, Republicans, still woefully unaware of their zombie-like deadness - reach back from the grave to salvage some degree of relevance. But nobody has yet seen what President Trump will do, or where his alliances lay - and who would be criticized for predicting that his alliances are those of convenience and not of substance.
The Democratic party was as soundly imploded after this election, as the Republicans were before. The only difference is that the Republicans don't realize they're dead yet.
Time we sit down and figure out what happened and talk to "the other side" which ever side it may be in one's case - without using inflammatory terms and zero-sum-gaining everything.
This is America. We do not banish half our people to oblivion at the end of each election. We live and prosper peacefully.
The voters have spoken. We have seen a repudiation of both parties at their (our) hands. Before the election Democrats smugly watched the implosion of the Republican party from a safe distance. Now, Republicans, still woefully unaware of their zombie-like deadness - reach back from the grave to salvage some degree of relevance. But nobody has yet seen what President Trump will do, or where his alliances lay - and who would be criticized for predicting that his alliances are those of convenience and not of substance.
The Democratic party was as soundly imploded after this election, as the Republicans were before. The only difference is that the Republicans don't realize they're dead yet.
Time we sit down and figure out what happened and talk to "the other side" which ever side it may be in one's case - without using inflammatory terms and zero-sum-gaining everything.
This is America. We do not banish half our people to oblivion at the end of each election. We live and prosper peacefully.
3
Can Senate Democrats Save the World?
I admire the EB's dexterity in skating around the Democrats' business-friendly centrists vs. working class progressives problem.
Bravo!
Bravo!
3
As the old joke goes: we've got just enough time to learn how to breath under water.
1
The Democrats may have the easier task of saving their party than the Republicans. There are ma historical examples of losing parties overcoming a narrow electoral defeat. There are fewer examples of a party maintaining power when winning despite multiple and bitter divisions within the party.
I do hope that you consider examining the Republican party in the same way.
I do hope that you consider examining the Republican party in the same way.
1
The Democrats need to refine their message which is still good i.e. popular vote.
They need new leadership i.e. Corey Booker et al.
What they really need to do is stop playing nice. Do not negotiate with the GOP and their Naziesque members. Time to get down and get dirty. Time to show the GOP what it feels like to be out maneuvered. Time to get the democratic, inclusive message out everywhere relentlessly. The Democratic Party has a good direction it just needs to be spoken by new leadership. Pelosi and Schumer don't cut it any more.
They need new leadership i.e. Corey Booker et al.
What they really need to do is stop playing nice. Do not negotiate with the GOP and their Naziesque members. Time to get down and get dirty. Time to show the GOP what it feels like to be out maneuvered. Time to get the democratic, inclusive message out everywhere relentlessly. The Democratic Party has a good direction it just needs to be spoken by new leadership. Pelosi and Schumer don't cut it any more.
2
Thanks for the mention of her "deplorables" remark as having contributed to her defeat, It did because it revealed something deeply negative and arrogant about her views of her fellow Americans. Also, you pointed out the "I'm with her" campaign logo, revealing from the very start that this was all about her - which also cost her support. The ugly truth many of her supporters are afraid to face now, and which the are trying to hide behind all this angst over phony accusations of "hacked" election results, and loud screaming about the "unfairness" of the Electoral college, which they were only too smug to support before the election because it showed her with an "insurrmountable" lead, is the fact this tribute to one woman's ego, sense of entitlement to the presidency, the behind the scenes cheating to ensure her nomination in the first place brought down the whole party - because whatever Democrats were before November 8, 2016, they are no more. Yes, Clinton supporters: You blew it. You made the election of Trump possible. Go cry about it again as you did when you realized your folly on November 9. The rest of us Democrats will have to try to pick up the pieces before we get to 2018, so you won't lead us into another disaster then, too!
13
Let’s see now. We’ve had slavery and the Civil War, World War I, the Depression, Pearl Harbor, World War II, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, 9/11 and the election of Donald J. Trump.
Not bad. He hasn’t even been inaugurated yet, and he’s already up there in the Top Ten List of our all-time greatest disasters, with a whole four years left to go.
Think of it. We all have a chance to see history made. The greatest disaster America has ever experienced.
I’m really excited about being a part of it.
Not bad. He hasn’t even been inaugurated yet, and he’s already up there in the Top Ten List of our all-time greatest disasters, with a whole four years left to go.
Think of it. We all have a chance to see history made. The greatest disaster America has ever experienced.
I’m really excited about being a part of it.
3
A caution from an astute observer: "Giving this man bipartisan cover is a mistake."
(http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2016/11/dont-help-him-at-least-until-we-c...
(http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2016/11/dont-help-him-at-least-until-we-c...
2
Feel the bern, New York Times. Not the candidate as much as the message.
It's important.
It's important.
10
You might also ask 'Can Senate Republicans Save the Party?' Trump isn't really a Repub but understood the base far better than established R's. Same could be said for Bernie. Will either of these party's resort back to type or just become a historical note. We're living in interesting time folks.
2
Given the blatant corruption of the DNC, from Debbie Wasserman Schutlz to Donna Brazile, I think they are in deep trouble. People turned away from them after they saw the cheating and rigged process to coronate HRC. What will they do to get us back?
15
1 Democratic Party needs to grow a new generation of informed, educated and reasonable voters -- starting NOW! Get out to high schools and colleges, get these young people involved in their own futures, get them educated in CIVICS. (Rob Portman's methods) The Constitution is here to stay inspite of efforts to dismantle our system, so they better learn about it!
2 DNC needs to get up to speed and connect with anyone and everyone throughout electronic media "open" and "dark» and keep messages simple, pithy, and catchy! People don't care about platforms, etc. just focus on getting and keeping their attention.
3 Democratic Party needs to get into legal gerrymandering asap any way they can and undo decades of Republican jiggering. They've got strangleholds on geographic areas throughout the county which preclude Democrats EVER winning. Their gerrymandering has skewed the districts but that leads to skewing the Electoral College for real. Check it out!
4 DNC needs to send some monies to Louisiana's Foster Campbell to help his senatorial campaign asap, no matter what! Prop this good guy up as much as possible, please! Senate 49 to 51 is a whole lot better than 48 to 52.
Stop assessing blame and trying to rewrite platforms. DNC's real priority now is the get into this post-fact tweet-driven world of under-educated and over-emotional public. The days of statesmanship are long gone. Get real and get with it, DNC
2 DNC needs to get up to speed and connect with anyone and everyone throughout electronic media "open" and "dark» and keep messages simple, pithy, and catchy! People don't care about platforms, etc. just focus on getting and keeping their attention.
3 Democratic Party needs to get into legal gerrymandering asap any way they can and undo decades of Republican jiggering. They've got strangleholds on geographic areas throughout the county which preclude Democrats EVER winning. Their gerrymandering has skewed the districts but that leads to skewing the Electoral College for real. Check it out!
4 DNC needs to send some monies to Louisiana's Foster Campbell to help his senatorial campaign asap, no matter what! Prop this good guy up as much as possible, please! Senate 49 to 51 is a whole lot better than 48 to 52.
Stop assessing blame and trying to rewrite platforms. DNC's real priority now is the get into this post-fact tweet-driven world of under-educated and over-emotional public. The days of statesmanship are long gone. Get real and get with it, DNC
1
Every one of us must communicate with our state senators and congressperson (mine are all conservative Republican) to register our voice, numbers count - or they should. Most Trump voters are not activists, they will not be calling representative offices and to our state elected officials (also all conservative Republican in Arkansas). It's a time for activism every day. Study news reports daily, take notes and call/write. In the 60's we made a difference. Today we are fighting fake web news and pathetic journalism. Our voices have to louder than before.
Are we just a number of states sharing a Constitution which some value more than others? The nation voted on election day and in spite the FBI’s violation of the Hatch Act and in intervention of a hostile foreign power with Trump’s consent, the people elected HRC as president by over 2 million votes; but the electoral college, a obsolete since the Civil War, gave former slave states and edge in presidential elections.
The Hayes-Tildon election of 1876 showed that the electoral college could be used for horse trading and the Republican loser of both the popular vote and the electoral vote became president in exchange for ending federal reconstruction of the Southern states. The Jim Crow era began. The problem is that the Democrates have nothing to trade, so the Trump kleptocracy will begin unless the ongoing recounts move enough electoral votes.
So what do Democrats do while rebuilding their party? How about doing what’s in the public interest. The Ryan budget is not in the public interest, privatizing Medicaid and repealing the ACA and privatizing our schools are not in the public interest or is a racist as AG or total know nothing as SecState or the repleal of Dod-Frank. If it helps the economy makes us safer if the public intest is served the Dems should support it. The Dems must rebuild but the Senate Dems must become a firewall against an autocratic kleptocracy where the USA becomes part of the Trump family business . What’s good for Trump isn't good for America
The Hayes-Tildon election of 1876 showed that the electoral college could be used for horse trading and the Republican loser of both the popular vote and the electoral vote became president in exchange for ending federal reconstruction of the Southern states. The Jim Crow era began. The problem is that the Democrates have nothing to trade, so the Trump kleptocracy will begin unless the ongoing recounts move enough electoral votes.
So what do Democrats do while rebuilding their party? How about doing what’s in the public interest. The Ryan budget is not in the public interest, privatizing Medicaid and repealing the ACA and privatizing our schools are not in the public interest or is a racist as AG or total know nothing as SecState or the repleal of Dod-Frank. If it helps the economy makes us safer if the public intest is served the Dems should support it. The Dems must rebuild but the Senate Dems must become a firewall against an autocratic kleptocracy where the USA becomes part of the Trump family business . What’s good for Trump isn't good for America
2
Democrats are too worried about trannies in the bathroom and global warming to understand what's really going on in this country.
3
It occurs to me that if the Democrats actually stood for something, they wouldn't have to "search for a message." Or to put it the other way round, the fact that they have to conduct such a search proves they don't really mean anything.
13
Incorrect. The Democrats' mistake was the packaging. Want to know what the Democratic message is? Listen to Bernie Sanders. That cranky old man woke this Democrat up.
It seems that this column and especially the comments presume that the Democratic party can be saved by running to the left - toward Sanders and the California delegations' big government, anti-business policies. That will leave the country with two extremes and no one ready to govern in a sensible and realistic way. Hillary thought she had the election won - why not, with the way the Times, the media, and the party had treated her candidacy? - and so she lever ran in the primaries to the extreme and in the general election to the middle (old political wisdom). I think the answer for the Democratic party is to abandon the silliness, the language policing and victims politics that have taken over campuses and the Times. We need a sensible, "the government can help but it can't do everything and markets have important roles" sort of center/left Democratic party (Bill Clinton and the New Democrats had this right). And the Times must stop being a lifestyle journal for the pseudo-intellectual elites from American higher education and the arts - it must balance interesting little pieces on things like football coaches who kiss their players and the like with some mainstream content that shows it at least has the self-awareness to recognize that everybody doesn't live at Williams, Oberlin, in Cambridge or on Manhattan.
5
While sexism and racial bigotry may have played a role in Hillary Clinton's defeat, the primary reason she lost--and this should be repeated whenever a discussion of her defeat is brought up--is the votes of the out-dated Electoral College that needs to be scrutinized and reformed or eliminated. In any other country that has a democracy, the 2 million plus votes for Clinton over Trump would have made her president.
The issue is not so much the mistakes of the Democrat's policies as it is their failure to challenge the existence of the Electoral College. Democrats have been out maneuvered by the Republicans. So let us not be distracted by wringing our hands over the supposed missteps of the party to miss "the primal scream on the part of a lot of voters . . .", and other self-flagellating cries, and concentrate on a strategy to bring democracy back to America.
The issue is not so much the mistakes of the Democrat's policies as it is their failure to challenge the existence of the Electoral College. Democrats have been out maneuvered by the Republicans. So let us not be distracted by wringing our hands over the supposed missteps of the party to miss "the primal scream on the part of a lot of voters . . .", and other self-flagellating cries, and concentrate on a strategy to bring democracy back to America.
3
Senate and House Democrats are all the same. They cater to and awn over their conglomeration of special interest groups, believing that the members of these groups will insure their re-election and on going power in Washington. Too bad for them, the American public has finally caught on. Trump's election proves that Americans are sick and tired of political correctness and the shaping of congressional legislation by every fringe group to the detriment of the majority. Hillary's deplorable comments pushed the majority to action. More of the same will follow. Majority rules, no matter how much Democrats, liberals and progressives wail and moan.
11
Since HRC won the popular vote by a large amount, majority did NOT rule.
Whether the Electoral College is fair or not or whether the Electoral College should be changed for future elections is a separate discussion,
But the majority did not rule.
Whether the Electoral College is fair or not or whether the Electoral College should be changed for future elections is a separate discussion,
But the majority did not rule.
6
These days Dems need someone like Biden who is widely respected by all Americans yet is not perceived like 'elitist' and can connect to the white working class.
3
"Above all, our economic message was not sharp enough, was not bold enough, was not strong enough. All those blue collar voters who voted for Donald Trump, even many who had voted for Obama, they thought he was the change agent." ---
Really? NOW they say that? The DNC I recall did everything in its power to have *that person* (the one with the sharp and clear message) expunged from the primary. The NYTimes I read was in the bag shilling for *that person's* opponent every inch of the way as well.... The Times' champion, Clinton, ran a stone cold STUPID campaign in the final two weeks. FWIW I cast a ballot for her. After Comey and the the Wiener emails, I observed that Clinton "MUST get her (self) OUT OF AZ, and spend ALL of the last 9 days of the pimary in WI, MI, PN, NH and MN." (I considered Ohio lost) That Clinton herself was dithering on the post debate poll bubble, and tilting at the windmills of AZ and other non-crucial states while assuming that Schumer's suburban moderate Republicans would materialize is unbelievable to me. Schumer has no business being a party leader going forward. I am not usually highly prescient, but in this case it is EXTREMELY painful to have been. Clinton could have won those states if she had recognized the same miraculous epiphany we see in all this Monday morning quarterbacking. Y'all might as well have run Sanders, the results could be no worse. NYTimes You blew this one BIG TIME, along with your ineffectually anointed candidate of choice.
Really? NOW they say that? The DNC I recall did everything in its power to have *that person* (the one with the sharp and clear message) expunged from the primary. The NYTimes I read was in the bag shilling for *that person's* opponent every inch of the way as well.... The Times' champion, Clinton, ran a stone cold STUPID campaign in the final two weeks. FWIW I cast a ballot for her. After Comey and the the Wiener emails, I observed that Clinton "MUST get her (self) OUT OF AZ, and spend ALL of the last 9 days of the pimary in WI, MI, PN, NH and MN." (I considered Ohio lost) That Clinton herself was dithering on the post debate poll bubble, and tilting at the windmills of AZ and other non-crucial states while assuming that Schumer's suburban moderate Republicans would materialize is unbelievable to me. Schumer has no business being a party leader going forward. I am not usually highly prescient, but in this case it is EXTREMELY painful to have been. Clinton could have won those states if she had recognized the same miraculous epiphany we see in all this Monday morning quarterbacking. Y'all might as well have run Sanders, the results could be no worse. NYTimes You blew this one BIG TIME, along with your ineffectually anointed candidate of choice.
4
--Mr. Schumer vows to block all efforts to kill Obamacare, or gut Dodd-Frank financial regulation. “We’re not going to undo it, period. And I have the votes.” --
He would be wise to work on a fix to Obamacare and not just oppose its repeal. The exchanges are a disaster. In my area upwards of $900 a month for a narrow-network, high deductible plan if you make more than $49K a year and are upper middle aged. I'd like to see single payer, but failing that maybe the Democrats can push through more generous subsidies or get a public option established by shrewd horse trading. Trump seems like a negotiator / transactor who is not bound by ideology.
Just sandbagging and claiming Obamacare is all good -- Hillary's strategy -- won't cut it.
He would be wise to work on a fix to Obamacare and not just oppose its repeal. The exchanges are a disaster. In my area upwards of $900 a month for a narrow-network, high deductible plan if you make more than $49K a year and are upper middle aged. I'd like to see single payer, but failing that maybe the Democrats can push through more generous subsidies or get a public option established by shrewd horse trading. Trump seems like a negotiator / transactor who is not bound by ideology.
Just sandbagging and claiming Obamacare is all good -- Hillary's strategy -- won't cut it.
5
When Schumer dissed Obama to listen to Netanyahu address the senate , I lost all respect for him.
4
Stop leaving out the uninvestigated Russian government assistance for Trump, and 11 days of the FBI Director silently using his position to imply guilt for Clinton.
The "deplorable" statement for the millionth time had a context of addressing that members of the KKK and American Nazi Party and others who were welcomed into Team Trump: THEY WERE.
Oh yeah- the Double Standard that crucified Clinton for calling a spade a spade while Trump gets a giant pass to call Mexicans rapists and murderers- with some goofy "his followers don't think he means it" manure. You can file that under Fake News - as ridiculous as pretending Fox News, air quotes, is not a propaganda outlet.
Raise the bar or lose our Republic.
The "deplorable" statement for the millionth time had a context of addressing that members of the KKK and American Nazi Party and others who were welcomed into Team Trump: THEY WERE.
Oh yeah- the Double Standard that crucified Clinton for calling a spade a spade while Trump gets a giant pass to call Mexicans rapists and murderers- with some goofy "his followers don't think he means it" manure. You can file that under Fake News - as ridiculous as pretending Fox News, air quotes, is not a propaganda outlet.
Raise the bar or lose our Republic.
3
If Democrats hope to have any influence in the future they have to stop allowing themselves to be defined by the right. The right has created a caricature of the left ( criminals just need a hug, free houses for illegal immigrants, and of course just waiting to take your guns away ) and has repeated it for so long that it is taken as fact by a lot of voters. While most people know what the GOP stands for, very few people could tell you what Democrats hope to achieve.
1
Sorry. The left has caricatured itself.
2
Just to think that this type of story was supposed to have been written about a wrecked Republican Party in the wake of Mrs. Clinton's sweeping victory. When party leaders praise the legacy of a brutal dictator like Fidel Castro, they are pulling themselves even further into the abyss of the reasons they lost.
6
This NY Times editorial is a great step forward for the progressive cause. It recognizes that we are all in this together as Americans, that we all must come together regardless of race and class. Our love and concern must extend beyond the coastal elites and minorities - who deserve our deepest respect - to include all marginalized and hurting groups, like dispossessed white workingmen in the Rust Belt. Truly, as Hillary Clinton said, we are stronger together and progressives must work to make that noble concept a true reality.
"To avert a future of increasingly factional politics, the United States needs at least one major party with a message that transcends the boundaries of race and class. " Add "gender and identity". But this election makes clear class is the a uniting concern, as it should be for us all. Everybody needs to eat. May the common good be the common will.
2
Nobody wants to talk about this. But it did not help that the Democratic Party tried to marginalize, undermine, delegitimize, and stack the decks against Bernie Sanders at every turn. It was obviously Democrats that were supporting Bernie and the Democratic Party should not have favored one candidate over the over, but should have let the people decide. But no, they knew better and they wanted to maintain power. There are millions of Democrats who are still very angry about this and who feel Bernie would have been a much stronger candidate against Trump. They feel completely disenfranchised by the Democratic Party and I am one of them.
9
Yup. How can I not give the voters what they want and stay in power? That came through loud and clear. Dissing Danders when voters, especially millennials, wanted change was foolish. Oh yeah, I voted for HRC but the Dems will not have my vote in the future. And let's be really clear about Chelsea Clinton--are you kidding me? No more Clintons. The DNC is uttererly shameless in their king making. Plus, where are they now? Licking their wounds and maneuvering? Speak up DNC. Trump has already done so many things that are impeachable...
3
"Mr. Trump's amorphous ideas"? What a nice name for a bucket of snake venom. Sorry, Republicans won't be looking to Democrats to help shape the agenda. They'll do it all by themselves. One need only look at Trump's appointments to see the direction he's being led.
Trying to capture Bernie's appeal is not the right path either. Bernie energized college students, not those who voted for Trump. Non-white faces were not common at Bernie rallies.
Democrats need a new idea. Here's one: a basic minimum living allowance for every adult citizen, say, $15,000 per year. This can be added to by work, even at a minimum wage job, up to $25,000 per year after which point the allowance is lowered on a sliding scale. A lot of libertarians are putting this forward with provisions for ending most welfare programs, minimum wage requirements, etc. I think there would be too many unintended consequences of such a radical change, but the idea of paying people who can't find jobs as automation takes so many is a good one. At the very least why not make this offer to coal miners and other displaced workers over 40? Automation and globalization are historical forces. Let's take care of the people who are caught in their vortex.
Trying to capture Bernie's appeal is not the right path either. Bernie energized college students, not those who voted for Trump. Non-white faces were not common at Bernie rallies.
Democrats need a new idea. Here's one: a basic minimum living allowance for every adult citizen, say, $15,000 per year. This can be added to by work, even at a minimum wage job, up to $25,000 per year after which point the allowance is lowered on a sliding scale. A lot of libertarians are putting this forward with provisions for ending most welfare programs, minimum wage requirements, etc. I think there would be too many unintended consequences of such a radical change, but the idea of paying people who can't find jobs as automation takes so many is a good one. At the very least why not make this offer to coal miners and other displaced workers over 40? Automation and globalization are historical forces. Let's take care of the people who are caught in their vortex.
1
‘I ask you what meat does Caesar eat that has made him grow so great? Our era should be ashamed! Rome has lost the ability to raise noble men! When was there ever an age, since the beginning of time, that didn’t feature more than one famous man? Until now, no one could say that only one man mattered in all of vast Rome. Now, though, in all of Rome, there’s room for only one man. You and I have heard our fathers talk of another Brutus—your ancestor—who would’ve let the devil himself reign in his Roman Republic before he let a king rule."
“Why, man, he doth bestride the narrow world like a Colossus, and we petty men
walk under his huge legs and peep about
to find ourselves dishonorable graves.”
"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings."
--- Cassius in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar
I wonder whatever happened to all the Trump signs that the people of ancient Rome put up on their front lawns.
“Why, man, he doth bestride the narrow world like a Colossus, and we petty men
walk under his huge legs and peep about
to find ourselves dishonorable graves.”
"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings."
--- Cassius in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar
I wonder whatever happened to all the Trump signs that the people of ancient Rome put up on their front lawns.
2
The economy is changing and the Dems were unfortunate to have a candidate associated with free trade, albeit through marriage. Personally, I like cheap iphones and i prefer not to have the toxic chemicals used to make these consumer products dumped in my backyard. Lament all you want about bygone jobs in the 'heartland' but the Great Lake region will always have terrific access to a multitude of raw materials with low transportation costs making it an eventual choice for manufacturing- just don't expect it to be like flipping on a light switch. Economic forces can be glacial and they can also be sudden and disastrous. The midwest economic slowdown could have been a lot more drastic and is rather gentle compared to the possible total collapse of commerce should a trade war ignite/
1
We need a new agenda, one that appeals to a wide range of voters. Here are the first five items on my proposal (the remainder to follow).
The New America Platform
1. We are pro-life. Abortion should be avoided if at all possible. This means good sex education and accessible and affordable birth control, both male and female. It means pre-natal support, parental leave, childcare support, and strong adoption programs. The final decision, however, must rest with the woman, her doctor, and her faith—government needs to mind its own business.
2. We are pro-gun. Americans have the right to own guns for recreational shooting, home protection, and hunting. We are also pro-life and we back the badge, so guns must not be available to terrorists, the mentally ill, and those on the do-not-fly list. Military-style assault weapons belong in the military only.
3. We are pro-privacy. The government should not be eavesdropping on our phone conversations or snooping in our email without a warrant.
4. We are pro-family. The government has no business in our bedrooms. Sexual preference is a private matter. Who we love and how we love is up to us.
5. We are pro education. America should have the world’s best public schools. Public schools have made us a nation. We can’t afford to lose jobs overseas, and can’t afford to have other countries out compete us.
The New America Platform
1. We are pro-life. Abortion should be avoided if at all possible. This means good sex education and accessible and affordable birth control, both male and female. It means pre-natal support, parental leave, childcare support, and strong adoption programs. The final decision, however, must rest with the woman, her doctor, and her faith—government needs to mind its own business.
2. We are pro-gun. Americans have the right to own guns for recreational shooting, home protection, and hunting. We are also pro-life and we back the badge, so guns must not be available to terrorists, the mentally ill, and those on the do-not-fly list. Military-style assault weapons belong in the military only.
3. We are pro-privacy. The government should not be eavesdropping on our phone conversations or snooping in our email without a warrant.
4. We are pro-family. The government has no business in our bedrooms. Sexual preference is a private matter. Who we love and how we love is up to us.
5. We are pro education. America should have the world’s best public schools. Public schools have made us a nation. We can’t afford to lose jobs overseas, and can’t afford to have other countries out compete us.
RE: accessible and affordable birth control
It is affordable and accessible at 1000s and 1000s of CVS, Walmarts, Costcos, Wallgreens, etc...across the country.
It is affordable and accessible at 1000s and 1000s of CVS, Walmarts, Costcos, Wallgreens, etc...across the country.
1
I'm waiting for the NYT to analyze what they and the rest of our MSM are going to do to strengthen our country. How are they going to clean up their acts?
4
It is past time to get past all the "-ism" excuses for losing the election. We lost because we gave the people a candidate and platform the was more of the same. That is not what the people wanted. They were so disgusted that they were willing to elect someone like Trump to make changes.
If we are not to become the party of "NO" that the Democrats derided for the last 8 years we must get a clear picture of what people want. That means getting out of the Beltway Bubble and going to listen. The leaders in Washington are the people's representatives, not their rulers. The people of our nation just issued a rather strong reminder of who really holds power.
If we are not to become the party of "NO" that the Democrats derided for the last 8 years we must get a clear picture of what people want. That means getting out of the Beltway Bubble and going to listen. The leaders in Washington are the people's representatives, not their rulers. The people of our nation just issued a rather strong reminder of who really holds power.
3
The Democrats response to their election drubbing has been to purge their party of all women: Hillary is persona non grata, Wasserman-Schultz is out, Donna Brazile has been exiled, and now Pelosi is being targeted. This misogynistic War On Women must stop!!!! Women across America are scared to death by the Democrat's misogyny, literally shaking with fear that the Dems will come after their jobs, money, houses, and even lives next!
2
Oh please. They're hacks. Each and every one. And so is Warren. Maybe this lady from CA will be different. I'm not holding my breath.
2
It has taken 60 years for the far right-wing to get to this place. And it still has farther inroads to could take. For organizational theorists, observing how people manipulate the pendulum provides great study.
1
So we are to hope a group a multi-millionaires are to save the Democratic Party? Does history show that the wealthy Democrats in the U.S. Senate did much for the Democratic Party during the Gilded Age?
Try reading some U.S. History NY Times Editorial Board members. Might help in giving you some understanding of the current situation the Democratic Party is in.
Try reading some U.S. History NY Times Editorial Board members. Might help in giving you some understanding of the current situation the Democratic Party is in.
7
As a life-long Democrat and ardent supporter of Bernie Sanders, but someone who voted for Hillary Clinton in the end, I'm not sure the Democratic Party is worth saving — by Democrats in the Senate or anyone else. The morning after the election, I did two things, in this order, drank a cup of coffee and then logged on to my state's voter registration site and re-registered as a "decline to state" independent.
7
Good Grief! Before writing this maybe looking at the facts would have been helpful. Clinton got more votes than any cabdidate in our history. So far we picked up 1 Senate seat and several House seats. In my red state that voted for the bigoted, misogynyist heading to the White House, we increased the number of Democrats in our state legislature.
Now maybe you can go on and write about how the Republicans can survive the hate they have unleashed with their bigoted misogynist white supremacist.
After that maybe you can write about issues.
Now maybe you can go on and write about how the Republicans can survive the hate they have unleashed with their bigoted misogynist white supremacist.
After that maybe you can write about issues.
4
If the Democrats think such tried and true representatives of the money-fueled status quo as Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are going to lead them out of the wilderness, then all is truly lost. They are clearly part of the problem, not part of the solution.
9
Hope not.
2
That's like saying "I hope drug prices go through the roof and the elderly and infirm have to suffer!"
Interesting strategy.
Interesting strategy.
2
The house did not burn down. The Democrats won the majority vote despite a candidate who was unpopular with a large portion of the voting public, a lot of inflationary press and a blustering opponent whose two major campaign strategies were promises he'd never keep and Breitbart-style attacks.
Focus on two future objectives. First, win at least 25% of the states between MA and CA without relying on undeliverable lies. Understand Americans - from farmers to Millennials - and address the issues with effective, practical policies, not Bernie-style promises from left field or Hillary-trying-to-be-your-mother feel-good promises. Part of that is getting voters to understand the trade-offs required of a global leader. It is not just a matter of having the most ships, soldiers and airplanes.
Second, hire adults to lead the party. No more e-mails with damaging messages in them or previewing debate questions. Those members of the team need to be expunged and replaced with people who know how to win a game and inspire voters to vote, even when the other side plays dirty. It's not just the candidate; it's the culture. Those two “KISS” changes will tip the scale.
Trump won by lying to the nation about promises. He has backed down on his bluster and one day the alt-right is going to figure that out. After that, Americans will either vote for another lying fantasy or see that the future is not the past revisited and vote for a nation that is better suited to the world of tomorrow.
Focus on two future objectives. First, win at least 25% of the states between MA and CA without relying on undeliverable lies. Understand Americans - from farmers to Millennials - and address the issues with effective, practical policies, not Bernie-style promises from left field or Hillary-trying-to-be-your-mother feel-good promises. Part of that is getting voters to understand the trade-offs required of a global leader. It is not just a matter of having the most ships, soldiers and airplanes.
Second, hire adults to lead the party. No more e-mails with damaging messages in them or previewing debate questions. Those members of the team need to be expunged and replaced with people who know how to win a game and inspire voters to vote, even when the other side plays dirty. It's not just the candidate; it's the culture. Those two “KISS” changes will tip the scale.
Trump won by lying to the nation about promises. He has backed down on his bluster and one day the alt-right is going to figure that out. After that, Americans will either vote for another lying fantasy or see that the future is not the past revisited and vote for a nation that is better suited to the world of tomorrow.
2
The Democrats in the Senate will now resort to the "arcane" rules of that august body. And maybe some commentators will explain why those rules are there. The rules may be arcane, but their purpose is transparent. The Federalist Papers made clear that the Senate was to be structured so as to resist the tyranny of the majority. Filibusters, in particular, give the minority the power to secure concessions from the majority. And countless other Senate rules serve the same purpose. These rules have been abused in the past. But now, for Democrats, they serve the very purpose intended. When Schumer enacted the nuclear option he did much to undermine the structure of the rules, and it will now come back to haunt the Democrats, Still, enough of the original rules apply to assist the minority party. Most important, they retain leverage in the Supreme Court appointment.
The rules of the Senate have been fully understood by few. But those who master them, are able to serve the purpose for which they are intended. It now falls on Schumer, who undermined the rules as much as any Senator, to master these rules on behalf of the Democrats. In that connection, he must learn to respect the purpose of these rules in resisting the potential tyranny of the Republicans.
The rules of the Senate have been fully understood by few. But those who master them, are able to serve the purpose for which they are intended. It now falls on Schumer, who undermined the rules as much as any Senator, to master these rules on behalf of the Democrats. In that connection, he must learn to respect the purpose of these rules in resisting the potential tyranny of the Republicans.
Funny how Democrats can disparage Republicans as the "party of no" but when they are in the minority suddenly being the "party of no" isn't so bad.
I'm a Democrat. Democrats have been rendered irrelevant. It's not clear that Schumer can, in the end, stop much. And most local offices are Republican controlled which will lead to even greater gerrymandering.
The debate is now between the center and right wing of the Republican Party. That's the editorial. As far as Democrats, I see little smart thinking. We are in for a dangerous and long ride.
The debate is now between the center and right wing of the Republican Party. That's the editorial. As far as Democrats, I see little smart thinking. We are in for a dangerous and long ride.
4
Can Senate Democrats save the party? I doubt it. Even after watching the party shoot itself in the foot by picking an establishment candidate who was widely seen by voters as corrupt and too cozy with Wall Street, thus losing an election that should have been a blowout, the Senate Democrats picked Chuck Schumer, who is the top hit when you google "Wall Street Senator." It seems Democrats didn't learn their lesson, which is why I think the answer to that first question is probably a no.
4
H-1B visa program and others like L1 visa are sweat-shop type of operations that were products of dot-com boom that was followed by dot-com bust. H-1B program has been abused for many years to replace Americans with temporary workforce displacing good paying US jobs. There is no shortage of skilled IT workers in US, but there is a demand by greedy corporations for "cheap" skilled IT workers that do not need health benefits and 401K's.
2014 Census data provided more detail that there was NO U.S. shortage of STEM workers in US. Many people who graduate with STEM degrees don't get jobs in the field as 74% of those who have a bachelor's degree in science, technology, engineering and math are NOT employed in STEM occupations. An Economic Policy Institute study in 2014 found that the supply of STEM graduates exceeds by 2-to-1 the number of graduates who get hired! That means that even the current 65,000 a year number of H-1B visas is WAY TOO MANY, and it should be significantly reduced - not increased!
According to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, six out of the top 10 H-1B visa recipients in any given year are IT-focused companies headquartered in India that focus on selling contracts for temporary employment. Many of them specialize in outsourcing and several are based in India although many have offices in US as well (Cognizant, Tata, Infosys, Wipro, Accenture.) Cognizant is the worst having 12,883 visa renewals in 2014.
2014 Census data provided more detail that there was NO U.S. shortage of STEM workers in US. Many people who graduate with STEM degrees don't get jobs in the field as 74% of those who have a bachelor's degree in science, technology, engineering and math are NOT employed in STEM occupations. An Economic Policy Institute study in 2014 found that the supply of STEM graduates exceeds by 2-to-1 the number of graduates who get hired! That means that even the current 65,000 a year number of H-1B visas is WAY TOO MANY, and it should be significantly reduced - not increased!
According to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, six out of the top 10 H-1B visa recipients in any given year are IT-focused companies headquartered in India that focus on selling contracts for temporary employment. Many of them specialize in outsourcing and several are based in India although many have offices in US as well (Cognizant, Tata, Infosys, Wipro, Accenture.) Cognizant is the worst having 12,883 visa renewals in 2014.
6
We need legislation passed that makes voting on presidential and mid-term elections a national holiday, and the Democrats need to spearhead that effort. And in that vein, Democrats need to persuade the 50 million people who didn't vote in this election to vote in 2018. Further, states that have laws and procedures that impede voting, e.g., voter id, should be challenged and repealed. The election process is an area of concern as much as the message. We can do better.
6
How sweet! Chucky is finally realizing that the corporate wing of the Democratic party was out of touch. He discovered that after loosing the mid-terms in 2010, loosing again in 2012, and 2014. So, finally, the 2016 election brought home the fact that they are spending far too much time in call centers dialing for dollars and nowhere near enough time listening to and supporting their base.
Chuck, that ship has sailed and it is moving away without you. Sanders was the candidate who spoke to the fears and needs of the people you ignored at your peril. He and the Progressives are the ones we can trust to rebuild, so get out of the way.
Chuck, that ship has sailed and it is moving away without you. Sanders was the candidate who spoke to the fears and needs of the people you ignored at your peril. He and the Progressives are the ones we can trust to rebuild, so get out of the way.
2
Am I living in a bizzaro world? I've been listening to "expert" political pundits telling me for months that this election was going to be the end of the Republican Party. Now, it's the end of the Democratic Party instead. How? Why? Because, despite the Republican Party's best effort to run an establishment candidate (ANYONE but Trump), They ended up nominating, by shear dumb luck, on-message Trump and the will of their base, to run an ANTI-establishment candidate. Did the Democrats have an anti-establishment candidate in the mix? Yes, but thanks to the DNC, Debbie Wasserman-Shultz, and Donna-"Sometimes I get the questions in advance" Brazile, the Democrats were able to do what the RNC was unable to do, and squash their anti-establishment candidate. Thanks DNC. And now Chuckie- "For every blue collar Democrat we lose, we'll pick up 2-3 Republicans"- is leading the Senate? And Howard- "Hillary is fine. She'll be meeting with donors tonight"-Dean want to run the DNC? Yes, the Democratic Party IS history.
3
If Senate Democrats do everything perfectly right, and the NYT only reports her email scandal, then what?
4
I wish people would stop saying Hillary lost the election but the real problem is the constitution which awards small states and penalizes large poplutlon centers. So Democrates has more congressional votes, more senate, votes and more votes for the peresidency. We need to have a constitutional amandment which gives the Presidency to the winner of the popular vote. But beyond that we need to strike a balance between small states and large states so as to give more power to large states. We need to correct Citizens United which gives too much power to the ultrarich.
3
Trump will govern as he has campaigned with personal insult and alt-right memes as his guides. The GOP will delight in using him as their weapon. We dare not give him and them a ghost of a chance for they will give progressives none.
The problem with the Democrats profiled in here is that they believe it's narrative that drives politics and government. They believe that different messages are the way to resist the GOP's Trumpian initiatives. They remind me of that young man facing a tank in Tiananmen Square. Brave, but about to be rolled over by tons of steel that cares nothing for his gesture.
Unless the Democrats begin to fight back with real ideas that offer hope for the millions who have turned away, we will all fall under the GOP's Trumpian tank.
The problem with the Democrats profiled in here is that they believe it's narrative that drives politics and government. They believe that different messages are the way to resist the GOP's Trumpian initiatives. They remind me of that young man facing a tank in Tiananmen Square. Brave, but about to be rolled over by tons of steel that cares nothing for his gesture.
Unless the Democrats begin to fight back with real ideas that offer hope for the millions who have turned away, we will all fall under the GOP's Trumpian tank.
2
“The party started looking at people through interest group coalitions, and we thought, ‘If we talk to them all in different ways, that will be enough to cobble together an election coalition..."
I've seen this comment, or variations, in a lot of election post-mortems. But can't the same be said of the coalitions that helped elect Trump? Pro-lifers who hope for a conservative supreme court justice who will strike down Roe v. Wade. Second amendment/NRA folks, who think the Democrats are coming to take their guns.
Even people who simply hate Hillary are a large well-defined coalition (I'm related to some of them. Benghazi! Emails! Obamacare! They're like those dolls with a string you pull and they blurt out a pre-programmed message.)
I don't "identity politics" played as large of a role in Clinton's defeat as most people think; we're all part of identity groups, whether by gender, race or philosophical.
I've seen this comment, or variations, in a lot of election post-mortems. But can't the same be said of the coalitions that helped elect Trump? Pro-lifers who hope for a conservative supreme court justice who will strike down Roe v. Wade. Second amendment/NRA folks, who think the Democrats are coming to take their guns.
Even people who simply hate Hillary are a large well-defined coalition (I'm related to some of them. Benghazi! Emails! Obamacare! They're like those dolls with a string you pull and they blurt out a pre-programmed message.)
I don't "identity politics" played as large of a role in Clinton's defeat as most people think; we're all part of identity groups, whether by gender, race or philosophical.
2
By choosing the cowardly draft dodging insufferable phony bloviating buffoon Senator from Tel Aviv, Wall Street, the Pentagon and the military/prison-industrial complex aka Chuck Schumer D. NY as their leader the Senate Democrats deserve to be sent on the first manned mission to the surface of the Sun. As a humanitarian gesture they will be landing at night. The Senate Democrats can't save themselves nor their party and they are a cancer on America and Americans.
8
I struggle with the idea that the Democratic leadership missed the message about blue collar economics. Reading Thomas Frank's "Listen, Liberal" was an eye-opener. As a member of Frank's liberal professional class, I saw clearly by way of Frank's thesis how the Clinton administration moved from the compelling message of "It's the economy, stupid" to what can ostensibly be called moderate to conservative Republican policies (NAFTA, Welfare Reform, Three Strikes). Then, after a disastrous eight years of Bush/Cheney, we had the opening we needed to repair infrastructure and offer relief through jobs bills. And we didn't do anything. It's true the ACA offered much to the poor and middle class but the message was garbled and the rollout was a disaster. And then came 2010.
I truly hope the Democratic leadership will take note (but I'm not counting on it). The pattern has been established: relatively new to the national stage in 1992, Clinton won the election. Then we had familiar (or is it dull?) with Gore and Kerry in 2000 and 2004 and we lost. We had new in 2008 with Obama and we won. I'm afraid HRC constitutes "familiar" and, therefore, we lost. The leadership had better recognize this pattern and not trot out some tired face in 2020.
I truly hope the Democratic leadership will take note (but I'm not counting on it). The pattern has been established: relatively new to the national stage in 1992, Clinton won the election. Then we had familiar (or is it dull?) with Gore and Kerry in 2000 and 2004 and we lost. We had new in 2008 with Obama and we won. I'm afraid HRC constitutes "familiar" and, therefore, we lost. The leadership had better recognize this pattern and not trot out some tired face in 2020.
1
Can Senate Democrats Save the Party?
Two words: Chuck Schumer
In other words: not a chance...
Two words: Chuck Schumer
In other words: not a chance...
13
It is time for the liberal progressive Democrats just to go away. Fold up your tent and leave.
4
Can we at least stop talking about bathrooms for awhile? Here's a memo from the rest of America to Brooklyn and San Francisco: it's really not all about you.
7
Actually it's as much about us as it is about you. We all count.
Here's a memo to you, hillbilly: After fanatical religionists made it an issue. transgender Americans and their allies fought for their civil rights. Another memo: there are all kinds of people in San Francisco, Brooklyn, and all points between.
1
I don't think the defense of Obamacare will win back the heartland, nor will a complicated issue like Dodd Frank. The heartland was willing to give Obama 8 years and, in their opinion, he failed them. The Obama legacy is not a foundation the Democratic party can build on and win.
4
One of the big problems that the Democratic Party has is their penchant for cowering and capitulating to the bellowing bullies of the GOP.
It's not the appearance of being weak. It's being weak, that has been their Achilles Heal. The GOP and, now the fascists that are coming to power never compromise, never take a backward step and are ruthless in pursuit of their agenda. This is why they win. They will keep on winning until the forces that oppose them are willing to fight as hard as they do, period.
It's not the appearance of being weak. It's being weak, that has been their Achilles Heal. The GOP and, now the fascists that are coming to power never compromise, never take a backward step and are ruthless in pursuit of their agenda. This is why they win. They will keep on winning until the forces that oppose them are willing to fight as hard as they do, period.
4
We exaggerate the lost of the election by painting it as a Democratic calamity. The real calamity is the twisted electoral structure that exists in this country where the loser of the popular vote (by more than 2 million votes) is ascending to the White House, while the loser is condemned and vilified. This situation will not change anytime soon, the country will continue to be ruled by a minority (mostly white) for a long time to come unless the totally distorted electoral structure is corrected. How is it possible that the Republican Party is sitting on top of the Federal, state and local governments when it barely holds one half of the voters? How is it possible that sparsely populated areas have more representatives in the government than smaller but heavily populated areas? In a true democracy everyone should have the right to have equal representation, but this is not the case here in the United States, the supposedly cradle of democracy.
So, let's stop crying over the Democrats' lack of programs and views and let us see if there a way to change how this country can become truly democratic and elect its representatives fairly.
So, let's stop crying over the Democrats' lack of programs and views and let us see if there a way to change how this country can become truly democratic and elect its representatives fairly.
4
Everyone keeps talking about the Dems needing a better "message."
The do not need a better "message;" they need to remove the rot from American liberalism and tell the truth and speak and act for the people not the elites. Thomas Frank recently said it better than anyone else:
"The even larger problem is that there is a kind of chronic complacency that has been rotting American liberalism for years, a hubris that tells Democrats they need do nothing different, they need deliver nothing really to anyone – except their friends on the Google jet and those nice people at Goldman. The rest of us are treated as though we have nowhere else to go and no role to
play except to vote enthusiastically on the grounds that these Democrats are the “last thing standing” between us and the end of the world. It is a liberalism of the rich, it has failed the middle class, and now it has failed on its own terms of electability. Enough with these comfortable Democrats and their cozy Washington system. Enough with Clintonism and its prideful air of professional-class virtue. Enough!"
The do not need a better "message;" they need to remove the rot from American liberalism and tell the truth and speak and act for the people not the elites. Thomas Frank recently said it better than anyone else:
"The even larger problem is that there is a kind of chronic complacency that has been rotting American liberalism for years, a hubris that tells Democrats they need do nothing different, they need deliver nothing really to anyone – except their friends on the Google jet and those nice people at Goldman. The rest of us are treated as though we have nowhere else to go and no role to
play except to vote enthusiastically on the grounds that these Democrats are the “last thing standing” between us and the end of the world. It is a liberalism of the rich, it has failed the middle class, and now it has failed on its own terms of electability. Enough with these comfortable Democrats and their cozy Washington system. Enough with Clintonism and its prideful air of professional-class virtue. Enough!"
13
That about sums it up, Frank. Where else are we liberals going to go? We thought it would be Bernie, but soon found we had been herded and fenced in like cattle. The only thing left was to break out into that open prairie land where we were told certain destruction awaited. Many broke out into that dangerous land in spite of the dire warnings. Now, we will have to wait and fight each one of these promised demons as it appears.
1
None of the many comments I've read so far address our serious problem of voting rights. Some of our states have simple, straightforward, and fair voting systems. Registering is simple, extra ID not necessary, polling places abundant and so forth. I live in MA, and as far as I can tell, we do a good job. In Cambridge where I live and vote we have machine readable paper ballots that can be recounted, as they often are in local elections where margins are close. Information we all need, and I haven't read any, is in each state what percentage of eligible voters are registered, and of those what percent vote. These data don't require rocket science.
Our state by state voting rules are inherently unfair. We need a national Voting Rights Act so that no matter where you live you have an equal opportunity to vote without interference from local rules aimed at keeping turnout low and certain classes of residents from voting. And everywhere votes should be easily recountable.
Our state by state voting rules are inherently unfair. We need a national Voting Rights Act so that no matter where you live you have an equal opportunity to vote without interference from local rules aimed at keeping turnout low and certain classes of residents from voting. And everywhere votes should be easily recountable.
10
Note what's missing in this editorial; any message of a third party, any message of the dire need for a third party. All this editorial does is perpetuate the false narrative of two parties with conflicting agendas, not two corrupt to-the-teeth parties that couldn't care less about the interests and well-being of the American people.
"Above all, our economic message..." says Chuck Schumer, senate minority leader, and protector of Israel.
"Democrats are now in search of their own unifying message" says the New York Times.
I think the message from this last election went in the other direction; obviously Democrats and the New York Times didn't get it.
"Above all, our economic message..." says Chuck Schumer, senate minority leader, and protector of Israel.
"Democrats are now in search of their own unifying message" says the New York Times.
I think the message from this last election went in the other direction; obviously Democrats and the New York Times didn't get it.
5
Senate Democrats have a tougher job than it first appears. In 2013 then Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid exercised the 'nuclear option' and modified the filibuster rule. That cat is already out of the bag, and as a result 51 votes (which Republicans have) are all that are needed to approve any Cabinet or other nominee (including to any and all federal courts other than the Supreme Court. So Democrats can do nothing to obstruct there. Rank-and-file voters do not care about Dodd-Frank, so Democrats would be crazy to waste political capital there. Democrats can block changes to Obamacare but as the New York Times recently noted, that program is already on life support so if the Democrats resist changes (i.e. repeal) the Republicans will simply stand back and let Obamacare fail, while (correctly) informing voters that Senate Democrats care more about Obama's legacy than their healthcare. Another loser for Democrats. If Democrats block a Republican appointment along the lines of Scalia (to restore the Court to the prior make-up), the Supreme Court will remain at 8 Justices until the 2018 midterms, at which point the Republicans will achieve a 60 vote majority and seat anyone they like on the Supreme Court (including, by then, RBG's and Breyer's replacements).
5
Well, the Democrats get it - - they need a message for the heartland -- but they obviously do not have one. Clinton's message was 'I'm a woman and he is a bad man'. Trump's message was, 'I'll work to save your jobs from globalization; I'll enforce our immigration laws, strengthen the military and take care of our veterans, and so much more. Clinton promised more immigration from the violent Middle East, more outsourcing of American jobs, more ObamaCare increases in health care costs and worst of all more of the same ol same ol. This op ed shows that Democrats are a long way from 'getting it', and can look forward to more losses in 2018 if they don't.
7
Chuck Shumer is just another in a long line of attention seeking, money grubbing political hacks. Saving the party? Its not about that, whether you are a Republican or a Democrat. They've had a stranglehold on our nation's capital for way too long. Unfortunately for them and the citizenry they've all had to become money grabbers in order to hang on to power. Money has poisoned the political well.
Now its about the American people coming together. It wont be easy but anything worth having is worth working hard to accomplish. We the people need to remember--they all work for us--not themselves or any party.
Now its about the American people coming together. It wont be easy but anything worth having is worth working hard to accomplish. We the people need to remember--they all work for us--not themselves or any party.
Democrats have a choice to make now.
Republicans grab power first. When President Obama had a Democratic Congress, what did the GOP do? Pure obstruction. Party and ideology first. Nation after, if at all. Oppose everything Obama supports. Then voter suppression. Refusing to vote Obama's Supreme Court nominee. And in this election they suffered no consequences for following this approach.
So, what do Democrats do now? If they mirror the last 8 years of Republican obstructionism, the GOP will probably change the filibuster rule, the sole means the Democrats now have to control anything in Congress, so that a mere GOP majority rules on everything. That must be avoided.
Instead, the Democrats should make judicious use of the filibuster to oppose any serious GOP overreach. But they should support what may benefit the country, even if that involves some compromise. But while doing so, they must deliver a clear message to the GOP: never again. Either you govern with respect for Democratic concerns or, the next time we are in control you should expect us to be as ruthless in the exercise of power as you have been. We are publicly keeping track of your misuses of power, and we will cite those examples in the future when we steamroll your interests. And when Democratic control occurs in the future, make the GOP pay for its transgressions. Demand payback for not giving Garland any vote. Teach the GOP that they cannot gain using their approach from the past 8 years.
Republicans grab power first. When President Obama had a Democratic Congress, what did the GOP do? Pure obstruction. Party and ideology first. Nation after, if at all. Oppose everything Obama supports. Then voter suppression. Refusing to vote Obama's Supreme Court nominee. And in this election they suffered no consequences for following this approach.
So, what do Democrats do now? If they mirror the last 8 years of Republican obstructionism, the GOP will probably change the filibuster rule, the sole means the Democrats now have to control anything in Congress, so that a mere GOP majority rules on everything. That must be avoided.
Instead, the Democrats should make judicious use of the filibuster to oppose any serious GOP overreach. But they should support what may benefit the country, even if that involves some compromise. But while doing so, they must deliver a clear message to the GOP: never again. Either you govern with respect for Democratic concerns or, the next time we are in control you should expect us to be as ruthless in the exercise of power as you have been. We are publicly keeping track of your misuses of power, and we will cite those examples in the future when we steamroll your interests. And when Democratic control occurs in the future, make the GOP pay for its transgressions. Demand payback for not giving Garland any vote. Teach the GOP that they cannot gain using their approach from the past 8 years.
2
The issues that precipitated Mr. Trump's Electoral win was a simple economic divide. The Democrats and Mrs Clinton ignored a slogan from one of Bill Clinton's Presidential runs: "It's the economy stupid!". Mr. Sanders understood that message and never strayed from it. That was what made him so popular. He was 100% correct. The Democratic Machine did it's best and succeeded in shutting him out of a fair primary election. They were too focused on electing Mrs. Clinton as a woman, instead of focusing on how her solutions could help all people in our country.
The pundits are framing this as voters who lost Unionized jobs . But there is a caveat. They are unhappy about State and Federal Unionized jobs that they see as part of the problem. They view Teachers, State ,County and Municipal employees as shielded from the economic woes they endure. They only see Police and Fire Fighter/EMT workers as exempt from their anger. Every appointment that Mr. Trump has announced is of a single mindset- anti Union. The jobs they lost are not coming back. After four years of a Trump Presidency the Plutocracy and the divide in our country will grow exponentially. Mr. Sanders was dead on. The stock market will do well because Trump will take care of the 1%... all of his policies are based on Privatization. Many people in the US live hand to mouth and will not reap the benefits of a strong market. They have nothing to invest. The Democrats need to focus on that reality.
The pundits are framing this as voters who lost Unionized jobs . But there is a caveat. They are unhappy about State and Federal Unionized jobs that they see as part of the problem. They view Teachers, State ,County and Municipal employees as shielded from the economic woes they endure. They only see Police and Fire Fighter/EMT workers as exempt from their anger. Every appointment that Mr. Trump has announced is of a single mindset- anti Union. The jobs they lost are not coming back. After four years of a Trump Presidency the Plutocracy and the divide in our country will grow exponentially. Mr. Sanders was dead on. The stock market will do well because Trump will take care of the 1%... all of his policies are based on Privatization. Many people in the US live hand to mouth and will not reap the benefits of a strong market. They have nothing to invest. The Democrats need to focus on that reality.
3
The Dem Leadership (DNC) manipulated the primary to put forward a candidate regardless of the will of the electorate.
They got EXACTLY what they should have gotten, MASS EXODUS. They thought they knew better than registered Dem voters. Repentance? I have yet to see it.
They got EXACTLY what they should have gotten, MASS EXODUS. They thought they knew better than registered Dem voters. Repentance? I have yet to see it.
4
"regardless of the will of the electorate."
My name is not Will however I am a member of the Electorate and
I'm. Still. With. HER.
My name is not Will however I am a member of the Electorate and
I'm. Still. With. HER.
3
Not sure the Democratic leadership has a clue about how to fundamentally make the party over.
Most of what is in this article looks like randomly putting fingers in the obvious holes in the dyke when the foundation is already seriously eroded.
“The party started looking at people through interest group coalitions, and we thought, ‘If we talk to them all in different ways, that will be enough to cobble together an election coalition,’ ”
Hardly a strategy for unity!
In fact the fundamental Democratic message going forward is murky at best.
Why in the first place was Hillary, with so much negative baggage and persistent unfavorability the altogether foregone DNC insider choice?
Add in the liability of the core campaign message — that HRC was first and foremost the agent for preserving and expanding the Obama legacy. This failed to energize the Obama coalition which had been mostly left untapped on the sidelines after the initial 2008 win.
Certainly time for soul searching and committed attention to the fundamentals of what the DNC is going to stand for. The question is who will lead this effort?
Most of what is in this article looks like randomly putting fingers in the obvious holes in the dyke when the foundation is already seriously eroded.
“The party started looking at people through interest group coalitions, and we thought, ‘If we talk to them all in different ways, that will be enough to cobble together an election coalition,’ ”
Hardly a strategy for unity!
In fact the fundamental Democratic message going forward is murky at best.
Why in the first place was Hillary, with so much negative baggage and persistent unfavorability the altogether foregone DNC insider choice?
Add in the liability of the core campaign message — that HRC was first and foremost the agent for preserving and expanding the Obama legacy. This failed to energize the Obama coalition which had been mostly left untapped on the sidelines after the initial 2008 win.
Certainly time for soul searching and committed attention to the fundamentals of what the DNC is going to stand for. The question is who will lead this effort?
4
Trump is stacking his cabinet with billionaires. Paul Ryan has Medicare and Social Security in his sights. I have a huge problem with politicians who enjoy stellar health care deciding what the rest of us should have. And deciding my SS should be in the hands of the private sector. We know how well they will do with that. Congress has regularly raided the SS coffers whenever they look around for money.
Prior to turning 65 my BCBS premiums were over $1500 a month. Just for me and my preexisting conditions that had been under control for years. We will never get close to recouping what my husband and I put into SS over our working years.
Prior to turning 65 my BCBS premiums were over $1500 a month. Just for me and my preexisting conditions that had been under control for years. We will never get close to recouping what my husband and I put into SS over our working years.
4
If Trump and the Republicans do half of what they're planning, the middle class will bear the economic brunt of this propagandist nonsense that favors the rich and will come back to the Democrats without any help from Schumer et al.
4
There is no need for the Democrats to take any active steps to regain some momentum because I believe that Mr. Trump will either resign, be forced out, or impeached and convicted by 2020, and that Democrats will then have to deal with president Mike Pence. Although Mr. Trump is obviously intelligent and cagey, he lacks any relevant and meaningful experience related to running the government as evidenced by his post-election actions, including his offering the position of secretary of housing and urban development to Dr. Ben Carson who has declined this offer, and who has readily admitted that he has no experience in running a large and complex organization such as HUD. We can expect that similar errors in judgment will eventually force Mr. Trump from office and that the backlash will provide the Democrats an opportunity to regain the momentum they lost in the election of 2016. The unknown in this scenario is how much damage president Trump and his Republican cohorts (e.g., Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell etc.) will wreak on America prior to his leaving office.
2
The question should be "Can the Senate Democrats Save the Country"? Is saving the Democratic Party really the prime objective of Senate Democrats over the next four years? Maybe, at least a small part of the reason that Democrats have done so poorly in elections (2016,2014,2010) is that they are spending too much time, money and effort on their party and not enough on the country. When Obama talks about not yielding on "our" values, who is the "our"? Is he talking about values of the laid off coal miner in SE Ohio, or the tenured Harvard faculty professor's?
5
Clinton lost because she was never going to get those votes. The working class and the middle class do not like the Clintons. Have not liked the Clintons. Will not like the Clintons ever. People in these groups often hate the Clintons and have hated them for almost two decades. Their reasons are not relevant. They simply don't like them and were not going to vote for her no matter what. That the DNC counted on them to and continually expresses confusion over where the "Blue Wall" voters went shows just how out of touch the Committee"s leadership was/is. Snap out of it! There's a country to save!
7
Then why did she get more of their votes than Donald Trump?
1
They might be able to do something but that will require something that is difficult to impossible. That is compromise. Obama care is a disaster and needs massive changes, perhaps so many that it needs to be removed and replaced. The current banking and consumer protections are not working and are way too expensive. We don't have enough jobs and too many illegals that erode respect for the rule of law. So either compromise or in two years way more Republicans will be senators and that would be bad for them and the country.
3
The Dems lost the gerrymander. Either win the gerrymander or reform it.
6
Liberals alway think that "tweaking the message is the key to winning elections--to make themselves more appealing to the electorate. In other words, the trick is to fool enough people to win.
Mr. Schumer says...
“Above all, our economic message was not sharp enough, was not bold enough, was not strong enough. All those blue collar voters who voted for Donald Trump, even many who had voted for Obama, they thought he was the change agent.”
But more than anything...blue collar voters saw Hillary as a power-hungry phony and Trump as authentic. They were not fooled by sophisticated messaging.
Liberals just don't get it--what's more, you can't make them get it. They are genetically incapable of understanding. The American people are not as stupid as they believe.
Liberals imagine that years spend in college, studying Skakespeare or Womens' Studies makes one savvy and smart. It is seen daily in this publication, and around untold coffee tables--the smarmy, smug, self-impressed Liberal tilting ones head slightly skyward, and sniffing..."I'm educated...I'm really, really smart". The arrogance is amusing.
You know that auto mechanic--who starts work at 6 a.m., can run a computer scan on your Volvo--and get it back on the road? He's smarter than you think. He lived the last 8 years of Obama--and understands something Liberals did not-- that Clinton offered 4 more years of stagnation.
Want to win more elections, Liberals? Ditch the arrogance and pretense.
Mr. Schumer says...
“Above all, our economic message was not sharp enough, was not bold enough, was not strong enough. All those blue collar voters who voted for Donald Trump, even many who had voted for Obama, they thought he was the change agent.”
But more than anything...blue collar voters saw Hillary as a power-hungry phony and Trump as authentic. They were not fooled by sophisticated messaging.
Liberals just don't get it--what's more, you can't make them get it. They are genetically incapable of understanding. The American people are not as stupid as they believe.
Liberals imagine that years spend in college, studying Skakespeare or Womens' Studies makes one savvy and smart. It is seen daily in this publication, and around untold coffee tables--the smarmy, smug, self-impressed Liberal tilting ones head slightly skyward, and sniffing..."I'm educated...I'm really, really smart". The arrogance is amusing.
You know that auto mechanic--who starts work at 6 a.m., can run a computer scan on your Volvo--and get it back on the road? He's smarter than you think. He lived the last 8 years of Obama--and understands something Liberals did not-- that Clinton offered 4 more years of stagnation.
Want to win more elections, Liberals? Ditch the arrogance and pretense.
14
They can't. Their self-image is far more important to them than winning, or in fact doing, anything. It's why the NYT will ultimately collapse into irrelevancy, if it hasn't already.
3
Some good points, but the reality is that the GOP is much better than the Dems at tweaking the message and fooling the people, as you say the liberals do. And the right wing has their message (mostly lies) going on 24/7 into people's homes and businesses in the form of Fox TV and AM hate radio. The auto mechanic that can fix your car may be savvy about certain things, but he doesn't read much and so believes what he hears on these media outlets. The Dems need to shout and permeate just as loudly to have a chance at these voters.
2
You assume a lot about people. Sad.
Clinton offered an expansive infrastructure buildout, affordable college, paid family leave, and minimum wage increases, among other things. Trump offered the moon, and we'll probably get nothing but mooned. Your eight years of Obama comment is telling. Obama accomplished a great deal, despite the stagnation the GOP did its damnedest to inflict upon us. Are you okay with that? What are your policy prescriptions to help lower income Americans, besides trickle down, which is a proven failure?
Clinton offered an expansive infrastructure buildout, affordable college, paid family leave, and minimum wage increases, among other things. Trump offered the moon, and we'll probably get nothing but mooned. Your eight years of Obama comment is telling. Obama accomplished a great deal, despite the stagnation the GOP did its damnedest to inflict upon us. Are you okay with that? What are your policy prescriptions to help lower income Americans, besides trickle down, which is a proven failure?
2
In general, the Democratic Party message and the ideals are still as good as it was in 2008 and 2012. But it was the messenger who failed. The failure in 2016 was with "the singer not the song!"
3
Interesting to know what evidence, if any, you have for that assertion.
1
In the short run Schumer can probably block some of the more offensive parts of the Trump and Ryan agenda providing McConnell does not end the filibuster.
Long term I'm not sure Schumer would support the type of economic reforms that are needed.
We are really talking about distribution;how much to labor and how much to capital.
Initially [his position may have since changed] Schumer opposed changing the treatment of "carried interest" from a capital gain to ordinary income.
Would he now support taxing dividends and capital gains as ordinary income and taxing unrealized capital gains at death [step up in basis].
These two would raise over 200 B /year.
It is easy to make photo ops about safety at railroad crossings.
Yes that is important.
But we now have important choices.
Do we raise revenues by eliminating tax preferences for the rich or do we cut the debt by slashing Social Security and destroying Medicare by converting to a voucher system as Paul Ryan wants.
Long term I'm not sure Schumer would support the type of economic reforms that are needed.
We are really talking about distribution;how much to labor and how much to capital.
Initially [his position may have since changed] Schumer opposed changing the treatment of "carried interest" from a capital gain to ordinary income.
Would he now support taxing dividends and capital gains as ordinary income and taxing unrealized capital gains at death [step up in basis].
These two would raise over 200 B /year.
It is easy to make photo ops about safety at railroad crossings.
Yes that is important.
But we now have important choices.
Do we raise revenues by eliminating tax preferences for the rich or do we cut the debt by slashing Social Security and destroying Medicare by converting to a voucher system as Paul Ryan wants.
5
As a minority and son of immigrant parents, who probably leans center-left, let me give a small bit of advice to the Democrats - stop with the identity politics. It is invariably the first thing that comes out of a Democrat when supporting or arguing a position. Even in this piece - before it states the core problem that not enough was focused on the economic message - it has to preface it with "Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat". It's tiring to constantly be told that I am either a sexist, misogynist, racist, bigot, etc, etc. simply because I may disagree with certain views. Constantly focusing on labeling people by gender or race will continue to lead to the Democrats downfall.
18
"Constantly focusing on labeling people by gender or race will continue to lead to the Democrats downfall."
Well..........it certainly worked for the Racist, Misogynist, Homophobic, Islamophobic and Pro Bullying of People With Disabilities- Repubs.
Well..........it certainly worked for the Racist, Misogynist, Homophobic, Islamophobic and Pro Bullying of People With Disabilities- Repubs.
2
It's about jobs, not messaging. In just one example, you can't cure income inequality and help the poor by killing off all the coal and oil sector jobs and raising their energy costs threefold in the bargain to support wind and solar. You need a better policy balance using existing resources to support job-creating business.
And it's worse than you think. Even against a massively flawed candidate, you lost 32 states last week, 2500 out of 3100 counties, with several Democratic senators neutered because Trump won their states so overwhelmingly. Further, since 2008 you have lost 13 governorships, 69 house seats, 13 senate seats, and 900 state legislature seats. The redistricting war is lost and you are only one state legislature away from losing the ability to block constitutional amendments. And in the process, you have wrecked an entire generation’s worth of leader development by eliminating the bench. Democrats are unlikely to get another Supreme Court appointment for at least 20 years, probably the minimum time it’ll take to recover.
And it's worse than you think. Even against a massively flawed candidate, you lost 32 states last week, 2500 out of 3100 counties, with several Democratic senators neutered because Trump won their states so overwhelmingly. Further, since 2008 you have lost 13 governorships, 69 house seats, 13 senate seats, and 900 state legislature seats. The redistricting war is lost and you are only one state legislature away from losing the ability to block constitutional amendments. And in the process, you have wrecked an entire generation’s worth of leader development by eliminating the bench. Democrats are unlikely to get another Supreme Court appointment for at least 20 years, probably the minimum time it’ll take to recover.
11
The Democratic party must use every legislative tool available to stop Trump and his fascist freinds. It's not a partisan issue. it's a matter of decency.
9
Dear Democrats: please take the progressive, and democratic, point of view and stand fast, on every Republican effort to harm our country, and to enrich themselves. Stand up for the people who have traditionally turned to Democrats for protection. You have a responsibility, and the power to do something.
9
"Obstructionist Democrats"
It has a certain ring to it, it had better, we'll be hearing it a lot...
It has a certain ring to it, it had better, we'll be hearing it a lot...
2
There is no reason to follow the lead of the NYT editorial board on fixing the problem. They have been instrumental in causing it to happen in the first place with biased reporting and editorials during the Democratic primary. They are complicit with the party leadership in promoting a favorite-daughter candidate that could not deliver a finish. If the Democratic Party doesn't realize that the results of this election are a total rejection of Obama, Schumer and Pelosi and the insider clique represented by the DNC and super delegates, we will deserve to fail. The key to Democratic Party renewal is attracting young voters of all "identity groups", many of which consider themselves Independents. If you want to know how to do that, get over your personal animosity and listen to Bernie. His campaign showed how to do that by winning the under-45 primary vote in all racial, gender and economic class categories and attracting unaffiliated voters in open primary states.
Sure, Schumer can probably cut some deals with Trump that would be good for New York, but that isn't good enough for the nation. People in the so-called heartland need meaningful work. If the media would just cover the story, people would begin to understand that the response to climate change offers that work. The challenge of converting to non-fossil fuel energy systems will require a massive reindustrialization of this nation. It will employ millions and deliver the working class votes.
Sure, Schumer can probably cut some deals with Trump that would be good for New York, but that isn't good enough for the nation. People in the so-called heartland need meaningful work. If the media would just cover the story, people would begin to understand that the response to climate change offers that work. The challenge of converting to non-fossil fuel energy systems will require a massive reindustrialization of this nation. It will employ millions and deliver the working class votes.
15
What this election was about: Get out of the Message Business and get into the Business of Action.
Neither side delivered. Trump got 103,000 more economically distressed voters in key states than Hillary.
The country revolted against threading the needle of messaging. It wants action.
A good place to start is to confirm the Supreme Court nominee that President Obama selected.
To Mich McConnell, more votes were cast for Hillary than your party's guy. There is no Electoral College requirement to confirm a Supreme Court nominee, just as there is no law to forfeit the Senate's responsibility waiting for the people to vote. Do your job Senator, there is still time. I remind you to review John Paul Stevens confirmation during an election year, the Democratic Senate (68-32 seats) confirmed an unelected President's (Ford) choice for a conservative to replace the liberal lion William O. Douglas who stepped down in mid November. Stevens was nominated two weeks later and confirmed by the Democrats in a veto proof Senate in late December.
Your inaction is deplorable.
Given Trump's choice of Jeff Sessions for AG & Ben Carson for HUD, I cannot imagine who he would name as Scalia's replacement.
The NY Times should remind the country what it was like before the dysfunction of the Senate that has divided this great country.
We demand action over messaging. Do your job Mitch and confirm Garland. The precedent was set by the Democrats in 1975. Senator your nine month delay is no excuse.
Neither side delivered. Trump got 103,000 more economically distressed voters in key states than Hillary.
The country revolted against threading the needle of messaging. It wants action.
A good place to start is to confirm the Supreme Court nominee that President Obama selected.
To Mich McConnell, more votes were cast for Hillary than your party's guy. There is no Electoral College requirement to confirm a Supreme Court nominee, just as there is no law to forfeit the Senate's responsibility waiting for the people to vote. Do your job Senator, there is still time. I remind you to review John Paul Stevens confirmation during an election year, the Democratic Senate (68-32 seats) confirmed an unelected President's (Ford) choice for a conservative to replace the liberal lion William O. Douglas who stepped down in mid November. Stevens was nominated two weeks later and confirmed by the Democrats in a veto proof Senate in late December.
Your inaction is deplorable.
Given Trump's choice of Jeff Sessions for AG & Ben Carson for HUD, I cannot imagine who he would name as Scalia's replacement.
The NY Times should remind the country what it was like before the dysfunction of the Senate that has divided this great country.
We demand action over messaging. Do your job Mitch and confirm Garland. The precedent was set by the Democrats in 1975. Senator your nine month delay is no excuse.
2
Where was the editorial board of the New York times when we needed them? Why did the New York Times bury the Sanders campaign? Where did the New York Times focus it's coverage of the presidential election campaign on denigrating Donald Trump rather than discussing the policy issues? Given the editorial boards record, I'd rather not rely on their strategic and tactical advice going forward. Let Bernie Sanders lead the Democratic Party. Let the editorial board of the New York Times learn some humility.
12
Some thoughts after this retched election: Democrats inclusion means you include white people and you can't just wait, as someone wrote, for demographics to change and all those people just fall into your laps. Political correctness (what a horrible phrase) has gone too far and it is off-putting to even some liberals like me. Hillary it was hubris to ignore Wisconsin and spend time in Georgia thinking it might turn. Ha to that idea. You couldn't even turn the once progressive NC who gave their electoral votes to President Obama in 2008. You could have spoken at the end of the 3rd debate with more passion about America as a great nation in the here and now and not a country that Donald Trump will make great again. You had a broad vision that could have been better expressed. Unfortunately people in this country don't warm up to policy statements no matter how well thought out. However even this paper played up your negatives to a degree that I feel was not fair reporting. Always sticking in 'unlikable' in columns that supported you. What a sad outcome. I just can't get my head around the fact that such a poor excuse for a human being is now president-elect. The conservative, do-nothing, congress is now posed to do something, like pushing us over the cliff into the swamp where all Trump's appointees seem to reside. Sleep tight America, this once great land where President Obama now has some of his highest ratings and yet Trump gets elected. Strange people we are.
3
People like Obama personally, not for his policies, which they hate.
Ratings like that are about POPULARITY -- like the Prom King & Queen in high school. They are not necessarily the smartest or best students or even the nicest kids in school. They are the best looking and MOST POPULAR. That's how they win.
Having seen Obama a lot in recent weeks, I am reminded of why I voted for him in 2008 (before he betrayed us). He's really handsome, TALL, articulate and charming. He's a movie star. He has that much personal charisma. He's light and funny and yeah, articulate. He's a terrific public speaker, with a very smooth appealing voice, that is quiet and low-key. He's undoubtedly quite intelligent. His wife is a lovely lady and he has two beautiful teenage daughters.
He'd make a great neighbor or coworker and I'll bet he was a HECK of a community organizer. The problem is that all that good looks do not amount to leadership. He is not a leader. He kowtows to political correctness. He lies as glibly as he speaks, and somehow, I don't even think he fully realizes how easily he lies -- it is second nature to him.
Despite his black skin, he's half white and from a white family and never knew his black father. He's an "honorary white person" and very affluent and elitist. He has never lived in a ghetto, never been poor, never denied a job or a chance -- he was always pampered, and given Affirmative Action for being "black skinned, but culturally pure white".
Ratings like that are about POPULARITY -- like the Prom King & Queen in high school. They are not necessarily the smartest or best students or even the nicest kids in school. They are the best looking and MOST POPULAR. That's how they win.
Having seen Obama a lot in recent weeks, I am reminded of why I voted for him in 2008 (before he betrayed us). He's really handsome, TALL, articulate and charming. He's a movie star. He has that much personal charisma. He's light and funny and yeah, articulate. He's a terrific public speaker, with a very smooth appealing voice, that is quiet and low-key. He's undoubtedly quite intelligent. His wife is a lovely lady and he has two beautiful teenage daughters.
He'd make a great neighbor or coworker and I'll bet he was a HECK of a community organizer. The problem is that all that good looks do not amount to leadership. He is not a leader. He kowtows to political correctness. He lies as glibly as he speaks, and somehow, I don't even think he fully realizes how easily he lies -- it is second nature to him.
Despite his black skin, he's half white and from a white family and never knew his black father. He's an "honorary white person" and very affluent and elitist. He has never lived in a ghetto, never been poor, never denied a job or a chance -- he was always pampered, and given Affirmative Action for being "black skinned, but culturally pure white".
One of the biggest miscalculations of the "Bern down the party", Susan Saradon types is that Trump might actually succeed in being a popular president. If Trump succeeds as a center-right economic populist and social conservative president, and the country is not disgruntled after 4 years of right wing populism, then moving left (with Bernie Sanders' collection of socialists and Nation of Islam radicals) will marginalize the Democrats even more whereas Trump will have cut off a move to the center.
So, unless Trump is a failure on two fronts (economic populism and social conservatism), the Democrats cannot rebuild the party in under a decade.
So, unless Trump is a failure on two fronts (economic populism and social conservatism), the Democrats cannot rebuild the party in under a decade.
3
Democrat strategists do not seem to be too particularly smart.
The primary strategy has been to call the majority of Americans nasty names and randomly apply labels such as stupid, uneducated, racist, etc.
The democrats so perfected the strategy of pandering to every tiny, manufactured, aggrieved group they could cobble together that they forgot completely that there is a majority out there that ought to at least be considered.
The primary strategy has been to call the majority of Americans nasty names and randomly apply labels such as stupid, uneducated, racist, etc.
The democrats so perfected the strategy of pandering to every tiny, manufactured, aggrieved group they could cobble together that they forgot completely that there is a majority out there that ought to at least be considered.
13
They can't help themselves, Ken. They are such bigots and snobs, that even in the face of OVERWHELMING failure in an upset GOP victory....liberals doing supposedly "in-depth analysis"....realizing that their name calling and snobbery contributed hugely to the loss....just can't stop themselves from their pet, satisfying phrases as "stupid low information voters who don't know their own self interests" or "racist homophobic xenophobic bigots & haters".
Even seeing how it has lead to failure, they KEEP DOUBLING DOWN ON IT....because the pure elitist satisfaction of mocking those beneath them is so darned satisfying and makes them feel SO superior and special and "correct".
Even seeing how it has lead to failure, they KEEP DOUBLING DOWN ON IT....because the pure elitist satisfaction of mocking those beneath them is so darned satisfying and makes them feel SO superior and special and "correct".
3
There many factors that contributed to Clinton's loss including systematic ballot suppression targeting democratic voters, the rigged electoral system, interference by Comey, Putin and Assange, and of course the decades of republican smears targeting Clinton and every other prominent democrat. But a major factor was the failure of democrats to remember who they represent when setting policy. Rather than compromise on globalization, deregulation or safety net issues, democrats should have focused on the people who elected them: the working poor and the middle class, and fought harder on their behalf. That path is still open to democrats. We can be sure the GOP will never go there.
2
Democrats need to stop being afraid of their own shadows; they've been "Republican-lite" since Reagan for all the good it's done them and the American people.
Obama had a message. Bernie had a message. Hillary did not. Democrats don't have a real message yet, only what some of them have described as Leftie nutjobs - like Warren and Bernie.
Like Trump, you begin to wonder what do Democrats really believe in?
Obama had a message. Bernie had a message. Hillary did not. Democrats don't have a real message yet, only what some of them have described as Leftie nutjobs - like Warren and Bernie.
Like Trump, you begin to wonder what do Democrats really believe in?
6
The suggestion that the election outcome was the fault of the Clinton campaign specifically, and and Democratic messaging in general, is maddening. Clinton won in excess of 2 million more popular votes than Donald Trump. The fact that white non-college educated Americans voted for Trump in large numbers is more about the lies and hate that he spewed over a 16 month period than a lack of message from the Clinton camp. Trump opened the campaign by assigning blame to certain segments of the population (Mexicans, Muslims, etc) making them a scapegoat for societal problems. This was followed by the incessant demonization of his opponent, which the media covered day after day. For the unsophisticated consumer of "news", if he keeps saying it, it must be true. Trump used divisive and hate-filled rhetoric to attract voters that ultimately voted against their economic interest. Democrats for decades have been the party that has fought for Social Security, Medicare, raising the minimum wage, fair trade, and the preservation of collective bargaining and unions. These are issues that benefit blue collar workers of every race. The fact that white blue collar Americans voted for Trump illustrates their vulnerability to rhetoric dripping of nativism, false promises and the demonization of his political rivals. Sadly history teaches us that this type of messaging can work. Let's make sure that people of good conscience hold the Trump administration in check.
5
It is time to stop blaming Clinton's loss on low income and low information working class voters with low self esteem. Trump belongs to Republican stalwarts who allowed him to capture a Party that once stood for something other than racial and religious resentment. It was a Party that once had a coherent economic policy other than lowering taxes which would drown the government of funds needed to promote the general welfare of the people and protect the environment for posterity.
The leaders of the Party, with very few exceptions, were happy to ride the Trump bandwagon to power, even when they knew he was unprepared and ill suited for the job of President of the United States.
The people who came to his rallies did not look underprivileged or desperate. They were there for a good show put on by a well known TV personality. They alone could not have produced the majorities needed to win the Electoral College vote without the help of millions of regular Republicans.
Now we have a leader who is an embarrassment at best and a destroyer of years of progress at worst. And the Republicans will get a chance to govern from the sidelines. Good luck, because we all will need it for the next four years at least.
The leaders of the Party, with very few exceptions, were happy to ride the Trump bandwagon to power, even when they knew he was unprepared and ill suited for the job of President of the United States.
The people who came to his rallies did not look underprivileged or desperate. They were there for a good show put on by a well known TV personality. They alone could not have produced the majorities needed to win the Electoral College vote without the help of millions of regular Republicans.
Now we have a leader who is an embarrassment at best and a destroyer of years of progress at worst. And the Republicans will get a chance to govern from the sidelines. Good luck, because we all will need it for the next four years at least.
4
That is crazy and provably wrong. The GOP leadership repudiated Trump. The Bushes opposed and mocked him; Poppy Bush voted for CLINTON (wife of the man that unseated him! imagine that!). That's much they hate Trump.
The Koches refused to support Trump with their millions, which they offered to Hillary. The GOP convention was a disaster; Cruz mocked Trump and walked out.
Paul Ryan withdrew his support and refused to campaign for Trump.
Marco Rubio mocked Trump's "small genitals and hands".
Trump has had very, very little support from the GOP mainstream or anyone else "in power".
Of course, now that he is POTUS-elect....they are all running to grovel at his feet, hoping from crumbs.
But support? no, they did not support him.
THE PEOPLE put Trump into power. It is pure populism. Ironic, isn't it? that populism in the USA has come from the RIGHT, not the left?......
The Koches refused to support Trump with their millions, which they offered to Hillary. The GOP convention was a disaster; Cruz mocked Trump and walked out.
Paul Ryan withdrew his support and refused to campaign for Trump.
Marco Rubio mocked Trump's "small genitals and hands".
Trump has had very, very little support from the GOP mainstream or anyone else "in power".
Of course, now that he is POTUS-elect....they are all running to grovel at his feet, hoping from crumbs.
But support? no, they did not support him.
THE PEOPLE put Trump into power. It is pure populism. Ironic, isn't it? that populism in the USA has come from the RIGHT, not the left?......
Poor white fundamental thought won this election and not the working class? It's actually disrespectful to the working class who are more multi cultural and urban, then the white rural fundamentalist.
The flyover state fundamentalists have been preached to about being better because "you're white" since they could listen. They were weened on Fox's Hannity, Limbaugh, etc., that preaches racism, sexism and hatred. These folks want to blow up the establishment every chance they get until they get someone who preaches what trump has, and that's hatred towards everyone who is not like them, "white". This was an outcome for the fundamentalists whose ideas about being better because they are white can not be changed. It's not about the elistests or the urbanites or the working class; it's about the white people who do not want to realize that the world has changed and now they have a preacher who may very well disappoint them. Not to worry, though, they will blow this up in 4 years.
The flyover state fundamentalists have been preached to about being better because "you're white" since they could listen. They were weened on Fox's Hannity, Limbaugh, etc., that preaches racism, sexism and hatred. These folks want to blow up the establishment every chance they get until they get someone who preaches what trump has, and that's hatred towards everyone who is not like them, "white". This was an outcome for the fundamentalists whose ideas about being better because they are white can not be changed. It's not about the elistests or the urbanites or the working class; it's about the white people who do not want to realize that the world has changed and now they have a preacher who may very well disappoint them. Not to worry, though, they will blow this up in 4 years.
1
"Mrs. Clinton’s popular vote totals surpass Donald Trump’s by more than two million and counting — an edge not seen in an Electoral College loss since 1876."
There's only one metric that matters: the number of electoral votes. That's simply the way the system works. But it seems like every article about the outcome of the election, and every other comment since the election, has been about the unfairness of it all because Secretary Clinton won the popular vote.
The popular vote is a meaningless "vanity metric". Period.
Whining about losing even though your side won the popular vote is like losing the seventh game of the World Series 12-0, and complaining that you lost even though your team had more hits than the winning team. Wrong metric.
The Democrats just imploded, which is yet another thing that everybody got wrong about this election. And frankly, so did the Republicans. It's just that they happened to win, in spite of themselves. Add that to the long list of things the "experts" got wrong.
In the meantime, this country faces extraordinary challenges that are only going to get worse.
There's only one metric that matters: the number of electoral votes. That's simply the way the system works. But it seems like every article about the outcome of the election, and every other comment since the election, has been about the unfairness of it all because Secretary Clinton won the popular vote.
The popular vote is a meaningless "vanity metric". Period.
Whining about losing even though your side won the popular vote is like losing the seventh game of the World Series 12-0, and complaining that you lost even though your team had more hits than the winning team. Wrong metric.
The Democrats just imploded, which is yet another thing that everybody got wrong about this election. And frankly, so did the Republicans. It's just that they happened to win, in spite of themselves. Add that to the long list of things the "experts" got wrong.
In the meantime, this country faces extraordinary challenges that are only going to get worse.
6
Nice example. Here's another: losing a tennis match 6-0, 4-6, 4-6, then claiming you won because you won more games.
1
Again, another swing and a miss. How many times are we going to point out the surge of middle-class/working-class particularly from the rust belt while not identifying the elephant in the room? As President Clinton proclaimed, "It's the economy stupid!" Can we begin to coin a phrase to summarize "It's the Dems revolving door with the Wall Street-Rubenites-Free Trade-bailout/austerity dance that has waged war on the working class, Stupid?!?"
5
“Above all, our economic message was not sharp enough, was not bold enough, was not strong enough. All those blue collar voters who voted for Donald Trump, even many who had voted for Obama, they thought he was the change agent.”
You mean, Democrats didn't lie enough?
How do you compete with a candidate like Trump who lies early and often, telling people exactly what they want to hear without any basis in reality?
Should Democrats compete by telling lies they can't back up? Tell them we're bringing jobs back from China? Tell them we're bringing steel and coal jobs back even though we know we can't?
Schumer doesn't seem to realize that it doesn't matter what Democrats say because it won't make it to "conservative" talk radio or Fox News without being taken out of context and completely distorted. The conservative echo chamber is completely impenetrable to any message Democrats may have.
You mean, Democrats didn't lie enough?
How do you compete with a candidate like Trump who lies early and often, telling people exactly what they want to hear without any basis in reality?
Should Democrats compete by telling lies they can't back up? Tell them we're bringing jobs back from China? Tell them we're bringing steel and coal jobs back even though we know we can't?
Schumer doesn't seem to realize that it doesn't matter what Democrats say because it won't make it to "conservative" talk radio or Fox News without being taken out of context and completely distorted. The conservative echo chamber is completely impenetrable to any message Democrats may have.
4
There's nothing left to save. The Democrats and the liberal elitists who control the Party didn't "get it" and still don't. People are tired of being told what's good for what ails them by people who don't have to take the same medicine. The Republicans barely comprehend their own victory, but at least they're rolling with it for now.
7
It's a tired old party that has lost its way with lots of tired ideas that don't work. The focus in recent times as always has been on raising taxes, spending it on entitlements, and focusing on tiny segments of the population who are aggrieved for various reasons. Then there is lots of talk about inequality, but mostly about tearing down the successful and "you didn't build it" rather than trying to raise up those left behind or promote entrepreneurship or individual achievement. It's pretty clear the party has lost its way, especially over the last 8 years. The idea that identity politics is all that matters to win election and more than 50% of the population are deplorables and don't matter was clearly a delusion. Good luck with Schumer at the helm, he's unlikely to do much to turn the ship around.
4
Its Capitalism!!! NOTHING will change in this country until some party is willing to take on capital and the way we allow it to operate. That is the kind of fundamental change that will make working class lives better.
Maybe working class men and women who voted for Trump will rethink their stance when they see him and his robber baron friends using the government as a big teller machine
Maybe working class men and women who voted for Trump will rethink their stance when they see him and his robber baron friends using the government as a big teller machine
9
"Yet other issues in which both sides and the larger public have an interest, like infrastructure, could offer room for collaboration."
In your dreams. They (ignorant bigoted white men) bought it, they own it. No need to reward them with a modern day CCC.
The larger public interest calls for the impeachment of this criminal con artist.
In your dreams. They (ignorant bigoted white men) bought it, they own it. No need to reward them with a modern day CCC.
The larger public interest calls for the impeachment of this criminal con artist.
6
Keep on calling those who have a different opinion than you ignorant and you will be writing letters like this on past 2018 and 2020.
2
I’m sorry, but he doesn’t “deserve” a chance. He’s getting a chance because, well, we basically have no choice here. Apparently, I’m going to have to keep saying this over and over every chance I get because the “normalization” of this man is already underway. Your choice of the word “deserve” is a prime example. And projecting his “deserving” a chance onto President Obama is absurd. Being “respectful of the office” carries not quite the same meaning as “deserving” a chance.
By the way, I read the press conference for which you provided a link. The intelligence, eloquence and grace of our departing President will be sorely missed.
By the way, I read the press conference for which you provided a link. The intelligence, eloquence and grace of our departing President will be sorely missed.
2
Another unpatriotic Democrat guilty of treason! Thanks to Obama's Imperial Presidency, Donald Trump has the right to do whatever he wants
2
The Times' Editorial Board writes, "Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat." Then in the next sentence describes how Hillary depended on minority voters to make up her "landslide".
The Editorial Board still doesn't get it. Putting everyone into an identity category and accusing those who don't of being "racist" and "sexist" is precisely the behavior that has turned off Americans to the Democratic Party. It's not messaging. It's identity politics.
Moreover, the Editorial Board is also still in denial about the president's negative influence. Democrats have suffered record losses under President Obama. Despite his positive personal ratings, his policies have been on the ballot and done quite poorly. That he might want to stay involved does not bode well for democrats in 2018.
The Editorial Board still doesn't get it. Putting everyone into an identity category and accusing those who don't of being "racist" and "sexist" is precisely the behavior that has turned off Americans to the Democratic Party. It's not messaging. It's identity politics.
Moreover, the Editorial Board is also still in denial about the president's negative influence. Democrats have suffered record losses under President Obama. Despite his positive personal ratings, his policies have been on the ballot and done quite poorly. That he might want to stay involved does not bode well for democrats in 2018.
14
A main point of this editorial is that the Democrats' reliance on identity politics was a serious mistake and a big contributor their defeat. Give the NYT some credit for wising up, even if it's after the horses are gone.
1
The ongoing environmental collapse is not going to go away until we decide to give it priority status over profiteering. Completely linked to this is the economy which is also not an issue that can be avoided. Our security,
along with that of every other country in the world is linked to how we as a global leader deal with these linked issues. We need to get the destructive influence of profiteering out of our electoral process if we are to seriously tackle the future. I think a large segment of the population is coming around to this realization as the collapse becomes more intrusive to our lives (and it certainly will). The only candidates somewhat awake to this fundamental problem we face were Sanders and Stein; the former discarded by the DNC, the latter with no chance as a third party candidate.
along with that of every other country in the world is linked to how we as a global leader deal with these linked issues. We need to get the destructive influence of profiteering out of our electoral process if we are to seriously tackle the future. I think a large segment of the population is coming around to this realization as the collapse becomes more intrusive to our lives (and it certainly will). The only candidates somewhat awake to this fundamental problem we face were Sanders and Stein; the former discarded by the DNC, the latter with no chance as a third party candidate.
4
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat."
Russian Intel with the help of Julian Assange's Wikileaks, partisan FBI Director James Comey's strategically timed innuendo, an electoral college that makes someone's vote in Wyoming worth 4 NY votes, continuous lies and propaganda on talk radio and Fox News, an overwhelming supply of fake news, a majority of it anti-Hillary being casually disseminated over social media sites, all obviously played roles in her defeat.
Let's not oversimplify things lest we draw the wrong conclusions.
Russian Intel with the help of Julian Assange's Wikileaks, partisan FBI Director James Comey's strategically timed innuendo, an electoral college that makes someone's vote in Wyoming worth 4 NY votes, continuous lies and propaganda on talk radio and Fox News, an overwhelming supply of fake news, a majority of it anti-Hillary being casually disseminated over social media sites, all obviously played roles in her defeat.
Let's not oversimplify things lest we draw the wrong conclusions.
4
You know the Dem Party is finished when crazy, nutcase, cuckoo, baseless, paranoid, insane conspiracy theories become mainstream thought in the Party
1
Larry: it used to be the Democrats mocked conservatives for their conspiracy theories, their paranoia, voter fraud, their fear of communism and the USSR.
Now it is DEMOCRATS screaming about conspiracies, stolen elections, PUTIN, Russia, hacking voting machines, etc.
Pot, meet kettle.
Now it is DEMOCRATS screaming about conspiracies, stolen elections, PUTIN, Russia, hacking voting machines, etc.
Pot, meet kettle.
1
I agree. I'd say the only difference is that truth is on the Democrats side.
1
The explicit message of the billionaires surrounding Trump is replace Medicare with a voucher system, reduce or replace the Social Security 'burden' on the wealthy, and marginalize Medicaid even more than it already is. If Schumer and his allies want respect, they will have to win on these fronts.
6
If you're waiting for the Democrats to show some spine, you may as well wait for the tooth fairy. David Frum once wrote "Republicans fear their base. Democrats hate their base." Mitch McConnell said it was his job to see that Obama was a one term president. Shumer, a shill for Wall Street (he is why hedge fund operators get their millions taxed as capital gains) is trying to figure out how to get along with Trump and the neanderthal Republicans.
I hope the Democrats filibuster Trump's Supreme Court nominee and all the bad legislation the Republicans introduce to eviscerate our environmental, civil rights, consumer protection and health and safety legislation. I doubt that they will because their past performance does not inspire confidence. Unlike Republicans, Democrats don't go to bat for their base. Maybe, when they do, they will win elections.
I hope the Democrats filibuster Trump's Supreme Court nominee and all the bad legislation the Republicans introduce to eviscerate our environmental, civil rights, consumer protection and health and safety legislation. I doubt that they will because their past performance does not inspire confidence. Unlike Republicans, Democrats don't go to bat for their base. Maybe, when they do, they will win elections.
10
Sexism and bigotry....get over it. These sexist and bigoted voters were the same ones who voted for Obama twice, especially in the Midwest. Y
The NYT refuses to Understand what really happened in this election.
The NYT refuses to Understand what really happened in this election.
16
Generally I find them the skunks at parties with their incessant questioning of attendees' politics; they are such boors, many of my even-tempered friends-liberals all - have begun to disinvite them. Plus they never bring anything to the party except their ill-mannered brats.
When FDR died my grandmother cried and said he was a friend of the working class who will help us now. That was the democratic party then. Now it is the party that enacted NAFTA, repealed Glass-Stegall, laid the cost of Obamacare on the middle-class, has a president who has pushed hard for the TPP and generally have ignored the cries across the rust belt that "we are really hurting".
As Thomas Frank has said the democratic party has become the voice of the rich establishment. It is hard to believe that Chuck Shumer the darling of wall street will be able to lead in a wise way. Nor do I have confidence in Senators Warren or Sanders. George Soros had a meeting of the rich democratic donors a few weeks back. Both Sanders and Warren attended those meetings instead of telling them keep your money, we want to small donations from the people who we want to help.
Finally, we need to look at the leadership of President Obama who entered the White House with democratic majorities and lost them all and lost most of the states as well. We need him to retire gracefully and stay on the sidelines.
As Thomas Frank has said the democratic party has become the voice of the rich establishment. It is hard to believe that Chuck Shumer the darling of wall street will be able to lead in a wise way. Nor do I have confidence in Senators Warren or Sanders. George Soros had a meeting of the rich democratic donors a few weeks back. Both Sanders and Warren attended those meetings instead of telling them keep your money, we want to small donations from the people who we want to help.
Finally, we need to look at the leadership of President Obama who entered the White House with democratic majorities and lost them all and lost most of the states as well. We need him to retire gracefully and stay on the sidelines.
9
Let Donald exercise his presidential prerogatives: Impose tariffs where now there are none -- and watch prices and inflation soar. Deport undocumented immigrants who do the dirty work on farms and construction -- and watch Republican farmers and contractors angered. Impose "law and order" in black and Islamic communities and watch civil unrest unfold. Cozy up to Putin and watch American influence in Europe collapse.
No need for speeches and filibusters. Donald will destroy Donald, and voters will restore Democrats to Congressional leadership in two years.
No need for speeches and filibusters. Donald will destroy Donald, and voters will restore Democrats to Congressional leadership in two years.
1
Unfortunately Chuck Schumer is whistling in the wind on both Obama care and the Supreme Court nominee. Democrats created the path for over riding their own filibuster via budget reconciliation which was used to pass Obama care and Harry Reid's nuclear option which he indicated Democrats would use to pass Hillary's court nominee. How awful that the one tool to for insuring moderation by a minority was eliminated by Harry Reid's partisan Senate. You live by the sword, you die by the sword.
4
You didn't mention what history will determine was the reason Hillary lost the election -- the FBI's astounding announcement eight days before the election that they found new emails to investigate. Look at your own paper's stories -- you were writing Trump's obit and portending a landslide. I was a strong HIllary supporter and even I got mad that her closest advisor's perverted husband had anything to do with her emails. I of course calmed down but millions of people who wanted to vote for Hillary got disgusted and didn't. That announcement dramatically changed the trajectory of both candidates' polling numbers. We must never forget this breech of long-standing protocol tipped the scales of an historical election. Americans must be reminded that Comey and his FBI croonies played a larger role than sexism or racism in determining who the next president would be.
By the way -- when is the New York Times going to do an investigation on what actually happened.
By the way -- when is the New York Times going to do an investigation on what actually happened.
2
"sexism, racism...bigotry...played a role in her defeat". You guys still don't get it. Here is what played a role in her defeat
1) A political establishment wed to Washington and its needs
2) A party that played to identity politics and worried about bathrooms than jobs for the working class. Most who could care less about bathroom usage
3) A revolt against the liberal media elite who ignored the hollowing out of the working middle class and its suffering.
Please note # 3 above. The NYT exemplified this as much as any liberal left coast media establishment. The vote was not just AGAINST Clinton- it was against the NYT and its ilk. The bitter truth for you, and for your paper, is that YOU were as responsible as anyone for the election of Donald Trump. I would wager the a number of voters in the forgotten midwest decided to give the NYT the middle finger thinking "well if the NYT is against Trump and for Clinton then Trump MUST be good and Clinton must be bad."
Here is the typical NYT opinion piece: "racism racism women hating women hating, immigrant hating immigrant hating Trump voters". Rinse and repeat.
At least try for originality with your ongoing condescension and arrogance towards anyone west of the Hudson River. Try a weekend in Youngstown Ohio for a change. I know a great bar you could visit. But I would suggest that if you go there you check your condescension at the door.
1) A political establishment wed to Washington and its needs
2) A party that played to identity politics and worried about bathrooms than jobs for the working class. Most who could care less about bathroom usage
3) A revolt against the liberal media elite who ignored the hollowing out of the working middle class and its suffering.
Please note # 3 above. The NYT exemplified this as much as any liberal left coast media establishment. The vote was not just AGAINST Clinton- it was against the NYT and its ilk. The bitter truth for you, and for your paper, is that YOU were as responsible as anyone for the election of Donald Trump. I would wager the a number of voters in the forgotten midwest decided to give the NYT the middle finger thinking "well if the NYT is against Trump and for Clinton then Trump MUST be good and Clinton must be bad."
Here is the typical NYT opinion piece: "racism racism women hating women hating, immigrant hating immigrant hating Trump voters". Rinse and repeat.
At least try for originality with your ongoing condescension and arrogance towards anyone west of the Hudson River. Try a weekend in Youngstown Ohio for a change. I know a great bar you could visit. But I would suggest that if you go there you check your condescension at the door.
13
How many midwestern newspapers endorsed Trump? I think the longstanding American anti-intellectual tradition has more to do with this than geography and class. Somehow "intellectual" has come to be regarded as a nasty slur, but be that as it may, thinkers tend to migrate to urban aress, the largest urban areas are on the coasts, and that's where the blue (and the popular vote margin) is.
It's about jobs, not messaging. In just one example, you can't cure income inequality and help the poor by killing off all the coal and oil sector jobs and raising their energy costs threefold in the bargain to support wind and solar.
And it's worse than you think. Even against a massively flawed candidate, you lost 32 states last week, 2500 out of 3100 counties, with several Democratic senators neutered because Trump won their states so overwhelmingly. Further, since 2008 you have lost 13 governorships, 69 house seats, 13 senate seats, and 900 state legislature seats. The redistricting war is lost and you are only one state legislature away from losing the ability to block constitutional amendments. And in the process you have wrecked an entire generation’s worth of leader development by eliminating the bench. Democrats are unlikely to get another Supreme Court appointment for at least 20 years, probably the minimum time it’ll take to recover.
And it's worse than you think. Even against a massively flawed candidate, you lost 32 states last week, 2500 out of 3100 counties, with several Democratic senators neutered because Trump won their states so overwhelmingly. Further, since 2008 you have lost 13 governorships, 69 house seats, 13 senate seats, and 900 state legislature seats. The redistricting war is lost and you are only one state legislature away from losing the ability to block constitutional amendments. And in the process you have wrecked an entire generation’s worth of leader development by eliminating the bench. Democrats are unlikely to get another Supreme Court appointment for at least 20 years, probably the minimum time it’ll take to recover.
4
Democrats are missing the real issue here - it is NOT about messaging or the next dynamic candidate, it is about PROCESS. The republicans ran a historically weak candidate who ran with an incredibly devisive message and ever-changing policy positions - and he still won.
Dems, from 2016 forward, must focus on the process of elections until the processes are fundamentally rebalanced. here's how:
1. The use of state wide plebiscites. Every state that allows citizens to propose and vote directly on legislation must be the focus.
2. Focus on redistricting process at both state house & fed congress level. Push plebiscite legislation that establishes bipartisan panels re: redistricting. We can debate specifics, dispute mechanisms, etc., but force a bipartisan group process - rip this from republican statehouse control.
3. Focus on process of changing the apportionment of electoral college votes to reflect % won by candidates in popular vote. No more winner take all. The Dems don't need success in every state - just enough to permanently eliminate the Bush 43 and Trump 45 scenarios. If HRC wins electoral votes proportionally across the rust belt, she wins in a walk - & it reflects the will of the people.
4. Run candidates in EVERY state & fed race. Howard Dean insisted on this when he ran the DNC & w/in 3 election cycles Dems had both houses of congress. Make the repubs play defense in every election instead of allowing them to just focus on swing state & close elections.
Dems, from 2016 forward, must focus on the process of elections until the processes are fundamentally rebalanced. here's how:
1. The use of state wide plebiscites. Every state that allows citizens to propose and vote directly on legislation must be the focus.
2. Focus on redistricting process at both state house & fed congress level. Push plebiscite legislation that establishes bipartisan panels re: redistricting. We can debate specifics, dispute mechanisms, etc., but force a bipartisan group process - rip this from republican statehouse control.
3. Focus on process of changing the apportionment of electoral college votes to reflect % won by candidates in popular vote. No more winner take all. The Dems don't need success in every state - just enough to permanently eliminate the Bush 43 and Trump 45 scenarios. If HRC wins electoral votes proportionally across the rust belt, she wins in a walk - & it reflects the will of the people.
4. Run candidates in EVERY state & fed race. Howard Dean insisted on this when he ran the DNC & w/in 3 election cycles Dems had both houses of congress. Make the repubs play defense in every election instead of allowing them to just focus on swing state & close elections.
1
President Obama and the editorialist have adopted the stance that should always define the attitude of an opposition party in a democracy. Evaluate the majority party's proposals according to your own principles and your vision of what serves the welfare of the nation. Compromise when you can influence the details of a bill sufficiently to transform its harmful effects into positive ones, or even in some situations where your input could convert a terrible measure into one that inflicts minimal damage. Choose your battles carefully, but adamantly oppose any proposal that undermines society's fundamental values or that imposes severe burdens on the weak or the marginalized sectors of society in favor of the powerful and the privileged.
This approach contradicts the strategy pursued by McConnell and the GOP during the last six years, and it will ensure that the Democrats can present themselves to the country in 2018 as a positive force more concerned about the wellbeing of the country than about narrow political advantage. More importantly, however naive this may sound, such a policy could help reduce the partisanship that has obstructed effective government in recent years.
Political combat in a free society should always pursue limited goals. Although the GOP bears most of the responsibility for the current impasse, the Dems have an opportunity to improve conditions through a mature and principled approach to the challenge represented by Trump and his agenda.
This approach contradicts the strategy pursued by McConnell and the GOP during the last six years, and it will ensure that the Democrats can present themselves to the country in 2018 as a positive force more concerned about the wellbeing of the country than about narrow political advantage. More importantly, however naive this may sound, such a policy could help reduce the partisanship that has obstructed effective government in recent years.
Political combat in a free society should always pursue limited goals. Although the GOP bears most of the responsibility for the current impasse, the Dems have an opportunity to improve conditions through a mature and principled approach to the challenge represented by Trump and his agenda.
1
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat."
"...the United States needs at least one major party with a message that transcends the boundaries of race and class."
On the first point, there is no evidence of this. On the second, that certainly would not be the Democratic party which is defined by racial compartmentalization. They sought to sew and exploit division. Now the question is double down or truly change.
"...the United States needs at least one major party with a message that transcends the boundaries of race and class."
On the first point, there is no evidence of this. On the second, that certainly would not be the Democratic party which is defined by racial compartmentalization. They sought to sew and exploit division. Now the question is double down or truly change.
9
They're referring to the sexism and misogyny in the Democrat Party that made Democrats abandon Dr Jill Stein, force Wasserman-Schultz out, exile Donna Brazile, target Nancy Pelosi, and now made Hilly persona non grata.
Nothing Democrats say or do will be presented in a positive light across 40 percent of America as long as the Republican Party has a chokehold on communication outside the cities through its propaganda arm of Fox News. Throw in talk radio and targeted social media, and you have the foundation for a one-party state. Mock Hillary Clinton all you want, but she was right in warning the nation about a "vast rightwing conspiracy" back in the '90s. America has become a one-party state again and will likely remain so for decades.
7
Nothing Trump or the GOP says or do will be presented in a positive light across 40 percent of America as long as the Democratic Party has a chokehold on communication outside the cities through its propaganda arm of the NY Times, CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, NPR, MSNBC, CNBC, etc, etc, etc.
2
One sign of propaganda as practiced by authoritarian regimes since Machiavelli is it seeks to discredit science-based, historically acccurate norms by creating an alternative universe.
1
Hillary called the Trump supporters who cheered at his racist and misogynistic remarks "deplorable". She did not call all of his supporters deplorable. In fact in the now infamous sentence she said while the racist supporters were deplorable there were those who felt left behind by the changing economy and were legitimately worried about their futures. God forbid that the whole sentence got repeated and reported. Just the sound bite. And so now we have President elect Donald Trump who will do NOTHING for the poor white voters of the rust belt.
3
Hillary and the left says all trump supporters are deplorable. Stop with your fake news
1
Only the ones spewing hatred and standing by while he dishonors veterans and handicapped people.
This paper did everything in its power to marginalize Bernie Sanders & his followers. This paper & its writers are too removed from middle-class citizens to understand their frustration. The fact that you still won't fess up to your lack of understanding is infuriating.
17
So some say we should respect the office and give him a chance? Well, look how much damage DT has done to the country and he's not even sitting yet in the chair! HRC's campaign made a lot of errors, but one thing stands apart: the lack of vigorous and persistent reporting of the press on DT. For example, the press went on ad nauseum about Clinton's emails and virtuality ignored DT's business dealings that only now are becoming clearer. The Democrats surely fumbled the ball, but they also had poor calls by the refs.
4
In the 1930's, progressives put the thumb o the government on the economic scales in favor of the working classes. The result was the greatest increase in personal wealth of a particular class the world had ever seen. Then progressives tried to include minorities and that richly benefitted class rebelled. In that rebellion they cut their own throat. We went back to much of te dog eat dog economic policies that existed prior to the 30's. Democrats need to either eschew their connection to minority causes, or wait until the GOP takes us back to 1928 when working people had a legitimate complaint about their economic condition.
2
People today have legitimate gripes about jobs. You seem fixated on minorities being a problem.
The greatest economic expansions in history that improved the lots of every American occurred in the 1960's after JFK's tax cuts and in the 1980s after Reagan's tax cuts and other economic initiatives. See a pattern here??
1
Bernie was absolutely the only one who could have beat Trump and possibly with a overwhelming mandate. The DNC was totally out of touch with their own constituents and we as a nation will bear the brunt of this frightening debacle playing out right before our eyes. From the list of characters that Trump is enlisting into some of the most powerful positions on earth, the Democratic Party should be shaking in it's shorts. Unless the Democrats can get some backbone and fight like commanders readying for war, the damage to our country by the newly elected administration can harm us for decades to come.
9
As Cromwell said to the rump Parliament, I would say to Schumer and Pelosi, "Go, get you out! Make haste! Ye venal slaves be gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!"I have no confidence in Senate Democrats' ability to weave the threads that should hold Democrats together into a unified force that will obstruct the hatred of the "other" and drive for protection of wealth we can expect from the next administration. As a senator from the financial c apital of the world, Senator Schumer has shown little interest in reigning in banks and other institutions who practices are once again driving the country to the precipice, by, for example as the NYT reported yesterday, loaning money and providing taxpayer subsidized insurance for waterside development that will foreseeably be underwater, both financially and literally, within a few years. He acts as if he need do nothing but watch as Republicans storm Medicare, as if the act itself will ruin them, whereas recent history has demonstrated the suits of the audacity of the Republicans' hopes. Finally, he has done nothing to grow his majority, as if fear of Republicans alone would make him majority leader. I am ready for something different, Maybe Schumer would be a good whip for a Minority Leader Sanders, if he could put aside his Empire State building size ego.
1
The Democrats have the same players that lost figuring our how to change.
It is clear that Obamacare was poorly designed, to be kind. If the Democrats oppose trying to change it, they will confirm for the American people why they should not hold power.
The Democrats will still choose Pelosi as a leader. Imagine how that looks to intelligent Americans.
Keep up with calling the rest of the country racist. That is like Democrat politician repellant to voters.
It is clear that Obamacare was poorly designed, to be kind. If the Democrats oppose trying to change it, they will confirm for the American people why they should not hold power.
The Democrats will still choose Pelosi as a leader. Imagine how that looks to intelligent Americans.
Keep up with calling the rest of the country racist. That is like Democrat politician repellant to voters.
8
The Visigoths have entered Rome and are preparing to torch it. But the watchman who failed to protect the city—Chuck Schumer—delivers a speech in the Senate. His words are hollow and removed from reality.
He is talking about working with a party that for eight years viciously attacked a (maddeningly) centrist President—a party that placed petty partisanship above the lives of Americans, openly seizing on the ACA as an instrument for "breaking" the President.
A party that refused even to hold hearings on a Supreme Court appointment, because it had declared, by fiat, that the President's term is only three years.
A party that sent an outrageous letter to Iran, seeking to scuttle among the most important agreements of the modern era—while the craven Mr. Schumer abetted.
This is a party that schemes to deny citizens' right to vote, lies about existential threat to the planet (to please fossil fuel paymasters), and laid the groundwork for Mr. Trump's own racist rise to power with years of dog-whistle tactics—while Mr. Schumer wanly "objected," failing to have the President's back.
In sum, we face an epic debacle at the hands of Republicans who will control every branch of government and show complete contempt for rules.
Comes now the man whose failures allowed all this to tell us *he* will protect us—from the Visigoths he practically invited into the city.
In reality, Mr. Schumer wants only to put on a good show, lest citizens realize it is time to remove him from office.
He is talking about working with a party that for eight years viciously attacked a (maddeningly) centrist President—a party that placed petty partisanship above the lives of Americans, openly seizing on the ACA as an instrument for "breaking" the President.
A party that refused even to hold hearings on a Supreme Court appointment, because it had declared, by fiat, that the President's term is only three years.
A party that sent an outrageous letter to Iran, seeking to scuttle among the most important agreements of the modern era—while the craven Mr. Schumer abetted.
This is a party that schemes to deny citizens' right to vote, lies about existential threat to the planet (to please fossil fuel paymasters), and laid the groundwork for Mr. Trump's own racist rise to power with years of dog-whistle tactics—while Mr. Schumer wanly "objected," failing to have the President's back.
In sum, we face an epic debacle at the hands of Republicans who will control every branch of government and show complete contempt for rules.
Comes now the man whose failures allowed all this to tell us *he* will protect us—from the Visigoths he practically invited into the city.
In reality, Mr. Schumer wants only to put on a good show, lest citizens realize it is time to remove him from office.
4
The Democratic Party has terrible priorities.
Instead of helping working class citizens they have decided to help illegal immigrants.
Instead of crafting good policy, which helps everyone, they want targeted policy that helps specific groups- based on race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.
Instead of fighting climate change with strong policies they are passing minor regulations- too small to be meaningful.
Instead of left-of-center policy they pass moderate-Republican plans (PPACA).
Instead of ending the wars they just prolong them (or expand them).
Instead of protecting law-abiding citizens they defend law-breakers.
There is no party to save- the Democratic Party is just the moderate wing of the Republican Party.
I am a working class, white-male, citizen. I am nothing to the Democratic Party. I am tired of voting for the 'party of working people' which doesn't help working people (at least not citizens). I am tired of voting for the 'left' and only getting more wars and tax-cuts.
We already have a pro-rich, pro-war, pro-environmental destruction, pro-import cheap labor, pro-tax-cuts and pro-big-business party. The Democratic Party is just a cheap knock-off version of the Republican Party.
Instead of helping working class citizens they have decided to help illegal immigrants.
Instead of crafting good policy, which helps everyone, they want targeted policy that helps specific groups- based on race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.
Instead of fighting climate change with strong policies they are passing minor regulations- too small to be meaningful.
Instead of left-of-center policy they pass moderate-Republican plans (PPACA).
Instead of ending the wars they just prolong them (or expand them).
Instead of protecting law-abiding citizens they defend law-breakers.
There is no party to save- the Democratic Party is just the moderate wing of the Republican Party.
I am a working class, white-male, citizen. I am nothing to the Democratic Party. I am tired of voting for the 'party of working people' which doesn't help working people (at least not citizens). I am tired of voting for the 'left' and only getting more wars and tax-cuts.
We already have a pro-rich, pro-war, pro-environmental destruction, pro-import cheap labor, pro-tax-cuts and pro-big-business party. The Democratic Party is just a cheap knock-off version of the Republican Party.
9
Honorable resistance is to be applauded; party-based resistance is not. Much as I fear the damage Mr. Trump might bring, I also fear that we are in danger of simply flipping the party roles. For eight years we have labelled the Republicans as the "Party of No" and criticized them for never accepting the legitimacy of President Obama, especially when polls show that a large percentage of Republicans still question whether he is Muslim or born outside of the U.S. It will be all too easy for the Democrats to now be the "Party of No" and by constantly repeating that Hillary won the popular vote, spend four years disputing President Trump's legitimacy. We need to find a way to govern which is more than gridlock.
1
Democrats have been struggling to be the shinier penny that the common man picks-up off the ground. Guess what? LOTS aren't stooping over to pick-up the penny...'cause it's not worth the bother. Better bumper-sticker-slogans win the elections, 'cause we've dumbed-down Americans for decades by following the Republicans example of an education that's not sufficient towards life post-18-years of age.
Don't fight the war that was lost, fight the war that's a-coming. Or, similar to a whiny young 16 year old girl, to her latest boyfriend: "What have you done for me today?"
Stop over-promising and under-delivering. (ACA, easy example; wall-street reforms as well) Our governments have the possibility of including the vast majority of Americans, such as through elections or unions. Instead, we've got the 800 richest families that run/loot Americans.
The average citizen isn't considering voting information until the 2 weeks prior to an election---can't get away from the t.v. adverts run ad-nauseum (they've been mute-buttoned mostly) Need better messages. Use graphs---well-sourced, not "creative" lies. Are you sure Ross Perot was so wrong?
Call-out EVERY time----and then tally-them-up----the offenses and increased burdens created by the Republicans in offices. It's their majority that's affecting Americans from top to bottom: Make them own it!
Don't fight the war that was lost, fight the war that's a-coming. Or, similar to a whiny young 16 year old girl, to her latest boyfriend: "What have you done for me today?"
Stop over-promising and under-delivering. (ACA, easy example; wall-street reforms as well) Our governments have the possibility of including the vast majority of Americans, such as through elections or unions. Instead, we've got the 800 richest families that run/loot Americans.
The average citizen isn't considering voting information until the 2 weeks prior to an election---can't get away from the t.v. adverts run ad-nauseum (they've been mute-buttoned mostly) Need better messages. Use graphs---well-sourced, not "creative" lies. Are you sure Ross Perot was so wrong?
Call-out EVERY time----and then tally-them-up----the offenses and increased burdens created by the Republicans in offices. It's their majority that's affecting Americans from top to bottom: Make them own it!
1
Senate Democrats led by corrupt Harry Reid are what gave us Trump. Reid became a multi millionaire selling influence and favors. He epitomized a Senate that was out of touch with America. Now they have Harry Reid lite, Chuck Schumer, at the helm. He is a angry, partisan demagogue, the worst kind of politician. This is the guy that brought Anthony Weiner into politics. He will lead the democrats further into the abyss. Stay tuned.
2
How sadly ironic that Bernie offered just the view the NYT is now espousing (transcending identity politics), and the Clinton campaign and NYT took him to task for it during the primary campaign. Just admit it: you backed the wrong candidate. Bernie would have won.
11
I think that Chuck Schumer has the right compass to lead the straying sheep
of the wayward Democrats back into the big pen.....only if these lost sheep
realize that they are one herd....and that diversity is important....because
not everyone thinks like Schumer or Elizabeth Warren...or Bernie Sanders.
so....revise the sheep pen....and although they seem alike ...sheep can
be like humans....out of many ...they can become one in purpose.
of the wayward Democrats back into the big pen.....only if these lost sheep
realize that they are one herd....and that diversity is important....because
not everyone thinks like Schumer or Elizabeth Warren...or Bernie Sanders.
so....revise the sheep pen....and although they seem alike ...sheep can
be like humans....out of many ...they can become one in purpose.
Schumer cares more about Israel then the USA
If you are saying "end identity politics," then yes, I'm all for it. I'm sick of being put into buckets or baskets. Let's focus more on economic growth --more, better, higher paying jobs for all -- and less on social justice issues.
4
Donald Trump's success was created by President Obama's policies. For eight years, the Obama administration has focused on social justice issues. The majority of the American electorate is fed up: they want the focus of government action to be on jobs and growth.
7
Lyndon Johnson and the Kennedy's were the last great Democrats who championed the causes of the weak. Now the weak rule the party. You will succeed when you once again put forth the strong to protect the weak.
If Senate Democrats, under Chuck Schumer's leadership, prove able to formulate policy ideas that relate clearly to a set of persuasively progressive principles, then they will slip out of the losing character that has dominated their collective behavior for roughly ten years.
For starters, the Democratic Party must open itself to to the youthful talent within its ranks so that dynamic figures like Kristen Gillibrand and Cory Booker can emerge, project a positive vision for the nation's future that inspires participation from young citizens whose futures are really at stake.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
For starters, the Democratic Party must open itself to to the youthful talent within its ranks so that dynamic figures like Kristen Gillibrand and Cory Booker can emerge, project a positive vision for the nation's future that inspires participation from young citizens whose futures are really at stake.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
44
Schumer is so over
The Senators should make Trump's potential for conflicts of interest an issue in every hearing or debate on Trump's nominees for Cabinet positions and for Supreme Court positions.
If the Republicans won't take a stand on public corruption and abuse of power, the Democrats should.
Yes, the President is entitled to his Cabinet but we are entitled to ask the members of the Cabinet whether they are employed by the government or Trump Enterprises.
Undoubtedly the Republicans will put forth legislation that will contain some good things and some poison pills. The workable provisions of Obamacare will be kept but Republicans will make sure to eviscerate any protections against insurance companies overreaching. We will go back to the days when insurance companies sold cheap policies with zero coverage.
Republicans opposed every initiative by Obama. Democrats must support what is good but oppose what is bad. Going along to get along got us the immoral Iraq invasion and occupation. Resistance, where appropriate. is the moral duty of Congressmen and women, Republican or Democratic.
If the Republicans won't take a stand on public corruption and abuse of power, the Democrats should.
Yes, the President is entitled to his Cabinet but we are entitled to ask the members of the Cabinet whether they are employed by the government or Trump Enterprises.
Undoubtedly the Republicans will put forth legislation that will contain some good things and some poison pills. The workable provisions of Obamacare will be kept but Republicans will make sure to eviscerate any protections against insurance companies overreaching. We will go back to the days when insurance companies sold cheap policies with zero coverage.
Republicans opposed every initiative by Obama. Democrats must support what is good but oppose what is bad. Going along to get along got us the immoral Iraq invasion and occupation. Resistance, where appropriate. is the moral duty of Congressmen and women, Republican or Democratic.
3
I am going to call, not write, my representative in Congress and senators in Congress to plead with them to oppose proposal which will privatize Medicare and Medicaid, roll back Social Security benefits, repeal the ACA, and use private money to fund infrastructure repair. Infrastructure repair should come from tax money generated by higher rates paid by the wealthy and taking back the offshore money kept there by wealth companies. And there are probably other means to enable the country to increase tax revenue, but not on the backs of the middle class and the poor.
9
Harry Reid, too, will come home to roost. Reid's rule has rendered the Senate minority powerless. Trump doesn't need Schumer. (If anything, Schumer owes Trump.)
The equation for 2018 is simple: If Trump succeeds, prepare for a D rout.
1
Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in Hillary's defeat???? Are you serious???Let’s review. Hillary had the entire Democratic, Republican, media, business, tech, and global establishment on her side. She had had the most formidable political machine of the past 30 years. She raised more money than any other Democratic candidate for President...over 900 million dollars. She out spent Trump 3-1. She had substantially more troops on the ground. She had President Obama at the height of his popularity not only anoint her as his successor but campaign by her side. She had her husband as well as Michelle Obama pleading her case. She won all three debates. Her opponent put his foot in his mouth every time he walked out the door. She had every conceivable advantage….more advantages than anyone who has ever run or probably ever will run for President. And she still could not beat....against…. Donald…. Trump! My God the Democrats have to accept responsibility for running a poor campaign ….that borders on political malfeasance... Sexism exists, but to blame it for Clinton's loss —is utterly ridiculous... Hillary had enough baggage to crush 100 glass ceilings. Practically any other Democratic candidate man or women with all of these built in advantages would have won by a landslide. Get real! Don’t you think VP Biden or Sen. Warren could have won with this overwhelming edge???
3
The Democratic Party needs to foster the Huey Longs and LBJs that are out in their farm system. I don't mean morally questionable candidates but fire throwers that connect with Middle America. The NY-fraud that is DJT will be a great target for the right candidate. The Party has become so NY-cenric it failed to see the tidal wave of discontent that this election brought to our shores.
2
The Democrats got the defeat that they deserved. They now will have a difficult job of convincing us skeptics that they are truly working on behalf of working Americans and not simply a toll of big business and the wealthy donors who showered them with money. It's pretty bad when a lifelong gay middle class democrat like me, whose middle class parents were both solid FDR democratic voters turns his back on the party and casts his vote for Jill Stein. Bernie had my support and he should have won the nomination but the party machine squashed him. We now need a true progressive party to emerge. I have lost faith in the Democrats and it will be a long time before I turn back to a major political party again.
4
I am tired of hearing "a humiliating defeat". Nope! This is part of the media message that elected Trump, thanks guys! HRC was a brilliant choice, won the election but the media packaged her otherwise, lied to the public, over and over and over again. Now we have a President who lost the election? Red states are poor in terms of balanced media. It's all Fox all the time! Headache News! When I visit family on the West Coast (Silicon Valley, no less) even they seem to only have Fox on TV in every public space there is. Some try to turn off the drone by turning to Facebook, another paragon of nonvirtue. Sander's candidacy fed into the Fox News HRC non news narrative with aplomb. At times I felt like he was a secret operative for the other side, especially some of his supporters, and who knows? Dems rewrite your rules: keep the vision of justice for all, but rebrand, keep a laser sharp focus on future goals, constantly re-evaluate and correct mistakes, and pound it into the media, and use the media, over and over again. The Dems can change the narrative by using the media. Its not message, its the medium (Mcluhan).
In 20+ years as an RN in a hospital ER, I learned a few things about people, myself included. First, when you're talking, you DO NOT hear what the other person is saying. Lesson: close your mouth. Second, you cannot reason with a screaming two-year-old. Lesson: State firmly what you are going to do for --not to, for-- the child, once, then do it.
We now have as President of the United States a 70-year-old with the emotional maturity of a toddler, whose mouth flies open the moment he wakes and runs non-stop until he falls asleep. Perhaps a visit to the ER is in order.
We now have as President of the United States a 70-year-old with the emotional maturity of a toddler, whose mouth flies open the moment he wakes and runs non-stop until he falls asleep. Perhaps a visit to the ER is in order.
1
The problem is that the rules of the Senate are no longer rules. Remember when Harry Reid employed the "nuclear option" and eliminated the filibuster for most confirmations? The biggest problem in doing this was not that they restricted the filibuster. The problem was that the changed the rules of the Senate in the middle of a term. If the majority can change the rules in the middle of a term, then there are no rules. Harry Reid led the Democrats to destroy the very concept of Senate rules, and now the Democrats in the minority must live with it. The Republicans can now justifiably change the rules any time it suits their political ends.
1
Don't forget how the Democrats, including the NY Times, wanted to callously discard the Biden Doctrine. Joe Biden unilaterally created and imposed this rule on America in 1992 when Bush was president. It states that the president is not allowed to nominate a Supreme Court replacement during his final year in office. For some reason, the principled left wanted to impose this rule on Republican presidents but not on Democrat presidents
The vote recall and attempted coup in the Electoral College shows that Democrats are stuck in anger and denial in the five stages of grief. They need to move through all the stages before they can arrive at a strategy to win back the White House, Congress, the Supreme Court, the governorships and the state legislatures. They should really begin regrouping now rather then dead ending lost causes and conducting a circled firing squad.
1
When a huge number of whites vote for Trump it's labeled as sexism and racial bigotry. When a huge number of minorities vote Democratic, no matter who the candidate is, it's labelled as unity. Maybe we were tired of Hillary's racial bias. She carried hot sauce in her purse for the blacks and her favorite food was Mexican for the Hispanics. For the rest, the coal mines will be closed and you will be out of work. Let the working class eat cake was her message as she felt minorities and progressives were enough. It wasn't.
4
If Democrats seriously want to be viewed as change agents STOP offering candidates with Ivy League law degrees, 6-7 figure bank accounts and family pedigree. Encourage candidates who look like, act like, live like the Average American. Smart, driven, passionate ideal warriors can be pipefitters, veterinarians, cops, veterans, teachers and garbagemen, people who can easily live on a $150-$200k salary and would be immune from rampant corruption and influence peddling. We need dozens of Mr/Ms Smiths who may lack the shiny glossy image and ability to backspin talking points, but know the challenges that life in the USA requires us all to meet. People who can inspire us not by their connections or boardroom expertise, but through their shared humanity. Hard work, raising good kids, investing wisely, acting responsibly and protecting the earth are not vague esoteric statements to these middle class heroes, they are the countless everyday tasks that make our nation great and people strong, compassionate, brave. The Democrats would do well to shut down every MBA and law program for the next decade and develop GRASS ROOTS MOVEMENTS from the best of our neighborhood leaders. No one can fight a Koch brother better than someone whose home has been threatened by their pollution or stand up to Wells Fargo more than a victimized account holder. I would die for Bernie Sanders because I feel his concern, his goodness, his humanity in every fiber of my being.
9
The NYT editorial board makes me sick. Fawning over Trump when he gave you exclusive access, while withholding all your questions that may cast Trump in a poor light gave him normalcy.
Why didn't you point out the glaring conflict of interest Trump's presidency would portend before the election, instead of giving so many column inches to the Clinton Foundation?
Why didn't you ask him, before any other question, "Where are your tax returns?". Why do you let his continual assault on the "lugenpresse" fall to the wayside after he talked about your paper as being a "jewel"?
You all really think you are being clever by treating Trump as sycophants, because what he really needs is adulation, so this tack will give us the ability to continue to report on our next leader. If you stop treating him like the con man he is, you are unwittingly doing his bidding.
Charles Blow and Paul Krugman are the only ones in you editorial staff who consistently get it. The headlines throughout the NYT after you "exclusive" were excessively fawning and normalizing.
That is what makes me sick!
Why didn't you point out the glaring conflict of interest Trump's presidency would portend before the election, instead of giving so many column inches to the Clinton Foundation?
Why didn't you ask him, before any other question, "Where are your tax returns?". Why do you let his continual assault on the "lugenpresse" fall to the wayside after he talked about your paper as being a "jewel"?
You all really think you are being clever by treating Trump as sycophants, because what he really needs is adulation, so this tack will give us the ability to continue to report on our next leader. If you stop treating him like the con man he is, you are unwittingly doing his bidding.
Charles Blow and Paul Krugman are the only ones in you editorial staff who consistently get it. The headlines throughout the NYT after you "exclusive" were excessively fawning and normalizing.
That is what makes me sick!
2
I do not know what paper you have been reading for the past year but it certainly was not the NYT. Front page fawning over every Hillary thought to the post election editorials that are carbon copies of each other in the same language towards Trump voters that sent Hillary home.
1
It is important for democrats to stop blaming the press/media, the FBI and the voters. There are three reasons they lost: (1) Hillary was the wrong candidate, with the wrong message and she and the DNC ran a very poor campaign. She had a lot of baggage (a lot of it manufactured), she was a moderate/neoliberal who angered many with her past and current positions. She courted the wealthy and the moderate republicans, while basically ignoring and disdaining the young, liberal and independent votes. She avoided the press and rallies. (2) We should not underestimate the degree of racism, sexism, misogyny, islamophobia, etc., even among the wealthy and middle class (Trump did not only win the poor whites). (3) Gerrymandering, voter suppression and even election fraud took its toll. Enough with the entrenched, established leaders like Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton.The country really needs to look at itself and improve the election process, giving more voice and attention to the hopes and fears of its people.
2
Trump won. He is not interested in making deals with the Democrats. Nothing
the Democrats say or do at this time will influence Trump. The Bannon
nomination was a successful trial balloon to test the Democratic opposition
Going forward, Trump will fill the remaining cabinet positions with loyal,
right wing GOP stalwarts.The Democrats have no strategies at this time
except to attack future Trump strategies. The game is unfolding.
the Democrats say or do at this time will influence Trump. The Bannon
nomination was a successful trial balloon to test the Democratic opposition
Going forward, Trump will fill the remaining cabinet positions with loyal,
right wing GOP stalwarts.The Democrats have no strategies at this time
except to attack future Trump strategies. The game is unfolding.
1
The Democrats have been a party of small groups seeking rights.
These are largely deserved rights, but if the Dems want to represent all Americans, they need to talk about working people again, as they did from the 30s to 60s. I still believe that appealing to the honesty of working folks, instead of donors, and crafting a message of fairness for all would resonate.
Trump is right that for those in many industries, the Corporations have exported their jobs while only the wealthiest benefit--including himself. Start there, Democrats. After all, FDR was wealthy and he saved the nation from men like Trump.
These are largely deserved rights, but if the Dems want to represent all Americans, they need to talk about working people again, as they did from the 30s to 60s. I still believe that appealing to the honesty of working folks, instead of donors, and crafting a message of fairness for all would resonate.
Trump is right that for those in many industries, the Corporations have exported their jobs while only the wealthiest benefit--including himself. Start there, Democrats. After all, FDR was wealthy and he saved the nation from men like Trump.
3
Can senate Democrats save the party? No
5
Schumer is going to lead the party savers? He's part of the group that is leading the party to ruin. Wake up. The country spoke. Even more than Republicans, they are sick of the pandering of the Democratic Party. At least the GOP pushes its losers aside, the Dems just had to run the loser HRC a second time to make sure she was a loser. Fools. As Einstein said Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So far the Dems are in denial and can't even realize why they lost and lost and lost again. Insane. Change all leadership to people not in denial
6
We have a better chance with Sen. Schemer saving the Democratic Party then the leader of the house. Just look @ the people she has surrounded herself with it's geriatric city. The DNC has to be de-Clintonized from top to bottom.
2
I think there's an element we're missing: the whites don't want to be identified as white trash, and the rest that voted for Trump unconsciously would do anything not to be counted as the bottom of the rung. "Stronger Together" meant we were taking the bottom rung into the fold, the fold that included us.
It was a class thing, as much as it was a race thing, and in this country, that has gone hand in hand for centuries.
It was a class thing, as much as it was a race thing, and in this country, that has gone hand in hand for centuries.
1
How ironic that Mr. Trump presumably rode to victory because this was a change election. For eight years, the republican party attempted to block President Obama's efforts and when he was able to make some progress toward change (the stimulus, Obamacare) his efforts were derided as ineffective. (As I recall, Senator Rubio accused the President of deliberately trying to change the country for the worse.)
I suppose it's tempting to suggest that the democrats block the efforts of the next president, but I suspect that democrats wouldn't be as adept at pulling this off. Plus, since we seem to have elected a president with few, if any, core beliefs, why not try to mold him in a more palatable direction? It will be interesting to see if Sen. Schumer can work out a compromise with the next president that blocks the Ryan/McConnell agenda.
I suppose it's tempting to suggest that the democrats block the efforts of the next president, but I suspect that democrats wouldn't be as adept at pulling this off. Plus, since we seem to have elected a president with few, if any, core beliefs, why not try to mold him in a more palatable direction? It will be interesting to see if Sen. Schumer can work out a compromise with the next president that blocks the Ryan/McConnell agenda.
How exactly was Obama a change agent? He is typical of the failed Big Government failures of the last 70 years: he lied about ObamaCare and his failed Big Government polices have destroyed the economy.
Shhhh, Larry. No one's supposed to know that. Keep it under your hat.
There has been a war between the truth and falsity for ages. In 2016, falsity won in the Democratic Party and Americans finally fed up with their creamy smooth lies stayed home, voted for third party candidates or for Trump, a bold-faced outrageous liar. The MSM, long a source of lies in behalf of upholding corrupt establishments, continues its filthy smooth way, seeming to tell the truth, but essentially still dishonest. The fact that Clinton won the popular vote just does not erase the fact that almost any other Democrat could have beaten the worst Republican nominee in history by 10-20 million votes
The next four years will be better than ever for the 1% and worse than ever for the rest of us. Chuck Schumer is not someone who is driven by the need for fairness, but rather someone who straddles both sides of the party, a seriously compromised leader. If the Democrats are to come back after their resounding defeat in Congress and so many states, then they need leadership that has the guts to take on Wall Street, the banks and corporate America. Chuck Schumer is not that man.
The next four years will be better than ever for the 1% and worse than ever for the rest of us. Chuck Schumer is not someone who is driven by the need for fairness, but rather someone who straddles both sides of the party, a seriously compromised leader. If the Democrats are to come back after their resounding defeat in Congress and so many states, then they need leadership that has the guts to take on Wall Street, the banks and corporate America. Chuck Schumer is not that man.
8
Its nice to see an editorial about the Democrats that doesn't call for complete surrender after eight years of Republican obstruction. But you are still a little too eager to ally with Trump.
No one really knows what Trump will do. He contradicts himself constantly. But most signs are bad, and there are a lot of reasons to predict that he will not negotiate in good faith, and will be trying to trick the country at every turn. The gullible Democrats must not be fooled.
The Republican Party must be punished for abandoning tradition to block everything the the Democrats tried to do. All of their legislation and nominees must be blocked. To play nice after they just robbed you of a supreme court nominee and eight years of legislation would be the last nail in the Democrats coffin. Americans don't like wimps that cower before bullies. Americans love an underdog that fights back.
If, as the Democrats block their nominees and legislation, Trump breaks with Republicans to follow a sane path of raising taxes on the rich to invest in the People and infrastructure, then the Democrats should consider helping him, very carefully.
But his infrastructure plan, so far, is actually a tax cut funded looting of the national wealth, following the same neoliberal, Milton Friedman script of using government funds to privatize government functions and assets they've used around the world.
The (r)evolution is about taking back democracy, not giving away the rest of the government to billionaires.
No one really knows what Trump will do. He contradicts himself constantly. But most signs are bad, and there are a lot of reasons to predict that he will not negotiate in good faith, and will be trying to trick the country at every turn. The gullible Democrats must not be fooled.
The Republican Party must be punished for abandoning tradition to block everything the the Democrats tried to do. All of their legislation and nominees must be blocked. To play nice after they just robbed you of a supreme court nominee and eight years of legislation would be the last nail in the Democrats coffin. Americans don't like wimps that cower before bullies. Americans love an underdog that fights back.
If, as the Democrats block their nominees and legislation, Trump breaks with Republicans to follow a sane path of raising taxes on the rich to invest in the People and infrastructure, then the Democrats should consider helping him, very carefully.
But his infrastructure plan, so far, is actually a tax cut funded looting of the national wealth, following the same neoliberal, Milton Friedman script of using government funds to privatize government functions and assets they've used around the world.
The (r)evolution is about taking back democracy, not giving away the rest of the government to billionaires.
1
No, Senate Democrats cannot save their party. But they can hold the line while others launch long-needed courses in civics, history, and economics. Inequality? Other than saying that it's all Wall Street's fault, what can be done to reduce the facts to Twitter-length? Many have excoriated oligarchs and plutocrats, but concrete examples have not been laid before the people.
Corporate raiding; destruction of company pension and health-insurance plans; and internal “outsourcing” aren’t high on the program list of Fox. Foreign car plants dot the Red states. Their sales pitches include low taxes, low regulation, and low union membership. Detroit’s misery is, in part, home grown, with good old American competition impoverishing many. The off-shoring of company HQs and their tax obligations--who knows? The role of Romney and Trump in such activities--who knows? Let’s teach kids such facts and hire them to carry out a Twitter blitz. Trump’s cabinet will provide ammunition. For example, Nikki Haley has played a role in the decay of northern industry. It wasn’t Obama and Clinton. It was Romney, Haley, Trump, Apple, Walmart etc.
Corporate raiding; destruction of company pension and health-insurance plans; and internal “outsourcing” aren’t high on the program list of Fox. Foreign car plants dot the Red states. Their sales pitches include low taxes, low regulation, and low union membership. Detroit’s misery is, in part, home grown, with good old American competition impoverishing many. The off-shoring of company HQs and their tax obligations--who knows? The role of Romney and Trump in such activities--who knows? Let’s teach kids such facts and hire them to carry out a Twitter blitz. Trump’s cabinet will provide ammunition. For example, Nikki Haley has played a role in the decay of northern industry. It wasn’t Obama and Clinton. It was Romney, Haley, Trump, Apple, Walmart etc.
2
What is missing in this piece as a leading American progressive newspaper is to state and restate what other international publications and their politicians are saying. Namely to remind the Democrats to stand up, fight back and be as loud as they can in face of this clown of a president. That is what is missing from all levels of the Democratic party is to regain their progressive or liberal values and not shirk from them. Be angry and do not accept the utterly phony Republican party of zero ethics or values other than the greed and power of getting elected including putting a resurrected P.T. Barnum carnival barker in the White House.
Quit asking can the Democrats save the party ask them how they intend to fight back because now they look like the mouse that roared.
Quit asking can the Democrats save the party ask them how they intend to fight back because now they look like the mouse that roared.
The Clinton loss will be endlessly debated. I myself subscribe to the theory that there are millions of Americans who admire what is ugly and despise what is true. You can find them by the train loads at golf courses, beauty contests, wrestling matches, bowling alleys, hunting lodges, gun shops, comic book and baseball card conventions and Powerball lottery ticket stores.
Trump is catnip to these people, so he won. The lesson to Democrats is simple. Cut out all the high-toned rhetoric
about saving Social Security, sensible gun control and improving the environment and give people circuses where illegal migrants get attacked by lions. From there it’s a short distance to the White House.
Trump is catnip to these people, so he won. The lesson to Democrats is simple. Cut out all the high-toned rhetoric
about saving Social Security, sensible gun control and improving the environment and give people circuses where illegal migrants get attacked by lions. From there it’s a short distance to the White House.
1
Please expand on this rather odd notion, "Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat."
Sexism I might buy but racism? She failed to win 70 electoral votes that an African-American won just 4 years ago. Did these 4 states suddenly turn against a white candidate?
Somehow the Democrats forgot about the 2010 census and resulting losses in States were historic. It remains to be seen if they can do any better in 2020. It would be hard to do much worse.
Sexism I might buy but racism? She failed to win 70 electoral votes that an African-American won just 4 years ago. Did these 4 states suddenly turn against a white candidate?
Somehow the Democrats forgot about the 2010 census and resulting losses in States were historic. It remains to be seen if they can do any better in 2020. It would be hard to do much worse.
2
Start by getting rid of the Neo Liberal Corporate Democrats.
They are just Republicans with a few social stances that are moderate.
We really only have one major party anymore. Corporate, Wall Street ,War profiteering that could care less about you or me or the future of this planet.
The sad part is the Political Elites don't even see that the oligarchs don't need these lying money grubbing power hungry traders anymore. They just took the presidency with out firing a shot.
Now comes the pain. Social Security and Medicaid will be cut to make room for massive tax cuts for the rich.
Say what you have to say while you can because the Republicans only need one more state house to amend the constitution as they please. Freedom of speech will be the first thing gone. Donny Tiny Hands doesn't like people making fun of him.
They are just Republicans with a few social stances that are moderate.
We really only have one major party anymore. Corporate, Wall Street ,War profiteering that could care less about you or me or the future of this planet.
The sad part is the Political Elites don't even see that the oligarchs don't need these lying money grubbing power hungry traders anymore. They just took the presidency with out firing a shot.
Now comes the pain. Social Security and Medicaid will be cut to make room for massive tax cuts for the rich.
Say what you have to say while you can because the Republicans only need one more state house to amend the constitution as they please. Freedom of speech will be the first thing gone. Donny Tiny Hands doesn't like people making fun of him.
1
No way Bernie Sanders gets to be the voice of the new improved Democratic Party. He rarely compromised in the Senate,he was not the big change maker in Veterans care he claimed to be and all that blather about free college tuition was not realistic. Yes,wages do need to increase and the traditional two Party system needs a whole new swath of candidates not named Cruz,Rubio,Stein,Johnson,Bush,or Clinton or the nice lady from the People's Republic of Massachusetts,Mrs. Warren. But first,clean house in State Democratic Offices of bad executives like down here in Floriduh.
The white men I saw in line at the polling place who I have never seen there before will not be there for the midterms. The democrats need to be there. We could shut him down.
You saw white men in line you've never seen before at a polling place???? And you know somehow they won't be there for midterm elections????? What exactly is that supposed to mean????????
Can the Times explain to me why this was an "embarrassing" defeat? Disappointing, sure. Consequential, probably. But embarrassing why? As a matter of historical probability the most likely outcome of this election - regardless of candidates - was a comfortable GOP Preaidential majority and a substantial margin in both houses. What they got was a very narrow electoral college win and popular vote drubbing with a razor thin majority in the Senate.
Time for reflection? Of cours - always in defeat. But put away the hair-shirts, they aren't appropriate.
Time for reflection? Of cours - always in defeat. But put away the hair-shirts, they aren't appropriate.
Unlike eight years of denial, disrespect, and humiliation, Obama want America to respect the Presidency. What a wonderful President he is. But, no Obama. Trump is not normal and will not be tolerated for a moment. Consider his depraved references to his own daughter, his racist birther fraud, terrorism against Mexicans and Muslims, and willful destruction of the world. There's more. Nuclear proliferation is not acceptable, nor is abandoning NATO.
1
You mention the white swing states but not the thin margins that were responsible for this swing. The swing towards Trump was of course important for those voters but the real question is IF it is important for the rest of the nation whose views are better representerade by the 2 million Victor for Hillary. The destortion of the result because of rules made to preserve slaveri should not be usel as base for reevaluation of the Democratic Party policy. As the enthusiastic support for Bernie shows - and he staiyed very much on the Democratic Platform message - big numbers of voters not least the young support exactly these policies that GOP is set on destroying.
I'm still in shock. I see the election of Trump as a cry of desperation by the American people.
We really need a new Party, without the Clinton gang that nobody likes or trusts.
We really need a new Party, without the Clinton gang that nobody likes or trusts.
1
The Republicans set the tone when they adopted their scorched earth policy of obstructionism in their racist scheme to delegitimize President Obama. Their obstructionism prolonged the recovery, cost jobs, promoted hatred and undermined American leadership in the world.
Unfortunately, the Democrats must continue to obstruct President-elect Trump, in order to prevent this racist, misogynist, war-mongering megalomaniac from accomplishing what the Republicans have well started - the destruction of the United States of America.
Unfortunately, the Democrats must continue to obstruct President-elect Trump, in order to prevent this racist, misogynist, war-mongering megalomaniac from accomplishing what the Republicans have well started - the destruction of the United States of America.
1
So you're openly demanding that the Democrat Party of No take America hostage, undo an election, defy the Will of the People, and commit treason?
Too late! It's too late for the Democratic Party. It is time to build a new coalition lead by Senator Bernie Sanders and "Our Revolution" and Dr Jill Stein and the "Green Party".
The NY Times editorial board is calling for the failed Corporatist Democratic Party to unite to fight Trump's Frankenstein's monster version of the Corporatist Republican Party. That's fine as far as it goes but it doesn't go nearly far enough.
In the face of climate change and oligarchic globalist corporations and Wall Street plutocrats more intent than ever on dividing and impoverishing the working and middle classes (regardless of race, religion or ethnicity it is not the time to be calling major segments of the coalition that must fight for an egalitarian, environmentally sustainable future deplorable and unredeemable.
Frankly it is time to unite to fight the interests of the fossil carbon energy industry and multinational corporations who seek to subjugate and destroy the planet for their private gain. It's time to build an environmentally sound democratic socialist society in the United States and around the world.
The NY Times editorial board is calling for the failed Corporatist Democratic Party to unite to fight Trump's Frankenstein's monster version of the Corporatist Republican Party. That's fine as far as it goes but it doesn't go nearly far enough.
In the face of climate change and oligarchic globalist corporations and Wall Street plutocrats more intent than ever on dividing and impoverishing the working and middle classes (regardless of race, religion or ethnicity it is not the time to be calling major segments of the coalition that must fight for an egalitarian, environmentally sustainable future deplorable and unredeemable.
Frankly it is time to unite to fight the interests of the fossil carbon energy industry and multinational corporations who seek to subjugate and destroy the planet for their private gain. It's time to build an environmentally sound democratic socialist society in the United States and around the world.
4
Core questions about our values and our ideals are answered not by our elected congress but by the lobbyists employed by the multinational corporations. The two party system is a clapped-out farce and plays right into the hands of the amoral 1% who sit on corporate boards. They get their way every time by having line-item after line-item rammed through the legislative sessions, as anyone who troubles oneself to read the Federal Register can note. We the little people who pay the taxes are beneath contempt in their eyes, as we remain in the eyes of politicians spawned by our archaic two-party system, a system that has long since failed to serve the constituents.
5
You have to admit, one thing the republican party has achieved that eluded democrats is a younger generation to come up behind the boomer generation as they retire and one that is focused and energized as well as taking up the agenda and taking it to the next level. Democrats had young people like Debbie Wasserman who washed out before the election.
My first time voting was for Reagan and ever since I've been waiting for democratic Gen-X inspired late boomers and Gen-X leadership to vote for ever since. Now at the age that many would consider an old fogey, I'm still waiting.
A large part of Clinton's lack of appeal was used as the leading selling point: her experience. Experienced yes, but she along with Schumer now have legacies that are ankle weights in a fast changing world. Their experience is critical but not the forward edge of what the world needs now.
We need to boldly put forward our brightest younger candidates front and center and ones that are not sycophants for the old guard. ones that will listen and take advice but act confidently from their take on the world they're living in, respectful but less fettered to the past.
My first time voting was for Reagan and ever since I've been waiting for democratic Gen-X inspired late boomers and Gen-X leadership to vote for ever since. Now at the age that many would consider an old fogey, I'm still waiting.
A large part of Clinton's lack of appeal was used as the leading selling point: her experience. Experienced yes, but she along with Schumer now have legacies that are ankle weights in a fast changing world. Their experience is critical but not the forward edge of what the world needs now.
We need to boldly put forward our brightest younger candidates front and center and ones that are not sycophants for the old guard. ones that will listen and take advice but act confidently from their take on the world they're living in, respectful but less fettered to the past.
3
They will all agree that a huge infrastructure program would be a good thing. Then the monster elect will have the huge power of infrastructure and increased defense contracts and will be able to swing anybody's vote with a promise to locate a project in the Congressperson's district.
Will Trump be a different president than he was a candidate? Unlikely. That he isn't pushing to lock up Hillary isn't a surprise. On all major policy issues, from repealing Obamacare to turning his back on NATO, Trump said what he thought his base wanted to hear. He has no firm ideas or goals re any major policy or program, except for those that affect his own business interest. So, what kind of president is he likely to be? Opportunistic, of course, but unconcerned about major issues re climate change, the environment, reining in Wall Street and the big banks, healthcare, labor, etc. He will recognize no clear boundary bet. his personal and the national interest, which will bring him to grief if not destroy his presidency. Given his dubious if not fraudulent business career, his vulnerability to the influence of foreign govts., especially Russia, Trump will be a hostage to anyone or power who has the goods on him. Very likely the CIA and FBI have already organized their own Trump watchers. His appointees? So long as they flatter him they will be allowed to do whatever they want to do. They are likely to go off in a dozen directions at once, with no control from the WH. You think the campaign was chaotic? Just wait. What should the Senate Democrats do? Block everything they can via the filibuster or any other means, including all nominations to the Supreme Court for the next 4 years. Exploit every scandal that comes to light -- and many will. Make Trump a one-term president.
and what about the role of the Democrats in the Senate?
They are the minority party, guided by sen. Schumer of New York, who did blamed Obamacare over more economic relief in the aftermath of 2008 ( maybe he has had time to consider that sick people are burnt by the medical debt), and opposed the Iran Nuclear deal , if i'm remembering well the only Democrat to do that,
I'm not going that far to say the sen. Schumer is a blue dog, but he is a pandering populist in a populist Trump's presidency. He will act more than how the Democrats acted in the past in similar- as minority party- situations, by appeasing and adjusting to the Republican agenda, which is, by the way, the same scripted way it would have acted if mrs. Rodham Clinton would have been elected.
And speaking of, i think it's a bit off from the NYT to have it both ways this long.
IF mrs. Rodham Clinton had the vote of the majority of the voters, 2 millions more than mr.Trump as remarked in the article, THEN she can't be blamed for her strategy to get a landslide of votes, which she did get, by targeting "minorities and white stalwarts". Or in other words, her ideological vision of portraiting herself as "the third-term-Obama" worked too well on the federal border ( the two coasts and Colorado and N.M.) but it didn't worked effectively in the states Obama won at his time, which means she was still too compromised by her precedent campaign against the current president to get the needy votes in crucial states.
They are the minority party, guided by sen. Schumer of New York, who did blamed Obamacare over more economic relief in the aftermath of 2008 ( maybe he has had time to consider that sick people are burnt by the medical debt), and opposed the Iran Nuclear deal , if i'm remembering well the only Democrat to do that,
I'm not going that far to say the sen. Schumer is a blue dog, but he is a pandering populist in a populist Trump's presidency. He will act more than how the Democrats acted in the past in similar- as minority party- situations, by appeasing and adjusting to the Republican agenda, which is, by the way, the same scripted way it would have acted if mrs. Rodham Clinton would have been elected.
And speaking of, i think it's a bit off from the NYT to have it both ways this long.
IF mrs. Rodham Clinton had the vote of the majority of the voters, 2 millions more than mr.Trump as remarked in the article, THEN she can't be blamed for her strategy to get a landslide of votes, which she did get, by targeting "minorities and white stalwarts". Or in other words, her ideological vision of portraiting herself as "the third-term-Obama" worked too well on the federal border ( the two coasts and Colorado and N.M.) but it didn't worked effectively in the states Obama won at his time, which means she was still too compromised by her precedent campaign against the current president to get the needy votes in crucial states.
2
Clinton got more votes, but a "landslide" would require getting many tens of millions more votes. No one has ever won a " landslide" and lost in the electoral college.
No because D's are so pathetic they could not defeat what will be the most divisive and Rightwing administrations in history.
Popcorn.
Popcorn.
1
Senate Democrats using the filibuster as advocated is just, yet impossible. Previous filibuster rules allowed a senator to block any bill, even from debate. Mitch McConnell used them as a WMD, preventing introduction of any legislation President Obama advocated, even killing Republican bills Obama supported. Current filibuster rules are far less potent. What's even worse? Trump. He's harnessed 50+ years of Republican hate and paranoia and he'll employ blatant Republican cheating which created the most non-representative government in modern history. (Republican Gerrymandering manipulation in Pennsylvania alone meant Democrats got only 25% of the House seats though winning over 50% of the vote; so a vote cast by a Republican was worth 2x that of a Democrat). Trump and the Republicans by rigging the system hold all branches of government, have destroyed virtually all checks and balances put in place by the Founding Fathers, and have vilified the Fourth Estate, replacing it with Alt-Right propaganda, AKA "fake news." If Trump wants something, no matter how destructive to working people, minorities, the economy, or democracy, what will stop him? He said he’d only accept the election results if he won. He also said there’d be "blood in the streets." If Senate Democrats oppose him, what will likely happen? These are dark times. The president elect is despotic. If opposed he'll be a vicious bully again; use racism and sexism to get his way. Be prepared for it. If it occurs; resist.
2
Did the Democrats miss the message of the electorate? Clearly the institutional leadership missed it and went along with Hillary's quest for the presidency. She could never rebrand herself as a friend of the people, even when running against a candidate as flawed and phony as Donald Trump. The election of 2016 demonstrates again that when Democrats run as Democrats they win, when they run as Republican - lite or friends of Wall Street, they lose. The one exception may be Russ Feingold, no ones idea of a tool of Wall Street who lost to the incredibly flawed and useless Ron Johnson. Rather than refight the vote count for president, the Democrats ought to be fighting the vote counts in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Florida for Senate. And they should be planning a strategy for 2018 based on contrasting the successes of California with the failures of Kansas. The successes of Minnesota with the failures of Wisconsin. And there is no circumstance under which they should compromise with the Republicans or with Trump. They don't have the votes to block everything but they do have the right to vote no. Let Trump's policies come to the floor, let them pass with no Democratic support. Let Ryan's vicious budget be passed and his plans to gut Medicare and Social Security pass with no Democratic votes. Then take the message to the people, even the angry white racists that elected Trump, about how they have only the Republicans to blame for the disaster that is their lives.
1
The DNC needs to pour money into taking back the Governorships and State Houses and do it with vibrant men and women who eschew partisan politics and don't live by talking points faxed to them every morning by Party headquarters. We need young Jerry Browns and Elizabeth Warrens and Bernie Sanders and the DNC better start cultivating them or we will live with right wing extremists and their spiritless policies for the next fifty years. They are there in the House right now. Go get them and bring them home to run our State Houses!
the Dems can't win at the state level because their policies are wrong and failed. The Party demands complete absolute adherence to Party Doctrine: no borders, limitless immigration, free food, free shelter, free healthcare, free college, abolition of free enterprise, abolition of private property, abolition of all military forces, abolition of civil police, abolition of Christianity and Judaism, free abortion on demand, abolition of the Constitution and limitless unquestioned Big Government power and control over even the tiniest detail of your life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Identity politics will not win the Dems a national election. The Dems need only look toward their own recent history to find the answer to their political problems with the working classes - see W. Clinton's message "It's the Economy, stupid." And, Term limits are the answer to the problem of professional politicians of both parties. Twelve years is more than long enough to serve in either of the nation's legislative branches.
1
Term limits is a good way to ensure that Republicans and big money completely dominate. Under term limits you will have government by, for, and of special interests. Candidates who know they are only going to be in for a few years know they have to serve the interests of their paymasters so they can be ensured of a career path going forward.
Obama spoke those words many times during his presidency yet caved into the Republicans every time from the beginning. The Democrats need to go the route of Sanders and Warren or else lose. The old guard establishment centrists ideas failed and unless Democrats truly admit this and change their ways and message then they suffer a defeat in 2018 and 2020 that will be impossible to recover from.
7
I have a theory of politics: the farther a party in power moves to the right, the farther the country elects someone to the left in the next election cycle - and vice versa. Nixon gave us Carter, Carter gave us Reagan, Reagan gave us Clinton, Clinton gave us Bush, Bush gave us Obama, and Obama gave us Trump. Who will Trump give us? Warren? Sanders?
Whomever the Democrats pick next time, I hope it's someone more inspiring. Everything went right for Clinton. With her 30 years of experience, the support of two popular presidents, the woman and minority vote, and facing a Republican candidate with no experience and a propensity for lying, cheating, womanizing - not to mention obnoxious, racist behavior - how could she lose?
How could she lose!
Send us someone more inspiring next time.
Whomever the Democrats pick next time, I hope it's someone more inspiring. Everything went right for Clinton. With her 30 years of experience, the support of two popular presidents, the woman and minority vote, and facing a Republican candidate with no experience and a propensity for lying, cheating, womanizing - not to mention obnoxious, racist behavior - how could she lose?
How could she lose!
Send us someone more inspiring next time.
4
Sorry, your theory of right and left is backwards. Clinton was farther right than Carter, and Obama was farther right than Clinton, so far as economic matters are concerned.
While I voted for her despite her shortcomings, what I really don't understand is why so many people fail to attribute Hillary's loss and the related lower Democratic turnout to the simple fact that people didn't like her because they think she is unethical. Donald Trump didn't claim to be a good human being while Hillary Clinton did, despite the evidence to the contrary. The Democrats nominated a flawed candidate and were willing to look past those flaws as the ends would justify the means in the same way that feminists gave Bill Clinton a pass despite the way he treated the women that he had extramarital relationships with. This is why Bernie Sanders, a proud Socialist, was able to give Hillary a run for the money in her own party despite her machine.
Neither party is able to put up a field of qualified candidates that can rally the country behind them. The most important thing to do when you have a problem is recognize it to deal with it, not blame it on "messaging."
Neither party is able to put up a field of qualified candidates that can rally the country behind them. The most important thing to do when you have a problem is recognize it to deal with it, not blame it on "messaging."
3
The problem was that the party was so weak after eight years of Obama that Hillary was the only "credible" candidate with a substantial support base. Sanders wasn't even a Democrat, and still isn't...that was a big part of his appeal. Ultimately, though, it's tough to grow a solid center- left party in a country that hates " big government" as a matter of principle.
1
The Senate Democrats strategy is to give Donald Trump victories, thinking that the success of the Republican president will result in more Democratic victories.
They saw Republicans take total control of the government by unremitting opposition to President Obama and take from it that they should do...the opposite.
This is political malpractice, political madness.
To those who say "we will get some things we want": maybe a few, in the short term. But in the long term you will get more Republicans, an eight-year Trump presidency and decades of conservative choices for the Supreme Court.
Chief executives -- presidents, governors, mayors -- get all the credit snd blame for what happens. To think that Democrats will benefit from giving Trump victories is delusional.
They saw Republicans take total control of the government by unremitting opposition to President Obama and take from it that they should do...the opposite.
This is political malpractice, political madness.
To those who say "we will get some things we want": maybe a few, in the short term. But in the long term you will get more Republicans, an eight-year Trump presidency and decades of conservative choices for the Supreme Court.
Chief executives -- presidents, governors, mayors -- get all the credit snd blame for what happens. To think that Democrats will benefit from giving Trump victories is delusional.
1
"Mr. Schumer, who has been in touch with Mr. Trump over the past two weeks. “Above all, our economic message was not sharp enough, was not bold enough, was not strong enough. All those blue collar voters ". Just a reminder Mr. Schumer you represent Wall Street, don't pretend to care for blue collar voters.
4
So Bernie Sanders was right all along ?
7
Yes, he was. You Dems ought to go full metal socialist!
When Carrier announced they were moving their plant from Indianapolis to Mexico the only one to speak out was Trump. Where were the Democrats and President Obama? That failure is why the Democrats lost and why they have lost their following. What do they offer the American People? Gay Rights and Abortion! They forgot there are a lot more people for whom those are not issues. It has been about the economy and a perception of lose all along.
9
The Dems are following Paul "your jobs are leaving and they're not coming back, so get used to it" Krugman. That will never be a winning strategy.
1
Sexism played an obvious role in her defeat? What facts are there to back up that bold statement? How many exit polls had voters listing " not wanting a women president" as a major reason for voting for Trump? While many voters may have been specifically voting against Clinton in this election they had a laundry list of legitimate reasons and suggesting that it was because she was a women gives her way to big a pass on the many and obvious flaws which actually cost her the election.
7
Sexism means Trump was given a pass on his many and (more) obvious flaws...but he didn't have to answer for them because he's a man.
The title should be, Can Senate Democrats Save Civilization? Because that's really what's at stake here. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either foolish or naive.
2
No he cannot
The loss for the Democrats and be traced to their abandonment of the states and putting all their efforts into winning presidential contests. The Republicans now control over thirty states. Thirty five states gives the Republicans a guarantee of 105 electoral votes. If the Democrats have the other 15 states, they receive 45 electoral votes, for a deficit of 60 electoral votes. Failure to win back the state houses will condemn the Democrats to a losing strategy, regardless of how many popular votes they receive in their dwindling collection of loyal states. If the Democrats intend to win, then they need to start with local, county and state victories.
I was a Hillary supporter....I like most of the party was funneled into her camp by the DNC. If the DNC had not done it's best to push Bernie aside he may have been our candidate....and now our president. I pray that Schemer and Sanders and all the strong democratic senators can protect our country from the most extreme and hurtful policies that will hurt Americans and the world community. I wait to see what will happen and hope that we become more honest with ourselves and less blind to the true voice of our country. The democratic party needs to listen to all the people...not just the donors, the powerful...it needs to listen to those without a voice...those without power.....those who voted!
I deel very strongly that after two years of Donald Trump his devoted rust belt fans would rather vote for their dog catcher.
1
I wonder how you came to the conclusion that racial bigotry was the cause of Mrs. Clinton's loss. She's white and so is Mr. Trump. All of the places that delivered Mr. Trump his victory voted for Mr. Obama, a black man. So please when you wish to blame white voters for Mr. Trump at least rey to see beyond your typical lens.
You were horrified when Republicans tried to block Mr. Obama. Now you want Democrats to block Mr. Trump. Funny how it goes at the NYT when the shoe is on the other foot. I presume you love the Filibuster which you have previously hated, loved, hated, etc. depending who was in charge. To paraphrase Mr. Obama - you lost.
You were horrified when Republicans tried to block Mr. Obama. Now you want Democrats to block Mr. Trump. Funny how it goes at the NYT when the shoe is on the other foot. I presume you love the Filibuster which you have previously hated, loved, hated, etc. depending who was in charge. To paraphrase Mr. Obama - you lost.
5
The Trump election was just the icing on the cake. The losses that Democrats have experienced on the state level in races for state legislatures and governorships over the last 8 years is the real symptom of a truly serious disease.
I and other friends from Chicago worked Kenosha Wisconsin for HRC the weekend before the election in a GOTV endeavor. The campaign had done a masterful job of identifying its voters and organizing the paperwork involved in sending its volunteer troops out. As we canvassed I found myself thinking: "How is this going to work? Chicago "elites" volunteering to chase down Black and Brown votes and women for HRC." Well it didn't "work." HRC lost Kenosha.
So what is to be done? The problem with USA today is that it has turned into an oligarchy that works only for and improves the lot of that oligarchy. And unfortunately HRC was perceived as the voice of that oligarchy more than Trump. And even that perception, amazingly enough, may have been correct.
So the Democratic Party has a lot of work to be done both in terms of its message and in terms of its grass roots organizing on the local level. And issues of divided group interest: Black, Brown, GLBTX or whatever that alphabet soup is, won't cut it. It is the Economy Stupid and it is the perceived unfairness of how the pie has been cut. Republicans have been most responsible for that cutting. But that message is not heard in local or national. Why?
I and other friends from Chicago worked Kenosha Wisconsin for HRC the weekend before the election in a GOTV endeavor. The campaign had done a masterful job of identifying its voters and organizing the paperwork involved in sending its volunteer troops out. As we canvassed I found myself thinking: "How is this going to work? Chicago "elites" volunteering to chase down Black and Brown votes and women for HRC." Well it didn't "work." HRC lost Kenosha.
So what is to be done? The problem with USA today is that it has turned into an oligarchy that works only for and improves the lot of that oligarchy. And unfortunately HRC was perceived as the voice of that oligarchy more than Trump. And even that perception, amazingly enough, may have been correct.
So the Democratic Party has a lot of work to be done both in terms of its message and in terms of its grass roots organizing on the local level. And issues of divided group interest: Black, Brown, GLBTX or whatever that alphabet soup is, won't cut it. It is the Economy Stupid and it is the perceived unfairness of how the pie has been cut. Republicans have been most responsible for that cutting. But that message is not heard in local or national. Why?
7
Will the New York Times ever be honest about Hillary Clinton?
“Sexism and racial bigotry yada, yada, yada.” With its head deliberately in the sand, no mention from the New York Times of private server emails or the interaction between the Clinton Foundation and Mrs. Clinton’s state department.
James Comey, in July, laid out the reasons why Mrs. Clinton should have been indicted but backed away in a political decision obviously influenced, if not dictated, from above. When, in October, Mr. Comey wrote a letter to Congress about the Anthony Weiner discovery and then quickly said “nothing to see here,” it gave credence to the Trump “rigged “ contention, a contention bolstered by the leaked emails showing the beyond the scenes manipulations of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign.
Bottom line: The electorate, in making a choice between a crook who had nothing really to offer but her gender and a clown, chose the clown. The Democrats made that happen by nominating as their presidential candidate the person who bore responsibility for the scandals surrounding her and was the one person who could put the clown in the White House.
It would be nice if the Times woke up and smelled the coffee regarding Hillary Clinton. Not in this lifetime.
“Sexism and racial bigotry yada, yada, yada.” With its head deliberately in the sand, no mention from the New York Times of private server emails or the interaction between the Clinton Foundation and Mrs. Clinton’s state department.
James Comey, in July, laid out the reasons why Mrs. Clinton should have been indicted but backed away in a political decision obviously influenced, if not dictated, from above. When, in October, Mr. Comey wrote a letter to Congress about the Anthony Weiner discovery and then quickly said “nothing to see here,” it gave credence to the Trump “rigged “ contention, a contention bolstered by the leaked emails showing the beyond the scenes manipulations of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign.
Bottom line: The electorate, in making a choice between a crook who had nothing really to offer but her gender and a clown, chose the clown. The Democrats made that happen by nominating as their presidential candidate the person who bore responsibility for the scandals surrounding her and was the one person who could put the clown in the White House.
It would be nice if the Times woke up and smelled the coffee regarding Hillary Clinton. Not in this lifetime.
7
When the Democratic Party remembers who it is and what it stands for it will not have a problem winning, but if they keep up with Clinton, Kaine, et alii the party could well fade away.
The Democrats used to be the party of working people, of the common man and woman, of those who earned their living by working. The Clinton era Democratic Party is the champion of Wall Street Banksters, NeoLiberal Globalists that think it fine to sell out factory workers, that send their kids to private schools while they endlessly meddle with public education. The term that comes to mind is Limousine Liberals.
Why should the vast working class support people who do not stand up for them? The great lie of America is that everyone describes themselves as Middle Class, but very few actually are anymore. The overwhelming majority of Americans are working harder and longer to maintain a lower standard of living than they had just a few decades ago.
Take a look at the archives of this very paper and read the vitriol directed at President Franklin Roosevelt in his time. If you stand for the vast majority of working Americans you cannot be the friend of the Banksters and Crooks that populate Wall Street and Corporate America. Democrats need to concentrate on the we, not the brain dead identity politics that was the Clinton Campaign's bread and butter. E Pluribus Unum - from many one - not the politics of division, the politics of inclusion.
The Democrats used to be the party of working people, of the common man and woman, of those who earned their living by working. The Clinton era Democratic Party is the champion of Wall Street Banksters, NeoLiberal Globalists that think it fine to sell out factory workers, that send their kids to private schools while they endlessly meddle with public education. The term that comes to mind is Limousine Liberals.
Why should the vast working class support people who do not stand up for them? The great lie of America is that everyone describes themselves as Middle Class, but very few actually are anymore. The overwhelming majority of Americans are working harder and longer to maintain a lower standard of living than they had just a few decades ago.
Take a look at the archives of this very paper and read the vitriol directed at President Franklin Roosevelt in his time. If you stand for the vast majority of working Americans you cannot be the friend of the Banksters and Crooks that populate Wall Street and Corporate America. Democrats need to concentrate on the we, not the brain dead identity politics that was the Clinton Campaign's bread and butter. E Pluribus Unum - from many one - not the politics of division, the politics of inclusion.
8
I like the phrase 'callous disregard' that appears near the end of the piece. Yes, this administration will be marked by callous disregard for blacks, Hispanics, and Muslims.
It will also show callous disregard for environmental issues, wildlife issues in particular. They are putting Myron Ebell, a lobbyist for the fossil fuel industry, at the head of the EPA or the Dept. of the Interior.
It will also show callous disregard for environmental issues, wildlife issues in particular. They are putting Myron Ebell, a lobbyist for the fossil fuel industry, at the head of the EPA or the Dept. of the Interior.
2
The Democrats need to boost morale by shouting out constantly all the good things they have done and stand for, instead of constantly being engaged in this corrosive self criticism. I wish before each time Bernie lets go on the Democrats he would spend 30 seconds listing all of the good things they have done over the past 80 years. Everything the working person has after their faith and family comes from Democrats and unions. Tick that list off before unloading on your own party. And drop the term liberal elite when criticizing the party. That is the exact term the Republicans use!! Calling us that only reinforces the image the Republicans try to create. There is a way to be self critical without being self destructive.
Although he's a good man, George H.W. Bush will forever be linked to the shameful Willie Horton campaign. Donald Trump is a manifestly bad man, and he will forever be linked to Vladimir Putin and a wide array of domestic deplorables. Trump believes that with better behavior now, people will forget what he's done. He'll never understand that the end does not justify the means.
This debacle began when Democrats did not adequately explain or convince people of the merits of the Affordable Care Act. Conservatives rushed in to fill the information void and speak to peoples' fears, discrediting ACA. That lie led to many other lies, successfully undermining public confidence in good government programs.
Going forward, we need to provide digestible, convincing information about market failures and how government programs benefit people. We need to recognize the formidable disinformation capabilities of the far-right, and the challenges of any public policy initiative that can't be thoroughly explained in 500 words at an 8th-grade reading level.
This debacle began when Democrats did not adequately explain or convince people of the merits of the Affordable Care Act. Conservatives rushed in to fill the information void and speak to peoples' fears, discrediting ACA. That lie led to many other lies, successfully undermining public confidence in good government programs.
Going forward, we need to provide digestible, convincing information about market failures and how government programs benefit people. We need to recognize the formidable disinformation capabilities of the far-right, and the challenges of any public policy initiative that can't be thoroughly explained in 500 words at an 8th-grade reading level.
I rephrase the main point of top Readers' Picks RLS Virginia and Mark Thomason Clawson, Michigan.
The main lines of thought expressed by Bernie Sanders are the foundation on which Elizabeth Warrem and others must build a future Democratic Party. Those lines of thought should be documented as should Warren's and others' expressions of what we need for a future America.
To that I add that we can benefit from Mark Lilla's essay a week ago and then learn from that and from one my guiding lights, Professor Dorothy Roberts, to formulate policy for all Americans in what I will call the lower 50% in SES terms.
A simple example: Coal miners are out of work and will stay out of work as coal miners. That must be the future. Imagine a Presidential candidate who had actually gone to them and told them that there could be a new work future for many of them. Coal is not the only natural resource "down there" now. The much more important resource consists of the millions of tons of solid waste sent there from further north. The candidate could have shown them how a program to build high-tech incinerators could have provided jobs and electricity and/or heat 24/7 365 far into the future. Solid waste is a major resource in the cold Nordic countries including the one I live in. Too bad a candidate did not propose putting out-of-work coal miners back to work that way.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US SE
The main lines of thought expressed by Bernie Sanders are the foundation on which Elizabeth Warrem and others must build a future Democratic Party. Those lines of thought should be documented as should Warren's and others' expressions of what we need for a future America.
To that I add that we can benefit from Mark Lilla's essay a week ago and then learn from that and from one my guiding lights, Professor Dorothy Roberts, to formulate policy for all Americans in what I will call the lower 50% in SES terms.
A simple example: Coal miners are out of work and will stay out of work as coal miners. That must be the future. Imagine a Presidential candidate who had actually gone to them and told them that there could be a new work future for many of them. Coal is not the only natural resource "down there" now. The much more important resource consists of the millions of tons of solid waste sent there from further north. The candidate could have shown them how a program to build high-tech incinerators could have provided jobs and electricity and/or heat 24/7 365 far into the future. Solid waste is a major resource in the cold Nordic countries including the one I live in. Too bad a candidate did not propose putting out-of-work coal miners back to work that way.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US SE
7
The Dems need to decide if they are the party for the 99%, or the party for the 1%. They can't be both. The fantasy of post-class politics in America is just that. Time to wake up.
5
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat" You are correct, to elect someone just because she has a vagina or to vote for a black man because he's black is sexism and racism
Still no clue as to why you lost
Still no clue as to why you lost
3
Unlike Obama who did not deserve to be vilified by republicans, Trump has demonstrated the lowest possible values and possibly criminal behavior negating any need to respect his election as president.
This piece advocates giving Trump a chance to demonstrate his intentions but my energy will be devoted to removing him from office by impeachment based on abuse of his office or simply asking him to resign in response to the majority of Americans not wanting him as president.
This piece advocates giving Trump a chance to demonstrate his intentions but my energy will be devoted to removing him from office by impeachment based on abuse of his office or simply asking him to resign in response to the majority of Americans not wanting him as president.
The Democrats only have themselves to blame for running Hillary Clinton. Or let us say forcing Hillary down our throats.
Next time around at least give the voters the image that they are selecting the nominee. Or at least have some say in the matter.
Hillary and back room politics delivered the election to Trump. Trump did not win, the Democrats lost.
Next time around at least give the voters the image that they are selecting the nominee. Or at least have some say in the matter.
Hillary and back room politics delivered the election to Trump. Trump did not win, the Democrats lost.
5
In 2009, Republicans were a smaller minority in Congress than Democrats are now. There were no headlines then about whether it would be possible to "save the Republican party."
On the whole, Democratic leaders of recent years have been the greatest political cowards in the history of the United States. All other considerations about the future of their party pale in comparison.
On the whole, Democratic leaders of recent years have been the greatest political cowards in the history of the United States. All other considerations about the future of their party pale in comparison.
2
The Times overlooks the real problem with the Democratic Party.
Senate Democrats can pick their fights (and hopefully they will win them), but Trump and the Republican Party can do as they please without losing their voters because they have what the Democratic Party does not have.
The Democratic Party lacks a national propaganda infrastructure like that of the plutocratic GOP which can effectively influence an evangelical Christian to choose a proven morally depraved predator of sex and greed, over a woman whose only proven crime was to receive large fees for speeches.
As The Times has pointed out before, Trump wins even when he loses. Voters in this country make bad decisions because they are misinformed, dis-informed and ill-informed by media. FOX misinforms them; hate radio dis-informs them; mainstream media ill-informs them.
Democrats can take arguments to the heartland and coasts, but their arguments will be twisted and understood as lies. In this election the GOP propaganda machine operated in concert with the Russian government to influence the outcome. There was no outrage from the voters.
The Democratic Party's only hope is for Trump to fail, the GOP to fail, the country to fail, the heartland and coasts to suffer bigly. That is the only thing the GOP propaganda machine cannot put lipstick on.
Senate Democrats can pick their fights (and hopefully they will win them), but Trump and the Republican Party can do as they please without losing their voters because they have what the Democratic Party does not have.
The Democratic Party lacks a national propaganda infrastructure like that of the plutocratic GOP which can effectively influence an evangelical Christian to choose a proven morally depraved predator of sex and greed, over a woman whose only proven crime was to receive large fees for speeches.
As The Times has pointed out before, Trump wins even when he loses. Voters in this country make bad decisions because they are misinformed, dis-informed and ill-informed by media. FOX misinforms them; hate radio dis-informs them; mainstream media ill-informs them.
Democrats can take arguments to the heartland and coasts, but their arguments will be twisted and understood as lies. In this election the GOP propaganda machine operated in concert with the Russian government to influence the outcome. There was no outrage from the voters.
The Democratic Party's only hope is for Trump to fail, the GOP to fail, the country to fail, the heartland and coasts to suffer bigly. That is the only thing the GOP propaganda machine cannot put lipstick on.
2
Only the Progressive Caucus can save the Democrats. The DLC influence must be rooted out. The neoliberalism that voters rejected must be abandoned. The Democrats must return to the authentic populism of the New Deal represented by Senators Sanders, Ellison, Grijalva and others. Anything less well be seen as the same empty rhetoric.
6
Trump may not look so appealing to the minions that voted for him when he does not meet their demands. It may look more like the disaster that the Bush presidency gave us: unending wars, and the great recession.
In four years we may not have to select another supreme court justice.
In four more years, the Democratic might be better at reading the tea leaves and actually listen to the people rather than take a "listening" tour across the country. It should have been apparent that the country including Democrats wanted change. Bernie got millions more people at his rallies than his competition. Bernie got millions of small dollar donations than his competition who relied on wealthy donors. Problem here is wealthy donors may have a lot of money, but like everyone else they get one vote. The handwriting was clearly on the wall.
In four more years, maybe the media will be more interested in the country than in selling its product.
In four more years, I hope there is still a semblance of the country to save.
In four years we may not have to select another supreme court justice.
In four more years, the Democratic might be better at reading the tea leaves and actually listen to the people rather than take a "listening" tour across the country. It should have been apparent that the country including Democrats wanted change. Bernie got millions more people at his rallies than his competition. Bernie got millions of small dollar donations than his competition who relied on wealthy donors. Problem here is wealthy donors may have a lot of money, but like everyone else they get one vote. The handwriting was clearly on the wall.
In four more years, maybe the media will be more interested in the country than in selling its product.
In four more years, I hope there is still a semblance of the country to save.
1
I would like to know where all the Democratic members of Congress (who were not running for their own re-election) were spending their time during the most recent election cycle. They were certainly NOT on television or social media promoting the Democratic candidate for President; they were certainly NOT in the newspapers promoting the benefits of Obamacare or Medicare or immigration or veteran benefits or international partners; they were certainly NOT sending any messages anywhere that I could see in support of any parts of the Democratic Party platform. I am a life-long member of the Democratic Party and I am APPALLED at the recent behavior of its leading members with the glaring exceptions of President and Mrs Obama who persevered in the fight for Clinton despite having been rather unceremoniously uninvited to campaign by any and all Democratic members of Congress during recent mid-term elections (which many of those Democrats eventually lost, BTW). It is long past time for all of you Democrats in DC to stop hiding from the things you believe in and GET OUT THERE AND FIGHT THIS! Mr Schumer, it is time for you to provide some aggressive leadership!
1
Hillary Clinton needed a better group of advisers. "Being the first woman President" wasn't exactly the sort of "change" most voters could grasp.
From what I saw on TV, there seemed to be a lot of voters who only very reluctantly voted for Donald Trump. So if the Democrats spend a bit of time 'listening' to those voters, they might be able to figure out what these voters were really upset about.
And it is an interesting question how you can have a prosperous economy when corporations are busily figuring out how to out-source every job and ship them overseas as, at some point, you end up with a lot of very unhappy unemployed people who wonder where all this prosperity went to that was supposed to show up as a result of all these free trade deals.
From what I saw on TV, there seemed to be a lot of voters who only very reluctantly voted for Donald Trump. So if the Democrats spend a bit of time 'listening' to those voters, they might be able to figure out what these voters were really upset about.
And it is an interesting question how you can have a prosperous economy when corporations are busily figuring out how to out-source every job and ship them overseas as, at some point, you end up with a lot of very unhappy unemployed people who wonder where all this prosperity went to that was supposed to show up as a result of all these free trade deals.
3
The first and most important job of a new Democratic Party lies in formulating a new platform centered on Sander's style reform and developing a focus on educating the voting public to the political realities that are the needs of the majority.
It's never too late to tell the truth.
The American public has been- like a frightened child- terrified by ghost stories.
That booger bear is Socialism.
Sanders did not equivocate. He did not hide his understanding of the real- the true inevitable conflict that must be faced if we can ever have a shared future for us all.
A modern state, in the complex world of today, requires regulation- environmental, financial, social and structural.
Take a group of 100 people anywhere. There will always be a certain morally malleable percentage that will never be able to provide for themselves- for whatever reason- that are ill or disabled and will always require care.
And next week it could be you or your Mom.
The simple, primitive impulse of profit margin alone is no longer sufficient moral justification- nor does it provide for, the essential social stability of a modern society.
The Democratic future, if we have one, will be organized around a proud resurgence of liberal policies that understand and bring together regulated Capitalism and responsible Social obligations.
We can't keep avoiding the big problem.
Are you proud of being a liberal Democrat or are you hiding in the shadows?
It's never too late to tell the truth.
The American public has been- like a frightened child- terrified by ghost stories.
That booger bear is Socialism.
Sanders did not equivocate. He did not hide his understanding of the real- the true inevitable conflict that must be faced if we can ever have a shared future for us all.
A modern state, in the complex world of today, requires regulation- environmental, financial, social and structural.
Take a group of 100 people anywhere. There will always be a certain morally malleable percentage that will never be able to provide for themselves- for whatever reason- that are ill or disabled and will always require care.
And next week it could be you or your Mom.
The simple, primitive impulse of profit margin alone is no longer sufficient moral justification- nor does it provide for, the essential social stability of a modern society.
The Democratic future, if we have one, will be organized around a proud resurgence of liberal policies that understand and bring together regulated Capitalism and responsible Social obligations.
We can't keep avoiding the big problem.
Are you proud of being a liberal Democrat or are you hiding in the shadows?
1
Granted that it is always an error to say offensive things about your opponent's voters, but I doubt very much if the discussion about the words deplorable and irremediable got to a large number of Trump's supporters or if they had ever heard such words. There is always a tendency in "retrospection" of commentators to try to find the one crucial moment that decides an election: Dukakis' helmet,
Muskie's commotion, etc. A superficial analysis, at best.
Muskie's commotion, etc. A superficial analysis, at best.
"Mrs. Clinton’s popular vote totals surpass Donald Trump’s by more than two million and counting..."
However, she won California -- where Trump didn't campaign -- by almost 3.5 million votes and she LOST all the rest of America by about 2.1 million votes, (even though she also beat Trump in New York, by 1.5 million votes). Not exactly the broad victory her supporters imply when they cite her victory in the the popular vote total. On balance, the rest of America repudiated the Obama policies and Mrs Clinton's plans. Senator Schumer and other leaders of the Democratic party should keep this in mind as they craft their approach to the next two years.
[Note: My source, The Times website, http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/president, hasn't been updated since Nov 21, so I have some differences from the two million used in this story, but the end result is essentially the same.]
However, she won California -- where Trump didn't campaign -- by almost 3.5 million votes and she LOST all the rest of America by about 2.1 million votes, (even though she also beat Trump in New York, by 1.5 million votes). Not exactly the broad victory her supporters imply when they cite her victory in the the popular vote total. On balance, the rest of America repudiated the Obama policies and Mrs Clinton's plans. Senator Schumer and other leaders of the Democratic party should keep this in mind as they craft their approach to the next two years.
[Note: My source, The Times website, http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/president, hasn't been updated since Nov 21, so I have some differences from the two million used in this story, but the end result is essentially the same.]
3
Hillary also got 3 million illegal votes from illegal aliens. She only "won" Virginia because felons illegally voted
Republicans unify people using scapegoats. Bernie Sanders did this too. He scapegoated Wall Street, trade deals, and "the establishment". Going forward, Bernie's message will only grow more appealing. Inequality will probably grow wider. Climate change, uy. I was never on the Bernie bandwagon but I now think he should oversee messaging. He has his finger on the pulse of the people and understands how to deliver a message effectively. The public also trusts him, which would contrast with the shadiness of the incoming administration. And who knows, maybe there are shy "socialist" voters.
2
The Senate Democrats can't save anything! They need to drink a lot more beet juice to get more energy. Most of the Democratic Congressmen have been a disappointment. We will see how long they remain taciturn and inaudible.
1
Would be good if someone could explain to me why in the world the "United States of America, yes so they are called, must remain one country at any price. As if what glues them together is this permanent opposition between the coastal borders and the inside of the country. Bound together by opposition. Can this be a permanent state of life? It appears to be a strong force but wouldn't people be happier if they could implement a way of living, closer to what the majority of the population where they live, think is appropriate? A split in two or three countries may be a way to go.
1
We see your "values and ideas" vividly on display in your fellow democrats making death threats against electors. We see your "values" and ideas" in support of late term infanticide. We see your "values and ideas" behind the rape of this country's middle class with your trade pacts and your bankster criminal money men free to pillage once more. We've seen enough.
1
Americans have been told to hate HRC for 30 years, and she still blew away the opposition in the popular vote. The Rs can't win without voter suppression, the electoral college, a rigged system. Hopefully a more naturally charismatic candidate can take the country back in 4 years.
1
Yes. And when are we going to hear about the changes the NY Times is going to make within its own organization, in light of its disastrous, unilateral support of Hillary Clinton?
The Clintonian experiment is over. Yes, she got 2 million more votes than the worst candidate in history - but that's not saying much.
The party needs to rid itself of all Clintonian influence. I know this is virtually impossible, but the future of Liberalism in America depends on it.
The least the Times could do is hire one - just one - progressive, pro-Sanders/Warren columnist.
Why not? Why do you have two full-time columnists representing the conservative viewpoint, and not a single progressive?
The Clintonian experiment is over. Yes, she got 2 million more votes than the worst candidate in history - but that's not saying much.
The party needs to rid itself of all Clintonian influence. I know this is virtually impossible, but the future of Liberalism in America depends on it.
The least the Times could do is hire one - just one - progressive, pro-Sanders/Warren columnist.
Why not? Why do you have two full-time columnists representing the conservative viewpoint, and not a single progressive?
7
So, is it okay now to start calling the Democrats "the party of no."
4
Yes!! it's also OK to denounce the Democrat's violent temper tantrums, their assassination threats against President Trump and Electoral College electors, their threats to democracy by refusing to accept the election results. You should also out out that their refusal to do Trump's bidding is treason
One thing is certain. We must resist the coming onslaught of alt-right and extremist republican hobby horse policy's with every tool we can lay our hands on. The Senate Democrats will play their part but all of us must engage.
If. And it's a mighty big if. The Grand Old Pirates actually propose something we can support we should. No overall obstructionist posture for us. We must continue to be the adults in the room.
But that's just the national level. We have to get real better real fast in defending our values at the state and local level. Stay engaged with your city council and state rep's. Don't be slow in taking your opposition into the Governors house in your state and let republicans in your state legislature and city & county governments know that you do not approve.
March. Give money. Show up at local meetings. Attend city council meetings. Stay engaged. It's going to be hard in the two years leading up to the next off year elections but it must be done.
If. And it's a mighty big if. The Grand Old Pirates actually propose something we can support we should. No overall obstructionist posture for us. We must continue to be the adults in the room.
But that's just the national level. We have to get real better real fast in defending our values at the state and local level. Stay engaged with your city council and state rep's. Don't be slow in taking your opposition into the Governors house in your state and let republicans in your state legislature and city & county governments know that you do not approve.
March. Give money. Show up at local meetings. Attend city council meetings. Stay engaged. It's going to be hard in the two years leading up to the next off year elections but it must be done.
Please stop acting like Hillary Clinton lost this election because she failed to put forth a message that assured blue-collar whites that she would offer economic salvation and stability. No, what she failed to do was offer them a scapegoat for their problems -- immigrants, other races and religions, globalization, government, the press. What she failed to do was stoke their fears and excite their anger. What she failed to do was promise them an ethnic cleansing, a "big beautiful wall," retribution against an opponent who was guilty of all manner of heinous sins (see fake news), more guns and bombs, and an end to grotesque "ripping babies from wombs" (as if that's a widespread practice rather than an extremely rare medical procedure).
Please just stop it.
Please just stop it.
171
Clinton lost to a demagogue. Is that a failing?
1
Huh??!?!?!?! All the Democrats have is hatred, division, and demonization. The whole left's existence revolves around creating hatred of "the rich", "the 1%", "banksters" and evil corporations. Without these people the dozen humanoids living in America would be eating seeds picked from their own excrement. Hillary promised the ethnic cleansing of whites and Christians. The left is now obsessed with assassinating Trump and all Electoral College electors who vote for him. And you really need to lay off the insane, delusional, clinically paranoid fake news nonsense. The NY Times is the biggest purveyor of fake news around. Don't forget Hillary's fake news about the 1% not paying their fair share of taxes. They pay far in excess, while the bottom 50% of "Americans" pay nothing
She did offer them a scapegoat - a legitimate wide open target for their economic woes. Her own self.
The democratic party will go the way of the Federalists, the Whigs and the dinosaurs unless they can provide a compelling answer to this question: How will you restore the middle class – good paying jobs (50-100K) with good benefits all across America. The answers I hear from them – and Mr Krugman has recently repeated them in his columns – are increasing the minimum wage and Obamacare. Even a minimum wage at $15/hr is 30K per year – hardly a good middle class existence unless you live in the bag woods of Vermont. Obamacare is for poor people – 85% who got insurance through the ACA get subsidies. The middle class doesn’t want Obamacare – they want to be one of the 50% of Americans who get there health care from their employer, along with other great benefits.
I personally don’t think Trump’s answers are the right ones or that they will work, but at least he offered people hope that their lives could improve. Democrats offered stagnation and government dependence. The millennials who voted for Bernie will learn over the next 4-8 years that they too have no jobs and no prospects, and they too will turn away from the party of stagnation and redistribution.
The number one thing the Democratic party needs is a viable platform for the American economy.
I personally don’t think Trump’s answers are the right ones or that they will work, but at least he offered people hope that their lives could improve. Democrats offered stagnation and government dependence. The millennials who voted for Bernie will learn over the next 4-8 years that they too have no jobs and no prospects, and they too will turn away from the party of stagnation and redistribution.
The number one thing the Democratic party needs is a viable platform for the American economy.
37
We won't get that from Krugman. Check out Zephyr Teachout's thinking.
At a minimum wage of $15/hour the annual income of a minimum wage worker is zero. With a ridiculously high $15/hr minimum wage, robots and automation will be used. Reality check: not every job is worth $15/hour.
The backwoods of Vermont aren't cheap. We're losing young people whose families have been here for generations as the economy has shifted to urban Chittendon County and dairy farms have closed.
Good to see the Times Editorial Board has regained it's sense of humor as this is the finest piece of humorous fantasy I have read in a long time.
1) The Senate Democrats could have saved the Democratic Party but instead they decided to support an establishment candidate with a love of dark money and zero transparency.
They were too wrapped up in their Democratic echo chamber to notice that Clinton was a terrible candidate even though they tried their absolute best to convince us that she was not:
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/076.gif
2) The time for the Senate Democrats to save the party was during the Democratic National Convention when as super-delegates they could have picked a better candidate but they dropped the ball.
They fell for Debbie Wasserman Schultz's scheme to rig the Democratic presidential nominating process which means they are corrupt or they are so clueless to notice that they were being manipulated which makes them stupid:
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/071.png
3) I am sure that there are many long-time Democrats that also chose to leave the party as I did. In my case it was after nearly forty years of being a loyal Democrat.
After 8 years of hoping for change under President Obama I was already upset. DWS's attempt to rig the nominating process meant that I sure as hell was not going to vote for the only candidate who Donald Trump could have beaten.
I voted for the only Democrat who could have beaten Trump:
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/061.png
1) The Senate Democrats could have saved the Democratic Party but instead they decided to support an establishment candidate with a love of dark money and zero transparency.
They were too wrapped up in their Democratic echo chamber to notice that Clinton was a terrible candidate even though they tried their absolute best to convince us that she was not:
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/076.gif
2) The time for the Senate Democrats to save the party was during the Democratic National Convention when as super-delegates they could have picked a better candidate but they dropped the ball.
They fell for Debbie Wasserman Schultz's scheme to rig the Democratic presidential nominating process which means they are corrupt or they are so clueless to notice that they were being manipulated which makes them stupid:
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/071.png
3) I am sure that there are many long-time Democrats that also chose to leave the party as I did. In my case it was after nearly forty years of being a loyal Democrat.
After 8 years of hoping for change under President Obama I was already upset. DWS's attempt to rig the nominating process meant that I sure as hell was not going to vote for the only candidate who Donald Trump could have beaten.
I voted for the only Democrat who could have beaten Trump:
http://userctl.com/BlueVsRed/061.png
3
I said this a year and a half ago and I still contend that if Hillary and the Democrats would have pandered half as much to the white working class as they did to the illegal immigration supporters and Black Lives Matter , she and the Dems would have won easily.
2
If we would spend Stein's recount money on the Louisiana Senate Race we might ave one more. Real cause instead of losing cause.
3
The Democrats lost for a very simple reason: misplaced trust in the American voter to be able to separate fact from fiction. The Democratic Party thought, as did I, that the American people would take one look at Trump and dismiss him. If not at first, then surely by the end of the campaign after he had insulted women, minorities, and Moslems among others and boasted about building a wall and making Mexico pay for it, deporting millions, and reexamining our trade and diplomatic relations. I thought people would see him as a narcissistic megalomaniac regardless of how quickly his handlers' explained his tweets. But, what mattered to some were their firm beliefs about Hillary Clinton's unsuitability. They pointed to the emails as "proof" of her untrustworthiness. Trump was vulgar, but as a relative who lives in Texas told me,"I had to vote for him." Why? "Benghazi and late-term abortion." Lately many dissections of the Democrats' loss have coalesced on failure to present a cohesive economic policy. The forgotten rural areas and the neglected Rust Belt voted with their wallets in mind. But did they? If the Democrats are to correct their course then they need to uncover all the reasons for their inability to win the hearts and minds of many. They need to find out what people believed based on what they were reading in the press and on Facebook, hearing on broadcast news and talk shows, and discussing with their neighbors. And, then they need to correct the narrative with facts.
3
Rep. Gallegos gets it. Tim Ryan gets it. Bernie Sanders got it long before they did, as did Liz Warren. But those still in charge of the DNC are living in denial, pointing their fingers at red herrings. "It's the economic divide stupid!" Address that and the voters - of ALL demographics - will return, but until the Democratic Party shows that they've reformed their Third Way philosophy, they'll continue to lose more seats in Congress and in the state houses and governorships. And as long as the NYT and other MSM outlets continue to dismiss and ignore those who truly "get it", no one will be able to "save" the Democratic Party. They did this to themselves, but they refuse to accept the blame. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.
1
It's time to end the hand-wringing and despair - I get it and am suffering - but this shall pass. At this moment in time and history the Right or Alt-Right are celebrating and predictions of their continued ascendancy and endurance abound - not unlike the predictions following the Regan, Clinton, Bush, Obama victories. And, guess what, many of those predictions, while reliable for at least two terms, have not endured. Those very same strategists whose stars once shown so bright in victory have also not endured (Carl Rove anyone). What most overlook is that the winning strategists with their slick operations and theory (the science is murky at best) simply lucked out. That is they were part of moment which coincided with history and were simply in the right place at the right time - no one could have predicted Trump (those who did made lucky guesses).
At this moment, and why not for after all a presidency has been won, the so-called dark arts is in the ascendancy and Bannon is suddenly a political genius (this in a provocateur with no history in running political campaigns and a history of engaging in shrill conspiracies). But this too shall pass - perhaps the same tactics will work in the next election, but unlikely after that for it will become quickly apparent that the promises of the Trump campaign are never going to materialise. And the anger with the political classes will continue, just waiting to be mined by someone else enroute to a tryst with history . . .
At this moment, and why not for after all a presidency has been won, the so-called dark arts is in the ascendancy and Bannon is suddenly a political genius (this in a provocateur with no history in running political campaigns and a history of engaging in shrill conspiracies). But this too shall pass - perhaps the same tactics will work in the next election, but unlikely after that for it will become quickly apparent that the promises of the Trump campaign are never going to materialise. And the anger with the political classes will continue, just waiting to be mined by someone else enroute to a tryst with history . . .
1
Democratic influence is not in their hands. If Trump remains popular among his following, the Republicans will unite behind him and the Democrats will be powerless. On the other hand, if Trump fails, many Republicans will abandon him and will be inclined to join forces with the Democrats.
As someone who is black and conservative who voted for Donald Trump in Pennsylvania, I don't think that it's in his interest to reach across the aisle with Democrats. As Rahm Emmanuel once said, election have consequences and it's the Democrats in congress who should reach out to Trump and his Republican counterparts.... As President Obama once said to Republicans at a meeting "You lost, I won"....End of story.... Now it's time to "Drain The Swamp"
4
I live in a community that mostly supports Trump (yes, Trump supporters exist in Brooklyn). I speak to Trump supporters almost everyday. It's not that they're rejecting the Democrat's message. The message is not even reaching their ears. It's like, if a message falls in a forest but no one's around to hear it, does it have a chance of resonating? Trump supporters were conditioned to distrust the "mainstream media". They only get their information from right-wing sources. Not right-of-center. They reject the Wall Street Journal too when I reference it. They trust Fox, talk radio, and for some reason, random news sources on the Internet that confirm their bias. By the time a Democrat's message reaches a Trump supporter (usually through someone like me), they have been conditioned to reject it.
14
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat."
What planet do you live on? HRC was a liar, a cheat, a thief, a crook, and she compromised BHO foreign policy by allowing the World (not just the Russians) to hack into her unsecured server.
Trump may be trash, but Hillary is worse. It had nothing to do with her race or her gender and everything to do with her corrupt career.
What planet do you live on? HRC was a liar, a cheat, a thief, a crook, and she compromised BHO foreign policy by allowing the World (not just the Russians) to hack into her unsecured server.
Trump may be trash, but Hillary is worse. It had nothing to do with her race or her gender and everything to do with her corrupt career.
6
Trump, Clinton, Sanders, Rubio and other political leaders agree America's roads, bridges, etc. must be urgently repaired. The Society of Civil Engineers gave America a D+ rating on the overall quality of our infrastructure, citing dilapidated roadways, insufficient waterways and "a pressing need for modernization." The group estimates $3.6 trillion would have to be invested by 2020 just to make infrastructure quality acceptable. In contrast to the attention given to the physical aspects of infrastructure, little has been said about improving its digital facet -- the Internet. Senate Democratic leaders may have an opportunity to correct this imbalance.
The Internet is the core technology of the Information Age. Yet, surprisingly, the U.S., where the Internet was born, is far behind other nations in exploiting advanced technologies to expand the bandwidth of Internet links and lower service costs to its users. Currently, the U.S. has the ninth-fastest average Internet speed in the world, behind South Korea, Japan, Hong Kong, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Latvia, the Czech Republic and Sweden. Yet Internet users in the U.S. pay at least twice as much. For example, in Japan, the speed of broadband Internet service in 2010 was 150 Mbps and its price $60 a month. The fastest service available in the United States was 50 Mbps and its price $90 to $150 a month. That is unacceptable.
The Internet is the core technology of the Information Age. Yet, surprisingly, the U.S., where the Internet was born, is far behind other nations in exploiting advanced technologies to expand the bandwidth of Internet links and lower service costs to its users. Currently, the U.S. has the ninth-fastest average Internet speed in the world, behind South Korea, Japan, Hong Kong, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Latvia, the Czech Republic and Sweden. Yet Internet users in the U.S. pay at least twice as much. For example, in Japan, the speed of broadband Internet service in 2010 was 150 Mbps and its price $60 a month. The fastest service available in the United States was 50 Mbps and its price $90 to $150 a month. That is unacceptable.
8
Jeff Greenfield recently told an anecdote that foreshadowed the Trump victory: a journalist called an unidentified Obama White House staffer and said "let me pose a hypothetical question. Say I'm a 50 year old man whose job in manufacturing has been outsourced and I'm now unemployed. What can you do to help me?" The Obama staffer replied: "Not a thing. But we can help your children so they can attend a community college and get good jobs."
"Not a thing!" That's why Democrats lost. That's the campaign Hillary ran. "We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business." It was horrendous.
Meanwhile Trump addressed exactly those people. He told them he heard them and would help them. He told them he knew they'd be discounted, ignored, insulted as unintelligent. He said he would be their champion.
Yeah, fat chance.
But it was more sympathetic than "Not a thing!" and "we're going to put many of you out of work!"
Democrats - surprise - have become the Stupid Party.
Our job now is to hand "stupid" back to the GOP. We can't do it if we persist in ignoring or insulting everyone in fly-over country.
We can't win by just winning New York and California. Figure out how to start talking respectfully to folks in Detroit, Pittsburgh, Winston-Salem, Pensacola, Macon, Las Vegas, all the places Democrats were hoping would turn out for them. For no good reason.
We have to give them a reason. This time we gave them nada.
Not a thing.
"Not a thing!" That's why Democrats lost. That's the campaign Hillary ran. "We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business." It was horrendous.
Meanwhile Trump addressed exactly those people. He told them he heard them and would help them. He told them he knew they'd be discounted, ignored, insulted as unintelligent. He said he would be their champion.
Yeah, fat chance.
But it was more sympathetic than "Not a thing!" and "we're going to put many of you out of work!"
Democrats - surprise - have become the Stupid Party.
Our job now is to hand "stupid" back to the GOP. We can't do it if we persist in ignoring or insulting everyone in fly-over country.
We can't win by just winning New York and California. Figure out how to start talking respectfully to folks in Detroit, Pittsburgh, Winston-Salem, Pensacola, Macon, Las Vegas, all the places Democrats were hoping would turn out for them. For no good reason.
We have to give them a reason. This time we gave them nada.
Not a thing.
9
The Democrats played every wrong trick in the book:
- backed a deeply-flawed candidate
- arm-wringed the perfect candidate Biden by denying him what was rightly and unquestionably his, complete with providing him a shoddy grieving-dad excuse to disappear into the shadows
- arm-wringed a better but still loser candidate Sanders out of running
- refused to distance themselves from a failed president
- acted as if they owned exclusive fighting rights for anyone not in the majority when it was and is clearly not the case
- sent the president to help black turnout, a president who himself never once made race an issue or strategy to get himself elected
- repeatedly played an out-of-fashion touch-feely we-are-the-world MP3 song even with mounting evidence it was unworkable and plain too stale to have anything but negative impact
- bought themselves inside a big-data bubble that assured them to ignore the messages in caps on walls, instead accept the chirpy messages from hastily-constructed algorithms
And all that is what the GOP did not do and so they won. It'll take more than Shumer putting on a brace face to overcome what appears to be at least one full decade of future GOP power. Longer if the Dems continue refusing to acknowledge their loss as one of their and only their making, as it seems they are still doing. What they need to do is to push out the old (yes Mr. Sanders included), bring in the new, rebuild.
No rush, voters can live with Trump for the foreseeable future.
- backed a deeply-flawed candidate
- arm-wringed the perfect candidate Biden by denying him what was rightly and unquestionably his, complete with providing him a shoddy grieving-dad excuse to disappear into the shadows
- arm-wringed a better but still loser candidate Sanders out of running
- refused to distance themselves from a failed president
- acted as if they owned exclusive fighting rights for anyone not in the majority when it was and is clearly not the case
- sent the president to help black turnout, a president who himself never once made race an issue or strategy to get himself elected
- repeatedly played an out-of-fashion touch-feely we-are-the-world MP3 song even with mounting evidence it was unworkable and plain too stale to have anything but negative impact
- bought themselves inside a big-data bubble that assured them to ignore the messages in caps on walls, instead accept the chirpy messages from hastily-constructed algorithms
And all that is what the GOP did not do and so they won. It'll take more than Shumer putting on a brace face to overcome what appears to be at least one full decade of future GOP power. Longer if the Dems continue refusing to acknowledge their loss as one of their and only their making, as it seems they are still doing. What they need to do is to push out the old (yes Mr. Sanders included), bring in the new, rebuild.
No rush, voters can live with Trump for the foreseeable future.
6
Democrats can win by taking a truly liberal approach, not neoliberal.
The Trump administration will crater soon enough, and America will seek liberal, progressive government that serves everyone.
The Trump administration will crater soon enough, and America will seek liberal, progressive government that serves everyone.
I feel certain that President Obama will step in and lead the party again temporarily at least after Jan 20
The Democrats have made the mistake of equating President Obama's personal approval rating with the popularity of his initiatives. While the President has enjoyed approval ratings in excess of 50%, the country emphatically rejected Obamacare in the 2010 midterms, and this legislation has never enjoyed more than 50% support of the electorate. In addition, voters are not stupid, they believe the DOJ has become politicized under the likes of Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder with fiascoes like "Fast and Furious." Voters believe that the IRS is corrupted by officials like Lois Lerner, who think it is OK to discriminate against conservative non-profits. When the head of the EPA, Lisa Jackson, uses a nom de email to conceal what she is doing, this is seen as sneaky and underhanded, while her EPA then ruins the Animas River with an ill-conceived and badly managed environmental disaster.
Given all that, and the President's embarrassing assertion that his administration has been free of scandal, the Democrats have a long road ahead to become at all relevant again.
Given all that, and the President's embarrassing assertion that his administration has been free of scandal, the Democrats have a long road ahead to become at all relevant again.
4
Yes, voters believed in Democrats corruption because Republicans have been spewing and spinning and spinning these myths. The IRS, for example, investigated misuse of funds by both Republican AND Democratic leaning small non-profits. And yes, they went after the miscreants, most of whom were on the Republican side ... a very salient fact you, I guess, overlooked.
With a two bit, headline suckling, charlatan in Shumer who compromises on every environmental legislation imaginable to just be able to say he is progressive the answer is no.
The democrats need to push Shumer back to his upstate hole where he can live out his days dodging protection.
It's imperative the Democrats find a tougher, honest voice.
The democrats need to push Shumer back to his upstate hole where he can live out his days dodging protection.
It's imperative the Democrats find a tougher, honest voice.
7
@John
Brooklyn (the "upstate hole" you say Schumer should be pushed back to) is upstate? News to me.
Of course, when you're upstate you realize that many people from "NYC" like John think the boundary line is 96th Street, or perhaps the Westchester county line.
Brooklyn (the "upstate hole" you say Schumer should be pushed back to) is upstate? News to me.
Of course, when you're upstate you realize that many people from "NYC" like John think the boundary line is 96th Street, or perhaps the Westchester county line.
The question is not how to save the Democratic Party, but what Senate Democrats can do to save our national unity in an age of increasing pluralism and disintegration. The Party needing saving is the Republicans, whose primaries failed to produce a highly qualified national leader, and whose leading Senators and Representatives are not well qualified for national leadership. The Democrats won the popular vote with a highly qualified candidate, and they have a deep bench of public policy experts with leadership vision and plenty of worthy ideas. Both Houses of Congress are disfunctional, thanks to Republican divisiveness, polarization, and outmoded ideas. National unification has to be the theme and goal of both Parties now. Who can deliver is the question.
8
Everybody agreed that the rule was that you had to win the electoral college vote. Everybody campaigned in key swing states. Now, based on the election results, Democrats claim they really won the election. In fact, they won a prize that didn't matter and everyone knew it didn't matter, and nobody was pursuing. Pollsters showed different results depending on whether they were measuring the popular vote or the electoral vote and everyone knew which one mattered. Repeat after me: the Democrats lost.
I do not question which candidate won the election, but you seem not to understand that as between the two Parties, the Democratic Party played a stronger, more united, more effective, role than the Republican Party, which Trump's candidacy embarrassed, divided and fragmented against itself.
3
Please fix the Recommend button!
4
Too bad The Times went all-in for Hillary including its entire Op-ed team! We're paying the price for your Bernie bashing and trashing. Now we have the horror of the faux populist bigoted billionaire to contend with. Will Chuck Schumer or, for that matter, Senators Sanders and Warren work to keep a known racist in Jeff Sessions from being confirmed as Attorney General? Will they oppose Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education for her virulent opposition to public education and the teachers unions? A cabinet of incompetence and bigotry must be opposed. That will be a test for the Democratic Party, and will soon see if they have the backbone to stand with and for the majority of voters who opposed the Trump tyranny.
3
Oh, please. The NYT joins the pearl-clutchers who insist on being losers and victims because, well, it's the polite thing to do. This election exposed some hideous truths about America, none having much to do with the Democratic Party.
First, our electoral system is rigged. The winner by far was Hillary Clinton, but we get a Republican president. Democratic Senate candidates got more votes than Republicans but lost the Senate. The House is so rigged that Democrats need a national landslide to ever gain the majority. Our problem here is a Constitution that was designed never to be changed.
Second, Republicans have demonstrated that lying, cheating, and total obstruction -- not to mention tossing all standards of decent behavior-- is very effective. Our problem here is a severely warped opposition.
Finally, Americans do not know what they're voting for. Powerful strains of misogyny and racism are woven into a public that reads fake news and cannot even name, let alone evaluate, its own elected officials. The problem here is us.
But instead of urging the Democrats to fight these obstacles, which I agree is an uphill, battle, the NYT wants them to improve messaging. And to use Senate rules that the Republicans will demolish as needed. But that requires another kind of autopsy. It will be too late.
First, our electoral system is rigged. The winner by far was Hillary Clinton, but we get a Republican president. Democratic Senate candidates got more votes than Republicans but lost the Senate. The House is so rigged that Democrats need a national landslide to ever gain the majority. Our problem here is a Constitution that was designed never to be changed.
Second, Republicans have demonstrated that lying, cheating, and total obstruction -- not to mention tossing all standards of decent behavior-- is very effective. Our problem here is a severely warped opposition.
Finally, Americans do not know what they're voting for. Powerful strains of misogyny and racism are woven into a public that reads fake news and cannot even name, let alone evaluate, its own elected officials. The problem here is us.
But instead of urging the Democrats to fight these obstacles, which I agree is an uphill, battle, the NYT wants them to improve messaging. And to use Senate rules that the Republicans will demolish as needed. But that requires another kind of autopsy. It will be too late.
3
If something will be remembered as historians see the takeover of America by a con, by a neo-fascist, and by a kleptocratic cabal of billionaires, that something will be the cowardly, false, and abject equivalences of the mainstream media.
Mr. Trump is not a normal candidate, and the GOP today is no loyal opposition. You should be ashamed of editorials like these that legitimize racism. white supremacists, and autocrats. American values trump unity, and the Constitution stand high above the accomodations of a feckle and pampered newsmedia. Mr. Trump deserves nothing but complete and absolute opposition.
Mr. Trump is not a normal candidate, and the GOP today is no loyal opposition. You should be ashamed of editorials like these that legitimize racism. white supremacists, and autocrats. American values trump unity, and the Constitution stand high above the accomodations of a feckle and pampered newsmedia. Mr. Trump deserves nothing but complete and absolute opposition.
3
It seems to me that Mr. Schumer has it about right. His specifications for an economic message must be cleary communicated to all Americans and this will be difficult. The media does not provide a perfect chain of communication and the truth is difficult to get out. It will require showmanship in all media. Mr Trump has demonstrated very effectively that he can create messages that can grab the attention of the media and the media has no choice but to go for the higher readership, ratings, and clicks. It is difficult to accept this new communications reality but network executives are compelled to chase the higher revenues. So my feelings are the interests of the American people must be portrayed in the most dramatic form possible in a manner that can be related to local economies and local examples of gross unfairness in opportunities for education and health care.
Clearly, if properly explained, there is no way that the Ryan plan of privatizing social security and medicare, or giving a tax break to the highest income earners can be enacted.
Immigration and resettlement of refugees are also very difficult problems. No one seems to have a solution. There are only forceful statements about "illegals" and "amnesty" but very little illumination on the issue.
There are barriers in law to broadly sharing economic growth. Our mixed economy and free-market capitalism must be adapted to close the income inequality gap. It can be done so that all will prosper.
Clearly, if properly explained, there is no way that the Ryan plan of privatizing social security and medicare, or giving a tax break to the highest income earners can be enacted.
Immigration and resettlement of refugees are also very difficult problems. No one seems to have a solution. There are only forceful statements about "illegals" and "amnesty" but very little illumination on the issue.
There are barriers in law to broadly sharing economic growth. Our mixed economy and free-market capitalism must be adapted to close the income inequality gap. It can be done so that all will prosper.
1
This editorial contains good sense, but it does not mention the two issues which are the most important to our future. These are both money issues, and they control who controls us. They are at least as important as Obamacare and climate, which the editorial does mention.
First is taxing rich people at half the rate of the middle class. This is done by giving low income tax rates to money acquired by capital gains -- that is, simply because you own something whose value his increased. Abraham Lincoln thought that capital gains should be taxed at a HIGHER rate than earned income, but Bill Clinton taxed it at half the rate the rest of us pay. Previously both types of income had been taxed at the same rate. Who is smarter, Lincoln or Clinton?
Similarly, most inheritance is not taxed at all. This allows people like the Koch brothers to inherit huge fortunes and use the money to subvert democracy. For that reason, Thomas Jefferson outlawed extreme inheritance when he was governor of Virginia. One effect was to end the practice of all inheritance going to the eldest son. Who is smarter, Jefferson or Trump?
The rich already pay less than half the tax rate that the middle class pays. Let's see the Democrats increase taxes on capital gains. and on inheritances over $1 million.
Watch Comedy Party Platform on YouTube (2 min 9 sec). Thanks. [email protected]
First is taxing rich people at half the rate of the middle class. This is done by giving low income tax rates to money acquired by capital gains -- that is, simply because you own something whose value his increased. Abraham Lincoln thought that capital gains should be taxed at a HIGHER rate than earned income, but Bill Clinton taxed it at half the rate the rest of us pay. Previously both types of income had been taxed at the same rate. Who is smarter, Lincoln or Clinton?
Similarly, most inheritance is not taxed at all. This allows people like the Koch brothers to inherit huge fortunes and use the money to subvert democracy. For that reason, Thomas Jefferson outlawed extreme inheritance when he was governor of Virginia. One effect was to end the practice of all inheritance going to the eldest son. Who is smarter, Jefferson or Trump?
The rich already pay less than half the tax rate that the middle class pays. Let's see the Democrats increase taxes on capital gains. and on inheritances over $1 million.
Watch Comedy Party Platform on YouTube (2 min 9 sec). Thanks. [email protected]
2
Yet another liberal who conveniently ignores the fact that the top 1% pay 60% of federal income tax in this country while 47% pay nothing.
No.
1
Electoral College!!!!
Members of the Electoral College must be persuaded to elect someone other than Trump president. It's possible. They vote December 19.
After that, this election is over.
Watching Trump's blase refusal to attend national security briefings - instead screwing around with "Apprentice" style vetting of his cabinet; tweeting in anger about "Hamilton" & "SNL"; his kids inappropriately calling or meeting foreign leaders; refusing to place his holdings in a blind trust; insisting 'the president can't have a conflict of interest'; intimidation of news anchors he met to rage at & insulted them; continual refusal to divulge info about his business holdings, international debt & taxes; personally embroiled in more than 2000+ lawsuits....
Trump's mentally unstable, a pathological liar & a corrupt businessman. He's completely unfit to be president - psychologically, ethically, no relevant experience for the office. It couldn't be worse.
If we have a possible out with the Electoral College, we should take it.
The GOP would be enraged - unless the EC voted for a Republican to become president. Can a campaign be started to do this? The Republicans couldn't accuse the E.C. of throwing the election if a Republican was chosen.
My choice would be Mitt Romney who's been vetted for the office of president, poses no ethical conflicts, is mature & experienced.
Or Mike Pence (gulp).
I didn't vote for Romney.
But I care more now about saving our democracy.
Members of the Electoral College must be persuaded to elect someone other than Trump president. It's possible. They vote December 19.
After that, this election is over.
Watching Trump's blase refusal to attend national security briefings - instead screwing around with "Apprentice" style vetting of his cabinet; tweeting in anger about "Hamilton" & "SNL"; his kids inappropriately calling or meeting foreign leaders; refusing to place his holdings in a blind trust; insisting 'the president can't have a conflict of interest'; intimidation of news anchors he met to rage at & insulted them; continual refusal to divulge info about his business holdings, international debt & taxes; personally embroiled in more than 2000+ lawsuits....
Trump's mentally unstable, a pathological liar & a corrupt businessman. He's completely unfit to be president - psychologically, ethically, no relevant experience for the office. It couldn't be worse.
If we have a possible out with the Electoral College, we should take it.
The GOP would be enraged - unless the EC voted for a Republican to become president. Can a campaign be started to do this? The Republicans couldn't accuse the E.C. of throwing the election if a Republican was chosen.
My choice would be Mitt Romney who's been vetted for the office of president, poses no ethical conflicts, is mature & experienced.
Or Mike Pence (gulp).
I didn't vote for Romney.
But I care more now about saving our democracy.
4
Save what party? Save whose party? Ditch the party and found the Independent Reform Party!
1
Tell Americans what Republican policies mean to them, their elderly parents, their kids.
Tell it plainly, repeatedly.
Americans don't like Republican policy.
They are not stupid.
They know it always favors the rich.
Search polls on any major issue from Reagan's administration to Ryan's proposals - Americans by clear and often large majorities reject Republican thought… from tax cuts for the wealthy to entitlement "reform" that rips them off.
They may like the occasional Republican charismatic leader but they know better on policy. They know when a Republican picks their pocket.
Explain the effect of Republican policy on the reality of their lives.
In short order, the Republicans will revert to their usual corruption, tilt toward the powerful and overplay their hand. (Look at Trump's cabinet so far - it's the usual swamp of the privileged and upper class)
This triumphant moment will flip on them…hard.
Tell it plainly, repeatedly.
Americans don't like Republican policy.
They are not stupid.
They know it always favors the rich.
Search polls on any major issue from Reagan's administration to Ryan's proposals - Americans by clear and often large majorities reject Republican thought… from tax cuts for the wealthy to entitlement "reform" that rips them off.
They may like the occasional Republican charismatic leader but they know better on policy. They know when a Republican picks their pocket.
Explain the effect of Republican policy on the reality of their lives.
In short order, the Republicans will revert to their usual corruption, tilt toward the powerful and overplay their hand. (Look at Trump's cabinet so far - it's the usual swamp of the privileged and upper class)
This triumphant moment will flip on them…hard.
3
The Senate Democrats cannot save the party or the people of the United States from years of destructive social and economic legislation if they do not find a way to bring Senator Sanders' message to the forefront of their agenda. He was correct in addressing income inequality, outsourced jobs, and unrestrained campaign spending. Had he been the candidate, we would very likely not be readying ourselves for an agenda determined to take us back to the era of the Robber Barons.
Party hacks like Chuck Schumer and my own Washington State Senators, Murray and Cantwell, are too invested in the status quo, and are not leaders capable of fighting back against a regressive Republican agenda or articulating an alternative vision for our future.
Party hacks like Chuck Schumer and my own Washington State Senators, Murray and Cantwell, are too invested in the status quo, and are not leaders capable of fighting back against a regressive Republican agenda or articulating an alternative vision for our future.
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat."
Yeah. That was it. I'm sure that was it, New York Times. In fact, you know what? Go with that. HARD.
Yeah. That was it. I'm sure that was it, New York Times. In fact, you know what? Go with that. HARD.
3
Of course it must be because tax and spend policies going back to FDR and compounded by LBJ aren't on anyone's radar.
Senate democrats are part of the problem. Elitism still reigns. I realize that it must be difficult for leaders to acknowledge that they are part of the problem, but they must step aside before any meaningful change can happen.
Senator Sanders connected with millions of voters nationwide. Yet, Mr. Schumer, whom I happen to like, still thinks that he can fix things better than Senator Sanders. This is a problem -- the old elitism in action.
The same situation exists in the House. It is time for Nancy Pelosi to retire, but she still thinks that she can fix our problems better than anybody else. It's like an addiction to power, a sort of sickness.
For the sake of the nation, the old guard must make way for new talent from the next generation, they must stop putting personal vanity ahead of better judgement.
Senator Sanders connected with millions of voters nationwide. Yet, Mr. Schumer, whom I happen to like, still thinks that he can fix things better than Senator Sanders. This is a problem -- the old elitism in action.
The same situation exists in the House. It is time for Nancy Pelosi to retire, but she still thinks that she can fix our problems better than anybody else. It's like an addiction to power, a sort of sickness.
For the sake of the nation, the old guard must make way for new talent from the next generation, they must stop putting personal vanity ahead of better judgement.
7
Pay attention to Arizona. Gallego and others here work w/o taking Liberal values for granted.
1
It isn't a marketing problem that tweaking "the message" will fix. It's a matter of seriously taking on the real problem: the country's wealth currently belongs to a small number of people and that wealth allows them to bend politicians, law, and media to their interests. It was nauseating to read the transcript of Trump's meeting with The New York Times and hear how everyone there was on a first name basis. This is war: class war, and Trump's class is winning.
7
Winning by a country mile. And wait until next year...this is why websites for surviving off the grid exist. The rich will horde all basic resources
Beyond all the political blather of how the Democrats need to recover from their worst defeat in centuries, they need to do one thing, and that is to physically get people to vote. That may involve renting taxis, limos or rickshaws, or sitting down with registered Dems in their homes and helping them fill out mail-in voting forms. Just appearing on TV or in neighborhood picnics ain't gonna do it. Democrats have grown basically lazy over the decades, especially after Roosevelt and Social Security, and they need to be persuaded in person, not just on TV.
1
Should Democrats shamelessly pander to white voters, promising every issue in America can be solved by pulling fantasy ideas out of the clouds instead of those boring earthbound reality-based solutions? Both Trump & Sanders appeared angry all the time campaigning & both pandered nearly exclusively to whites at opposite ends of the age & life experiences spectrum. Both campaigns attracted legions of misogynistic & sexist white male followers whose vulgar comments directed at Mrs. Clinton easily reached a new level of deplorable in American politics.
Mrs. Clinton campaigned on a positive vision for a great America that can always improve. Her economic promises were the ones more often embraced as the most realistic & helpful by economists than Trump's or Sanders'.
The message of Mrs. Clinton & the Democratic Party was inclusive, hopeful, realistic & mostly achievable. The message of both Trump & Sanders was expediency with policy outcomes ranging from mostly to utterly unachievable. If the NY Times editorial board believes that the Democratic Party indeed needs saving & the Sanders or Trump model might be one to emulate, then, I say let my beloved Democratic Party die. It is those voters who voted for Trump in need of some serious soul searching. They really messed up here in grand fashion by casting a vote based on emotion rather than intelligence & reason. Voting for change for just the sake of change & believing that change will always be better, is lunacy.
Mrs. Clinton campaigned on a positive vision for a great America that can always improve. Her economic promises were the ones more often embraced as the most realistic & helpful by economists than Trump's or Sanders'.
The message of Mrs. Clinton & the Democratic Party was inclusive, hopeful, realistic & mostly achievable. The message of both Trump & Sanders was expediency with policy outcomes ranging from mostly to utterly unachievable. If the NY Times editorial board believes that the Democratic Party indeed needs saving & the Sanders or Trump model might be one to emulate, then, I say let my beloved Democratic Party die. It is those voters who voted for Trump in need of some serious soul searching. They really messed up here in grand fashion by casting a vote based on emotion rather than intelligence & reason. Voting for change for just the sake of change & believing that change will always be better, is lunacy.
3
I could not have said it better. It really is a pervasive problem when the electorate either doesn't vote or cannot understand objectively how government works and the complexity of the problems we face. There are no simple solutions. They didn't destroy two party rule they just made it Republican/lunatic. This is historic and should be analyzed as such.
I do not argue that the Democratic Party isn't in need of a course correction in the aftermath of the election, but I find some of the rhetoric grossly exaggerated. If Hillary Clinton had not unexpectedly lost a small handful of states by razor thin margins, phrases like "as they sort through the wreckage of 2016," might be applied (also inappropriately) to the Republican Party which lost seats in both houses of Congress as well as the popular vote for President for the sixth time in the last seven elections (2004 being the lone exception). Yes, let's get a check-up to see what maladies keep us from being in tip-top shape. That IS important. But let's not get carried away with descriptions of wreckage or a need to erase our values & strategies and begin anew from nothing. A lot of factors contributed to Donald Trump's legitimate electoral victory and I'm more than a little troubled about that, but while the Democrats should reassess everything, wholesale reinvention is not advised or prescribed.
5
We are not talking about one election. We are talking about a once majority party that has been losing the majority of races around the country for decades. The Democratic Party's move to the corporate center, for tactical reasons, has been a strategic disaster.
Yes, J McGloin, your analysis of the problem as something insidious over decades is more accurate than the column's overblown description of "the wreckage of 2016." In our zeal to embrace every part of our society - a good thing! - we left one part feeling ignored. And that traditional blue-collar base of support needs our attention, too. We ARE their natural political home and we can put out a fresh welcome mat without alienating our other constituencies. A message of hope for the future (supported by specific policy prescriptions) will be more attractive than the message of fear and division they are hearing from the other side. We can do a better job but we are not a wrecked party. We need only to engage in an honest self assessment and remember who we have been and who we still are.
Don't be surprised if 2016 becomes a motivational springboard for our party to become an even more powerful voice for the middle class and those striving to be in the middle class. We drifted a bit off course (to the right), to be sure, but we did not get lost. And we most certainly are not wrecked.
Don't be surprised if 2016 becomes a motivational springboard for our party to become an even more powerful voice for the middle class and those striving to be in the middle class. We drifted a bit off course (to the right), to be sure, but we did not get lost. And we most certainly are not wrecked.
1
First, Trump did not win the election, Clinton lost it because she mostly dodged rather than addressed difficult issues that matter to us (she also seemed too transparently opportunistic, secretive and dishonest).
Going forward, the Democrats should openly champion a few core policies and not shy away from defending them:
First, we should cut billions of dollars from the military budget and reduce our military engagements abroad, while spending sufficiently to protect the nation. Our military should deter aggression against us, not police the world.
Second, we must spend massively on world-class infrastructure across the country, including borrowing funds at historic low rates to do so. These projects create hundreds of thousands of good jobs now, those workers will spend their pay, and they will build the platform for our future prosperity and communities.
Third, we should find new ways to provide affordable university education and continued professional training to adults in a ever-changing world. Online education must be a big part of the solution.
Fourth, we should champion the vigorous enforcement of antitrust law as an antidote to the evils of excessive concentration of economic power.
Finally, the Republicans can be the party of hate, but the Democrats should become the party of ALL Americans, offering a BETTER DEAL so that all of us have a real opportunity to enjoy the blessings of a prosperous society.
Going forward, the Democrats should openly champion a few core policies and not shy away from defending them:
First, we should cut billions of dollars from the military budget and reduce our military engagements abroad, while spending sufficiently to protect the nation. Our military should deter aggression against us, not police the world.
Second, we must spend massively on world-class infrastructure across the country, including borrowing funds at historic low rates to do so. These projects create hundreds of thousands of good jobs now, those workers will spend their pay, and they will build the platform for our future prosperity and communities.
Third, we should find new ways to provide affordable university education and continued professional training to adults in a ever-changing world. Online education must be a big part of the solution.
Fourth, we should champion the vigorous enforcement of antitrust law as an antidote to the evils of excessive concentration of economic power.
Finally, the Republicans can be the party of hate, but the Democrats should become the party of ALL Americans, offering a BETTER DEAL so that all of us have a real opportunity to enjoy the blessings of a prosperous society.
5
Why does every liberals solutions ALWAYS involve more government and more spending? Why not get out of the way and let the natural forces of the economy find their way, for better or worse? Programs have wasted trillions over the years with nothing to show for it.
I believe that the Dems can survive vTrump; but, its really a question of how much he will destroy the Country first. I hesitate to suggest what the people who voted for him will or will not due. Would it be best to just let him do the most damage quickly, or via the Chinese water torture, drop-by-drop. Will any of his Trumpians cross-over from "the Dark Side", or will they remain ing the Devil's trance.\?
He's know to like bending the rules; so, what will the Constitution look like after just a year? Two? Three? And, will them scoreboard register "Tilt!" after four. Besides the question of what he might do to America, what will he do to the World? Will he gather each month with Putin, Xi, and with a rotation of Erdogan, Maduro and Kim to play poker. Obviously, they won't be able to play "Hearts", since none of them has one.
So far, he wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act, cancelling health insurance for some 34 million people, including Extended Medicaid and State nExchanges. That includes KyNect, Mitch McConnell, which you told the Kentuckians wasn't like ACA. He'll give Iran The Bomb by tripping-up the Agreement and, then, further irk them by helping Saudi Arabia have one---getting astonished looks from the neighbors, and there he'll invite China (once again) to invade north Korea, and joining our troops in a nuclear face-off across the 2 1/2 mile DMZ. Can Dodd-Frank be near behind?
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
He's know to like bending the rules; so, what will the Constitution look like after just a year? Two? Three? And, will them scoreboard register "Tilt!" after four. Besides the question of what he might do to America, what will he do to the World? Will he gather each month with Putin, Xi, and with a rotation of Erdogan, Maduro and Kim to play poker. Obviously, they won't be able to play "Hearts", since none of them has one.
So far, he wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act, cancelling health insurance for some 34 million people, including Extended Medicaid and State nExchanges. That includes KyNect, Mitch McConnell, which you told the Kentuckians wasn't like ACA. He'll give Iran The Bomb by tripping-up the Agreement and, then, further irk them by helping Saudi Arabia have one---getting astonished looks from the neighbors, and there he'll invite China (once again) to invade north Korea, and joining our troops in a nuclear face-off across the 2 1/2 mile DMZ. Can Dodd-Frank be near behind?
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
2
Chuck Schumer is very special. I used to refer to him as The Senior senator from Wall Street. But I was wrong. He is the most canny politician in Congress for, at least, twenty years.
And he is backing Ellison for the DNC chair. Thank God. He is also mentoring Kristen Gillibrand, who may well succeed where another Senator from New York failed, and become the first woman president. Chuck doesn't bet on hearsay, he bets on "form." He often WINS!
And he is backing Ellison for the DNC chair. Thank God. He is also mentoring Kristen Gillibrand, who may well succeed where another Senator from New York failed, and become the first woman president. Chuck doesn't bet on hearsay, he bets on "form." He often WINS!
1
The senate rules are not the problem. Russian hacking is not the problem. The problem is that no one is buying what the democrats are selling. Denial will not work. The democrat party has to update its merchandise and modernize its message.
Stop thinking that Americans are too stupid to understand the wisdom of your policies. Change your policies. Until democrats turn the page, they will not catch up to with Americans and with the times. Next time, nominate someone under 65, that would be a good beginning.
Stop thinking that Americans are too stupid to understand the wisdom of your policies. Change your policies. Until democrats turn the page, they will not catch up to with Americans and with the times. Next time, nominate someone under 65, that would be a good beginning.
Actually, the fact that Hillary Clinton is winning the popular vote count by 2 million votes, shows that plenty of people brought what the Democrats were selling. The problem was simply a lack of attention to getting out the vote in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, as well as, very successful voter suppression efforts by Republicans in Wisconsin and North Carolina.
The Democratic Party needs to maintain its voice for the student, the LGBT community, the rights of women, the African-American, the Muslim, health care for all, and immigration reform. Those constitute its base. But it needs to put into action Representative Gallego's words...that there should be a "common interest in our economic policies among the laid off worker in Flint, the African American, and the Latino in Phoenix." Mr. Gallego has it right. Helping the working class is part of the Democratic Party's history. It is also the legacy of one of its finest presidents, FDR.
Also, Senator Schumer needs to walk the walk - to remain true to his words of working with the president-elect repairing our aging infrastructures while standing firm in protecting those many facets of his party's base as mentioned above.
Finally, I would urge the new minority leader to pay attention to his progressive colleagues...Sanders, Warren, and those many Senators from the Mid-West who fully understand the needs of their region.
Also, Senator Schumer needs to walk the walk - to remain true to his words of working with the president-elect repairing our aging infrastructures while standing firm in protecting those many facets of his party's base as mentioned above.
Finally, I would urge the new minority leader to pay attention to his progressive colleagues...Sanders, Warren, and those many Senators from the Mid-West who fully understand the needs of their region.
1
Democrats have become highly moralistic. They champion all the downtrodden -- the poor, minorities, the undocumented, criminals, prisoners, terrorist detainees, those on death row, immigrants with criminal records, children who commit murder. Meanwhile, they attack those who go to church. As a result, they seen soft on crime, solicitous of illegal immigrants and terrorists, and of immigrants with criminal records, too lenient on juvenile delinquents, and vindictive against churchgoers. In many ways, they favor outcasts over upstanding citizens. Ir is hard to fathom why they defend the worst of us against the rest. Democrats have gotten to a point where they champion all kinds of lawbreakers, assuming they are good people at heart who need only a pat on the back and lots of money to rehabilitate them. Democrats seem like soft-hearted suckers who want us to pay big bucks to redeem the unredeemable. The middle class doesn't have the money for this nonsense.
4
How did Democrats ever wind up so out of touch with what actual people want and need? They chose a past insider, believed themselves to be entitled to govern based on fundraising prowess, and had no message for the future.
Wasn't it obvious that people of both parties have become fed up with money, that delivering speeches to line Democratic (Clinton) pockets with millions of dollars is tawdry? That 74-year-old Bernie Sanders who was attracting many tens of thousands of people all over the country in both red and blue states had a message for which people were hungry?
We're facing the demise of our country. We had better come together in our communities to figure out how to resist the very totalitarianism our Founders feared.
Wasn't it obvious that people of both parties have become fed up with money, that delivering speeches to line Democratic (Clinton) pockets with millions of dollars is tawdry? That 74-year-old Bernie Sanders who was attracting many tens of thousands of people all over the country in both red and blue states had a message for which people were hungry?
We're facing the demise of our country. We had better come together in our communities to figure out how to resist the very totalitarianism our Founders feared.
1
Senate Dems definitely have their work cut out for them. That being said, NYT editorial board, hopefully you have learnt a lesson as well. I hope you will be more cautious in the future while endorsing a candidate, even before the primaries have begun.
1
You didn't mention the last-minute intervention of Comey's Secret Police, who once again lived up to their reactionary agenda. You didn't mention Mr. Trump's direct appeal to the basest passions in American society. You didn't mention the inability of the legitimate press to cope with Trump's lie-of-the-day strategy, or the media's obsession with Mrs. Clinton's email server.
As much as I respect the Times, I don't believe the analysis you've offered here is very cogent. It's too reminiscent of the Republicans' ballyhooed post-mortem after their last big loss--remember, when they declared their determination to attract the Latino, African-American, and female voter rather than risk losing the presidency forever more? Instead, they won by doing precisely the opposite, that is, by using a race-baiting, xenophobic, misogynistic, campaign run by a shameless oligarch and vulgarian.
Democratic navel-gazing and hand-wringing won't resolve the problem. The Republicans have been consistent in stoking the anger, resentment, and paranoia of American citizens--even convincing many of them to vote against their own interests. What the Democrats need to do is to understand why a majority of our fellow citizens voted for Hillary Clinton, what their values, fears, and hopes are, and how these can be addressed in a way that will allow America to restore respect for, and confidence in, American political and social institutions already damaged by a regime not yet in power.
As much as I respect the Times, I don't believe the analysis you've offered here is very cogent. It's too reminiscent of the Republicans' ballyhooed post-mortem after their last big loss--remember, when they declared their determination to attract the Latino, African-American, and female voter rather than risk losing the presidency forever more? Instead, they won by doing precisely the opposite, that is, by using a race-baiting, xenophobic, misogynistic, campaign run by a shameless oligarch and vulgarian.
Democratic navel-gazing and hand-wringing won't resolve the problem. The Republicans have been consistent in stoking the anger, resentment, and paranoia of American citizens--even convincing many of them to vote against their own interests. What the Democrats need to do is to understand why a majority of our fellow citizens voted for Hillary Clinton, what their values, fears, and hopes are, and how these can be addressed in a way that will allow America to restore respect for, and confidence in, American political and social institutions already damaged by a regime not yet in power.
3
Unfortunately Schumer doesn't have the votes if Mitch McConnell decides to implement the nuclear option. McConnell is a ruthless partisan who will do what is necessary to win whatever legislative fight he's in. The "Chicago Way" metaphor would apply to him. I would posit that his obstruction tactics from attempting to block, without compromise, Obama's legislative agenda, and stealing a Supreme Court nomination, are acts of political treason against the concept of consensus, proffered by the architects of the Constitution. He is a cynical political hack, who is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Koch brothers and the fossil fuel oligarchs.
2
Trump got his 'populist' stripes, as it were, on the issue of illegal immigration. The Democratic position on illegal immigration is, if we are honest, an amnesty, even though they resist calling it that and have for this lost credibility. While perfect consistency is neither possibly nor desirable when it comes to applying principles, still there must be some adherence to principles and to the rule of law. The Democrats have abandoned any semblance of respect for the rule of law on the issue of illegal immigration, and have lost much of America over this, even immigrants themselves, who often waited years and even decades to migrate legally. Let the Democrats tackle this one issue with credibility as well as the compassion they like to tout. Right now the Democrats have the appearance of a party of panderers. Where is the integrity, where is the decency, where is the appeal for voters in such a party?
5
The correct position on immigration is to prosecute CEOs of corporations that hire illegal immigrants. Building a wall to cut the supply of illegal immigrants is just more supply side economics. It doesn't work with the general economy. It doesn't work with the drug war, and it doesn't work with immigration. It just increases traffic across the border, making the border more porous.
We have to cut demand for illegal immigrants and they will stop coming. To cut demand, you must punish those that hire them. Once demand for illegal immigrants dries up, then you can increase legal immigration. That will not be so popular, but legal immigrants have rights, get paid the same salary, and get benefits. Thus they cannot compete so effectively with citizens, and cannot be used to cut the wages of citizens.
Why does neither party propose the obvious solution, instead of fake non-solutions. Because they want to give the corporations the cheap labor they want, while pretending to try to solve the problem.
We have to cut demand for illegal immigrants and they will stop coming. To cut demand, you must punish those that hire them. Once demand for illegal immigrants dries up, then you can increase legal immigration. That will not be so popular, but legal immigrants have rights, get paid the same salary, and get benefits. Thus they cannot compete so effectively with citizens, and cannot be used to cut the wages of citizens.
Why does neither party propose the obvious solution, instead of fake non-solutions. Because they want to give the corporations the cheap labor they want, while pretending to try to solve the problem.
There are fractious parts of both the GOP and the DEM in Congress...
and why...
They have been tainted by the control of their "handlers"...those lobbyists
that keep their campaign finances going....according to those who finance
them...like Wall Street or Big Pharma...etc..
No...there needs to be a repeal of Citizens United...
so never mind the musings about the DEMS....why not say all these
depolorables who beg for money to stay in power....just report what is
really the problem...and then we can solve it..
No more spin...Editors...we see right through this post truth ...fog of
Corporate Media...so quit it..NOW..
and why...
They have been tainted by the control of their "handlers"...those lobbyists
that keep their campaign finances going....according to those who finance
them...like Wall Street or Big Pharma...etc..
No...there needs to be a repeal of Citizens United...
so never mind the musings about the DEMS....why not say all these
depolorables who beg for money to stay in power....just report what is
really the problem...and then we can solve it..
No more spin...Editors...we see right through this post truth ...fog of
Corporate Media...so quit it..NOW..
It's not about Democrats saving the party this time. It's about saving the country.
This is not a little bit of trouble we're in. We keep talking about it as though it's just a party loss, something familiar if painful.
We've got a demagogue and a gang of real extremists sitting in the white house, not a Bush or a Reagan. Don't normalize this for one minute.
I never talk like this. I very much hope I'm completely crazy.
This is not a little bit of trouble we're in. We keep talking about it as though it's just a party loss, something familiar if painful.
We've got a demagogue and a gang of real extremists sitting in the white house, not a Bush or a Reagan. Don't normalize this for one minute.
I never talk like this. I very much hope I'm completely crazy.
3
Hillary Clinton could have won the 2016 election but for two problems. 1. She took Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania for granted and instead spent time in places like North Carolina and Arizona, thinking that if she won those too, she'd have a landslide. 2. Her campaign was weakened by Bernie Sanders' long primary campaign. He should have dropped out much sooner for the sake of a Democratic victory. Instead, he kept hammering her on issues like NAFTA, ties to Wall Street and single-payer health care. This forced her to delay the start of her general election campaign in the states where electoral votes mattered.
1
I can see that you are very upset at what's happening with your party, NYT (a formerly well-respected news establishment, now a Democratic Party Organ).
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat." That's your big Dem talking point. You can't admit your anointed candidate was a horrible person, a liar, a criminal, a traitor to her country, and universally disliked.
Many people who voted for Trump had voted for Obama, so I guess you'd like to think they weren't racist, but now ARE racist?
I note your point "the electorate that supported him, which was overwhelmingly white." Why don't you mention that he got more non-white votes than Romney? You really should have said that, but it doesn't fit the Democratic talking points. You just want to make it about race, don't you?
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat." That's your big Dem talking point. You can't admit your anointed candidate was a horrible person, a liar, a criminal, a traitor to her country, and universally disliked.
Many people who voted for Trump had voted for Obama, so I guess you'd like to think they weren't racist, but now ARE racist?
I note your point "the electorate that supported him, which was overwhelmingly white." Why don't you mention that he got more non-white votes than Romney? You really should have said that, but it doesn't fit the Democratic talking points. You just want to make it about race, don't you?
1
No.
Does success come to politicians who set the 'emotional agenda' of the electorate?
Haven't noted Dems on that page for awhile; certainly not HRC.
In 1971 public intolerance for the continued existence of Government's inability to bring resources to bear effectively on the problems of the poor, decay of urban centers, inadequate public education, and inequity of healthcare was pervasive.
Has anything changed here?
Haven't noted Dems on that page for awhile; certainly not HRC.
In 1971 public intolerance for the continued existence of Government's inability to bring resources to bear effectively on the problems of the poor, decay of urban centers, inadequate public education, and inequity of healthcare was pervasive.
Has anything changed here?
The silver lining in this defeat is the defeat of Clintonism. The Democratic party has to turn to its roots and to its Democratic wing. It's way too late for Schumer to complain that the economic message was not sharp or bold. Bernie's was.
3
What voters want America to do or not do in the world may also have played a role in Trump's election. When Woodrow Wilson tried to get the US to join the League of Nations after WWI, Teddy Roosevelt urged Americans not to meddle in the affairs of other nations in cases where the US had no strong interest and his argument won the day. During the Cold War against the Soviet Union and "Red China" many Americans bought into the domino theory which in essence held that the defense and safety of America needed to be guaranteed and if necessary fought in "West Berlin" and Vietnam. Today Americans do not believe that the defense and safety of America depends on what Russia did in the Crimea or what it will do in the rest of the Ukraine. In hindsight the Bush and Obama interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya appear disastrous. Nor is there much reason for optimism that American intervention in Syria will prove any better. Trump sounded like Teddy Roosevelt and Clinton like Wilson in the recent election.
The idea of common sense for the common good and all that implies can be a rallying cry with ideas about how to deal with the enormous changes most people are facing in their work lives.
If you want to win over voters who want "to blow up a political establishment that had failed to improve their lives", you should not have a Nancy Pelosi or a Chuck Schumer - both the embodiment of establishment - at the helm. It's the time for the Tulsi Gabbart - Bernie Sanders wing. Trade Deals are dead for the moment and if you want to politically profit from the re-deregulation of the banks (since Dodd-Frank will die, too), you need people who didn't get a share of their money. Also, if the Senate minority wants to filibuster stuff, it would help if it was still in place (and it isn't except for Supreme court nominees). If the Pentagon budget can be cut down from 20 to 15% of the federal income and if the East Coast infrastructure is rebuilt, it will have been worth having had a psycho as a president until impeachment over his corrupt deals. Democrats should try and look less tarnished by big money and oil than the Republicans, can they pull it off? Have they learned anything at all?
1
WHY do you say "humiliating defeat"? Why are we in disarray? Hillary is winning by 2 million votes and counting. That says that a VERY LARGE majority wanted Hillary to win (these are individual votes) - wanted the country to go in the direction she would take us. Democrates are always looking for their failure rather than their success. We need to stand on our beliefs - and fight for them. We also need to go on the attach when it comes to Trump. The republicans always are on the attack, even when unwarranted, but Dems never push (we are push overs, always claiming failure even when it ISN"T. We have every reason to go after Trump. Think of what the republicans would be doing if our candidate were keeping their own business, having and promoting business ties to foreign countries for their own gain, looking for hires that were racist and totally unqualified for the job, breaking all the rules that keep us honest. We have a mandate (with Hillary's 2 million lead in the popular vote) to FIGHT/not give in, not compromise, not normalize the absolutely worst person ever to be a president elect. It's the only way we can win. Now. In the future.
2
I'm confused. Hillary supported raising the minimum wage, fixing what is broke in the ACA, expanding social security and providing tuition free public college for those under a certain income level.
EVERY ONE of those points would help DIRECTLY the very people in the so called rust belt states who abandoned her campaign and voted for Trump.
And, by the way, in 2012, with an incumbent Obama at the top of the ticket and his vaunted Axlerod machine at full throttle, the Dems picked up 8 seats in Congress.
In 2016, with the establishment Hillary machine wheezing along in tonal deafness, the Democrats picked up 6 seats in Congress.
Oh, and by the way, they picked up 2 seats in the Senate, just like in the Obama heyday of 2012.
So, let's stop all the talk of a party in collapse.
EVERY ONE of those points would help DIRECTLY the very people in the so called rust belt states who abandoned her campaign and voted for Trump.
And, by the way, in 2012, with an incumbent Obama at the top of the ticket and his vaunted Axlerod machine at full throttle, the Dems picked up 8 seats in Congress.
In 2016, with the establishment Hillary machine wheezing along in tonal deafness, the Democrats picked up 6 seats in Congress.
Oh, and by the way, they picked up 2 seats in the Senate, just like in the Obama heyday of 2012.
So, let's stop all the talk of a party in collapse.
3
Can establishment Democrats like Chuck Schumer save the party? Sure they can! Just like they managed to maintain control Congress, appoint a Supreme Court Justice, get Hillary elected, and retain control of State governments. Plus, they have great policies that definitely aren't failed neoliberalism from the 1990s, garnished with insincere lip-service to civil rights. It's not like the Democrats spent the last 8 years dragging the country from one war to another, negotiating unpopular trade deals, deporting 2.5 million people, and belittling popular liberal movements such as Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter.
The Party either needs to let the Sanders/Warren wing lead the Senate or stop leading on the people the DNC just betrayed with their dismal performance in this election.
The Party either needs to let the Sanders/Warren wing lead the Senate or stop leading on the people the DNC just betrayed with their dismal performance in this election.
It would be nice if there were bipartisan support for infrastructure, but given Trump and Ryan's interests in privatizing public assets the Dems must be scrupulous in examining GOP plans. Otherise these infrastrucutre improvements could be boondoggles benefitting developers and contractors, providing short term jobs and long term drains on the citizenry. Being obstructionists has not hurt the Republican party, though it hasnt been good for the country. democratic obstruction could perhaps SAVE the country frm wretched excesses, malfeasance and reversion on many progressive fronts. We must not be afraid of opposing, resisting and if necessary obstructing attacks on rights and programs that have been good forpeople,mwherher they recognized that at the voting booth or not ( referring to the article about afloridians who voted Trump, but want to keep Obamacare).
I read your "hot air" editorial. We don't owe mr. trump anything. He lost the election by 2,000,000 votes. I think it is time to be as disrespectful toward him as he is toward everyone else. He's earned it.
I won't be a supporter of the Democratic Party as long as "Go Along to Get Along" Chuck Schumer remains the Senate Minority Leader. He went along with the Bush Tax cuts and threw American under the bus by voting for the Iraqi War. He was hardly a strong supporter of President Obama. Chuck Schumer is almost as pathetic as that former Democrat, Joe Lieberman.
I won't be a supporter of the Democratic Party as long as "Go Along to Get Along" Chuck Schumer remains the Senate Minority Leader. He went along with the Bush Tax cuts and threw American under the bus by voting for the Iraqi War. He was hardly a strong supporter of President Obama. Chuck Schumer is almost as pathetic as that former Democrat, Joe Lieberman.
2
This editorial demonstrates a failure to recognize the deep hole the Democrats have dug for themselves. There is a great deal of blame to spread around, The Koch brothers are an existential threat that for decades have flawlessly implemented a brilliantly conceived plan to purchase control of the United States. Given the Republican control of roughly 2/3 of State legislatures and a majority of the govenorships provides proof of the Koch's effectiveness. The Democratic leadership didn't learn a thing from the "swift boating " of John Kerry and allowed the delegitimatizing of Hillary Clinton. The weak Senatorial candidates, like Katie McGinty, indicated a very thin bench. Hand wringing is not an effective strategy in face of the Republicans ability to get voters to vote on an emotional basis and fall victim to a con man like Trump.
5
Ironic, isn't it, that it was that well-liked Democrat, Tip O'Neil, that noted that "all politics is local."
The Democrats must decide "which side are you on". For the past few elections, they have played a game of being on the side of people who work for a living in their rhetoric and governing on behalf of their campaign contributors. Enough voters caught on this year to elect to Trump. They don't believe his promises but he at least recognizes their problems unlike the Democratic establishment and their media allies who think that there has been a great economic recovery under Obama.
Too much is being made of the 2 million vote lead of Clinton over Trump. California has given Clinton a 4 million vote over Trump, in the other 49 states Trump leads by 2 million votes.
Too much is being made of the 2 million vote lead of Clinton over Trump. California has given Clinton a 4 million vote over Trump, in the other 49 states Trump leads by 2 million votes.
3
elected officials have to stop thinking how to serve their respective parties and start thinking about how to serve their constituents and the country. So much effort goes into ideology and attempting to get re-elected that no cogent policy is ever set forth and acted upon.
When a candidate is elected , he / she is no longer a Democrat or Republican, He / she is a US Senator working for the good of the US and its people.
When a candidate is elected , he / she is no longer a Democrat or Republican, He / she is a US Senator working for the good of the US and its people.
7
A very well-written editorial. I, too, hope that Senate Democrats can make a big difference.
I am disappointed to hear about-to-be-ex-President Obama popping off, as if he were to continue to be a person-of-power after the next few weeks. Both in the recent campaign, and in eight years of governing, he was one of the leaders in missing most of the good points that the editorial makes. If he had made an effort to keep more of his campaign promises when he had the power to do so -- instead of protecting Wall Street and the status quo -- there would have been no foothold for Mr. Trump. He is most often an authority figure about how to do it wrong.
I am disappointed to hear about-to-be-ex-President Obama popping off, as if he were to continue to be a person-of-power after the next few weeks. Both in the recent campaign, and in eight years of governing, he was one of the leaders in missing most of the good points that the editorial makes. If he had made an effort to keep more of his campaign promises when he had the power to do so -- instead of protecting Wall Street and the status quo -- there would have been no foothold for Mr. Trump. He is most often an authority figure about how to do it wrong.
6
Ah, finally, a Democrat that is understanding what has actually happened.
1
Under Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution, office holders are barred from accepting “any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”. Trump has already demonstrated he will use the office of the presidency for personal gain therefore the Electoral College should reject a Trump presidency. This provision was specifically created to prevent the President, most of all, from being corrupted by foreign influences.
We know a foreign power specifically the Russian government of Vladimir Putin meddled in the election. We know despite the denials at the time that representatives of the Russian government met with one of Trump's children prior to the election. While we don’t know what promises Trump made to the Russians in exchange for their assistance it is fair to assume the best interests of the United States were not a consideration.
In addition to the above there is the 25 million dollar settlement for the Trump University scam; the use of the Trump foundation for personal benefit, along with numerous allegations of sexual assault and literally thousands of law suits pending against Trump demonstrate Trump is unfit for the office of the presidency and must be rejected by the Electoral College.
Simply put we can not afford to give a fascist bigot a chance
We know a foreign power specifically the Russian government of Vladimir Putin meddled in the election. We know despite the denials at the time that representatives of the Russian government met with one of Trump's children prior to the election. While we don’t know what promises Trump made to the Russians in exchange for their assistance it is fair to assume the best interests of the United States were not a consideration.
In addition to the above there is the 25 million dollar settlement for the Trump University scam; the use of the Trump foundation for personal benefit, along with numerous allegations of sexual assault and literally thousands of law suits pending against Trump demonstrate Trump is unfit for the office of the presidency and must be rejected by the Electoral College.
Simply put we can not afford to give a fascist bigot a chance
2
Here's your problem...
Trump, Inc. is not President Trump.
It is difficult to see how Trump, Inc., being paid by foreign individuals or governments for goods and services could be considered unconstitutional.
This is different from the Clinton Foundation "selling" Bill Clinton for $250K w pop when his wife, as Secretary of State, is overseeing policy decisions that affect the donor individual or nation...particularly when very shortly after the "sale" favorable action was taken by the State Department that directly benefited the individual or foreign nation.
You need to look beyond the "for sale" sign to see whether it is actually apples or oranges are being sold in spite of the sign's claim.
Trump, Inc. is not President Trump.
It is difficult to see how Trump, Inc., being paid by foreign individuals or governments for goods and services could be considered unconstitutional.
This is different from the Clinton Foundation "selling" Bill Clinton for $250K w pop when his wife, as Secretary of State, is overseeing policy decisions that affect the donor individual or nation...particularly when very shortly after the "sale" favorable action was taken by the State Department that directly benefited the individual or foreign nation.
You need to look beyond the "for sale" sign to see whether it is actually apples or oranges are being sold in spite of the sign's claim.
Ironically, what's best for the Democratic Party and what is best for the United States over the next two years are probably at cross-purposes. The best thing for the Democrats would be to let Donald Trump and Paul Ryan do whatever they want (while not taking any ownership of those policies), because the Democrats' prospects in 2018 improve the worse the country gets, the unfiltered Trumpism and Ryanism will send the country down the tubes. Let them wreck the health insurance market by trying to unwind ACA and restore discriminatory insurance industry practises, let Ryan try to destroy Medicare and Social Security, let the financial services industry run wild and blow up the economy again, let corruption in the executive branch run wild. To a great extent, all of this will happen regardless of what they do, with the GOP in control of Congress. But to the extent that the Democrats can resist, mitigating the damage will be good for America, but bad for the Democrats, because they'll once again be protecting the GOP's white voter base from the consequences of what they voted for.
3
Talk about Fake News!! The economy was blown up by Big Government; this has been proven by the science of economics 1000 times over. It was Big Government meddling in the insurance market with ObamaCare that made healthcare worse, not better and cheaper as promised. With Hillary out of DC and the Dems in the minority, corruption will not find a welcome home in DC. And your wish for an America in ruins just so Democrats can gain is vile and treasonous
Right, just like they protected the American People with their stances on immigration, foreign policy, the economy, and...oh...yes...Obamacare.
Your belief Mr. Curley, that The People are in love with what the Democrats and the Obama administration have been delivery is noble for its loyalty, but it runs counter to the trends that have given the Republicans control of state legislatures and governors chairs, the House and the Senate, and even the presidency.
Sea changes in the American Political Waters rarely occur twice in a decade, and almost never occur three times in a 10-year span. The Republican gains will not easily be turned, and it may take at least a decade to engineer even IF the Democrats can find the right formula. That puts 2030 or even 2040 as the the timeframe that the Democrats can reasonable consider regaining control or the all-important redistricting process.
Our political institutions and presses are DESIGNED to be conservative, intended to allow social and political change to occur slowly and only having achieved broad-based consensus of The People being governed.
It's been this way since 1787. It's not about to change in four years time.
Your belief Mr. Curley, that The People are in love with what the Democrats and the Obama administration have been delivery is noble for its loyalty, but it runs counter to the trends that have given the Republicans control of state legislatures and governors chairs, the House and the Senate, and even the presidency.
Sea changes in the American Political Waters rarely occur twice in a decade, and almost never occur three times in a 10-year span. The Republican gains will not easily be turned, and it may take at least a decade to engineer even IF the Democrats can find the right formula. That puts 2030 or even 2040 as the the timeframe that the Democrats can reasonable consider regaining control or the all-important redistricting process.
Our political institutions and presses are DESIGNED to be conservative, intended to allow social and political change to occur slowly and only having achieved broad-based consensus of The People being governed.
It's been this way since 1787. It's not about to change in four years time.
Until the Democrats give up the money and influence of George Soros and his ilk, they will continue to lose political ground.
7
"But I think there is a common interest in our economic policies between the laid-offworker in Flint, the African-American and the Latino in Phoenix." Do ya THINK!? When you can't pay rent or car repair,you don't care about who is using what restroom or if what you said yesterday offends one race or another, or a religious group. You just want to feed and house your family. That means gainful and dignified employment. It's the economy, stupid!!
7
No they cannot and if they think Bernie Sanders or Sanders-like politics will then they are in for an even bigger surprise when they totally destroy what is left of the Democratic party.
4
Lol. What's your solution: that the dems should be even more corporate than they already are?
This editorial takes Secretary Clinton's quote out of context re: deplorables. She stated some - the white supremacists - were deplorables. The rest of the quote went on to state she knew many suffer great economic distress and needed our help. And if economic distress were the root cause, why did the fact that Obama pulled us out of the great crash not matter? Why did his attempt to pass infrastructure bills, extend unemployment, and his actual rescue of the auto industry not count? Why did an improved economy not count? Why did Republican obstructionism not matter to voters? Trump appealed to people's fears of the other and contempt and even hatred for women and it worked. The clips of his rallies were broadcast wide and far with cries to "Lock her up," and "Second Amendment" solutions. The entire nation knows what Trump said, and half of the voters voted for him anyway. Others couldn't bother to vote.
I think this editorial minimizes hatred of women and unconscious sexism. One of the most enduring and negative stereotypes about women is they are corrupt and are corrupters, and cannot be trusted--not when they state they have been sexually assaulted, not when they state they want control over their sexuality, not when they have positions of power. That is the smear placed on Secretary Clinton by Bernie Sanders and the Republicans, and it worked. Now we have a corrupt, untrustworthy man as President almost elect...
I think this editorial minimizes hatred of women and unconscious sexism. One of the most enduring and negative stereotypes about women is they are corrupt and are corrupters, and cannot be trusted--not when they state they have been sexually assaulted, not when they state they want control over their sexuality, not when they have positions of power. That is the smear placed on Secretary Clinton by Bernie Sanders and the Republicans, and it worked. Now we have a corrupt, untrustworthy man as President almost elect...
113
The entire DNC rigged the system to defeat Bernie. People didn't trust Mrs. Clinton since she proved herself unworthy of trust.
"basket of deplorables" is a difficult phrase to spin away, not matter how hard you try to pin the "out-of-context" tag on it.
What Clinton managed to do with those two words was to pin a donkey's tail on her backside which there was no way too shake off.
What Clinton managed to do with those two words was to pin a donkey's tail on her backside which there was no way too shake off.
Yes we hate all women, that of course would mean no wives, children, etc. We would have had a corrupt incompetent Hillary, now we are saved that.
Democrats are fine. Hillary Clinton won by 2 million and counting votes. The Dems need to get back the State Governorships and legislatures that manage national elections from the GoP. That's the weakness. The Democratic message is fine. Its the media that failed to focus on any policy issues during the election campaigns and to question a demagogue.
87
If the Democrats are fine, why is Trump interviewing people for Cabinet positions?
Still bitterly clinging to the fantasy that Hillary won the popular vote??? You forgot to subtract the 3 million illegal votes Hillary got from illegal aliens
Those newfangled automobile thingies will never replace the trusty old horse.
1
I am lifelong Jimmy Carter Democrat from Georgia. My first vote in a presidential race was for Carter. I have never voted Republican. I never will.
But what do we Democrats stand for now? Have we Democrats been arrogant with our identity politics? Have we let down our core constituents? I think so. Too cozy with Wall Street? Yes.
Far too often, until Bernie Sanders came along, we decided to shift our policies to the right so we could compete with Republicans on the issues that worked for them. Like Bill Clinton did with welfare reform and with financial regulations. That just makes Democrats look weak and disingenuous. Remember when Democrats tried to get on the family values train? We had no answer to the charges by the right about being anti-religion.
I'm not saying Senator Sanders is right on all the issues. I'm a Carter Democrat remember. But I prefer Sanders' approach a thousandfold over the shifting sand approach and our obeisance to polling. It all smacks of being phony. I would rather be what we are and state it clearly and be in the minority. Instead of being timid, Democrats need to be bold in defeat. Let's start by defending Obamacare by trying to change it to Medicare for All, for example.
Does our fuzziness and sometimes holier than thou attitude explain why Trump won? It certainly did not help but let's be clear, electing Trump was a dark day for America. The Republican Party may be ascendant but it does not mean they are right.
But what do we Democrats stand for now? Have we Democrats been arrogant with our identity politics? Have we let down our core constituents? I think so. Too cozy with Wall Street? Yes.
Far too often, until Bernie Sanders came along, we decided to shift our policies to the right so we could compete with Republicans on the issues that worked for them. Like Bill Clinton did with welfare reform and with financial regulations. That just makes Democrats look weak and disingenuous. Remember when Democrats tried to get on the family values train? We had no answer to the charges by the right about being anti-religion.
I'm not saying Senator Sanders is right on all the issues. I'm a Carter Democrat remember. But I prefer Sanders' approach a thousandfold over the shifting sand approach and our obeisance to polling. It all smacks of being phony. I would rather be what we are and state it clearly and be in the minority. Instead of being timid, Democrats need to be bold in defeat. Let's start by defending Obamacare by trying to change it to Medicare for All, for example.
Does our fuzziness and sometimes holier than thou attitude explain why Trump won? It certainly did not help but let's be clear, electing Trump was a dark day for America. The Republican Party may be ascendant but it does not mean they are right.
176
You will never vote for a Republican?!?!? Your fanatical devotion to a failed ideology is exactly what's wrong with the left
Carter had a poor record and got crushed in his re-election try. He invented "stag-flation". So what's to like -the Energy Department that produces no energy?
But Bernie would lose in the electoral college perhaps even worse than Hillary. Bring him or Warren on, if they are your best you are very poor.
NO, he does NOT "deserve a chance"! Did republicans give Obama a "chance"?
Hillary deserved a chance and the republicans knew it, which is why they began a program of character assassination thirty years ago. You gotta hand it to them, they'r smart. And evil. Then they pulled off a coup that I'd never have guessed: they became the party of the working stiff. Which leaves the Dems with, uh, what?
Our only hope is that the trump administration will implode; maybe then we can pick up the pieces, if there's anything left.
Hillary deserved a chance and the republicans knew it, which is why they began a program of character assassination thirty years ago. You gotta hand it to them, they'r smart. And evil. Then they pulled off a coup that I'd never have guessed: they became the party of the working stiff. Which leaves the Dems with, uh, what?
Our only hope is that the trump administration will implode; maybe then we can pick up the pieces, if there's anything left.
The Democrats have become totally unhinged. Hillary is entitled to be dictator for life!!!!! Now these fanatics refuse to work with President Trump or even accept Trump's election!!! This is totally without precedent and is unpatriotic and treasonous
Whatever Trumps moderates on, the Democratic Party will have to address the immediate blow back by the Ann Coulters on the social media side and the Steve Bannons on the political side who have metastasized into the body politic of our government. Trump has received commitments from these types and they are expecting a quid pro quo as are those who voted for Donald Trump.
By all means give Trump a chance. But beware how quickly our government could become inextricably enmeshed in white nationalist policies and actions. And worse.
By all means give Trump a chance. But beware how quickly our government could become inextricably enmeshed in white nationalist policies and actions. And worse.
Hillary Clinton won the election by 2.5-3 million votes, a solid achievement the non-stop coverage of the fake email scandal and Comey's interference. Donald Trump was the runner-up, and is President-elect only because he got a few extra votes in Pennsylvania while Hillary Clinton lost a few of her voters in Michigan and Wisconsin. Furthermore, most of the people who voted for Trump are better off economically than most of the people who voted for Clinton. These are the same people who vote for Republicans in every election, one could almost say, religiously. I wish the Times would lay off the "white working class" tidal wave narrative. It does a disservice to the real individuals who make up the working class (and the poor, who nobody bothers talking about, or with). Many millions of them chose Clinton, or did not vote at all. As for those who voted for Trump, given what has been occurring politically in the last thirty years, it would be amazing if all but a small segment of the population tuned into talk radio and the NRA were to actually jump ship and voted for the Democratic candidates on the ballot. That ship sailed a while ago.
Wait a minute. Pick your stand. One one hand, you say "prominent Democrats have said he [Trump] deserves a chance". On the other hand, you refer to the filibuster as the " arcane rules give the opposition party leverage to shape or block legislation passed by the rigidly conservative, Republican-dominated House."
The latter sounds suspiciously like Dems want to be the "party of no" that they had accused Republicans of being.
Let's place the cards on the table. There is no "higher road". Each party has different ideas of the role of government. So when "Mr. Schumer vows to block all efforts to kill Obamacare, or gut Dodd-Frank financial regulation", let's keep in mind that these laws were passed by the "rigidly liberal, Democratic-dominated government" using questionable tactics like Pelosi's "deeming a bill passed". Obamacare, in particular, has been unpopular since day 1.
So why shouldn't Repubs follow the Dem example and oppose this liberal nirvana "by any means necessary" ? Yes, liberals will point out how repealing Obamacare will leave 20 million without insurance. But even if Repubs offer no replacement (unlikely), the blue states like CA can always add these welfare programs where the federal government removes them. And if you read the Constitution, that's supposed to be the idea in the first place.
The latter sounds suspiciously like Dems want to be the "party of no" that they had accused Republicans of being.
Let's place the cards on the table. There is no "higher road". Each party has different ideas of the role of government. So when "Mr. Schumer vows to block all efforts to kill Obamacare, or gut Dodd-Frank financial regulation", let's keep in mind that these laws were passed by the "rigidly liberal, Democratic-dominated government" using questionable tactics like Pelosi's "deeming a bill passed". Obamacare, in particular, has been unpopular since day 1.
So why shouldn't Repubs follow the Dem example and oppose this liberal nirvana "by any means necessary" ? Yes, liberals will point out how repealing Obamacare will leave 20 million without insurance. But even if Repubs offer no replacement (unlikely), the blue states like CA can always add these welfare programs where the federal government removes them. And if you read the Constitution, that's supposed to be the idea in the first place.
The Democrats have a peculiar agenda. They champion the poor, claiming to be self-righteous. They attack the wealthy also claiming to be self-righteous. And they purport not to have an agenda that serves their own interests. We are to believe that they are selfless champions of everybody but themselves. It's as if their politics were about getting to heaven. It isn't surprising that a selfless agenda is viewed with deep suspicion and resentment. Anyone who pretends not to want or need anything from the government is either intolerably superior or entirely insincere. Democrats need an interest-based agenda that everyone else can identify with so and fairly evaluate.
While Democrats are thinking about their wholesale election evisceration, they might do well to remember that they lost for a very simple reason:
"Republicans govern by fear while Democrats fear to govern."
Anger and tribalism on one side versus timorous empathy on the other. When voters have this choice, which always. . .always wins?
"Republicans govern by fear while Democrats fear to govern."
Anger and tribalism on one side versus timorous empathy on the other. When voters have this choice, which always. . .always wins?
On a personal level, I can't handle hating Republicans and Trump anymore like I did during the election. It's too costly to my otherwise good life.
2
If we don't take seriously what Sanders is saying at this point, we might as well forget party. If we stay status quo, we hand young voters--and certain older ones--into the Independent Party. The whole paradigm has shifted and the 2 parties were bystanders.
Put a silver stake through neoliberalism, let Sanders, Warren and other Progressives take the reins, kick the corporate 'centrists' out. Or call it something altogether different, but let's get it up to speed now. The messaging and grasp of zeitgeist could not have been worse, part of '12 through '16.
Put a silver stake through neoliberalism, let Sanders, Warren and other Progressives take the reins, kick the corporate 'centrists' out. Or call it something altogether different, but let's get it up to speed now. The messaging and grasp of zeitgeist could not have been worse, part of '12 through '16.
8
What makes anybody think Trump will take ANY input from Democrats -- whether in the Senate or elsewhere?
As a lifelong democrat who has no further use for the party, I'm willing to listen. But, there is one condition: The democratic party must develop a relentless, and I mean relentless focus on the working class. By that I mean the black working class, the female working class, the white working class, the one-mother one-father family working class, the lower educated working class, the higher educated working class, the native American working class, the immigrant working class, the industrial rust-belt working class, the poor southern working class, and the working class as it exists in the northeast, the west, and the southwest. This includes all the working class, not to the exclusion of people who have to perform frac jobs for a living, or work in a refinery or change out broken toilets for the elite. Finally, more than anyone else, the focus must include the old, elderly working class of all the above groups who are having to work into their 70s because their pensions and retirements have been stolen and marginalized through MCI, stock market busts, dot com busts, real estate busts, banking busts, Enron busts, oil and gas market busts, and whatever the financial collapse of the week. Those, the elderly, are forced to begin the last phase of their lives in social security poverty after having worked their entire lives. These people are being driven into financial ruin by pernicious policies that favor the rich.
Somehow, I doubt democrats can do that.
Somehow, I doubt democrats can do that.
19
Well written, and probably sums up very clearly why the votes for Trump occurred.
Kind of hard to have the right economic message if you are a neoliberal party owned and operate by Goldman Sachs, as the Clinton Dems were. Bernie had the PERFECT economic message, and would have crushed Trump, but he would have been much worse for Goldman in office than Hillary will be in defeat. So Bernie had to be smeared by the Black Political Machine so the blacks in Congress and the pulpit, all owned by the Goldman Dems, would make sure that the right economic message for the poor and the working classes of all races never made it to the White House. Worked like a charm, didn't it? Hope the blacks enjoy four years of Trump, instead of four years of a guy much, much on their side than the Clintons, Bernie.
6
The Clinton camp miscalculated -- they thought they could run a typical campaign -- and with their 2.5 to 1 advantage in campaign funding buy the election with massive television advertising -- as has been done for 30 years.
Guess what ? The electorate isn't buying this anymore and chose Trump to burn the house down. Clinton couldn't support all those blue collar folks without annoying her corporate funders and risking loss of their financing, which she and the DNC felt was essential to her electability. The only rational explanation for Clinton's silence on blue collar economic issues was that she felt she would part of her corporate machine funding. There's no other plausible explanation for not reaching out to such an important constituency.
Guess what ? The electorate isn't buying this anymore and chose Trump to burn the house down. Clinton couldn't support all those blue collar folks without annoying her corporate funders and risking loss of their financing, which she and the DNC felt was essential to her electability. The only rational explanation for Clinton's silence on blue collar economic issues was that she felt she would part of her corporate machine funding. There's no other plausible explanation for not reaching out to such an important constituency.
11
I doubt it as long as the party stays wrapped up in its internal power struggles, spends more time staring at data on their monitors and less time out talking to actual people. By the way, what is it that the party stands for anymore? You get a bunch of the party's Big Thinkers together and they arrive at instant consensus. And the plan will be on how to woe different sets of voters that they didn't do so well with this time around. The Democratic Party needs to reform itself from the grass roots up not from the boss level down.
5
"And the plan will be on how to woe (sic) different sets of voters that they didn't do so well with this time around."
Unfortunate slip, Mr. Clever, but probably quite accurate. The will be a lot of true woe amongst the "stakeholders" of the Democratic Party while the power brokers try to come up with a message.
Here's a suggestion; take it or not as you will... Try finding out what The People want, and start formulating your party's platforms around THOSE thoughts...
That's how the Republicans have managed to gain control of the state and federal governments over time, no by trying to dictate to the unwashed, dumb masses that will believe in anything you try to sell them.
Unfortunate slip, Mr. Clever, but probably quite accurate. The will be a lot of true woe amongst the "stakeholders" of the Democratic Party while the power brokers try to come up with a message.
Here's a suggestion; take it or not as you will... Try finding out what The People want, and start formulating your party's platforms around THOSE thoughts...
That's how the Republicans have managed to gain control of the state and federal governments over time, no by trying to dictate to the unwashed, dumb masses that will believe in anything you try to sell them.
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat," Unable to come to terms with the reasons HRC lost, the Editorial Board reverts to platitudes to cover the bidding from Wall Street Goldman Sachs speeches, her Iraq War vote, ability to foster mistrust, her lack of progressive policies ('wait and see on marijuana', timidity on gay marriage, stating we shouldn't be like Denmark), etc. It is easy to call everyone that disagrees with your open borders policies or the BLM movement bigots; it is a lot harder to debate on actual facts and the experiences of Americans in our heartland. Hillary Clinton, and the bubble that surrounds her, were profoundly out of touch with America's heartland.
Yes, Hillary won the popular vote, but if I had a penny for the number of people on the NyTimes who said "I am voting for Hillary Clinton, but I am just voting to keep Donald Trump out of the White House." That shows a severe lack of enthusiasm for her candidacy. This is not to mention that fact that Obama, who I consider one of our best presidents in 40 years, actually is Black and a relative political outsider won a lot of the counties that went went to Trump.
The DNC needs to take a hard look at itself. What can we do to prevent this from happening next time? One, become more like Bernie Sanders, whose main source of support were Independents. Independents are the largest voting block in the country, start courting them and not the Regressive Left.
Yes, Hillary won the popular vote, but if I had a penny for the number of people on the NyTimes who said "I am voting for Hillary Clinton, but I am just voting to keep Donald Trump out of the White House." That shows a severe lack of enthusiasm for her candidacy. This is not to mention that fact that Obama, who I consider one of our best presidents in 40 years, actually is Black and a relative political outsider won a lot of the counties that went went to Trump.
The DNC needs to take a hard look at itself. What can we do to prevent this from happening next time? One, become more like Bernie Sanders, whose main source of support were Independents. Independents are the largest voting block in the country, start courting them and not the Regressive Left.
6
I believe that Harry Truman said that any time a Democrat running for office tries to look like a Republican the real Republican wins. The D's have to get back to what was their base, the classes which are not the upper classes. That is, the majority of people in this nation. Those are the people who have historically been defended by the D's and voted for the D's. So, next election, how about the Democrats run for office trying to look like Democrats?
1
The Democrats have lost it all, the Presidency is just the most noticeable. They are no longer in control of most governorships, most state-houses, the house and the senate. I am afraid the Democratic Party is in danger of becoming a permanent minority party.
It's the eceonomy stupid! The country has been looted of the very jobs which created this great country and the middle class which kept the Democrats in power for three generations. If Trump is successful in bringing even some of those jobs back and keeping more from leaving, it's over for the Democratic Party for at least a generation.
It's the eceonomy stupid! The country has been looted of the very jobs which created this great country and the middle class which kept the Democrats in power for three generations. If Trump is successful in bringing even some of those jobs back and keeping more from leaving, it's over for the Democratic Party for at least a generation.
13
Hard to see how that will happen, though...the big problem is that the only way the government can actually create jobs is by creating government jobs, or perhaps jobs at government contractors, either way the government is the source of revenue...which runs totally counter to the ideology of the "free market" anti-tax right. I suppose we'll see another debt-financed military buildup, but if veterans think Trump is going to fix/fully fund the VA they're going to be disappointed.
Job #1 for the Senate Republicans, follow the Harry Reid lead and dump the filibuster for all appointments, to include the Supreme Court.
Job #2 dump the filibuster for all votes, go to a straight "winner take all" vote.
Time to get rid of that, just like the Dems would like to get rid of the electoral college since it does not reflect the will of the people.
Job #1 for both parties, give us a real choice on a vote for president, with 300+ million folks in this country these two were the best you could do?
Another reason why I vote libertarian.
Semper Fi
Job #2 dump the filibuster for all votes, go to a straight "winner take all" vote.
Time to get rid of that, just like the Dems would like to get rid of the electoral college since it does not reflect the will of the people.
Job #1 for both parties, give us a real choice on a vote for president, with 300+ million folks in this country these two were the best you could do?
Another reason why I vote libertarian.
Semper Fi
3
Was "what's a leppo?" Johnson the best your folks could find? Maybe the problem with finding good candidates is that the media circus they must pander to is so superficial yet vicious that only the insanely ambitious, or just plain insane, will dare to run.
Let's be clear on the nature of this defeat, though. The Times reports that Clinton lost Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin by a mere 100,000 votes. Her insurmountable lead in the popular vote is well over two million and counting.
This is a devastating defeat, yes. But it is not the end of the Democratic party, nor should it be interpreted as a mandate for Republicans. And when the Republicans do act in such ways, the Democratic party as a whole must demand that the voice of the people be taken into account.
This is a devastating defeat, yes. But it is not the end of the Democratic party, nor should it be interpreted as a mandate for Republicans. And when the Republicans do act in such ways, the Democratic party as a whole must demand that the voice of the people be taken into account.
98
You are correct is writing the Democratic Party and the people must respond but I would like to see some concrete suggestions coming from the DNC. Right not, I feel the Dems are on very shaky legs.
Sanders and Warren seem to be foremost in the polls and Schumer is a capable leader but we need more from the DNC . . . a lot more.
Sanders and Warren seem to be foremost in the polls and Schumer is a capable leader but we need more from the DNC . . . a lot more.
Well it is a mandate for change, not Obama change but real change. A government that is much smaller but actually does its work properly within the constitution. A government that remembers that its first and most important responsibility is to our citizens, nobody else.
But the Democratic party, like the Republican party, doesn't listen to the people.
They are cozy with the rich and elite because they need the money to remain in office. They pass laws or implement policy that is crafted to help the rich and elite become even more rich and elite. Mainly because that is their own "tribe". They, too, are rich and members of the elite.
Their sole purpose is their "career" and keeping their job with it's great salary and benefits. Think of all the perks these politicians has insured they have and maintain.
They are cozy with the rich and elite because they need the money to remain in office. They pass laws or implement policy that is crafted to help the rich and elite become even more rich and elite. Mainly because that is their own "tribe". They, too, are rich and members of the elite.
Their sole purpose is their "career" and keeping their job with it's great salary and benefits. Think of all the perks these politicians has insured they have and maintain.
Who would you rather have as President, Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders?
I was a strong and early Sanders supporter, but I suspect many if not most Times readers would take him over Trump.
But among the drawbacks people saw for Sanders was--as commenters here have noted, that he was an old, white Jewish man.
I would suggest that if we are going to win in the future, all those characteristics have to become unimportant.
We can't vote for people based on age, race, religion, or gender. Or choose someone to "prove" something.
I was a strong and early Sanders supporter, but I suspect many if not most Times readers would take him over Trump.
But among the drawbacks people saw for Sanders was--as commenters here have noted, that he was an old, white Jewish man.
I would suggest that if we are going to win in the future, all those characteristics have to become unimportant.
We can't vote for people based on age, race, religion, or gender. Or choose someone to "prove" something.
12
Chuck Schumer embodies the VERY things that were rejected by working-class voters that the Democrats need to represent. His choice to lead them in the Senate is about as WRONG as the choice of Dona Brazile to replace Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. It is proof that this party still represents the moneyed classes.
7
Please don't push the Democrats again to do the "grand bargain" on the budget with large cuts to Medicare and Social Security....these do not need to be bargained away for a tax cut, or even for infrastructure.
1
Agreed. I can't believe Obama put Social Security cuts on the table.
1
Democrats are not going anywhere until the democratic voters change their attitude. As proven in this election, republicans vote "Republican" even if the candidate's or party's platform is against their interests. Democrats on the other hand vote for the "Person". If they don't like the "Person", they won't vote or they will vote third party!
All these folks who 'misread' the electorate now try to explain what went wrong and to predict the future. Phooey on you. You know nothing. In fact, let's put that in quotes - "you know nothing". And the message isn't targeted at the progressives.... in fact, the GOP misread the election also. So, let me repeat for them and the alt-right "you know nothing". So you may ask me, what does it all mean and where are we headed? My answer is that I don't know but I do know that these other professional pundits know nothing.
1
It makes me cringe when the NYT says "her failure to crystallize a broad economic vision from among her many proposals for helping working-class voters regardless of race" while avoiding its own culpability: dancing to Trump's tune on appearances over substance, it's own relentless avoidance of policy discussion in favor of content free "clouds and shadows" over the Clinton campaign, and breathless coverage of the Comey's announcement, based on, approximately nothing. You're not in a position to lecture on this until you get your own house in order.
2
In his first 100 days in office FDR pushed through 15 major bills through Congress in response to the great depression. He stabilized the banks, made agriculture profitable for farmers, pushed for large scale welfare programs, pushed through major works projects, and began regulations on both the banks and the stock market to prevent another depression. He gave Americans hope and he was effective at selling his vision to the public.
Obama focused more on social issues i.e. Obamacare which while important, were not the focus of the American people. Had he taken advantage of the Democratic majority he initially had and pushed through a major infrastructure bill which would have gotten people working again he might have been a stronger President. He needed to do more to address the immediate economic suffering of the American people and he needed to do a better job of telling us what he was doing to address our economic fears.
Going forward Democrats need to remember that it's always the economy stupid. Americans are more open to social revolution when our basic needs are being met. There was a time when a minimum wage job provided a pretty comfortable lifestyle. Help us achieve that and you will never lose us.
Obama focused more on social issues i.e. Obamacare which while important, were not the focus of the American people. Had he taken advantage of the Democratic majority he initially had and pushed through a major infrastructure bill which would have gotten people working again he might have been a stronger President. He needed to do more to address the immediate economic suffering of the American people and he needed to do a better job of telling us what he was doing to address our economic fears.
Going forward Democrats need to remember that it's always the economy stupid. Americans are more open to social revolution when our basic needs are being met. There was a time when a minimum wage job provided a pretty comfortable lifestyle. Help us achieve that and you will never lose us.
4
There was never a time when a minimum wage could provide a pretty comfortable lifestyle. That was never true. Never. You are living in a fantasy world
The Democrats are identified with the managerial class, and that ties them to a bankrupt form of capitalism shuffling paper and investing the proceeds in multimillion dollar art.
The way forward requires a revised form of capitalism based on building a better future, not the bottom line.
Somehow America has to be put to work doing the jobs that aren't being done because a pallid unimaginative bottom-line capitalism cannot see a big enough picture. It cannot find a way to lift all boats by focusing on BIG endeavors that benefit the country, but can see only new ways to differentiate Pepsi from Coke.
The way forward requires a revised form of capitalism based on building a better future, not the bottom line.
Somehow America has to be put to work doing the jobs that aren't being done because a pallid unimaginative bottom-line capitalism cannot see a big enough picture. It cannot find a way to lift all boats by focusing on BIG endeavors that benefit the country, but can see only new ways to differentiate Pepsi from Coke.
5
" unimaginative bottom-line capitalism cannot see a big enough picture" What!?!?!? Since you're so committed to this mythical Big Picture and unconcerned about the bottom line, I'm sure you're emptying your bank accounts and IRA to pay people to dig holes in your yard and paying others to fill them up, right???
The democrats (and Republicans when they are in power) are doing a great job all by themselves of emptying my IRA and bank accounts with zero interest savings and zero-growth economy.
If this article was written two days after the election maybe it would be an example of brave optimism. But I check the date and this is actually what you can write after Bannon, Sessions, Devoy, the Trump University Settlement, the refusal to divest nay clear intention to fold this country within his personal business plan, etc. At this point, and with Hilary ahead by 2,228,000 votes, this is simply fatuous
1
America is finished. The choices we will be given will either be unrestricted capitalism or Trump-style, 21st century crypto-fascism. Either one will eventually lead to disaster. Under the first, the economy will boom and then bust so hard it might bring down the entire world with it. Under the second, we will have tariffs and trade wars and will probably eventually find ourselves in a major war with another great power or a coalition of rival great powers over those things. We just don't have enough people or industrial output, nor will we, to win that war on our own (rest assured, we will be alone - no one will come to help a Trumpist USA). The democrats can try their best to slow this bus down, but unless they can somehow come up with a way to unilaterally abolish the electoral college this country is doomed.
4
Perhaps a more pressing and crucial topic/title for the editorial would have been:
Can Senate Democrats Save the Country?
Can Senate Democrats Save the Country?
2
Democrats need to start letting people know that Republicans aren't only after Obamacare. That want to Privatize and defund Medicare and Social Security. Republicans want to get rid of these Programs so the Rich can enjoy large Tax Cuts. Paul Ryan is already chomping at the bit to get at Medicare. Ryan, who is extremely wealthy, seems to have a real passion for harming the Poor, Elderly and Disabled. His loyalty is to the Koch Brothers not the American People.
1
Ryan is a scourge on the USA.
It would help if they returned to the New Deal message of FDR and, today, Sanders. In 1950s the Clintons would have been Republicans to the right of Eisenhower, and, as unbelievable as it may seem, Richard Nixon. In this election the working men and women finally gave them up after fifty years of their baloney.
The Democrats are a wholly owned subsidiary of Goldman Sachs, et al., just as the Republicans.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
The Democrats are a wholly owned subsidiary of Goldman Sachs, et al., just as the Republicans.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
7
The Senate Democrats saving the party? They are going to do all they can to save their own hides. The Democrats that have remained in office are too far left and out of touch with Main Street USA that they will be ineffective. That is why they are failing to gain a majority and why they have lost the Presidency. The Democrats are too ideologically driven, and their ideology too radical for most people.
1
Winning an election requires more than putting 30 topics, in alphabetical order, on your website. I looked and it told me that she had no idea how to prioritize issues, how to decide what the most crucial are and focus on them.
I'm amazed that after all these years she has no idea what a good slogan is. I pondered "stronger together" and am pretty much at a loss for what it means. It wasn't a good idea to back Debbie Wasserman Schultz when she was clearly slanting things to favor Hillary over Bernie. That reminded me of Watergate where Nixon didn't have to do dirty things to win the election, but he did anyway. She could have won the nomination on her own, but used the DNC to gain an unfair advantage. I haven't forgiven her for that yet.
She never understood trying to create an image that working class people could relate to. When she chose to attend fund raisers in the Hamptons with wealthy donors instead of holding rallies, she was even telling upper middle class voters like me that we weren't good enough to be in the same room as her.
Trump wore that stupid hat, but he was trying to relate to working class people who wear baseball caps. It always had his slogan on it reinforcing his message. Even Romney would wear jeans, or do a photo op where he did his own laundry. Why couldn't Hillary ever wear jeans? Why couldn't she ever do a single event that dramatized that she is comfortable with normal people?
I'm amazed that after all these years she has no idea what a good slogan is. I pondered "stronger together" and am pretty much at a loss for what it means. It wasn't a good idea to back Debbie Wasserman Schultz when she was clearly slanting things to favor Hillary over Bernie. That reminded me of Watergate where Nixon didn't have to do dirty things to win the election, but he did anyway. She could have won the nomination on her own, but used the DNC to gain an unfair advantage. I haven't forgiven her for that yet.
She never understood trying to create an image that working class people could relate to. When she chose to attend fund raisers in the Hamptons with wealthy donors instead of holding rallies, she was even telling upper middle class voters like me that we weren't good enough to be in the same room as her.
Trump wore that stupid hat, but he was trying to relate to working class people who wear baseball caps. It always had his slogan on it reinforcing his message. Even Romney would wear jeans, or do a photo op where he did his own laundry. Why couldn't Hillary ever wear jeans? Why couldn't she ever do a single event that dramatized that she is comfortable with normal people?
3
The Senate Democrats need fresh leadership. Fortunately the bench is strong, especially its women: Klobacher, Gillibrand, McCaskill, Kemala Harris, along with leaders in the making such as Mark Warner, Angus King, Booker, both Connecticut Senators, Al Franken . . .
Senate Dems also need an issue agenda based upon national needs and opportunities: environmental protection, infrastructure that emphasizes light rail and futures technologies, a government public health insurance option, and many others that impact all Americans.
Finally, Senate Democrats must take the initiative to reach voters directly and constantly via social media and direct-to-voter platforms, such as town halls, legislator training, and issues management. They can no longer afford to leave messaging to the Republican/Breibart/Russian propaganda machine.
Time for the party to elevate its game in the national interest.
Senate Dems also need an issue agenda based upon national needs and opportunities: environmental protection, infrastructure that emphasizes light rail and futures technologies, a government public health insurance option, and many others that impact all Americans.
Finally, Senate Democrats must take the initiative to reach voters directly and constantly via social media and direct-to-voter platforms, such as town halls, legislator training, and issues management. They can no longer afford to leave messaging to the Republican/Breibart/Russian propaganda machine.
Time for the party to elevate its game in the national interest.
2
You missed Tulsi Gabbard.
1
Leaders of both parties didn't miss the anger, Democrats did. And Chuck Schumer is hardly the next generation. Look at the people who shaped the Trump victory. Young, well spoken business types, family and extended family that have a vision. Look at the children of the man. Well spoken, respectful and decent. Give the man his due, he kicked out a political dynasty that the media had conceded to Hillary. The Times showed her having a 96% chance of winning at 3:59 pm PDT/6:59 EDT on November 8th. Within 7 hrs. Trump was projected to have a 96% chance of winning. If that isn't an upset of epic proportions I don't know what is.
3
Senate Minority Leader Schumer is quoted as follows, “Above all, our economic message was not sharp enough, was not bold enough, was not strong enough."
Like most Democrats (including many commenters here) Schumer is out of touch. The time for bolder, stronger messaging is long past. The voters wanted ACTION, and they took matters into their own hands.
Many working-class whites voted for Obama in 2012. Disappointed with him as a change agent, and despairing not only of liberal Democrats, but of liberal democracy, itself, these Trump supporters voted to blow them all up, and replace them with an authoritarian solution to their problems. In effect, theirs was a constitutional movement.
For Schumer and his fellow Democrats on Capitol Hill to think they can work with a fascist dictator reflects an appalling naiveté. For that is what Trump will become on January 20th.
And that is what his aggrieved voters so consummately desire. Theirs was a rejection of liberalism in all its forms, as a political, cultural and institutional force.
Incidentally, Bernie had no more of a chance against that than Hillary; he would have been swept away just as easily. To Trump voters, he was just another liberal, and they wanted a strongman.
Like most Democrats (including many commenters here) Schumer is out of touch. The time for bolder, stronger messaging is long past. The voters wanted ACTION, and they took matters into their own hands.
Many working-class whites voted for Obama in 2012. Disappointed with him as a change agent, and despairing not only of liberal Democrats, but of liberal democracy, itself, these Trump supporters voted to blow them all up, and replace them with an authoritarian solution to their problems. In effect, theirs was a constitutional movement.
For Schumer and his fellow Democrats on Capitol Hill to think they can work with a fascist dictator reflects an appalling naiveté. For that is what Trump will become on January 20th.
And that is what his aggrieved voters so consummately desire. Theirs was a rejection of liberalism in all its forms, as a political, cultural and institutional force.
Incidentally, Bernie had no more of a chance against that than Hillary; he would have been swept away just as easily. To Trump voters, he was just another liberal, and they wanted a strongman.
12
Generally agree, but I don't think it's true that the angry white guys in rural areas voted for Obama. I believe that in the counties and precincts that gave Trump wins in Michigan, Wisconsin and NC the vote was up over 2012 and the urban vote wasn't big enough to overcome that (whoever's fault it was).
To say that they voted for Obama is to buy the argument that these guys voted Trump for economic reasons (I dont think you are saying that).
They voted for for him cultural reasons. Trying to change their minds is a waste of time. The can be defeated by bigger turnout by people who oppose this clown.
To say that they voted for Obama is to buy the argument that these guys voted Trump for economic reasons (I dont think you are saying that).
They voted for for him cultural reasons. Trying to change their minds is a waste of time. The can be defeated by bigger turnout by people who oppose this clown.
Fascist dictator?!?!? I know the fascist Dem/leftist leadership and all the left's Little Eichmanns don't believe in freedom and democracy, but freedom, democracy and opportunity won on Nov 8. You are on the wrong side of history, as usual
Reply to Bumpercar,
Yes, turnout increased among working-class whites, but there’s also no doubt that many of them voted for Obama in 2012. (They are not all racists as liberals like to portray them.)
According to Nat Cohn of The New York Times, “Democrats have to grapple with the fact that they lost this election because millions of white working-class voters across the United States voted for Obama and then switched to Trump.” http://tinyurl.com/gmxffg7
In 2016, they voted for Trump for BOTH economic and cultural reasons. As one pundit put it, it was a “primal scream of despair and rage.”
Yes, turnout increased among working-class whites, but there’s also no doubt that many of them voted for Obama in 2012. (They are not all racists as liberals like to portray them.)
According to Nat Cohn of The New York Times, “Democrats have to grapple with the fact that they lost this election because millions of white working-class voters across the United States voted for Obama and then switched to Trump.” http://tinyurl.com/gmxffg7
In 2016, they voted for Trump for BOTH economic and cultural reasons. As one pundit put it, it was a “primal scream of despair and rage.”
1
The desperate need is for America itself to be saved. The America that was making slow incremental progress toward liberty and justice for all.
My beloved country's progress will now be set back fifty or a hundred years, if DT and his minions have their way. They're planning to sell off everything from our roads and schools and prisons to our national monuments to corporations. To silence the free press. To harass anyone who disagrees with them.
They've been planning this for decades and have the power to achieve it by stacking the courts in their favor just as they've gerrymandered voting districts. By encouraging Fake News media like Breitbart, Fox, and the web-savvy guys the NYT recently reported on, who've been raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars a month from pro-Trump anti-Hillary clickbait.
It's up to liberals to halt their destructive path as best we can. I'd vote for a socialist like Bernie, given a chance. I'd settle for a sturdy Democrat like Elizabeth Warren.
It's disheartening to have to contend with this demagogue right here in the US. Trump supporters are primed to lick up every lie tossed their way.
My beloved country's progress will now be set back fifty or a hundred years, if DT and his minions have their way. They're planning to sell off everything from our roads and schools and prisons to our national monuments to corporations. To silence the free press. To harass anyone who disagrees with them.
They've been planning this for decades and have the power to achieve it by stacking the courts in their favor just as they've gerrymandered voting districts. By encouraging Fake News media like Breitbart, Fox, and the web-savvy guys the NYT recently reported on, who've been raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars a month from pro-Trump anti-Hillary clickbait.
It's up to liberals to halt their destructive path as best we can. I'd vote for a socialist like Bernie, given a chance. I'd settle for a sturdy Democrat like Elizabeth Warren.
It's disheartening to have to contend with this demagogue right here in the US. Trump supporters are primed to lick up every lie tossed their way.
14
Ooooooohhhhhh, the fake news conspiracy!!! Boogeyman under the bed!!!!!! The biggest perpetrator of fake news is the NY Times. Charles Blow lied about his son being questioned by a white Yale police officer; the officer was black like Blow. The Times squealed how Trump wouldn't accept the election results, in reality its Hillary and Stein who are threatening democracy! The Times whined about violence by Trump supporters after the would lose, the violent fascist treasonous left is throwing a violent temper tantrum. Every lie and smear the Times/left put out about Trump has come to pass- bu it's Hillary/the left who's living those lies! Fox, brietbart, etc are the only sources of true news around. Reality has proven this
I realize we must go through a period of horrific introspection as Democrats to see how to improve our messaging for the next go-round. But enough with the hand-wringing over "identity politics." Did the messages: "hope and change" and "stronger together" convey division? No. The fact that these Democratic messages appealed to a diverse group of people is borne out by the results of the 2008 race and this election's popular vote tally. The person who played identity politics in this election was none other than Donald Trump, who played the (white) race card over and over. It worked because diversity of color, age, gender and sexuality exists and is celebrated mainly in the cities and on the coasts. I know this isn't a popular view right now, but I was never prouder to be a Democrat than during the convention in Philadelphia, or when I attended a beautifully diverse rally on Independence Mall the night before the election. Please let's not lose a key part of our own Party's identity in a vain pursuit of those white voters who will never celebrate this most American of values. There can be NO compromise with a man who appealed to the very worst impulses in the human psyche to get elected nor with his henchmen on the Right who would send us back to pre-Civil War days in their wish to return to the days of white male supremacy.
19
Make that "a beautiful diverse rally" where 30,000 people got in and several hundred (maybe even a couple thousand) more had to be turned away.
1
In conclusion, power breeds arrogance then corruption which needs not be criminal, which was the culprit here, along with a deeply flawed candidate.
The Clintons and Wasserman Schultz aided and abetted their questionable acts with impunity, and thought they would be overlooked by their supporters as was the case back when Bill was President. The three of them were again proven wrong by their public, and the Republicans who would let the big lies Trump the truth in many issues.
Once the millionaire and billionaire Trumpeters are appointed to run his cabinet, which of course had never contributed to his "grass roots" movement, and deconstruct OB's Exec Orders and Rules and Regs, a second Supreme is approved by the Republicans, and Ryan and McConnell cram down "The Better Way", and privatizeSocial Security and Medicare, the Democrats won't have to worry about running the country for the next few generations. Neither will the 320 million of us realize the benefits of the last 240 years of our country.
There needs to be a viable change to effectively counter the current ruling plutocracy built by the Kochs and there buds, who gave us and our children the present of Citizens United. If not, the US will go the way of the Greek and Roman plutocratic empires.
The Clintons and Wasserman Schultz aided and abetted their questionable acts with impunity, and thought they would be overlooked by their supporters as was the case back when Bill was President. The three of them were again proven wrong by their public, and the Republicans who would let the big lies Trump the truth in many issues.
Once the millionaire and billionaire Trumpeters are appointed to run his cabinet, which of course had never contributed to his "grass roots" movement, and deconstruct OB's Exec Orders and Rules and Regs, a second Supreme is approved by the Republicans, and Ryan and McConnell cram down "The Better Way", and privatizeSocial Security and Medicare, the Democrats won't have to worry about running the country for the next few generations. Neither will the 320 million of us realize the benefits of the last 240 years of our country.
There needs to be a viable change to effectively counter the current ruling plutocracy built by the Kochs and there buds, who gave us and our children the present of Citizens United. If not, the US will go the way of the Greek and Roman plutocratic empires.
10
We are already there.
Only in our case the barbarians are from within.
I feel sick to my stomach.
What will those who have paid into SS and Medicare do? Do they plan to take this away from those of who are elderly and depend on the we put into the system.
What happens to the money our kids have been contributing for their SS and Med having worked and contributed since they were teenagers?
Where would Ryan be without those benefits after his father died. Disgusting!!
Hard to find work if you are over 50 much less 65 .
Only in our case the barbarians are from within.
I feel sick to my stomach.
What will those who have paid into SS and Medicare do? Do they plan to take this away from those of who are elderly and depend on the we put into the system.
What happens to the money our kids have been contributing for their SS and Med having worked and contributed since they were teenagers?
Where would Ryan be without those benefits after his father died. Disgusting!!
Hard to find work if you are over 50 much less 65 .
"Representative Ruben Gallego of Arizona says. “But I think there is a common interest in our economic policies between the laid-off white worker in Flint, the African-American and the Latino in Phoenix.”
Exactly.
The Democrats need to be an economically-focused party. When you address the legitimate economic concerns of working and middle class Americans, you'll get a majority of them to go along for the ride on the social issues, especially in presidential years.
When Bill Clinton argued for the ratification of NAFTA, he promised Americans that higher-paying service jobs would replace the manufacturing jobs that were exiting. But corporate America had other ideas.
The Republicans have become a wildly ideological party - but the Democrats were supposed to be pragmatists. A pragmatist would have devised a robust method for preventing corporations from outsourcing more of those service jobs, and compelling them to return the ones that they previously outsourced, before attempting to foist another top-down trade agreement on the American people. We didn't do that. We instead let Trump campaign on doing it.
It's still the economy, stupid. For many less well-off Americans, it's always going to be the economy.
When centrists Democrats side with the fat cats of corporate America, yet count on working people to keep them in office, they say to those voters that they think they're stupid. But even "stupid" people need to be able to make a living, right?
Exactly.
The Democrats need to be an economically-focused party. When you address the legitimate economic concerns of working and middle class Americans, you'll get a majority of them to go along for the ride on the social issues, especially in presidential years.
When Bill Clinton argued for the ratification of NAFTA, he promised Americans that higher-paying service jobs would replace the manufacturing jobs that were exiting. But corporate America had other ideas.
The Republicans have become a wildly ideological party - but the Democrats were supposed to be pragmatists. A pragmatist would have devised a robust method for preventing corporations from outsourcing more of those service jobs, and compelling them to return the ones that they previously outsourced, before attempting to foist another top-down trade agreement on the American people. We didn't do that. We instead let Trump campaign on doing it.
It's still the economy, stupid. For many less well-off Americans, it's always going to be the economy.
When centrists Democrats side with the fat cats of corporate America, yet count on working people to keep them in office, they say to those voters that they think they're stupid. But even "stupid" people need to be able to make a living, right?
17
If you want the world to change, change yourself.
The first thing the Democratic Party needs to do is to eliminate the "superdelegates" in its primary process. It is the most undemocratic part of how it selects its nominee. Let the people decide who they want, for good or bad. But to shove a nominee down their throat after 10 years of political maneuvering that renders the primary process a foregone conclusion? Well, we saw how well that turned out, didn't we?
The first thing the Democratic Party needs to do is to eliminate the "superdelegates" in its primary process. It is the most undemocratic part of how it selects its nominee. Let the people decide who they want, for good or bad. But to shove a nominee down their throat after 10 years of political maneuvering that renders the primary process a foregone conclusion? Well, we saw how well that turned out, didn't we?
18
Is America ready for more socialism? That was Bernie's promise. Probably not. Can the party appeal to white working class men and assure African Americans that we are not returning to segregation and Jim Crow? That was Obama's promise. Probably not. Can we support women's autonomy and require women to have children they can't afford to raise. That was Hillary's promise. Answer, No. Can Americans compromise? Find the middle way? No. We will swing, lurch, between seeming extremes where one party sort of rocks along somewhat stable, Democrats, and the other party tries radical change via Trump and the end of the spotty social net with the end of Social Security and Medicare as promoted by Paul Ryan. The GOP hadn't been good for the middle class since Teddy Roosevelt, but Americans forget and know more about the NFL than their national history.
10
In polls Americans like socialism just as much as capitalism. The young like it more. And Bernie showed that large numbers of Americans, even many who ended up voting for Trump, will vote for a socialist.
The People are sick of having our democracy sold to the highest bidder. That is what unites us. Fight for true democracy and the People will fight by your side.
The People are sick of having our democracy sold to the highest bidder. That is what unites us. Fight for true democracy and the People will fight by your side.
Robert Reich, B Clinton’s Labor Secy, says it all: “Why We Need A New Democratic Party”
“Democrats occupied the White House for 16 of the last 24 years, and for 4 of those years had control of both houses...but failed to reverse the decline in working-class wages and security.
Both B. Clinton and Obama ardently pushed for free trade agreements without giving millions of workers who lost jobs means of getting new ones that paid at least as well.
They stood by as corporations hammered trade unions, the backbone of the white working class - failing to reform labor laws to impose penalties on companies that violate them, or help workers form unions with simple up-or-down votes.
Union membership sank from 22% of all workers under Clinton to less than 12% today. The working class lost bargaining leverage to get a share of the economy’s gains.
Clinton and Obama let antitrust enforcement to ossify – so corporations got larger, major industries more concentrated. All this shifted power to the top few ---and created an opening for Trump’s authoritarian demagoguery, and his presidency.”
Reich and many others say we can’t save US political culture and make any progress without campaign finance reform. This editorial should focus on that, but the op ed page mostly ignores it. Too radical? But most democracies don’t turn over their elections to elite megadonors. Their public funding allows their govts to be more responsive to the people.
“Democrats occupied the White House for 16 of the last 24 years, and for 4 of those years had control of both houses...but failed to reverse the decline in working-class wages and security.
Both B. Clinton and Obama ardently pushed for free trade agreements without giving millions of workers who lost jobs means of getting new ones that paid at least as well.
They stood by as corporations hammered trade unions, the backbone of the white working class - failing to reform labor laws to impose penalties on companies that violate them, or help workers form unions with simple up-or-down votes.
Union membership sank from 22% of all workers under Clinton to less than 12% today. The working class lost bargaining leverage to get a share of the economy’s gains.
Clinton and Obama let antitrust enforcement to ossify – so corporations got larger, major industries more concentrated. All this shifted power to the top few ---and created an opening for Trump’s authoritarian demagoguery, and his presidency.”
Reich and many others say we can’t save US political culture and make any progress without campaign finance reform. This editorial should focus on that, but the op ed page mostly ignores it. Too radical? But most democracies don’t turn over their elections to elite megadonors. Their public funding allows their govts to be more responsive to the people.
56
But there is no chance for campaign finance reform as long as Republicans have a say in the matter, certainly not when they have effective control of both state and federal government as they do today. The great irony of arguing for campaign finance reform now is that we just saw a better financed Democratic candidate lose to a Republican campaign fueled mainly by "free media"...turns out money isn't everything. What's needed is more creativity in messaging, and finding new ways to get the message out.
"Both B. Clinton and Obama ardently pushed for free trade agreements without giving millions of workers who lost jobs means of getting new ones that paid at least as well."
Those jobs ain't comin back soon. Let's see if Trump can pull them out of his hat? A new WPA program is the only answer because sweatshops dictate economics, and they're as toxic to Americans as polio or the whooping cough. We want a factory with an 8-hour work-day, 5 days a week, unionized and paying a living wage; that, however, went by way of the dodo bird. The only option for the American worker is to to become a migrant, picking fruits and vegetables.
Mrs. Clinton and President Obama knew this, but were thwarted in creating WPA jobs or programs to re-educate workers by the carcinogenic Republican Party, the party that not only didn't help us, but infected us with its cancerous ideology.
Now Trump is wearing the crown (maybe literally) but let's see how long he can fool the foolish with his magic act - even he, no fool, outsources and takes advantage of immigrant labor. Why you ask? To quote him, "Because I'm smart."
Those jobs ain't comin back soon. Let's see if Trump can pull them out of his hat? A new WPA program is the only answer because sweatshops dictate economics, and they're as toxic to Americans as polio or the whooping cough. We want a factory with an 8-hour work-day, 5 days a week, unionized and paying a living wage; that, however, went by way of the dodo bird. The only option for the American worker is to to become a migrant, picking fruits and vegetables.
Mrs. Clinton and President Obama knew this, but were thwarted in creating WPA jobs or programs to re-educate workers by the carcinogenic Republican Party, the party that not only didn't help us, but infected us with its cancerous ideology.
Now Trump is wearing the crown (maybe literally) but let's see how long he can fool the foolish with his magic act - even he, no fool, outsources and takes advantage of immigrant labor. Why you ask? To quote him, "Because I'm smart."
The money always flows when the Republicans have the presidency. Look for more spending on the credit card because of the coming tax cuts and de-regulation demanded and secured by the Republicans and the willingness of the Democrats to put the country back on the right path with infrastructure spending. What is worrisome is that the Democrats will go along with the privatization schemes of the Republicans when it comes to private financing not public financing and further gut the commons and sell them off to the investor crowd that has been under taxed for 3 decades. There's nothing left to buy but more politicians and the public commons. We are going to need to pay close attention and use public activism similar to what is being done at DAPL, the pipeline, to try to get the somnambulists that populate the establishment media to cover and report the stories the oligarchists don't want the electorate to know about.
12
I believe that I have a fairly good track record on picking winners because I told my wife that Barack Obama was a future president after his speech at the 2004 Democratic convention. The Democrats had two candidates who would have beaten Donald Trump; Bernie Sanders and VP Joe Biden. We fell into the Republican playbook of giving Hillary her turn just as the Republicans gave Dole and McCain their turn at the nomination. It is still hard to believe that she never held a campaign event in the State of Wisconsin. Trump is already on the hook for giving coal miners back their jobs (not going to happen with cheap natural gas and solar getting cheaper), steel plant workers, family farmers, and factory workers back their jobs. Globalization is here to stay and it is our duty to help re-train these workers for 21st century jobs. Democrats need to craft this message for 2018!
33
How many retrained 55 year olds will be hired at anywhere near a living wage. Almost none.
Globalization is here to stay, but there is more than one way to globalize, and the way we have been doing it has been bad for the US. We need to fix globalization. Clinton said it was OK the way it is and just needed some tinkering around the edges. That is why she lost.
Globalization is here to stay, but there is more than one way to globalize, and the way we have been doing it has been bad for the US. We need to fix globalization. Clinton said it was OK the way it is and just needed some tinkering around the edges. That is why she lost.
Typical of the NYT to call for a major party that "transcends the boundaries of race and class." That's been the Democrats for decades and look where it's gotten them. The United States needs a major party that is inclusive but that takes on Wall Street, the billionaire class, the corporations, and their media, including this newspaper. If I sound like I'm plagiarizing Mr. Sanders it's because I am reading his book "Our Revolution" and that sort of sea change is the only hope for democracy in this country.
44
"President Obama, for one, has said: “I want to be respectful of the office and give the president-elect an opportunity to put forward his platform and his arguments without somebody popping off in every instance.”
translation - Let's give him enough rope to hang himself with
translation - Let's give him enough rope to hang himself with
8
We have let negative, fear-mongering GOP braying against sound solutions the country needs (Medicare, social security, the ACA adding 20 million to the health-insured rolls, public education to suit changing work opportunities, free public higher education, higher minimum wages, decent income and wealth tax structures) drown out progressive messaging. We have even let Republicans garner working and middle class votes by their initiatives to destroy unions. If nothing else, the re-set button presents an opportunity to re-focus our message on the common interests of most Americans and no longer let negative GOP messaging specifically aimed at so many insignificant gender, ethnic, and religious differences push us apart, into overly narrow interest groups. Whether we need new voices or reframing, and I think it is much more the latter, we must get out in front with a cohesive positive message as this editorial demands.
2
OK, I got it. So, now when the democrats disagree with policy, they should do what the minority is empowered to do. Fight to block it on behalf of their constituents. BUT, when the republicans did this and tried to block policies they disagreed with (as did the majority of Americans), like Obamacare; they were branded as obstructionists and the party of NO!
The sweet irony of the NY Times asking, if not begging for the democrats to exact in exactly the same way.
Nauseating!
The sweet irony of the NY Times asking, if not begging for the democrats to exact in exactly the same way.
Nauseating!
28
The Democrats have to stand up to Paul Ryan's plan to end Social Security and Medicare. The also need to support legislation that requires stock brokers to be punished for cheating their clients. If we are going to be the country of investors, as is the dream of Ryan, we can't let brokers bilk us. And not addressing climate change is a death by small cuts. Until that hurricane or flood drought induced wildfire destroys all you own.
16
First of all, you're misreading the article. They're not encouraging Democrats to implement a scorched-earth policy, as Republicans did under Obama. They think that Democrats should stick with wishy-washy ideals like unity.
Second, you're wrong that Democrats are just as bad as Republicans if they flout the norms that Republicans have already broken. Informal norms of political cooperation in Congress were norms that were created to make governing a country like the United States possible. To be effective, they have to be recognized. But as we've already seen, they have not been effective over the past eight years, and Republicans in their triumphalism have indicated little interest to reach across the aisle since November 8th.
Norms of political cooperation have to be recognized in order for them to be worth having, and they're not recognized now. So they don't bind Democrats. This isn't revenge, or two-wrongs-make-a-right. It's not being in the bottom-left corner of a prisoner's dilemma (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma).
Second, you're wrong that Democrats are just as bad as Republicans if they flout the norms that Republicans have already broken. Informal norms of political cooperation in Congress were norms that were created to make governing a country like the United States possible. To be effective, they have to be recognized. But as we've already seen, they have not been effective over the past eight years, and Republicans in their triumphalism have indicated little interest to reach across the aisle since November 8th.
Norms of political cooperation have to be recognized in order for them to be worth having, and they're not recognized now. So they don't bind Democrats. This isn't revenge, or two-wrongs-make-a-right. It's not being in the bottom-left corner of a prisoner's dilemma (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma).
PJ: What the GOP disagreed with was not policies, but Obama. The ACA was developed at the Heritage Foundation, road-tested by Romney in Mass, and excoriated as Obamacare thereafter. The GOP shut down government because they couldn't enforce Armageddon against the poor. That's not policy. That's vindictive superstition. The false equivalence you draw is, unfortunately, one of the newer weapons of disinformation war.
4
The editorial refers to Ms. Clinton's "failure to crystallize a broad economic vision from among her many proposals for helping working-class voters regardless of race — the kind of message Mr. Obama was able to send."
How could Ms. Clinton crystalize a broad economic vision for helping working-class voters when the vast majority of us recognize that (a) she works for Wall Street, not for us, and (b) she will say anything in order to get elected, even though she means none of what she saying in public. Mr. Obama was able better to enunciate a set of policies because none of us really knew anything about him. Ms. Clinton's unavoidable problem is that enough people know who she is, and they rejected her for it.
I suspect that fairly quickly enough people will also discover who Mr. Schumer is, who also has been a faithful servant of Wall Street. So, the Democrats will not easily be saved by the Senate. Fortunately, most Americans also reject Mr. Trump. The problem is that electoral politics are played out between two parties, both of whom work for Wall Street and other corporate interests, so Americans generally will continue to be profoundly alienated from the results of American electoral politics.
The problem concerns not whether the Democrats can be saved, but whether the American people can be saved from the current cynical two-party duopoly that pretends not to be functionaries of the rich and powerful.
How could Ms. Clinton crystalize a broad economic vision for helping working-class voters when the vast majority of us recognize that (a) she works for Wall Street, not for us, and (b) she will say anything in order to get elected, even though she means none of what she saying in public. Mr. Obama was able better to enunciate a set of policies because none of us really knew anything about him. Ms. Clinton's unavoidable problem is that enough people know who she is, and they rejected her for it.
I suspect that fairly quickly enough people will also discover who Mr. Schumer is, who also has been a faithful servant of Wall Street. So, the Democrats will not easily be saved by the Senate. Fortunately, most Americans also reject Mr. Trump. The problem is that electoral politics are played out between two parties, both of whom work for Wall Street and other corporate interests, so Americans generally will continue to be profoundly alienated from the results of American electoral politics.
The problem concerns not whether the Democrats can be saved, but whether the American people can be saved from the current cynical two-party duopoly that pretends not to be functionaries of the rich and powerful.
19
Entirely agree. We have one party with two wings but there is one which is more malevolent than the other.
Only democracy can save the democrats and they don't want it cose mondaine things like super delegates, simple delegates, gerrymandering, closed primaries, winner take all, electoral college and the whole constitution have kept them in the business of being elected.
2
Trump should be a wake up call that having an imperial presidency and allowing the Supreme Court to make our laws concentrates power in too few hands.
Congressional Democrats should work with like minded Republicans, to limit the power of ALL presidents and return to a more democratic vision of America.
For example, Democrats should vow to only confirm Supreme Court justices who believe in a less activist court. It might be painful, but THAT is better than an activist court who legislates against you.
Perhaps one of the driving forces of our divisive political system is that our executive and judicial branches have become too powerful, so the stakes are so high. I think we'd be better off if the people and the states had more power to decide how they wish to live.
For example, if people in Texas don't want abortions but people in NY do, maybe that is how the law should be. Similarly, if people in NY don't want guns, but people in Texas do, maybe that is how the law should be as well. The Supreme court should only step in for gross violations of constitutional rights.
Me, I live in NYC, and want the laws to reflect my leftist leanings. I don't want right wing nuts in Texas telling me what to do. On the other hand, I don't feel the need to tell Texas what to do.
Congressional Democrats should work with like minded Republicans, to limit the power of ALL presidents and return to a more democratic vision of America.
For example, Democrats should vow to only confirm Supreme Court justices who believe in a less activist court. It might be painful, but THAT is better than an activist court who legislates against you.
Perhaps one of the driving forces of our divisive political system is that our executive and judicial branches have become too powerful, so the stakes are so high. I think we'd be better off if the people and the states had more power to decide how they wish to live.
For example, if people in Texas don't want abortions but people in NY do, maybe that is how the law should be. Similarly, if people in NY don't want guns, but people in Texas do, maybe that is how the law should be as well. The Supreme court should only step in for gross violations of constitutional rights.
Me, I live in NYC, and want the laws to reflect my leftist leanings. I don't want right wing nuts in Texas telling me what to do. On the other hand, I don't feel the need to tell Texas what to do.
We don't own the other people in our communities, though. Sometimes, they have rights against us, even if we're in the majority and they're in the minority. The people actually having abortions in Texas want them. The question is whether or not the rest of the people in Texas should be able to legally stop them. If that's a question left up to Texas, then of course the majority will legislate according to its will. But might doesn't always make right. Sometimes, states shouldn't be able to do this.
Also, one states' rights issue these days is what states can do to influence the vote. Should Republican majorities be able to redistrict or pass laws making it hard for those disadvantaged to vote in order to make it easier for Republicans to get elected in those states in the future? That's obviously a national issue, I think, and one that we need a strong Court to arbitrate.
Also, one states' rights issue these days is what states can do to influence the vote. Should Republican majorities be able to redistrict or pass laws making it hard for those disadvantaged to vote in order to make it easier for Republicans to get elected in those states in the future? That's obviously a national issue, I think, and one that we need a strong Court to arbitrate.
"Similarly, if people in NY don't want guns, but people in Texas do, maybe that is how the law should be..." That is how the law actually is. The problem for NY is that Texas law and the laws of other states allow guns to be sold indiscriminately (gun shows, inadequate back-ground checks, and bulk sales), and those guns are trafficked to the North.
1
There was a time when some states allowed human beings to enslaved, while other states did not...this is the fundamental problem of "states' rights"...and unless we have customs checks at state lines, how would you stop people bringing guns into NY from another state where they're allowed ? It's tempting to think we can just go our separate ways, but ultimately we can't do that and remain one country.
@RLS in Virginia and @njglea in Seattle; while I agree with RLS, I think the first sentence may be misleading. I am a Bernie supporter. Notwithstanding, Bernie the man is not the future of the Democratic Party. Bernie, (the "old, white, Jewish man" according to njglea) the visionary, the fighter and the politician able to reach compromise without sacrificing principle is most certainly the future of the Progressive Movement. He won't run again but he can provide the enormous experience and energy he has accumulated over a lifetime to guide Progressives. It would save time and energy if the Democratic Party would become Progressive again but if it can't, then Progressives will discard it like a husk.
Personally, I could care less about the future of the Democratic Party. Debbie Wasserman-Shultz and the Party establishment lost the presidency to Trump because they maneuvered and schemed to put forward the one candidate who could lose to Trump. Why? Because "it was her turn." Sit in it.
The task of Senate Democrats and all right-thinking Americans is not to save the Party but to minimize the impact of the shuffling, incoherent, narcissistic ignorant Orange misanthrope over the next two years...hold the line and do it again two years later.
That's the task.
Personally, I could care less about the future of the Democratic Party. Debbie Wasserman-Shultz and the Party establishment lost the presidency to Trump because they maneuvered and schemed to put forward the one candidate who could lose to Trump. Why? Because "it was her turn." Sit in it.
The task of Senate Democrats and all right-thinking Americans is not to save the Party but to minimize the impact of the shuffling, incoherent, narcissistic ignorant Orange misanthrope over the next two years...hold the line and do it again two years later.
That's the task.
32
Patrick Borunda: Bernie's a nice old guy--a bit younger than me and bit too centrist!!! If he is the future of the progressive movement, god help America.
1
Good. Yes. And over the next 2 weeks the Dems can throw their considerable weight and intellect behind Foster Campbell in the Louisiana Senate runoff. Are any of the party power brokers even paying attention to this gift?
Does Schumer and Co. realize how nice it would be to be only down 2 seats instead of 4 in the venerable chamber? Do they not have the exact ingredients they need to gain this victory by simply observing the way they lost other key races, and then vowing to never repeat those mistakes? And by now couldn't a team of the Democrat elite fly into the bayou and coach their guy on exactly what to say and how and when to say it?
Warren? Sanders? Obama? Anyone listening? C'mon man!
Don't let talk of recounts, rigged votes, and 1876 cloud your judgement. The prize is there for the taking in Baton Rouge, right here and now. Go get it!
Does Schumer and Co. realize how nice it would be to be only down 2 seats instead of 4 in the venerable chamber? Do they not have the exact ingredients they need to gain this victory by simply observing the way they lost other key races, and then vowing to never repeat those mistakes? And by now couldn't a team of the Democrat elite fly into the bayou and coach their guy on exactly what to say and how and when to say it?
Warren? Sanders? Obama? Anyone listening? C'mon man!
Don't let talk of recounts, rigged votes, and 1876 cloud your judgement. The prize is there for the taking in Baton Rouge, right here and now. Go get it!
8
I felt revulsion at both candidates. As an Independent I look at both parties. On
this occasion I saw two quite dislikeable people--along with the multitude of others. I want to see the Democratic Party saved from the increasingly socialist, progressive, even communist persons currently inhabiting it. I wanted change for our Republic but felt was failed by both parties. At this point in time, I am hoping for the best for all. The election is over.
this occasion I saw two quite dislikeable people--along with the multitude of others. I want to see the Democratic Party saved from the increasingly socialist, progressive, even communist persons currently inhabiting it. I wanted change for our Republic but felt was failed by both parties. At this point in time, I am hoping for the best for all. The election is over.
3
Can senate democrats save the party? Not when minority leader Shumer is known as the senator from Wall Street . The New Democratic playbook seems to be the same as the old democratic playbook. Wall Street plus identity politics: gays, women, etc. The fly in the ointment is Wall Street, that group is not compatible with the needs of the submerged working class. If Wall Street were more susceptible to a government jobs program, massive infrastructure improvements through government outlay, etc, the Dems might reemerge as a majority party.
7
The party needs to evolve, or it will continue to wonder why their candidates can't win. The old message used to be about a tent big enough for everyone, but the 2016 message seemed to be a narrow definition of "Democrat" and a menu with both options, "take it or leave it." Which allowed The Orange Menace to swoop in and carry the down-ballot Republicans to a massive victory. Democratic Senators like Elizabeth Warren are the future. This was a populist election at the top of the ticket. But the D party wouldn't budge. Sanders was the candidate with the message to compete, but the DNC stubbornly refused to listen to the primary voters and even after Wasserman-Shulz was uncermoniously "resigned" from the DNC, the Clinton campaign gave a big middle finger to the voters again and immediately hired her. With a bunch of SCOTUS justices in their 8th decade, this was a make-or-break election. And Democrats managed to ignore enough Americans to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Again.
12
Yes, what was Clinton thinking, rehiring DWS immediately? What poor judgment.
1
Chuck Schumer (and Hillary Clinton, for that matter) and Wall Street are much too close in their outlook on cutting big banks—and big corporations—down to size to reduce their power. But it is time to bring back vigorous antitrust and Glass-Steagall and all the other laws that once prevented the concentration of wealth and power that is destroying this country, though of course making a great deal of money for a very small set of people, who are happy to use some of that money to relax rules and regulations even more.
Take a look at this article by Matt Stoller in the Atlantic. I think it makes a persuasive case that the Democratic party needs a new direction and a new leadership, and it points the way. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/10/how-democrats-killed...
Take a look at this article by Matt Stoller in the Atlantic. I think it makes a persuasive case that the Democratic party needs a new direction and a new leadership, and it points the way. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/10/how-democrats-killed...
1
Amazing, Art - amazing...
First, railing against the Electoral College - by entreating the very institution built on extreme distortion against popular representation, and which half-influences the structure of the college...
Second - and I know you aren't going to post this comment anyway - you're essentially arguing that the Senate should grow a pair...As we've seen, it's easier to be a back-bencher - i.e. to bust a pair, rather than grow a pair...
Third: "...Leaders of both parties missed middle-class voters’ determination this year to blow up a political establishment that had failed to improve their lives...
Or - said another way - unsubsidized ObamaCare for generally-well people is junk coverage, on a level with option ARM mortgages...
Fourth:"... the United States needs at least one major party with a message that transcends the boundaries of race and class...
Do you mean - as Alec would say - like they have in Ghina???
Also, do you mean it exclude and demean people of all races that you deem uneducated, unwashed, and generally unworthy???
Fifth, and - Art, this one has me rolling in the aisles...
"...claim the loyalty of Americans who deserve hope, regardless of race...
They deserved hope, Art...
They deserved change, too...
Well - they finally got it...
First, railing against the Electoral College - by entreating the very institution built on extreme distortion against popular representation, and which half-influences the structure of the college...
Second - and I know you aren't going to post this comment anyway - you're essentially arguing that the Senate should grow a pair...As we've seen, it's easier to be a back-bencher - i.e. to bust a pair, rather than grow a pair...
Third: "...Leaders of both parties missed middle-class voters’ determination this year to blow up a political establishment that had failed to improve their lives...
Or - said another way - unsubsidized ObamaCare for generally-well people is junk coverage, on a level with option ARM mortgages...
Fourth:"... the United States needs at least one major party with a message that transcends the boundaries of race and class...
Do you mean - as Alec would say - like they have in Ghina???
Also, do you mean it exclude and demean people of all races that you deem uneducated, unwashed, and generally unworthy???
Fifth, and - Art, this one has me rolling in the aisles...
"...claim the loyalty of Americans who deserve hope, regardless of race...
They deserved hope, Art...
They deserved change, too...
Well - they finally got it...
3
Taking into account how Sen. Sanders was side-lined and seeing the smug entitlement of party elites during the election season, is it worth saving?
Better to start from scratch and work to reclaim a working people / middle class base. The Democrats have lost their way so completely, that I don't think they can find their way back anymore.
Better to start from scratch and work to reclaim a working people / middle class base. The Democrats have lost their way so completely, that I don't think they can find their way back anymore.
13
Senator Sander was sidelined by voters like me. What's your problem with that?
I doubt Democrats will have much near term success converting Trump voters. They should broaden their base elsewhere.
Half of eligible Americans didn't vote this year. Democrats should look urgently and in depth into why that happened and recruit those abstainers.
Half of eligible Americans didn't vote this year. Democrats should look urgently and in depth into why that happened and recruit those abstainers.
4
The only tool the Senate Democrats have at their disposal is the filibuster. Judging from Trump's selections of his closest advisers and his arrogant above the law stance on running his business empire while treating the presidency as a sideline, Schumer and company will have their hands full. They will have to revive the working class's confidence that they are the party on their side and they must constantly press Republicans eager to look away at what promises to be an administration fraught with ethical issues of commingling the business of Trump with duties of the presidency, and the impending crises brought on by fear of Trump's misogyny, xenophobia, and eagerness to scrap the Affordable Care Act.
As a Democrat, I need to get the vote out so we win more senate seats and I hope all democrats this time get out and vote, such a simple thing to do.
I learned nothing from this article that I did not know.
1
Read Charles Blow recent column to understand what needs to be done
2
Yes read Mr. Blow and see that his one refrain remains "White man bad! All others good!" I seldom have read such racial baiting as one finds in his "columns".
1
Representative Ruben Gallego of Arizona says. “But I think there is a common interest in our economic policies between the laid-off white worker in Flint, the African-American and the Latino in Phoenix.”
The problem is that far too many of Trump's voters hate, overtly or covertly, that African-American and Latino.
Too much of this election was about white nationalism and its ugly mutant cousin, white supremacy.
The problem is that far too many of Trump's voters hate, overtly or covertly, that African-American and Latino.
Too much of this election was about white nationalism and its ugly mutant cousin, white supremacy.
In what way was Trump's campaign "anti-black"? When did he EVER say anything against black people?
This is typical of lefty liberalism, trying to use "racism" as a catch-all for "anything you don't like or disagree with".
Trump is not anti black, anti latino or anti Muslim. He is anti ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION and anti TERRORISM.
This is typical of lefty liberalism, trying to use "racism" as a catch-all for "anything you don't like or disagree with".
Trump is not anti black, anti latino or anti Muslim. He is anti ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION and anti TERRORISM.
The blind spot of the Democratic Party is enormous. Essentially, especially after the release of the ET tonight tape with Billy Bush, the Clinton campaign tried to rely on shaming Trump -- and by proxy, his supporters -- as the path to victory.
But shaming is exactly what conservative-leaning voters are extremely weary of. There is an irony here, since Democrats have pilloried conservatives for trying to shame various groups for decades, beginning with the catcalls thrown at Dan Quayle for daring to say the TV show Murphy Brown was not wholesome because it scripted Candice Bergen's character as a deliberate single mother.
So the shaming strategy has come back to bite them. Shaming is a tawdry tactic, in my view. I'm a "devout liberal," but how many times can I watch a predictable SNL sketch before I start to feel something has gone amiss with our political pursuit of real solutions to real problems?
The recent tiff about the case of Hamilton preaching at Pence proves, the Left still thinks a politics of shaming is the ticket. But it isn't. It was, I believe, in fact the secret ingredient of Trump's victory.
If Hillary had never said "basket of deplorables," if her campaign had resisted the enticing option of making the election about a 24/7 campaign of shaming of "Trumpism," we might not be in the pickle we now are in.
Democrats need a new angle. You can shame some of the people some of the time, but, we now know, you cannot shame some of the people all of the time.
But shaming is exactly what conservative-leaning voters are extremely weary of. There is an irony here, since Democrats have pilloried conservatives for trying to shame various groups for decades, beginning with the catcalls thrown at Dan Quayle for daring to say the TV show Murphy Brown was not wholesome because it scripted Candice Bergen's character as a deliberate single mother.
So the shaming strategy has come back to bite them. Shaming is a tawdry tactic, in my view. I'm a "devout liberal," but how many times can I watch a predictable SNL sketch before I start to feel something has gone amiss with our political pursuit of real solutions to real problems?
The recent tiff about the case of Hamilton preaching at Pence proves, the Left still thinks a politics of shaming is the ticket. But it isn't. It was, I believe, in fact the secret ingredient of Trump's victory.
If Hillary had never said "basket of deplorables," if her campaign had resisted the enticing option of making the election about a 24/7 campaign of shaming of "Trumpism," we might not be in the pickle we now are in.
Democrats need a new angle. You can shame some of the people some of the time, but, we now know, you cannot shame some of the people all of the time.
2
The senate democrats are arguably ideally placed now, to be productive like never before.
Until 2010, democrats controlled the house, senate and presidency. They could have achieved a lot including gun control, but disappointed us by doing zilch.
They retained the presidency, but used it to lie about Obamacare, pass illegal executive orders, and encourage illegal immigration.
Now they have just enough power -- to veto pernicious legislations and support constructive ones.
Things are beginning to look up, after all.
Until 2010, democrats controlled the house, senate and presidency. They could have achieved a lot including gun control, but disappointed us by doing zilch.
They retained the presidency, but used it to lie about Obamacare, pass illegal executive orders, and encourage illegal immigration.
Now they have just enough power -- to veto pernicious legislations and support constructive ones.
Things are beginning to look up, after all.
1
Where pray tell is the middle ground on which which America can find a political balance?
I am looking for a new name under which to comment I am no longer Montreal Moe an American who moved back to the country where he was born, and I am no longer Chimoe the Canadian born American living in the midwest.
I am Canadian and feel the pain and anguish of my wife children and grandchildren who were taught to believe in a country many believe no longer exists.
I look at today's newspaper I remember the celebration we had when the US puppet in Havana was overthrown and we celebrated. I remember trips to the Caribbean and friends telling us you can go here and you can't go there because it is too dangerous and I remember my nephews telling me how safe and alive Cuba was in 2013. In the same 2013 I remember my grandson pleading for a quick way out of his armed encampment in El Salvatore where his two week stay lasted three days.
I don't know if the USA can be saved, it is up to Americans to decide if it worth saving but before it can be saved Americans must decide what America is. Will it be the last outpost of European Colonialism or will it again be the greatest experiment in human evolution where being American was not dependent on your parents, your religion , the colour of your skin, the vehicle you drive, or if you are urban or rural, your politics or the first language you spoke?
When I look at Liberty Island I should not think of Planet of the Apes.
I am looking for a new name under which to comment I am no longer Montreal Moe an American who moved back to the country where he was born, and I am no longer Chimoe the Canadian born American living in the midwest.
I am Canadian and feel the pain and anguish of my wife children and grandchildren who were taught to believe in a country many believe no longer exists.
I look at today's newspaper I remember the celebration we had when the US puppet in Havana was overthrown and we celebrated. I remember trips to the Caribbean and friends telling us you can go here and you can't go there because it is too dangerous and I remember my nephews telling me how safe and alive Cuba was in 2013. In the same 2013 I remember my grandson pleading for a quick way out of his armed encampment in El Salvatore where his two week stay lasted three days.
I don't know if the USA can be saved, it is up to Americans to decide if it worth saving but before it can be saved Americans must decide what America is. Will it be the last outpost of European Colonialism or will it again be the greatest experiment in human evolution where being American was not dependent on your parents, your religion , the colour of your skin, the vehicle you drive, or if you are urban or rural, your politics or the first language you spoke?
When I look at Liberty Island I should not think of Planet of the Apes.
2
Moe: the problem with the America you believed in, IMHO, was that it never existed. It was a myth. Think of the wonders of ancient Greece and Rome. The beauty, the drama, the slavery and the poverty. The challenge for all of us is to find a way to live in the reality of the jungle of life. Have you watched the movie Sicario? A naïve FBI agent is told she should move to a small town where the law still is observed. "You are not a wolf," she was told. "But this is a world of wolves now."
1
FIrst off, Moe, you are not now nor have you ever been an AMERICAN citizen. You are and have always been a CANADIAN citizen, who sometimes lived in the USA.
It is interesting how you pretend to be American, when it suits your political agenda.
NOW, you come out FOR Fidel Castro and communist Cuba -- defending a dictator, defending a totalitarian government with a strongman leader. I guess you don't like democracy! You prefer a communist dictatorship because "it's safe in the streets!"
Of course it is safe; there is total repression and the Cuban people live in terror of the state police! DUH!
Oh and here is a heads up: WE do NOT want to be Canada.
It is interesting how you pretend to be American, when it suits your political agenda.
NOW, you come out FOR Fidel Castro and communist Cuba -- defending a dictator, defending a totalitarian government with a strongman leader. I guess you don't like democracy! You prefer a communist dictatorship because "it's safe in the streets!"
Of course it is safe; there is total repression and the Cuban people live in terror of the state police! DUH!
Oh and here is a heads up: WE do NOT want to be Canada.
Arizona is the most "gerrymandered" state in the union. Until we tackle the illegal redistricting in that state, the dominant number of democrats will never win that state.
The ludicrous manner which we use to select our "so called" representatives can never lead to change. People are supposed to select their employee (the president) with no resume, no real background checks, and no way to compel the candidate to fulfill his promises. How many people would pay a contractor to build a porch who doesn't build it, never intended to build it, and didn't have the skills to build it. Well, you just elected him president.
The ludicrous manner which we use to select our "so called" representatives can never lead to change. People are supposed to select their employee (the president) with no resume, no real background checks, and no way to compel the candidate to fulfill his promises. How many people would pay a contractor to build a porch who doesn't build it, never intended to build it, and didn't have the skills to build it. Well, you just elected him president.
2
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat. " I don't think so. If anything, Mrs. Clinton won more votes than she lost due to her gender. Remember, women make up the majority of the electorate. And it's hard to make a case that it was bigotry, after Mr. Obama won two terms. So, stop playing the victim, NYT.
Why did Mrs. Clinton lose? Well, she won the popular vote. But she lost enough votes to lose the Electoral College, because she is Hillary Clinton. She and her husband have made a large fortune with speaking engagements to Wall Street firms. And look at her husband's infamous pardons. Bill thought nothing about giving crooked donors get-out-of-jail free cards. The email situation was part of it, not so much because she jeorpardized national security, but because she came across as frankly untrustworthy.
And if the Democratic party wishes to speak a "message that transcends the boundaries of race and class", they should reject Affirmative Actions, which is racial discrimination plain and simple Diversity is a worthwhile goal, but it must not be achieved by favoring some ethnic groups over others. The equal protection clause needs to be respected, for a change.
There were an awful lot of close calls this election day, and the Republicans won many of them. But the Democrats are just as powerful a political party. The need to remember, however, the no one wishes to be left behind, including those who live in flyover country, worried about jobs.
Why did Mrs. Clinton lose? Well, she won the popular vote. But she lost enough votes to lose the Electoral College, because she is Hillary Clinton. She and her husband have made a large fortune with speaking engagements to Wall Street firms. And look at her husband's infamous pardons. Bill thought nothing about giving crooked donors get-out-of-jail free cards. The email situation was part of it, not so much because she jeorpardized national security, but because she came across as frankly untrustworthy.
And if the Democratic party wishes to speak a "message that transcends the boundaries of race and class", they should reject Affirmative Actions, which is racial discrimination plain and simple Diversity is a worthwhile goal, but it must not be achieved by favoring some ethnic groups over others. The equal protection clause needs to be respected, for a change.
There were an awful lot of close calls this election day, and the Republicans won many of them. But the Democrats are just as powerful a political party. The need to remember, however, the no one wishes to be left behind, including those who live in flyover country, worried about jobs.
6
The Democrats have not had a unified message for years. They have been running, at least since the days of the Contract for America, as the party that will keep the GOP from sending us back to the days before Teddy Roosevelt. But holding the GOP Way Back Machine at bay has been a full time job.
So what does the party want, other than to stop the destruction of Medicare and Social Security, or the reversal of Roe vs Wade?
When the Democrats figure out a way to position education as a valuable right rather than a tax drain, and figure out how to position social safety nets as necessary to all, and not just to the lazy losers who take our paychecks, and healthcare as a vital part of economic strength, and not an entitlement to the poor and a cost to everyone else, then we might save the party. When the Democrats come up with something real that will grow the incomes and opportunity of the middle class, they might save the party. But the DNC is using a playbook from 1960. The nation has moved on.
Somehow the Democrats lost all sense of how to sell the necessity of maintaining social stability.
So what does the party want, other than to stop the destruction of Medicare and Social Security, or the reversal of Roe vs Wade?
When the Democrats figure out a way to position education as a valuable right rather than a tax drain, and figure out how to position social safety nets as necessary to all, and not just to the lazy losers who take our paychecks, and healthcare as a vital part of economic strength, and not an entitlement to the poor and a cost to everyone else, then we might save the party. When the Democrats come up with something real that will grow the incomes and opportunity of the middle class, they might save the party. But the DNC is using a playbook from 1960. The nation has moved on.
Somehow the Democrats lost all sense of how to sell the necessity of maintaining social stability.
172
"This disposition to admire, and almost worship, the rich and powerful, and to despise, or, to neglect persons of poor and mean condition...is...the great and most universal cause of the corruption of our moral sentiment."
--Adam Smith, "Theory of Moral Sentiments, " Book 3, Section 3, Chapter 3
2
Education as a mission. A skilled workforce is a natural resource. Leads to stronger middle class and higher GDP. That translates into higher tax revenue so there's a return on investment with education spending. Education is also necessary from a national security perspective. An educated electorate is less susceptible to foreign propaganda.
1
The Democrats moved to the right during the Clinton presidency. They lead the way to the money machine and "compromise" that alienated their base.
This newspaper did not turn on Hillary. They did everything in the their power, including printing her campaigns smears against Sanders, during the primary. Then, they assured us that she couldn't lose! Who wasn't moved by her message of "abandon hope for any change" and "I'm not Trump"? The Times was! They were in the same bubble as the DNC and just as horribly wrong.
Inside the Beltway wisdom is no wisdom at all, just self-dealing. Trump will be right at home in that swamp.
This newspaper did not turn on Hillary. They did everything in the their power, including printing her campaigns smears against Sanders, during the primary. Then, they assured us that she couldn't lose! Who wasn't moved by her message of "abandon hope for any change" and "I'm not Trump"? The Times was! They were in the same bubble as the DNC and just as horribly wrong.
Inside the Beltway wisdom is no wisdom at all, just self-dealing. Trump will be right at home in that swamp.
So it is not enough for Democrats to get the popular vote - they now need to overcome Gerrymandered districts and voter suppressed states as well? So much for a level playing field and the spirit of one person one vote. Perhaps running as the "underdog" is the last "American" card they have left.
The polls told us Hillary was going to win - hands down. After all, who could possibly vote for that other guy? The result was a depressed voter turn out for Hillary.
Given the narrow victory, Democrats just need to try harder - even if Donald may make the job a lot easier over the next couple of years. Still, they need to work even harder.
Democrats also need to find a leader late enough in the election cycle to avoid giving the GOP the time to implement character assassination and faux scandal strategies they can only win with. Light speed social media makes this difficult.
Perhaps as a last resort they can hire Chinese hackers to counter the Russian hackers. Sorry, not funny!
At least Hillary had the guts to call out the racists, bigoted lynch mob (lock her up mob) as the “deplorables” and “irredeemable” people they truly and accurately are.
Indeed, Mr. Trump will impose himself on all Americans - whether we like it or not.
The polls told us Hillary was going to win - hands down. After all, who could possibly vote for that other guy? The result was a depressed voter turn out for Hillary.
Given the narrow victory, Democrats just need to try harder - even if Donald may make the job a lot easier over the next couple of years. Still, they need to work even harder.
Democrats also need to find a leader late enough in the election cycle to avoid giving the GOP the time to implement character assassination and faux scandal strategies they can only win with. Light speed social media makes this difficult.
Perhaps as a last resort they can hire Chinese hackers to counter the Russian hackers. Sorry, not funny!
At least Hillary had the guts to call out the racists, bigoted lynch mob (lock her up mob) as the “deplorables” and “irredeemable” people they truly and accurately are.
Indeed, Mr. Trump will impose himself on all Americans - whether we like it or not.
5
Hmmm. i never thought of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin as "gerrymandered districts". They are states. And the drafters of cur Constitution wanted to assure that large states could not render the concerns of smaller states irrelevant.
The rules were known in advance of the election. Mrs Clinton, against the advice of her husband, chose to either not understand, or ignore, the core concerns in these states. So she lost them. The voters there would rather have someone who gets the economic problems they suffer, rather than an election eve Beyonce concert.
The rules were known in advance of the election. Mrs Clinton, against the advice of her husband, chose to either not understand, or ignore, the core concerns in these states. So she lost them. The voters there would rather have someone who gets the economic problems they suffer, rather than an election eve Beyonce concert.
1
The rules were not known. Who knew Putin and WikiLeaks would target Democrats and edit emails before releasing them? Who knew Comey would tip the scale? As for "districts" versus "states," we all vote by district, and Republicans have gerrymandered districts all over America.
Hmmm. I never thought of Republicans - and especially Trump of all people - to give a hoot about the economic problems of the struggling. Their only concern is for the economic "problems" of the wealthy who have to spend so much money on politicians who will write legislation giving them a pass on paying taxes.
Gerrymandered districts may not apply to the three states you indicate, but they certainly matter in many other states.
I am sure the Constitution did not intend for Gerrymandering or other cheating mechanism to allow for the gaming of the electoral college votes.
Of course we know the rules - but that does not mean we cannot complain about them or the results - its the American way. And I certainly prefer hearing Beyonce sing than a mob screaming "lock her up" and beating people who do not fall in line.
Gerrymandered districts may not apply to the three states you indicate, but they certainly matter in many other states.
I am sure the Constitution did not intend for Gerrymandering or other cheating mechanism to allow for the gaming of the electoral college votes.
Of course we know the rules - but that does not mean we cannot complain about them or the results - its the American way. And I certainly prefer hearing Beyonce sing than a mob screaming "lock her up" and beating people who do not fall in line.
Have fun dominating the world and hanging out with all the square people.
They wouldn't even know how to invent something like "Game of Thrones". It takes a liberal mind to imagine.
They wouldn't even know how to invent something like "Game of Thrones". It takes a liberal mind to imagine.
The issue here is not a Donald Trump and the future republican policy.This is about the Democratic Party and how you, as a party, will change your direction for the people of your party, it's members.
Every day, every article written in media is the same message before your defeat in the Nov. 8th elections, what happened is this....not what we did was wrong. Even from 2008 to 2016. Obama had given people Hope and Hope never even made it to the WH lawn ! You still believe or want to believe it's not what you did, or how you ran the party, and want as a party, but what everyone else has done to stop you.You are and have been stopping yourselves. Your message does not resonate with the people. You created your own agenda with only certain party members. You split this party- Own It! and Change It!
Look who is elected as your minority party heads-Sen. Schumer and Rep. Pelosi- same messages with the same agenda. Where does this speak of any changes coming to the Democratic party? Business as Usual!
Why did Bernie Sanders do so well in the primaries? What did he say that you do not? You have split this party...Now the time is to listen and learn ,and then act. Even the NY Times editorial Sunday Review asks the this question:
"Can the Senate Democrats Save the Party?" What will your answer be?
How your starting is not a good indication of positive change for the party.
Every day, every article written in media is the same message before your defeat in the Nov. 8th elections, what happened is this....not what we did was wrong. Even from 2008 to 2016. Obama had given people Hope and Hope never even made it to the WH lawn ! You still believe or want to believe it's not what you did, or how you ran the party, and want as a party, but what everyone else has done to stop you.You are and have been stopping yourselves. Your message does not resonate with the people. You created your own agenda with only certain party members. You split this party- Own It! and Change It!
Look who is elected as your minority party heads-Sen. Schumer and Rep. Pelosi- same messages with the same agenda. Where does this speak of any changes coming to the Democratic party? Business as Usual!
Why did Bernie Sanders do so well in the primaries? What did he say that you do not? You have split this party...Now the time is to listen and learn ,and then act. Even the NY Times editorial Sunday Review asks the this question:
"Can the Senate Democrats Save the Party?" What will your answer be?
How your starting is not a good indication of positive change for the party.
2
As you say "arcane rules" of the Senate give the Democrats in the Senate the power to block any part of Trump's agenda that they don't like. But Trump should have none of it. Since the majority in the Senate has the power to change its rules whenever it wants to just like in the House and in any other democratically elected legislative body in the whole wide world, Trump should demand that the Senate change its rules so it can pass his agenda, or any part of it that the majority supports and if they don't he will blame his failure on them. Not on the Democrats but on the Republicans in the Senate, He should tell them in no uncertain terms that as far as he is concerned the Senate is the swamp and it needs to be drained of its arcane and undemocratic rules so that it is free to do the people's business.
It is not "obvious" to most folks that sexism and bigotry played a role in the outcome of the election. That is the view of a narrow swath of deeply intolerant liberal partisans. Repeating this lie over and over again makes it no more credible, and only demonstrates how deeply out of touch the NYT continues to be.
1
So now The Times--which has long crusaded against both Clintons, and which did its level best to undermine the candidacy of Hillary Clinton, starting with its curious arrangement with Steve Bannon ally and dark money hatchet man Peter Schweizer -- has joined the Republican Party in calling for--what do we call collaboration now? "common ground"?; "bipartisanship"?
Whatever you call it, it requires Democrats to ignore the extraordinary and radical and dangerous trajectory on which the GOP has now embarked, and to accept the official Republican myth, embraced by the editorial staff at The Times, that the GOP is somehow still a mainstream political party, that it "won" this battle fair and square in the piteous white heartland, and that in consequence, what? white people must henceforth be more generously accommodated (Why, my goodness--declares The Times--even Muslims want the Democrats to play nice).
The Times wants Democrats to "negotiate" with a man who ran on a barely-veiled platform of white supremacism, who has surrounded himself with Dominionists and other extremists, who has already stacked his Cabinet with radicals and incompetents, whose track record for fiscal corruption exceeds that of any in recent memory before he has even been sworn in, who has threatened to ignore or suspend the rules of small-d democratic governance--but who did, after all, have a nice little talk in private with the paper's owner, and in public with its senior staff.
Dear Lord.
Whatever you call it, it requires Democrats to ignore the extraordinary and radical and dangerous trajectory on which the GOP has now embarked, and to accept the official Republican myth, embraced by the editorial staff at The Times, that the GOP is somehow still a mainstream political party, that it "won" this battle fair and square in the piteous white heartland, and that in consequence, what? white people must henceforth be more generously accommodated (Why, my goodness--declares The Times--even Muslims want the Democrats to play nice).
The Times wants Democrats to "negotiate" with a man who ran on a barely-veiled platform of white supremacism, who has surrounded himself with Dominionists and other extremists, who has already stacked his Cabinet with radicals and incompetents, whose track record for fiscal corruption exceeds that of any in recent memory before he has even been sworn in, who has threatened to ignore or suspend the rules of small-d democratic governance--but who did, after all, have a nice little talk in private with the paper's owner, and in public with its senior staff.
Dear Lord.
279
The Times was anti-Clinton? What planet do you live on?
3
@Doro
You think the Times tried to UNDERMINE Hillary's candidacy??!!! I'm a lifelong Democrat, but the shilling, promotion and outright propaganda this paper engaged in on Hillary's behalf was blatant and shameful. The NY Times has functioned as the marketing arm of the Clinton campaign for the past year.
Did you miss the last three months of coverage, where every article above the fold told readers how bad Trump was and that his supporters are nothing but racists?
You think the Times tried to UNDERMINE Hillary's candidacy??!!! I'm a lifelong Democrat, but the shilling, promotion and outright propaganda this paper engaged in on Hillary's behalf was blatant and shameful. The NY Times has functioned as the marketing arm of the Clinton campaign for the past year.
Did you miss the last three months of coverage, where every article above the fold told readers how bad Trump was and that his supporters are nothing but racists?
3
Let me get this straight. You're accusing the New York Times of unfavorable bias against Hillary Clinton and the Democrats? You do realize how ridiculous that sounds, right? The Times endorsed Clinton for the nomination as early as January and has been stumping for her campaign ever since. Actually, you could argue the Times was stumping for Clinton even before the announcement. Contrary positions only deserve attention when their statements are factually accurate. The Times comment board is beginning to look more like Facebook everyday.
1
how about the disgraceful FBI intervention? Hillary Clinton was winning and would have won otherwise - and isn't she over two million votes ahead?
8
Senate Democrats can only save the party if the can listen to and hear their former constituents. Fine tuning an irrelevant and useless message is not a solution. The goals of the Democrats need to reflect the needs of the people. First on the list should be jobs, industry, manufacturing and research and development of new technology in the United States. Trade agreements need to dismantled and tax law changed to help Americans not to improve relations with other nations or promote democracy and change the behavior of other nations. The borders need to made secure. A push against crime should not include punishment of innocent gun owners. Stop threatening gun owners. A real plan to rebuild infrastructure, schools and communities needs to put on the table. The war against ISIS needs to be won and our military needs rebuilding not dismantling. If Demos can't realize that then the Republicans will rule for the next 8-16 years. Restore the middle class and American industry and power. And do it fast. Sadly, I don't believe the Demos can do it.
1
As the Democratic establishment rallies to battle its base the same way the GOP establishment did, my hopes are dimming that Senate Democrats can "save the party" any time soon. While Sens. Schumer, Warren, and Sanders are trying to make the necessary changes to Democratic priorities and policies, the Obama-Clinton neoliberals and their wealthy benefactors are digging their claws in.
The Democratic Party has become the party of the ruling class and professional elites. See Paul Krugman's recent writings, or an article just today over at Politico, for all the evidence you need. Clinton cronies and loyalists are already insisting the Democratic Party doesn't need to change anything, because "2 million votes!". The basic premise is, "these people are all stupid and let's just wait for them to die rather than try to improve their lives". They are still seething with incredulity that most of America didn't get the memo: it was Her Turn!
The fight for the DNC chair will be the test. If an Obama alum or a Clinton toady wind up in the chair, well, enjoy your time in the wilderness, Democrats. I, for one, will not be following you there.
The Democratic Party has become the party of the ruling class and professional elites. See Paul Krugman's recent writings, or an article just today over at Politico, for all the evidence you need. Clinton cronies and loyalists are already insisting the Democratic Party doesn't need to change anything, because "2 million votes!". The basic premise is, "these people are all stupid and let's just wait for them to die rather than try to improve their lives". They are still seething with incredulity that most of America didn't get the memo: it was Her Turn!
The fight for the DNC chair will be the test. If an Obama alum or a Clinton toady wind up in the chair, well, enjoy your time in the wilderness, Democrats. I, for one, will not be following you there.
2
The Republicans need to have a Revolution against Drumpf and against the base elements of their own party. The Republicans need to stop the corruption in the transition and insist on a true blind trust for Drumpf's business. It's shameful that Drumpf is doing this so blatantly.
The values of the Republican Party are sickening and do not represent the values of the vast majority of the American public. Yeats' poem "Slouching towards Bethlehem" has never been more true in America: "The worst are full of passionate intensity, and the best lack all conviction."
I am writing letters to Ryan (and McConnell, for what good it will do) to insist as a constituent in America that they actually work with Dems to craft bi-partisan legislation FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUNTRY AND NOT JUST THEIR OWN BANKRUPT IDEOLOGY. It's sickening policy to thunder out of the gate on Jan. 21 to seek to undo the last eight years of Obama's presidency when they refused to work with him to craft policies for the good of the American people.
Republicans are the ones who have broken government and are now holding us all hostage to their sick, UN-American, and UN-Christian agenda.
And yes, I do think everyone who voted for Trump is racist, because if you voted for it, you are supporting the package. Most corrupt and bigoted regime in American history.
The values of the Republican Party are sickening and do not represent the values of the vast majority of the American public. Yeats' poem "Slouching towards Bethlehem" has never been more true in America: "The worst are full of passionate intensity, and the best lack all conviction."
I am writing letters to Ryan (and McConnell, for what good it will do) to insist as a constituent in America that they actually work with Dems to craft bi-partisan legislation FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUNTRY AND NOT JUST THEIR OWN BANKRUPT IDEOLOGY. It's sickening policy to thunder out of the gate on Jan. 21 to seek to undo the last eight years of Obama's presidency when they refused to work with him to craft policies for the good of the American people.
Republicans are the ones who have broken government and are now holding us all hostage to their sick, UN-American, and UN-Christian agenda.
And yes, I do think everyone who voted for Trump is racist, because if you voted for it, you are supporting the package. Most corrupt and bigoted regime in American history.
3
""Representative Ruben Gallego of Arizona says. “But I think there is a common interest in our economic policies between the laid-off white worker in Flint, the African-American and the Latino in Phoenix.”""
Of course there is a common interest, it's called class struggle. Its roots go back to colonial times when the aborning aristocracy labored to keep the poor farmers, ex-indentured servants, free blacks, and common laborers, who together vastly outnumbered them, from ever seeing that they had anything in common, lest they unite against them.
You don't have to be a Marxist to see what is self-evident, if you bother to look. It's as American as apple pie.
Of course there is a common interest, it's called class struggle. Its roots go back to colonial times when the aborning aristocracy labored to keep the poor farmers, ex-indentured servants, free blacks, and common laborers, who together vastly outnumbered them, from ever seeing that they had anything in common, lest they unite against them.
You don't have to be a Marxist to see what is self-evident, if you bother to look. It's as American as apple pie.
1
From the Times editorial. “Negotiating in this spirit could help to Democrats shape Mr. Trump’s amorphous ideas into useful legislation.” Look what NO Negotiating got the Republican Senate. EVERYTHING! They stonewalled every piece of legislation the President and Congress put forth for six straight years.
The Democrats don’t need to play pattycake they need to play “hardball”. And stymie the republicans at every move they try to make. If it’s infrastructure legislation you blast them because it’s not big enough and will not solve the “decent” jobs issues. Send Sanders and Warren around the countryside for rallies and town hall meetings right away and tell them Trump lied to them. Because he already has.
You fight fire with fire and the Senate Democrats need to lead the fight.
The Democrats don’t need to play pattycake they need to play “hardball”. And stymie the republicans at every move they try to make. If it’s infrastructure legislation you blast them because it’s not big enough and will not solve the “decent” jobs issues. Send Sanders and Warren around the countryside for rallies and town hall meetings right away and tell them Trump lied to them. Because he already has.
You fight fire with fire and the Senate Democrats need to lead the fight.
466
On the one hand, working with Republicans creates a moral hazard. On the other hand, people need their government right now. Tough decision. Wow, Republicans made the decision to abandon Americans after the 2008 crash. That's kind of twisted.
A few years back, I read a book by Matt Bai, late of the NYT. He conjectured that Republicans win elections because they frame the issues in one-two-three words. He used 'tax relief' as example. Sounds good to the voters, but goes no where near saying to the voters that is 'tax relief' for those already near the top, not 'Joe Sixpack.'
1
"Fight fire with fire," yes! That's the way to unity of the Democrats and embarrassment of the Republicans. If the "GOP" in its desire to give nothing to any but the very wealthiest can be shown to be asking for half a loaf when the whole loaf, think borrowing the appropriate sum to do the infrastructure job correctly and FOR THE PUBLIC INSTEAD OF FOR TRUMP'S WEALTHY CONTRACTOR FRIENDS, then the Democrats in the Senate will be able to show that they have the citizens' instead of their own interests at heart.
If you're expecting the Democrats under Chuck Schumer to stand up to Don the Con and the GOP I've got some bad news for you.
You're likely going to feel really let down by them in short order.
What we need now are Warriors in the Senate what we have is about 30-35 Ancient Millionaire Left Wingers who are great at cocktail fundraisers and can rail ad nauseam back home at the local union hall once an election year about what exactly is wrong with Trump and the GOP, but actually stand up and fight?
Don't me laugh!
The rest of the Dems are from States which lean Republican and so they will do either one of two things in the next 2 years:
1) vote with the GOP Consistently
or
2) Actually switch parties all in an effort to save their jobs.
Because when you get right down to it what's wrong with Politics today in Washington is that the title Democrat really just means Professional Politician who is like a Brass Rooster on top of a weather vane. Real good a striking a pose but ultimately will simply go in whatever direction the current wind is blowing.
The only job security they're concerned about is their own!
The GOP which is bought and paid for by the Koch Bros. is even worse!
The only thing I'm hopeful of is that this country once elected someone as bad as Trump - James Buchanan widely regarded as the worst President ever at least until Trump showed up.
The guy after JB?
"The late great Abe Lincoln" of course we also got a civil war to go along with his election.
You're likely going to feel really let down by them in short order.
What we need now are Warriors in the Senate what we have is about 30-35 Ancient Millionaire Left Wingers who are great at cocktail fundraisers and can rail ad nauseam back home at the local union hall once an election year about what exactly is wrong with Trump and the GOP, but actually stand up and fight?
Don't me laugh!
The rest of the Dems are from States which lean Republican and so they will do either one of two things in the next 2 years:
1) vote with the GOP Consistently
or
2) Actually switch parties all in an effort to save their jobs.
Because when you get right down to it what's wrong with Politics today in Washington is that the title Democrat really just means Professional Politician who is like a Brass Rooster on top of a weather vane. Real good a striking a pose but ultimately will simply go in whatever direction the current wind is blowing.
The only job security they're concerned about is their own!
The GOP which is bought and paid for by the Koch Bros. is even worse!
The only thing I'm hopeful of is that this country once elected someone as bad as Trump - James Buchanan widely regarded as the worst President ever at least until Trump showed up.
The guy after JB?
"The late great Abe Lincoln" of course we also got a civil war to go along with his election.
78
There are no left wing Democratic Senators. There are center right Democratic Senators.
1
In addition to all of this democratic party incompetence, there is another even more dangerous proposition in the offing that the MSM has failed to mention in that if the Republicans were able to secure one or two more state legislatures, in numbers they would then have the power of actually being able to open up the constitution and make changes, in which at that point all bets are off. Welcome to the 1800s, America.
I'm heartened to see that the NYT has finally gotten the message clear. An all-inclusive, universalist economic AND anti-bigotry platform is exactly what is needed, and has been needed, for decades. I'm skeptical that the party is ready to actually defy their own personal financial interests and the interests of their large donors enough to do so, but realization is a necessary first step.
94
Just what is a An all-inclusive, universalist economic ? I care only for the benefit of US citizens, nobody else.
So , once again we all take the bate and eviscerate the losing party and fail to to pay attention to the man behind the curtain, pulling the levers. Let us also look at the disarray of the GOP, and follow the lead of an article in today's Ttimes discusssing the rifts in the Republicans in the Senate who opposed Trump and who will oppose on many issues. To better understand the defeat of the Dems, we need to first understand what was happening with millions of Americans who voted for an angry white guy, willing to have his rally follows break head and have them carried out in stretchers....goodness, and that was only during the campaingn.
1
We cannot improve the economic conditions for the majority of non-college educated Americans and even for a good chunk of those young people with college degrees. We cannot impose tariffs on imported goods without setting off a trade war, and automation is at the point where it can displace workers from formerly skilled tasks, diagnosing routine X-rays.
What we need is a universal basic income for everyone.
White working and middle-class people are angry, because they are worse off than their parents and grandparents. Black people and Latinos are relatively happy, because they are better off than their parents and grandparents.
The Democratic strategy of assembling a coalition of minority and college-educated white voters worked, because Hillary Clinton amassed almost 2.5 million more votes than her opponent. What kept her from being elected was James Comey, the media's focus on the bogus issue of Clinton's e-mails, misogyny, racism, and, most important of all, the antiquated "electoral" college.
What we need is a universal basic income for everyone.
White working and middle-class people are angry, because they are worse off than their parents and grandparents. Black people and Latinos are relatively happy, because they are better off than their parents and grandparents.
The Democratic strategy of assembling a coalition of minority and college-educated white voters worked, because Hillary Clinton amassed almost 2.5 million more votes than her opponent. What kept her from being elected was James Comey, the media's focus on the bogus issue of Clinton's e-mails, misogyny, racism, and, most important of all, the antiquated "electoral" college.
10
"Sexism and racial bigotry obviously played roles in her defeat." Since they are both white, let's put racial bigotry aside for the moment. These were two of the most unpopular candidates in history. I suspect we should not read too much into this outcome. Let us not create answers which may lead us down incorrect paths. Sexism won for the 45th time in the history of this nation. The outcome may well be no more significant than that. I don't know how to eliminate sexism. I thougth it had been killed my generation in the late 60's and early 70'S. Obviously it was not, but I am not going to conjure reasons for this outcome when sexism alone is the most obvious one.
2
I've only read as far as the first sentence so far, but I've got to object. "One of the most humiliating presidential defeats in its history . . . " Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by approximately two million votes. True, she did not win the election, but she was not humiliated.
4
Schumer is a bigger deal maker than Trump. I doubt if he will be a better one.
1
"All those blue collar voters who voted for Donald Trump, even many who had voted for Obama, they thought he was the change agent.”
Those Blue Collar voters came out for Obama who campaigned on Hope, and Change We Can Believe In, but, for all Their Hope, Obama did not deliver much Change for those voters. In fact he was working on two more Trade Pacts whose Change They wished They had never experienced, trade pacts that Clinton was for before she was against; the voters did not have much confidence in her conversion.
Those Blue Collar voters came out for Obama who campaigned on Hope, and Change We Can Believe In, but, for all Their Hope, Obama did not deliver much Change for those voters. In fact he was working on two more Trade Pacts whose Change They wished They had never experienced, trade pacts that Clinton was for before she was against; the voters did not have much confidence in her conversion.
3
Insisting on euphemisms and calling those present present in violation of civil and criminal laws "undocumented" simply infuriates the mainstream voters who feel they've been ignored on this too long.
Deliberately conflating criticisms of those who violate immigration laws with criticism of legal immigrants has been a staple of Times writers and editorial staff for decades. That tactic is both deceitful and disrespectful of who follow the rules and immigrate legally.
Intentionally misinforming the public that unlawful presence is "not a crime but merely a civil violation" has cost the Times a huge amount of trust among its readers outside liberal coastal enclaves. Yes, unlawful presence more than 30 days is indeed a crime, not just a civil violation (see 8 USC 1302 thru 1306), and after prompting from candidates, folks looked it up themselves (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1302 ) and discovered the claim was just widespread lie designed to allow the media to perpetuate the myth that unlawful immigrants in the US are not commiting a crime by remaining.
This issue is why Trump managed to increase his percentage of Hispanic vote above that of Romney. This will continue so long as the Times refuses to recognize the fact of widespread opposition to unlawful immigration.