Get Real Democrats

Avatar photoby

Democrats have a choice. Waste your time blaming the Russians, misogynists, racists, whatever — or figure out why you lost voters who chose Obama twice and then abruptly switched to Trump.

Here’s a county that did just that. Basically those voters decided Dems hate them. Figure out a way to change that or sit on your postage stamp of principle and live in defeat.

CNN: How Trump ended Democrats’ 144-year winning streak in one county.

Perhaps Chuck and Nancy should go spend a week in that county. They might learn something.

I mean, really, I spent my last year trying to get Democrats to pay attention to these folks. But Dem bosses called us racists for daring to defend them, drove us out. So many counties lost jobs, replaced by meth labs, and Dems just call them racists for voting against them.

Dems just lost a county they’ve won for 144 years. Can’t someone go find out what went wrong?

💬 Add your voice: Comment on today’s post
Share

100 thoughts on “Get Real Democrats”

  1. craig, interesting what that county’s main politician there said  only 3 years ago before the fakirs took over the media or at least tantalized it with distractions so that positives became negatives.
    When Nelson wrote from Sandy Hook three years ago, he interviewed Rocky Adkins. Trump’s political earthquake was barely a quiver, and the local lawmaker not only thought his hometown county would continue its streak, but that Clinton would carry other places like it, too.
    “She is one of the Democrats who in my opinion can bring the South back to the Democrats,” he told Nelson. “I believe that with all of my heart.”
    also don’t overlook those interviewed in that story who hold views that even your candidate could not have espoused or avoided such as the one that railed against her  supporting “killing babies….men marrying men” and “Hillary, some of the things that she stood for, especially abortion, our Second Amendment, I didn’t — I couldn’t vote for her especially (because of) that.”

  2. The Democratic elites won’t listen to anyone unless they come with a check bearing a whole lotta zeroes. Wasn’t a selling point of continuing Pelosi Inc. is that she is a first class fund raiser? No secret about Schumer’s ties to Wall Street. Listening to everyday Americans isn’t in their self interest. If the Sanders run accomplished anything positive it highlighted just how “Republican” the Democratic Party hierarchy is. Apres moi, le deluge.

    Just a reminder that the Non Affiliated choice exists. I’ve been one since day one & have no plans to change.

  3. Note to anyone trying to sell their candidate: Look up from your damn phone/pad & see the faces in front of you. Shaking my hand will do more to win my vote than sending an email touting how great you are & how bad the other guy is. Delete. Delete. Delete. Marked as spam. Block.

     

  4. according to this chart back in 2008, Elliott county dems in the primary voted 89.2% for Hillary,  9.6% for Obama, 2% for Edwards, 1.6 % for other.

    sooo what happened?  what turned them against her?  and what could have caused the 180 degree turnaround from that statement made  only 3 years ago by the chief pol adkins: “She is one of the Democrats who in my opinion can bring the South back to the Democrats”

  5. patd,

    Fatigue? Too much baggage? Same old-same old with no hope of differing results? A golden opportunity for the overlooked to give a mighty FU to the status quo?

    Can you hear me now?

     

  7. Niell Stanage, The Hill, has an article up about how everybody is right about losing three states which meant the election for HRC.   My view is there is a failure to look at what FDR and Johnson did to bring much to America between the Mid-Atlantic states and California.  Manufacturing and service jobs, excluding the physical repair type, were lost in mega-mergers, transfers overseas.  I worked for Mobil Oil and Amoco Production in the seventies and early 80’s.  Those mergers of oil companies overseas went against the prior laws that crucial resources, oil and gas, would never be put under foreign control, yet they were shipped over by the reagan.  Thousands of white collar jobs evaporated.

    Next were the blue collar jobs as manufacturing left the South.  No more weaving in the U.S.  No more clocks, televisions, computers, almost all industries have moved offshore.  Not much will return, there is no reason for them to.  The next WH has no interest in doing so.  Maybe in four years another FDR will come along.  But the Dems do not have a bench to draw from.  The R’s have a bench, losers they might be, but at least they have a bench to work from, and a sandlot team ready to join them.

     

  8. Why is the floater so emphatic about not looking at the Soviet Russian attacks on our system?  Is he complicit?  He has to release his income tax forms for us to see.

  9. The epitaph for Election 2016 may have happened the night of November 7th: the Democrats held a star studded gala featuring multi-millionaires. The President-elect went on a marathon tour presenting himself. “Look at me … I have no guitar … I have no piano …”

    Ouch. Thud.

     

  11. Went to the South Carolina Women’s basketball game yesterday afternoon. USC looked pretty good. They beat Minnesota 98-58. Much of the 4th quarter was played by brand new players who confused the round object with a soccer ball.

    Our team’s coach, Dawn Staley, chose to call off the offense during the last several minutes—it wasn’t necessary going over the century mark to prove the rout. I’ve never seen her teams go for gratuitous points in the final minutes of a game they’ve already won. I like that.

  12. From an e-mail sent to my democratic House Representative and Democratic Senator on November 30.  Of course I have not received a response yet.

    During the 2008 election, Obama promised us hope and change, recovery and prosperity.  When Barack Obama was elected with strong majorities in both houses of Congress, he had an unprecedented opportunity to shape American history by bringing the country’s financial oligarchy under control. Obama could have done great things.

    Not since 1929 have there been so few Democrats in the House of Representatives.

    The Democrats in the Senate have chosen an east coast New Yorker and Wall Street lap dog Chuck Schumer as their leader.  The Democrats in the House of Representatives have chosen a west coast Californian from San Francisco Nancy Pelosi as their leader.  What happen to the “rust belt?”

    From the November 14, 2016 MSNBC Morning Joe show during the Howard Dean interview.

    During the Obama administration, Democrats have lost:
    11 Senate seats
    60 House seats
    14 Governorships
    900 state legislator seats.

    I also heard, but have not verified, that Democrats have 5 states where they have a combined Governor and legislative majorities and the Republicans have 26 states.

    Nancy Pelosi has presided over a slew of lost elections, including when she lost her two-year post as Speaker of the House. For the 2016 election, Pelosi predicted Democrats would gain 20-plus House seats; they got six. If anyone can cite something positive she’s done worthy of maintaining her role please enlighten me.

    I remember when Nancy Pelosi supported Obama choice of using the C-CPI-U for computing the Social Security cost of living adjustment (COLA) which would have hurt seniors even more than usual.

    I think that, maybe, the Democrats have a real problem with their message, candidates and judgment.

  13. Craig….  after reading the entire article, I didn’t see anyone talking about hate.  The only one I see using that word is you.

    I agree with BlueB…  it boils down to money.  People used to have good paying manufacturing jobs that paid them a living wage.  Now so many of them have wages that are cut in half and they’re barely keeping their heads above water if at all.  They think Obama didn’t do a thing for them…  so why not try Trump who promises to bring those jobs back.  If he doesn’t succeed, they’ll get pissed off at him too.  I feel for these people….  they are good hard working people who lost jobs through no fault of their own.  Honestly…  I don’t think those jobs are coming back….  and I think neither party has an answer.

  14. Can A DCCC Ever Heal Itself If It Remains In Critical Denial?
    Posted on December 12, 2016  by  Lambert Strether

    The DCCC and other campaign committees ought to retool their campaign operations looking back to the 1980s and 1990s. Back then, they introduced research and polling to campaigns. Now, they should be teaching campaigns how to use social media and online operations to reach voters early and build low-dollar fundraising operations.

    Today, Democrats are so far in the hole that they could use the opportunity to try new tactics and strategies to see if they can win in some unlikely places. Longshot and marginal races are not won in the final two months of a campaign. They’re won because candidates put together campaigns that prepare them to take advantage of opportunities throughout the cycle. Social media and online fundraising give candidates the platforms to build profiles and low-dollar fundraising operations, as well as create excitement among their base before the paid media and field campaigns begin.

    For Democrats to be successful, they need leaders, both campaign professionals and elected officials, who understand how modern communications and campaigns have changed. They would be wise to reach out to operatives and consultants who live outside the Washington, D.C., bubble to better understand voters. They should get back to their roots: recruit candidates to compete in as many races as possible; create an army of professional operatives across the country to run campaigns cycle after cycle; provide a base level of support for every candidate who files; introduce innovative strategies and tactics and teach campaigns how to use them. They’ll need the leadership to take them there.

    And, alas, that’s never going to happen while Nancy Pelosi is the House Democratic Leader. She should give it up and let the party she loves, and has served for so many years, get a new lease on life. This morning I was speaking with a recent candidate who told me he thinks he’s better off with the DCCC not getting involved in his race in any way. “All they can do,” she told me, “is diminish my chances of winning. They don’t seem able to bring anything worthwhile to the table… They’re from a bygone era. It’s pretty sad… As you pointed out in your blog, the best people who won this year, like Pramila and Nanette Barragan, Carol up in New Hampshire, Jamie Raskin all won without any involvement with the DCCC.”

  15.  

    No one is denying that the Dems made severe mistakes.  Principle was the old adage of fighting the last war.  In a previous year lots of money, normal turnout, usual liberal policies etc would have been more than enough.  All you have to do is look at the numbers from the 2008 election.  Hillary should have won in a walk despite same ol’ same ol’ with one exception.  All of the negative coverage was given a Russian booster rocket, media coverage wings and the twittersphere to fly in.  All of those “word clouds” with the repetitive “untrustworthy” and you have a lie traveling around the world before the truth dons its shoes.

     

  16. I see this as consisting of 2 issues – the first is what the Dem machine needs to do to convince working class Americans that they will not be helped by republicans and will be helped by democrats.  IMHO the dems are victims of the arc of history wrt the global economy.  (I await trump putting a 35% tariff on the shit he sells).  While the ethics of manufacturing by women and children who are virtually unpaid and in some instances virtually slaves are abhorrent, it is a fact of life in emerging economies.  Letting Carrier take only 700 rather than 1000 manufacturing jobs to MX isn’t even a good start, but it makes for good sounding headlines.

    The second issue is the security of and confidence we can put in our electoral system. I laugh about trump calling the CIA’s conclusions in to question, saying it’s the same folks who were confident about WMDs in Iraq — 14 years ago.  The short answer to that idiocy is no, it isn’t the same people, it’s the same Agency, 14 years, eight directors and 3/4 of a republican and a full democratic administration later. I suspect that if Russian hackers had hacked into the IRS database and gotten his tax returns, audit letters, etc. and released them he’s be whistling a different tune.

  17. RR,

    I agree with BlueB…  it boils down to money.

    You and BlueB… are still in critical denial just like the rest of the Democrats.  Hillary out spend Trump and lost!

  20. “…are still in critical denial just like the rest of the Democrats.  Hillary out spend Trump and lost!” -PiT

     

    RR’s post had nothing to do with campaign spending, but don’t let her point get in the way of a good argument with yourself.

  21. After the inauguration, I expect the GOP establishment conservatives in the House to impeach Trump for either mishandling classified information or conflict of interest with a foreign country or some other charge.

    The GOP establishment conservatives in the Senate will then convict Trump of whatever he is charged.

    That will allow the GOP establishment conservative Vice- President to become president.

    I would then expect a major revolt by the white, mid-west, II Amendment, middle class workers that supported Trump.

  22. Trump’s racist, deceptive, and ignorant platform appealled to middle America, but not because middle America is ignorant, racist and easily-fooled.  Great logic.

  23. xrepublicansays:
    December 10, 2016 at 6:13 pm

    “Imo, the last 40 years has seen a class war. The repub object is to replace upward mobility with a caste system. An essential tactic of their war is to de-legitimize education and the products of education. The repubs won while attacking public schools, college grads, and educated civil servants (except those in military or paramilitary organizations) – you know, stuck up & snotty bastards like chardonnay drinking quiche eaters.”

    -posted on this forum

  24. Renee

    Those jobs aren’t coming back for the simple reason that they no longer exist.  Mike Rowe was on CNN last night about the millions of jobs that do exist.  They just aren’t the ones that the majority of these people have the training to do.  That requires a massive investment in trades and services that require education but not necessarily at the college level (remember the old HS shop classes?).

    As far as salaries are concerned, the problem is that the numbers of people needing jobs kept climbing at the same time that the jobs kept disappearing other than low paying service jobs to service the numbers and intensive education expensive careers (and high interest bills to go with them).  This was covered up for decades first with middle class women going into the work force (family incomes didn’t need to rise with inflation) and of late three and four income families as children simply don’t leave home.

    The end result is that it is a ponzi scheme:  Too many people, vs too few resources and the wealthier nations are feeling the pinch that has enveloped the third world for decades and the classes continue to divide between the Barons and Serfs plus the added excitement of wars and rumors of wars.  The four horsemen are in the saddle and ready to go “Giddy Up”.

     

  26. Craig

    The question isn’t why that county voted for Trump, it is why they still voted Democrat. They are late bloomers, everybody else like them have already made the switch, And yes, prejudice has a lot to do with it. If you went and stayed in that county you would notice it, especially the first time you went down the street holding David’s hand.

    Time to get real, many of the things you hold dear they see as a threat. Wisconsin didn’t go for Trump because of economic reasons. Much of where Trump won the unemployment rate was under 4%, meaning not only was there full employment but there is pressure to raise wages especially at the bottom.

    Trump won because the Democrats became the party of social issues that the white working class doesn’t support. They became the symbol of disorder from the Black lives matter protests and police shootings to the loony left trying to disrupt Trump and Clinton rallies. Trump won because they saw Obama trying to institute social change in the bathrooms of their children.

    Finally, Trump won because the Democrats are addicted to disaster politics and can’t seem to make the case that they have solved many of the past problem, they just keep moaning about how they still exist.

    The Democrats have a good record but they refuse to run on it.

    Jack

  30. Ana Navarro and Rick Santorum were on a late night together.  She was sane.  He was his usual knee jerk, doofus self wailing on how Obama was attacking Christians.  We know how Christians are suffering extreme persecution, particularly this time of year when the word Christmas isn’t allowed to cross their lips for fear the Obama squads will drag them off to some dungeon for appropriate torture.

    So yes. All of us rotten elites have a really hard time being kind to people who have prejudice of one kind or another at the center of their political lives and won’t vote for a politician who doesn’t share their favorite hatred.

     

  32. Bink….  thanks for trying to set PIT straight.   Purple…neither BBronc or I mentioned campaign spending.  We did however mention lower wages.  Yes unemployment is now low…  hell it’s only 2.3% here in NH.  Even at my age I could get numerous jobs in this state…   provided I didn’t mind working for minimum wage or close to it.

    I also agree with Jack….  this “it’s as simple as they think you hate them” meme is IMO, useless.

    Jamie…  I also agree with your post.  There is no simple or inexpensive solutions as to what to do for these people.

  33. I forced myself to listen to the first portion of 60-minutes yesterday. It featured that pos Netanyahu, you know, trump’s great friend. Forget stability and/or peace in that region.

  34. The Democrats abandoned the working classes long ago and like an abusive spouse, never thought their victims would leave them.

    Bill Black: After 30 Years of Throwing Working People Under the Bus, Democratic Party’s “Centrist” Leaders Remain Clueless About Voter Revenge
    Posted on December 12, 2016 by  Yves Smith

    On December 10, 2016, a New York Times article entitled “Democrats Have a New Message: It’s the Economy First” that unintentionally revealed that the Party’s “centrist” leadership and the paper remain clueless about how to improve the economy and why the “centrist” leadership needs to end its long war against the working class. This is how the paper explained the five “centrist” leaders’ framing of the problem.

    It was a blunt, plain-spoken set of senators who gathered last Monday at the Washington home of Senator Heidi Heitkamp, Democrat of North Dakota, dining on Chinese food as they vented frustration about the missteps of the Democratic Party.

    To this decidedly centrist group, the 2016 election was nothing short of a fiasco: final proof that its national party had grown indifferent to the rural, more conservative areas represented by Democrats like Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Joe Donnelly of Indiana and Jon Tester of Montana, who attended the dinner. All face difficult re-election races in 2018.

    This non-centrist group was a gathering of five New Democrats. President Obama self-identified himself as a New Democrat. The Clintons and Al Gore are leaders of the New Democrats. The leadership of the Democratic National Committee was, and remains, New Democrats. On economic issues such as austerity, jobs, and full employment, the New Democrats are far more extreme than the (stated) views of Donald Trump. The New Democrats are infamous for their close ties with Wall Street. This means that the paper’s description of the Chinese nosh is as clueless as the five New Democrats kvetching about policy “missteps” that they championed for decades. Of course, neither the paper nor the non-centrists mentioned that critical fact. The blindness of the non-centrists to the fact that it is their policies that launched the long war by the New Democrats against the working class is matched by the blindness of the paper.

    The kvetching may have been “blunt,” but it was also dishonest. The five New Democrats know that they will likely be replaced in the 2018 elections by Republicans who share the New Democrats’ anti-working class dogmas. What was really going on was an extended cry of pain about the five senators’ fear of losing their jobs.

    Note that the paper never tells you what the five New Democrats so bluntly identified as the New Democrats’ “missteps” or what new policies they believed needed to be adopted by the Party.   This failure is particularly bizarre because the paper says that its reportage is based on sources that the paper agreed to keep anonymous so that they could speak frankly about this meeting over Chinese food. That combination of supposed frankness from the sources gained by the grant of anonymity so them could describe in detail the purported bluntness by the gang of five should have produced some epic, specific condemnations of the Democratic Party’s leadership by the New Democrats. Instead, it produced mush. Focusing on the “economy” is the right general idea for any political party, but it is so general a word that it is close to meaningless without identifying the specific policy changes that the five New Democrats now support and oppose. The mushy reportage provides a thin gruel to the reader.
    Most of all, they lamented, Democrats had simply failed to offer a clarion message about the economy with appeal to all 50 states.

    “Why did the working people, who have always been our base, turn away?” Mr. Manchin said in an interview, recounting the tenor of the dinner conversation.

    And the “clarion message about the economy” that they proposed that the Democratic Party make was? You would have thought that little detail would (a) be critical to the article and (b) would be something that the five New Democrats would have been eager to publicize without any need for anonymity. Conversely, if even after the disastrous election, from their perspective, the five New Democrats could not compose that “clarion” call, then the real problem is that the New Democrats’ economic dogmas prevent them from supporting such a “clarion” pro-worker policy.

  37. Craig

    I think the Democrats need to revitalize their core beliefs, not change them but modernize them for a new century

  38. Not sure how that happened but my above post posted itself before I even finished my thought.

    Democrats have a good message of economic opportunity, a good deal of the  information technology revolution came about because of their policies. Support of basic research, education,  spreading knowledge and releasing much of the tech development brought on by the cold war to the public. And Centrist Democrats can even make the case of being startup entrepreneurial friendly.

    In some ways I’m seeing on the national level a satisfaction with the status quo. My district is safe so that is ok by me. Republicans have been putting on a full court press on the local level and have driven Democrats out of the suburbs and taken over rural America. Democrats have been marginalized to Urban America and College towns

    That’s all for now, I’m setting on a balcony over looking the river walk in San Antonio. a beautiful place. Mrs Jack is down here for business but has today off. And she is ready to go out and explore. See Y’all later.

    Jack

     

  39. The commonality is that the bigger celebrity won each time.  Nominate Kim Kardashian in 2020.  There, next topic.

  40. people who voted for Obama twice did not vote for Trump

    The counties may have switched but they are not the same voters-

    I am sick of people saying that Trump had a better message- tht is crap and a big pile of it. He had a message of blaming others especially people who don’t look like you.

    I’m really sick of faux southerners and their pitiable desire to bring back segration and the confederate flag so loser racists can feel good about themselves

  41. We’re not going to modernize the implementation of our core beliefs unless the gentrification of the party ends. We need leadership in their 30s and 40s. Those people should be identifying potential leaders in their 20s. People should become leaders emeriti when they reach their middle 60s.

    That does not mean the ideals of the party should change, e.g., I’ve been an Eleanor Roosevelt Democrat all my life; that will not change no matter what young whippersnapper we elect.

  42. This is an editorial written by a young woman just elected to the Board of Supervisors in Sonoma County

    I think she addresses the problems of the Democratic Party at every level.   I know her but did not vote for her  because of some of the sources of her campaign donations.  But I think she is absolutely correct.  I think there are a lot of Lynda Hopkins out there and the Democrats will have a good future.

  43. Jack,

    I had a post that was eaten by the the phantom of the trail……Gene Autry? Max Sand…..any way…….you make some great points…..and not the first time…….I also dont think that there is nothing wrong with what the Ds are trying to sell…..education, health,..etc, etc, it all makes good sense….but they are sending the wrong people to sell it to us……..as an indi…..i dont want (like Purple pointed out) people that look and act, sound just like the Republicans do….i want some one like Al Franklin that comes across like some one that i would want to have dinner with.

    The ds need to go after the indies right now…..we have already been blamed for the ds failure, and forgotten until the next time…..we get the message……we don’t matter…….

    Here is the way that I would go after the independents……and the middle class voters……..I have said it before….there a people here on the trail that have shown the way also……I have learned much from the way that you approach a subject…..not alway in agreement like most of the voters….they would not agree with anything 100%….but I do agree with you about 80% of the time…..When you state something ot other…you almost always give a comparison……like your charts…..they are a great way of saying what you want to say……..

    Give you another GREAT example of what it would take to get the middle class voter behind the Ds……..STRUG a feww weeks ago put up a post that made me think about for quite some time…..and one that i use now to make one of my arguments about which party is best for the country…..he posted that:

    Each time that The republicans controlled all three houses….that there shortly followed a financial crises…..first came the Great Depression…..then in 2000 The great recession……..then he asked this question…….in 2016 the white house, the senate, and the congress are all republican…..WHAT DO YOU THINK HAPPENS NEXT?………

    Purple is right….the Ds have been out in the cold for quite some time…..if you want them back….along with us indies…….that will stop another Trump …..show us the comparisons and challenge us to research the truth……..we all have the Internet now…..and we Can Handle The Truth…….time to change the DNC….cut off its head………in the final analyses…..they are the ones along with the clintons that lost it all…….

    Sturg….post that information once again please………that will lead them out of the wilderness……

  44. My point is….Stop telling me how i should vote stop spending so much money showing me what the f is wrong with the other side……stop talking down to me….stop blaming others…..is this the first time that voter depression tactics were used by the Rs…..get back to basics and let the news paper boys go door to door asking for votes……….stop any and all things that look like business as usual …..and include all of us….look in the mirror….get rid of the conflict of interest positions that makes the middle class voter so confused that they vote on where the pendulum is swinging…….i for the life of me….do not understand why someone is in charge of a committee….while others in both partys know that their spouse is receiving special favors from…contracts, enacting laws that favor that spouses business….and themselves………….this is what we indies see out here…….one party not too much different than the other…….but now…..you both fkn went too far………..you created this monster…….shut up and get it right the nest time……….cops are getting worse now…..the racist shits will be getting worse now…….it will be very dangerous for those that look different than others……..it is going to be very tribal imo…….im thinking about how to protect my self with a fire arm for the fist time….since i left the military…….

    But if it is ok of have someone like that in place (like Dianne Finstein) that we all know that her husband and she are military contractors…..Tom Dashel…pushed to pass laws that greatly benefited his wife and his slef…..there are many, many others………then dont you see…….you created the way for trump to be potus…and for him and his empire to gain from it…………time to get back to basics and start all over again……the ds need to show us that they are different….and that they are not (worst thing imo that one can be) hypocrites………later

  46. You’re correct, all of you. Racism, content, sexism, style, religious bigotry, a biased ‘news media’, and classism all connected to fashion this disaster.

    Dems need to address each piece.

  47. I’m in the “it was a GOTV failure” camp.  Finding a message that appeals to Philly suburbs and to metro Detroit is a balancing act I’m not sure I could manage.  I’m with KGC – the Obama voters prolly didn’t flip, but they also prolly didn’t bother.  Not sure how you get to both of those demos and get them interested enough to go vote.  They have different issues they would want to see addressed.

  48. Sitting here working away listening to Jimmie Dorsey Orchestra and Frank Sinatra.  Good stuff.

    Due to news feeds I need for work, I just saw that a handful of Electors want a briefing on the Soviet Russian attacks on the U.S.  I am calling these attacks and not hacks on the electoral process or the news systems because that is what they are.  Coordinated attacks to destroy the U.S.  The floater is more or less part of it as a useful idiot.

     

  49. Solar,
    Be sure to get a CWP before you carry. With my 214, I didn’t even have to fire the damned thing—just had to take the state mandated test on rules and regs, which is given after a class.

    Rather than protecting myself, I’ve put my mindset on protecting others being subjected to violence. That goes far to remove the paranoid aspect of carrying.

    I have an M1911, an S&W .40, and a 2-inch 5-shot .38. Those along with my persuader 12-ga with pistol grip, laser, and sling. Almost like days gone by.

  50. just had to share, an event I did for Glenn with my pal Clay Henderson, we also wrote the speech, would be nice to see Dems get back to something like this:

    February 15, 1984

    New York Times
    GLENN STEPS UP ATTACKS ON 2 RIVALS
    BY DAVID SHRIBMAN
    MOBILE, Ala., Feb. 14— With the first political test of 1984 less than a week away, Senator John Glenn has traveled deep into the South and has raised the pitch of his criticism of his two principal rivals, former Vice President Walter F. Mondale and President Reagan.
    In the last two days, in a campaign tour through Georgia and Alabama, Mr. Glenn has charged Mr. Reagan with involving the nation in military actions in Lebanon that are ”foolish, unwarranted and morally reprehensible” and has questioned whether Mr. Mondale will be able to resist the entreaties of the labor leaders who have endorsed him.
    Both themes have been major elements of the Glenn campaign strategy, but this week’s versions were expressed in unusually strong language. Aides said they were designed to sharpen Mr. Glenn’s differences with both Mr. Mondale and Mr. Reagan at a critical juncture of the political season.
    Today, for example, Mr. Glenn stood on the deck of the U.S.S. Alabama in this port on the Gulf of Mexico and, amid cool breezes and military bands, suggested some actual combat experience would have tempered Mr. Reagan’s views on the use of force in Lebanon. Effect of Combat Experience
    ”Those of us who have spent time in the military are often looked at as ‘super hawks,’ ” said Mr. Glenn, a decorated Marine flier in World War II and the Korean War. ”Nothing could be further from the truth. I truly do wish the President had seen a little actual combat himself personally. I think there would be less commitment of forces.”
    Then the Ohio Democrat, who has been critical of Mr. Reagan’s refusal to withdraw the American marines from Lebanon immediately, added: ”I think it’s time we have political leaders who understand both the uses and the limits of force, and a President who levels with the American people.”
    Mr. Glenn chose the settings for his new attacks carefully, using a ship that earned nine battle stars for the backdrop of his criticism of President and selecting the Statehouse of Georgia, a state that has opposed union shops, for his criticism of Mr. Mondale’s connections with organized labor.
    ”Shells like the one the U.S.S. Alabama once fired, are leveling villages and killing innocent women and children,” said Mr. Glenn, who stood beneath the battleship’s 16-inch guns. ”Indeed, we are using more fire power in Lebanon now than we used at any time since the war in Vietnam.”
    Mr. Glenn said the Reagan Administration was moving the United States from an ill-defined mission to an undeclared war in Lebanon. ”Instead of bringing this to a halt, they are expanding this,” he said. ”Even if there was military justification for this, there is no moral justification for it.”
    His words were equally sharp when, at stops in Atlanta and Moultrie, Ga., and Tuscaloosa, Ala., he said the assistance organized labor was providing to Mr. Mondale was threatening to erode democratic traditions.
    ”I do not in any way question the right of A.F.L.-C.I.O. leaders to support the candidate of their choice,” he said. ”But I do say there is the right to ask what this huge and unprecedented infusion of cash is doing to our democratic process. What happens to the interests of ordinary Democrats when the million-dollar deals come down?”
    Mr. Glenn spoke angrily of what he described as the ”threats and coercions and the bludgeons of big money” and said the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations was devoting $20 million to insure that Mr. Mondale received the Democratic nomination. Labor Group’s Influence
    ”What does Lane Kirkland think he’s buying with his $20 million?” Mr. Glenn asked in a reference to the leader of the nation’s largest labor federation. ”A President will never disagree with the A.F.L.-C.I.O.? What do you think? What happens when a campaign takes tens of millions of dollars or has it spent on its behalf by a very strong and demanding and aggressive labor organization? Can it still resist the pressures and remain objective on issues that affect not just labor but all the people of this country?”
    For the last two days Mr. Glenn, who knows that the 475 convention delegates that are to be selected in seven Southern states in a four-day period in mid-March are critical to his political future, has been telling audiences no candidate can ”buy the nomination of the Democratic Party.” In the Georgia Statehouse, he urged Democrats to ”stand up to the ideologues and the bosses and take back the soul of our party.”
    Mr. Glenn first began to talk in these terms last autumn, after the labor federation endorsed Mr. Mondale for the nomination. As his ratings in national political polls have dropped steadily, Mr. Glenn has stepped up his attacks, and they reached a crescendo this week.
    ”Let’s be honest,” Mr. Glenn said. ”If the Democratic Party nomination can be bought for $20 million in the spring, it isn’t going to be worth a plug nickel in November. This nomination is not for sale”

  52. Jennifer Rubin’s piece in today’s WaPo gives a bit of insight into one issue although she doesn’t make the leap.  IMHO trump’s voters bought the lies he spewed because they tended to reinforce a reality they wanted to exist, never mind that it didn’t and doesn’t.  Sounded good enough at the time to make it feel like it is true.  Belief trumps (sorry) information every time.  Hard to get the unemployed or underemployed to believe that the economy was doing much better under Dem policies that Hillary would continue than it would under drumpf when he was promising to bring our jobs back and kick the Mexicans who steal the jobs that are here back to Mexico.

    Oh, and another sign of continuing improvement in the economy – gasoline went up $.15 per gallon over the weekend.

  53. Pogo, that coupled with $3-million/day for Secret Service and NYC security for the ex hubris one, means things can only improve ~~~

  54. Maybe it’s just me but if the CIA and the FBI really thought that any other country was attempting to influence or elections why wouldn’t our conclusions be kept ridiculously secret until we developed a strategy to counter them. Who at FBI or CIA releases any of this to anybody?

    I would like to think that we have a strategy to counter this type of thing.

    I don’t think that the CIA willingly broadcast all of our efforts to influence elections around the world.

    I hope that the CIA/FBI/NSA aren’t becoming so politicized that actual security goes right out the window in favor of domestic political efforts.

  56. Jax,

    Now, Russia is being given the opportunity to say that they caught the miscreants and, if only they had known, they would have nipped it in the bud. Absent that, they’ve created an act of war. If we don’t appropriately respond to that act, we are truly Chicken of the Sea.

  57. Flatus,

    I have my CWP but rarely carry. I don’t even keep in my car. I have to enter too many port cargo areas and they are all still no weapon areas. They make you declare and surrender the weapon with a time consuming protocol to come back and retrieve it.

    I still haven’t seen anyone open carry in Houston. The only place I’ve seen that has been in Wyoming (Bear Country) and quite a few were there. All big caliber revolvers.

  58. Flatus – not sure that $3M/day does a lot to improve the economy outside a 2 block perimeter around Faulty Tower.

  59. Flatus,

    I wonder if they are worried that the Russians will publicize all the CIA’s transgressions along these lines?

     

  60. “The Democrats have a good record but they refuse to run on it.”

    jack, yep…    need some positive spin out there.  stop wearing hair shirts. beat the drums of success not the dead horses.  and don’t let the big liar get a way with his lies.

    puzzling to me is why garnering s 2.8 million vote lead is considered a loss of support?  Hillary was a winner with the majority of the people voting by the time all votes are counted.  he won the presidency not by majority rule but by a technicality.    democratically speaking drumpf is a loser, does not have of a mandate nor does he speak credibly on behalf of America.

  62. RR and BlueB I own you an apology. I did think the remark was about campaign spending.

    The graph is The Federal Government from a Per Capita Prospective 1928 – 2015(CPI-U 2015 $)

    Jobs, Jobs, Jobs – Not Austerity
    By William K. Black, New Economic Perspectives, December 5, 2016

    Bob Rubin and Alan Greenspan convinced the New Democrats, over a quarter-century ago, that the key to economic growth was to out-Republican the Republican Party in the fervency of their embrace of austerity.  This began the long war of the New Democrats against the working class that culminated in the loss of their candidate, Hillary Clinton, to Donald Trump.  Rubin’s and Greenspan’s support for austerity constitutes economic and political malpractice.  Austerity is the enemy of the general economy and the people of the world, but it targets for its greatest harm the working class.  As I have explained in earlier columns, Hillary was so devoted to austerity that she made it her major new policy theme in the closing weeks of her campaign – even as every poll warned her that she had enraged the white working class, a principal victim of austerity.

    The stranglehold that Rubin and Greenspan’s anti-worker dogmas continue to exert over the Democratic Party’s faux centrists’ policies even after Trump’s election is illustrated by a December 5, 2016 New York Times editorial entitled “How to Help Working People” and Larry Summers’ December 4, 2016 op ed entitled “Trump’s tax plans favour the rich and will hamper economic growth: The proposals would threaten to increase federal debt and interest rates.”  Summers is Rubin’s protégé.

    Any plan by Democrats to “Help Working People” should begin with the word “jobs.”  But the creation of “jobs” funded by the federal government in its critical role of employer of last resort is not even an option when policy is in the grips of austerity fever.  New Democrats take the bizarre policy position that it is too expensive to pay people who want to work to do useful work, but fine to pay them extended unemployment insurance because there are not enough private sector jobs to employ them full-time.

     

  64. patD, jamie et al sorry to point this out but around 2 million of Hillary’s surplus votes were in the 5 counties in and around NYC, meaning they would choose our presidents if not for the electoral college.

  65. Poobah, I doubt that anyone here isn’t aware of where Hilary’s votes were concentrated.  She won the shorelines north of Virginia and on the West Coast.  I see that her total vote is now approaching the most votes won by any presidential candidate, except Obama.  Cold comfort.

  66. yes Pogo. The question is whether the Founders were wise to design a system that allowed smaller population states a voice.

    Altho the other purpose in establishing an Electoral College was to allow a different outcome when the masses just get it wrong. Hmmm

  67. How Reaganism actually started with Carter
    Think Reagan was the first modern president to preach low taxes, free markets and morality?
    By Michael Lind, SALONÂŽ, February 8, 2011 07:01 AM EST

    Carter, not Reagan, presided over the dismantling of the New Deal regulatory system in airlines, railroads and trucking. Intended to reduce inflation by reducing the costs of essential infrastructure to business, Carter’s market-oriented reforms have backfired, producing constant bankruptcies and predatory hub-and-spoke monopolies in the airline industry, an oligopolistic private railroad industry that has abandoned passenger rail for freight, and underpaid, overworked truckers.

    Today’s Democrats would like to forget that supply-side economics was embraced by many members of their own party during the Carter years, while it was resisted by many old-fashioned fiscal conservatives in the GOP. As the economist Bruce Bartlett points out in a history of supply-side economics: “By 1980, the JEC” — Joint Economic Committee of Congress — “was a full-blown advocate of supply-side economics, despite having a majority of liberal Democrats, such as Senators Edward Kennedy (D-MA) and George McGovern (D-SD). Its annual report that year was entitled, ‘Plugging in the Supply Side.””

    According to the chairman of the JEC, Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, who went on to be President Clinton’s secretary of the Treasury, “The 1980 annual report signals the start of a new era of economic thinking. The past has been dominated by economists who focused almost exclusively on the demand side of the economy … [T]he Committee recommends a comprehensive set of policies designed to enhance the productive side, the supply side of the economy.”

    While Carter and Reagan disagreed on many things, they shared the neoliberal consensus that continues to provide the common assumptions for presidents of our own day like George W. Bush and Barack Obama. The New Deal consensus, which lasted from the 1940s until the 1970s, included “Modern Republicans” like Eisenhower, Nixon and Ford. Gerald Ford was the last New Deal president and Jimmy Carter was the first neoliberal president.

  68. Purple, Dems would rule the roost today if they hadn’t destroyed their own president in 1980, one who understood the need for change and tried to do it. Ironically Ted Kennedy elected Ronald Reagan and the anti-government culture we see today. Not even Bill Clinton or Obama could overcome what was unleashed in those days.

  69. Craig

    The problem with the EC is that the House of Representatives has been frozen in  its numbers.  All the smaller states no matter how low the population always get 3 votes.  All the other states get whatever is left over of the 435 seats to divide amongst themselves.  As more and more of the population flees the center and drifts to the coasts, the center has more and more power and the coasts are no longer represented.  This is not what the founders intended by a long shot.  Or just for the Hamilton electors and musical fans:   My Shot

    YouTube thumbnail

     

  70. Craig,

    IMO, there are two President Carters. The one who has been a marvel of Human and aspirational American values since he left office, and the one who made a tremendous mess of Central and South American affairs, and, by feat, tried to declassify documents that would have caused untold misery for many, many individuals. I did not vote for President in that year.

  72. Craig

    I lived in CA in 1976 and got politically involved on (believe it or not) the right wing of the GOP (Don’t ask it was romantic). I still have connections based on that benighted aspect of my life.  They regularly visit me on Facebook.  The truly sad truth is that those in power want to stay in power.  Those they use continue to believe the lies of those in power want them to hear.  I continue to try to believe in the good things while knowing first hand that politics and the money that serves it are anything but good.

  73. craig, you’re right about teddy giving us Ronnie.

    about your dissing the big apple voters tho’…. are you saying each of them and their vote shouldn’t be just as respected, have the same rights and valued as much as those living elsewhere?  I bet many of the “surplus voters” (a euphemism for redundant, unworthy?) were originally from the Midwest, maybe even the rustbelt, or from out of the old south. they moved to nyc  just like you moved to dc but surely didn’t expect to be disenfranchised because of it.

  74. When discussing the Constitution and Amendments it is important to remember that in 1776, to pick a year, the population of the colonies and birthing states was about 2.5 million people.  The population today is over 310,000,000 million.  The speed of news then was the speed of a horse.  Today it is the speed of light.  They did not have any thoughts that the world would be much larger, although they did know and plan for it to expand, but a number of today’s population was not conceivable.

    Trying to create an equivalence between the world of the Revolutionary War and today’s wars is not possible.  Though many republicans try to make it seem the same.

  75. Bipartisan Electors Ask James Clapper: Release Facts on Outside Interference in U.S. Election
    Open Letter to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper:
    We are Electors who were selected by the voters of our states to represent them in the Electoral College on December 19, 2016. We intend to discharge our duties as Electors by ensuring that we select a candidate for president who, as our Founding Fathers envisioned, would be “endowed with the requisite qualifications.” As Electors, we also believe that deliberation is at the heart of democracy itself, not an empty or formalistic task. We do not understand our sole function to be to convene in mid-December, several weeks after Election Day, and summarily cast our votes. To the contrary, the Constitution envisions the Electoral College as a deliberative body that plays a critical role in our system of government — ensuring that the American people elect a president who is constitutionally qualified and fit to serve. Accordingly, to fulfill our role as Electors, we seek an informed and unrestrained opportunity to fulfill our constitutional role leading up to December 19th — that is, the ability to investigate, discuss, and deliberate with our colleagues about whom to vote for in the Electoral College.
    We further emphasize Alexander Hamilton’s assertion in Federalist Paper #68 that a core purpose of the Electoral College was to prevent a “desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.” The United States intelligence community has now concluded with “high confidence” that a foreign power, namely Russia, acted covertly to interfere in the presidential campaign with the intent of promoting Donald Trump’s candidacy. During the campaign Russia actively attempted to influence the election outcome through cyber attacks on our political institutions and a comprehensive propaganda campaign coordinated through Wikileaks and other outlets.
    Allegations that Donald Trump was receiving assistance from a hostile foreign power to win the election began months before Election Day. When presented with information that the Russian government was interfering in the election through the course of the campaign, both in private briefings and public assessment, Donald Trump rejected it, refused to condemn it, and continued to accept their help. Donald Trump even made a direct plea to the Russian government to interfere further in the election in a press conference on July 27, saying, “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.”
    According to reports in the Washington Post, New York Times, and other outlets, the United States intelligence community has now concluded definitively that the Russian interference was performed to help Donald Trump get elected, yet even today Mr. Trump is refusing to accept that finding. In response to the reports, the Trump transition office instead released a statement which called into question the validity of United States intelligence findings, and declared the election over despite the Electoral College not yet casting its votes. Trump’s willingness to disregard conclusions made by the intelligence community and his continuing defense of Russia and Russian President Vladimir Putin demand close scrutiny and deliberation from the Electoral College.
    Separate from Mr. Trump’s own denials of Russian involvement in the election, the confirmed communication between Trump’s aides and those associated with the Russian election interference activity raise serious concerns that must be addressed before we cast our votes. Trump-confidant Roger Stone confirmed during the campaign that he was engaged in back-channel communications with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, responsible for releasing much of the Russian-hacked Democratic communications, and indicated that he was aware of the hacked content prior to its release. Trump foreign policy advisor Carter Page reportedly visited Moscow in July of this year, just prior to the release of hacked DNC communications, during which it was believed he met with the Putin aide in charge of Russian intelligence on the U.S. election. Page returned to Moscow this week where he claimed to be meeting with Russian business and thought leaders.
    In addition to Donald Trump and his aides’ conduct, revelations about their further involvement with the Russian government over the course of the campaign demand further investigation, as well as full disclosure of findings from any ongoing or closed investigative efforts:

    Russian government officials revealed that they had maintained contact with the Trump campaign during the election, and stated that they were familiar with most of the individuals associated with Mr. Trump.
    Media inquiries into whether the FBI was investigating Donald Trump’s July plea for Russian interference in the election resulted in a “Glomar response” neither confirming nor denying the existence of an investigation, rather than the more typical response of denying the request outright.
    U.S. intelligence officials reportedly probed Trump foreign policy advisor Carter Page in regard to travel to his Moscow during the campaign.
    The FBI reportedly began an inquiry into Trump associates following reports of a multi-million dollar business relationship with pro-Putin figures in Ukraine and Russia, and reports of an effort to sway American public opinion in favor of Ukraine’s pro-Putin government.
    Michael Flynn, Trump campaign aide and the announced incoming National Security Advisor, traveled to Russia in December of 2015 for a gala event celebrating RT, a state-controlled propaganda network, at which he was seated next to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    The Electors require to know from the intelligence community whether there are ongoing investigations into ties between Donald Trump, hiscampaign or associates, and Russian government interference in the election, the scope of those investigations, how far those investigations may have reached, and who was involved in those investigations. We further require a briefing on all investigative findings, as these matters directly impact the core factors in our deliberations of whether Mr. Trump is fit to serve as President of the United States.
    Additionally, the Electors will separately require from Donald Trump conclusive evidence that he and his staff and advisors did not accept Russian interference, or otherwise collaborate during the campaign, and conclusive disavowal and repudiation of such collaboration and interference going forward.
    We hope that the information and actions described in this letter will be provided in an expeditious manner, so that we can fulfill our constitutional duty as Electors.
    Signed,
    Christine Pelosi (CA)
    Micheal Baca (CO)
    Anita Bonds (DC)
    Courtney Watson (MD)
    Dudley Dudley (NH)
    Bev Hollingworth (NH)
    Terie Norelli (NH)
    Carol Shea-Porter (NH)
    Clay Pell (RI)
    Chris Suprun (TX)
    Presidential electors interested in adding their names to this letter should contact ElectoralCollege16@gmail.com.

  77. patd, well, “prove” may be a little strong, but very little. I’d say “demonstrate the high likelihood that…” (And I’m no fan of Comey.  I felt that Obama should have fired him.)

  80.  
    Craig,
    I know that you have a history with Carter and have a better insight into his administration than I could ever have.  I voted for Carter in 1976 because Ford had pardoned Nixon.  I viewed Carter as an incompetent administrator, in large part because of his handling of the Iran Hostage situation. I did vote for Reagan in 1980 and 1984.

    Every President since 1977 has had the same economic view which destroyed the unions and thus the middle class worker.  The unions had gotten a little too big for their own britches. The 1981 strike by the Professional Air Traffic Controls Organization (PATCO) was illegal and stupid.  That one event could have been the start of the decline of unions in America.
     

  81. Craig – I have always been concerned about “passing the torch” to a family member.  And, it was long before I became involved in politics.  So many seats are replaced by a relative.  And, that is on all sides.

    But

    The Founding Fathers were far the barrier from family and relatives from taking office.  the Adams Family for an example.

    I do have a predilection for having politicians stay in office and run the country.  To me the fallacy of the farmer in the field, who leaves the plow and rides the ox to town to do the town or county business and then return to the plow is a laugh.  Someone who has no knowledge of how to run a political division should not be in the control house.  Running a political division, such as a county or state or a country takes skill and knowledge.

    Right now we have a “business man”, or more like a child with a large legal division, getting ready to run the country.  Each and every Cabinet position he proposes is to be filled by a person who has one goal, the goal to remove that department.

    I am currently post election.  My goals are to bring the incoming idiot down and elect Democrats to all offices.

     

  82. Overcharged: The High Cost of High Finance
    By Gerald Epstein, Juan Antonio Montecino, Roosevelt Institute, July 12, 2016

    What Defines a Healthy Financial System?

    Overcharged: The High Cost of High Finance
    By Gerald Epstein, Juan Antonio Montecino, Roosevelt Institute, July 12, 2016

    What Defines a Healthy Financial System?

    It is important to note at the outset that a well-functioning financial system is crucial to the operation of modern economies. Unfortunately, our current financial system is not well-functioning, so it needs to be reformed and restructured. What does a well-functioning financial system do? Various economists and text-books delineate the roles of finance somewhat differently but they usually come down to some version of the following six key roles (Epstein, 2013):

    A Productive Finance Sector
    1. Channel finance to productive investment.
    2. Provide mechanisms for families to save for large expenses (e.g. sending their kids to college) and retirement.
    3. Help businesses and households reduce risk by, for example, providing home insurance, life insurance, and car insurance.
    4. Provide stable and flexible liquidity so that families and businesses can make long-term investments, but can easily and readily sell these assets for cash if needed.
    5. Provide an efficient payment mechanism so households and businesses can buy goods and services easily and at a low transaction cost.
    6. Develop new products and processes to make all these activities better, cheaper, and more readily available (“financial innovation”).

    Our Current Finance Sector…
    1. Channels finance to financial transactions and speculation.
    2. Charges high fees, and delivers mediocre returns to families trying to save and invest.
    3. Often encourages businesses and households to take on excessive risks.
    4. Creates booms and busts in liquidity that contributes to bubbles and crashes.
    5. Provides payment systems that needs to be backstopped by the government.
    6. Often develops innovations that helps finance avoid taxes, avoid regulations, generate rents and hide excessive risks.

    For several decades after financial regulatory reforms were made in response to the Great Depression, the U.S. financial system performed these functions reasonably well, with relatively little risk and relatively low costs. It has become common to refer to this early postwar system as one of “boring banking.” But starting in the 1980s or so, with the acceleration of financial deregulation and other changes, boring banking increasingly gave way to a much higher-risk and, as we will show, much higher-cost system of “speculative banking” (Epstein and Habbard, 2013). We argue that this system of “speculative banking” has done a poor job of serving these six functions, and it has done so at a very high cost to the bulk of society. The solution, of course, is not to close down the financial system, but to create a financial system that serves these important functions efficiently, inexpensively, and with relatively low risk.

    The graph ‘Domestic Financial Sector Total Assets as a Percentage of GDP’ shows the huge increase in the size of the U.S. financial system relative to the size of the economy that began around 1980. Between 1980 and 1999, financial sector assets almost doubled relative to the size of the overall economy (measured by GDP). This growth began to accelerate with the erosion and then final repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act and the other deregulatory provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. By 2008, total financial assets were almost five times the size of the annual production of goods and services in the economy

    Epstein and Montecino show how the asset management industry charges excessive fees and delivers mediocre returns for households trying to save for retirement; how private equity firms grab excessive levels of payments from pension funds and other investors while often worsening wages and employment opportunities for workers in the companies they buy; how hedge funds underperform; and how predatory lenders exploit some of the most vulnerable people in our society.

  84. purple, all I can say about the Iranian hostages is they all came home alive. If that’s Carter’s fault so be it. He could have ignored the situation, let them die, piously mourned with the families and been reelected, which is the new normal these days. He put their survival above his own. So silly.

  85. Plus side to this election.  People who can barely read the National Enquirer with any degree of comprehension are being introduced to the Federalist Papers.

  87. Bernie was speaking to those people.  If the DNC had behaved in a proper manner, Bernie would’ve been the Dem nominee & he would’ve beaten Trump.

    Bernie & Trump had the messages (although much different ideas) that addressed the concerns of the 99%.

    Hillary was always gonna lose this thing because she was arrogant. She was clearly the voice of the 1%, giving only lipservice to the rest of us.    She was never going to get Bernie’s supporters; she was condescending to us.   The Clintons have gotten away with so much, for so many years. Just good, old-fashioned arrogance.

  89. Hillary Clinton won more people but apparently not people who count I thought all her extra votes came from California

  90. KGC, her pop vote lead came from running up the score in lots of safe states. Somebody in Brooklyn needed to study how the Electoral College vote works. A gazillion votes in NY, CA mean nothing if you pretend Wisconsin and Michigan don’t exist.

  91. Wow! Quite a thread. Some trailmixwes came back.

    Can’t disagree with much of what I’ve read.

    My question to Trump voters would simply be; what jobs will a Trump administration bring back? The jobs that once defined places like Detroit, Flint, Pittsburgh and Scranton are not coming back. Trump can’t make it so neither can anyone else.

    Did Dems. do a poor job of communicating with those folks? Probably so. Was there anything that dems could have said that might have swayed them? Probably not. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

    Political memories are fantastically short, so there was little reason to expect those who voted for Trump to remember the state of the key economic indicators on January 20th 2009 especially the stock market or the unemployment rate.

    Trump voters have been seduced by a vision of a country  that gave way to a new economic model beginning in the late seventies and early eighties. That they can not or will not acknowledge it can hardly be laid at the feet of democrats. The days of manufacturing jobs that abounded in the  mid century are gone for better or worse. That realization may not sit well with those who put Trump in office.

  93.  

    Question to anyone who works in retail: How’s your business? My place of employment is booming; best it’s been in years. Money is rolling in. This may be cynical but I think it is a result of the election. People sense they will be keeping more of their money than having it used for social/governmental programs. Btw Canadians are spending bigly on this side of the border too.

     

  94. SJWNY – retail is one of those areas where optimism is most important.  The economy has recovered, although the big fat liar made is sound like we were still in the Bush Depression.  It is Christmas time.  Americans are back to work, even though the big fat liar made is sound like we were still in the Bush Depression.

    What pessimists like me see is the destruction of America starting in just over a month.   For that reason I am no longer spending, just paying off debt.

  95. “Cacti  and bison can’t vote”

    Jamie, but if they form corporations, they can make campaign donations and run ads

  96. Whew, this is a stirred up hornets’ nest with blame coming from every direction.   My view is that lots of people just do not like Hillary and many are unable to articulate their reason(s).  There is a veneer around her but during the campaign bits and pieces of the real person squeaked through almost unnoticed (or ignored).

    During the 1990’s I had lots of “Feds” as friends and here’s what I heard (jokingly) but I do not think they were joking.  Agents assigned to Hillary’s security detail viewed the assignment as punishment.   The voters not only voted for Trump, there were just as many who voted against Hillary.  Her veneer, seen by agents, wore a little too thin.

  97. 1. Clinton won at least 487 counties. More than twice 57 in the confederate states alone. 

    2. Carter lost because of his ill thought out raid to free hostages, and the well-deserved public rebuke by the SoS, whom Carter had cut out of the loop that followed the failure of that raid. Dammit, the Dope-in-Chief had 1 year and 2.5 months to plan the rescue. Between that and his anti-labor position he deserved to lose.

  98. Cabinet starting to resemble the branding of football stadiums. – Cap’n Crawford

    2018 NEWS ITEM :

    Tonight the Exxon (XOM-NYSE) State Department announced that United Brands and Ford Motors will be bringing you the Third Gulf War, to be shown exclusively here on Fox.

  99. People who can barely read the National Enquirer with any degree of comprehension are being introduced to the Federalist Papers. – Jaime, Senior Scout

    Actually, they’re being introduced to the fake Federalist Papers, which are touted as being binding on government.

  100. The fact that Clinton won 8 1/2 times as many counties as the rip up licanthrope lie maintains, does NOT mitigate the Clinton campaign failures in MI, WI, FL, NC, and PA.

Comments are closed.