Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the DNC category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘DNC’ Category

A generation ago, the Democratic Party was a legitimate political party. It isn’t anymore. Today’s Democrats have gone so far around the bend that even lifelong Democrats have started backpedalling … fast. Jim Geraghty’s column illustrates just how foolish the Democratic Party is. What caught my attention is the paragraph that says “The Democratic party’s leaders haven’t changed their methods, either. They denounced Trump and his ‘Deplorables’ and the rest of the Republican party in the most furious terms in 2016, but that didn’t produce the results they wanted. In 2017, Democrats decided to just keep on doing that, but with more profanity.”

Later, Geraghty wrote “After 2016, one might have expected Democrats to reconsider their full embrace of identity politics. Instead they’ve doubled down. Instead of examining why so many voters in so many states rejected their arguments and philosophies, many within the academy and universities greeted 2017 by insisting even more adamantly that freedom of speech is dangerous and that you should be threatened or violently assaulted if you express a view they disagree with. Instead of giving the lecturing speeches at awards shows a break, Hollywood celebrities are becoming even more politically outspoken and strident, and even more openly contemptuous of roughly half their audience.”

Rational people wouldn’t think that Sending rioters to a congressman’s front steps isn’t a way to prove you’re rational, either:

These tactics might help fire up the Democratic Party’s bi-coastal base but they won’t help flip any of the districts or states that they’ll need to retake the House, Senate or the White House. Republicans will increase their margin in the Senate, thereby marginalizing John McCain, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski and Rand Paul. Republicans will maintain their House majority, too. Most importantly, they’ll have net gains in terms of governorships, state legislators and total control of state governments.

This isn’t because Republicans are doing a great job. I’ve repeatedly said that they aren’t. It’s because Democrats are doing a great job frightening people, either with violence or unaffordable ideas like Medicare for All.

Next November, Democrats will gather somewhere to question what went wrong … again. The Media Wing of the Democratic Party won’t accept the fact that they’re hurting the Democratic Party. The Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party won’t figure it out that their policies don’t appeal to many people. Instead, they’ll think that the enthusiasm that their supporters show are proof that they’re on the right track. They’ll be wrong … again.

The Democrats won’t retake the majority in the US House of Representatives. They won’t because Democrats have a Martha Plimpton problem. As usual, Salena Zito identified the problem in her latest column. The opening paragraph of Ms. Zito’s column says “A clip of Martha Plimpton’s exuberance over the ‘best’ abortion she ever had played out on the television overhead of a gas-station counter somewhere along U.S. Route 422 between Ohio and Pennsylvania.”

To the average person, that’s a little too cold-hearted sounding. That image is amplified in this article. The opening paragraphs say “The days of abortion advocates calling abortion “rare” and “unfortunate” are clearly over. So are the days of being able to claim, “No one is really pro-abortion. No one actually likes it.”
Enter self-proclaimed ‘Christian’ abortionist Willie Parker and actress Martha Plimpton. Sadly, these (and other) abortion advocates do openly celebrate the violence of killing a preborn child. Between movements like #ShoutYourAbortion and Planned Parenthood fighting for abortion like it’s saving someone’s life instead of taking it, abortion has become a symbol of pride for many. Actress Martha Plimpton, however, has taken the pride of having an abortion to an incredulous level.”

In the 1990s, Bill Clinton famously said that abortions “should be safe, legal and rare.” That Democratic Party doesn’t exist anymore. Tom Perez, Nancy Pelosi, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren killed that Democratic Party.

Ms. Zito’s column continues:

After saying Seattle was the home of some of her family, she went on to cheer what she did in her teens: “I also had my first abortion at the Seattle Planned Parenthood. Yay!” With equal exuberance, she also revealed that her Seattle abortion wasn’t her last.

Later, she writes:

“Democrats used to debate the legal right to have one, and that was a point of view that was shared by most voters,” said Michael Wear, a theologically conservative evangelical Christian and Democrat who served in Barack Obama’s faith outreach office in the White House. “I don’t understand why, 14 months before a midterm election, why would you push 20 percent of voters who would love to support Democrats out the door? Better yet, why would you speak of pro-life Democrats as though they were some extraterrestrial who just landed on earth?” he said.

It is rare that anyone who has had an abortion celebrates it — Plimpton seems to fail to understand few in this country do. Maybe the privileged class celebrates abortions? Even if they did, that won’t help the Democratic Party win back voters. Or is it the intellectual class that celebrates them? Even if they did, that doesn’t win back majorities either. Or maybe it’s the celebrity class that does? If so, there’s not enough of them to win back the House or Senate.

In short, this is not the message you want to win every down-ballot seat the party has let waste away under the thrust of identity politics.

When Republican strategists talk about San Francisco liberals or tie candidates directly to Nancy Pelosi, that’s the image they’re trying to plant. It’s the image of a heartless, machine-like woman. (Barbara Boxer fit that image, too.)

Between driving away Catholics with these pro-abortion fanatics and blue collar workers in the Midwest and Rust Belt with their love of environmental activists, Democrats have ceded America’s heartland. That’s why the Democratic Party is a bi-coastal, urban political party.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

Here’s hoping that Democrats take Al Hunt’s article seriously. The title of Hunt’s article is “Democrats Need a Message, Not a Program.” It starts by saying “Democrats are in terrible shape. Republicans control all three branches of government in Washington, 34 of 50 governorships, and 68 of the 99 state legislatures. As they plot a comeback, Democrats have one obvious asset: the reckless presidency of Donald Trump. That’s not enough to close such a huge gap. And the battles that have started to rage inside the party over policies to promote and strategies to pursue are mostly missing the point.”

Thanks for the pep talk, Al. There’s nothing that’ll get a crowd excited faster than telling people they’re failing miserably. Hunt went wrong when he said “Most other political-party comebacks also were marked not by some innovative policy agenda but by connective messages and powerful personalities like Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Trump. It’s not about ideology or 17-point policy prescriptions.” Hunt is partially right in that political comebacks require a powerful personality to lead them. He’s wrong, though, in saying that it isn’t about ideology or policies.

President Trump won the presidency because he connected on policies with coal miners and other blue collar workers in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and, to a lesser extent, Wisconsin. Winning those states had everything to do with the policies Trump advocated.

Most other political-party comebacks also were marked not by some innovative policy agenda but by connective messages and powerful personalities like Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Trump. It’s not about ideology or 17-point policy prescriptions. State governments also often serve as farm clubs to develop candidates for higher office and national prominence. Before they start quarreling about policy papers, Democrats need to restock their Triple-A teams.

After 8 years of getting pounded at the local level, Democrats don’t just need their Triple-A rosters. It’s that they need to stock their Double-A teams, too, because they’re depleted. It doesn’t help to have this politician as one of the chief faces of the Democratic Party:

With messengers like Keith Ellison, why would anyone think that the Democratic Party is a legitimate political party?

Technorati: , , , ,

This article certainly will help raise Keith Ellison’s profile in DC. That’s the good news for Ellison. The bad news is that it’s shining a spotlight on the idiotic things that Ellison’s saying these days.

When Ellison sat down with the Fix, he said “I think you have to put it in context. You know, it happens within the context of a president that is knocking down every check and balance on the presidency. He’s attacking the press, which is one of the elements of our democracy that shines a light on government to hold him accountable. He’s pushing through members of the judiciary based on them promising to support certain things, and by escaping the normal rules Supreme Court justices have to follow.”

I didn’t hear Ellison criticize President Obama spied on the AP and FNC’s James Rosen. If Ellison is the civil rights warrior he claims to be, then a president investigating journalists should be something to speak out about. It isn’t surprising, though, that he didn’t speak out.

As for Ellison saying that President Trump is “pushing through members of the judiciary based on them promising to support certain things”, what proof does Rep. Ellison have of that? Is it possible that Rep. Ellison doesn’t have proof but is trying to gin up hatred against President Trump for purely partisan political reasons?

Here’s a perfect example of the media’s bias:

FIX: White supremacists used to hide behind hoods — now they’re showing their faces and giving interviews. Why do you think they feel so emboldened?

In baseball terms, that’s what’s known as a belt-high hanging slider. Here’s Rep. Ellison’s reply:

I think the white supremacists are feeling emboldened because they received the signal from the president of the United States that it’s all right for them to be active, to be aggressive, to be threatening. They feel greenlighted.

Rep. Ellison thinks that President Trump “greenlighted” racists. I don’t have to guess about this Ellison statement:

At the event, Ellison told the Pioneer Press he believed the prosecution of Olson was political. In his speech, Ellison noted he didn’t know much about the SLA and he thought Olson was being prosecuted in the court of public opinion because of some of her political beliefs.

“I’m a supporter of anybody who’s subject to political prosecution based on their being in a vilified group,” he told the Pioneer Press. “Your chances of getting a fair trial are low. I’ve been waiting for the evidence against her. I don’t think they would not cheat to prosecute this woman.”

I don’t have to guess what Rep. Ellison meant about this statement, either:

Ellison also spoke favorably of convicted cop killer Assata Shakur and expressed his opposition to any attempt to extradite her to the United States from Cuba, where she had fled after escaping prison.

“I am praying that Castro does not get to the point where he has to really barter with these guys over here because they’re going to get Assata Shakur, they’re going to get a whole lot of other people,” Ellison said at the event, which also included a silent auction and speech by former Weather Underground leader Bernardine Dohrn. “I hope the Cuban people can stick to it, because the freedom of some good decent people depends on it.”

It’s fair to say that, in those speeches, Rep. Ellison greenlighted the killing of police officers. Ellison’s statements weren’t veiled threats against police. Ellison’s statements were quite explicit. How dare he call our president a racist after exhorting crowds to kill police officers.

Here’s Assata Shakur, aka Joanne Chesimard, in her own words:

That’s who Rep. Ellison has fought for.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

The Political Wilderness Party, aka the Democratic Party, won’t be returning from Lewis & Clark territory anytime soon, at least if Elizabeth Warren has a say in the matter.

Speaking at this weekend’s Nutroots Convention, Sen. Warren said “If we’re going to be the people who lead the Democratic Party back from the wilderness and lead our country out of this dark time, then we can’t waste energy arguing about whose issue matters more or who in our alliance should be voted off the island. We aren’t a wing of today’s Democratic Party. We’re the heart and soul of today’s Democratic Party.” Later, Sen Warren took a shot at the Clintons, saying “The Democratic party isn’t going back to the days of welfare reform and the crime bill. It is not going to happen.”

I’d be a bit dishonest if I said that, each time I pray, I thank God for foolish people like Elizabeth Warren. Sen. Warren apparently doesn’t understand what people hear when she makes statements like that. The Clinton administration had an impressive job creation record. If people have to choose between President Clinton’s economic record and President Obama’s economic record, that isn’t a fair fight. President Clinton will win that fight every time with voters 40 years of age and older.

Sen. Warren is right, though, in saying that the Warren/Sanders/Obama wing of the Democratic Party is “the heart and soul of today’s Democratic Party.” That’s why this is music to my ears:

Warren’s speech at the conference, which is viewed as a testing ground for prospective presidential candidates, further fuels buzz that Warren plans to run for president in 2020. The Times reported that the Massachusetts lawmaker made little attempt to dismiss the bid speculation.

Last November, President Trump won 306 electoral votes. If he’s running against Warren in 2020, expect that to increase to 328 or 332 electoral votes. I’d be surprised if President Trump didn’t add Virginia and Colorado if his 2020 opponent is Sen. Warren. New Hampshire would be a possibility, too, though a bit of a longshot compared with Virginia and Colorado.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

If there’s anything that comes through clear in Kim Strassel’s latest article, it’s that Democrats have returned to being national security appeasers. The Awan family is living proof that Democrats don’t take national security seriously.

One of the first points from Ms. Strassel’s article that’s disturbing comes when she wrote “Mr. Awan, 37, began working for House Democrats as an IT staffer in 2004. By the next year, he was working for future Democratic National Committee head Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Over time he would add his wife, two brothers, a brother’s wife and a friend to the payroll—and at handsome sums. One brother, Jamal, hired in 2014 reportedly at age 20, was paid $160,000. That’s in line with what a chief of staff makes—about four times the average Capitol Hill staffer. No Democrat appears to have investigated these huge numbers or been asked to account for them.”

For the Awan family to get hired by 38 Democrats is outrageous enough. That the Awan family got hired at high salaries is more outrageous. That that isn’t the worst that the Awan family did is what’s most frightening. Ms. Strassel’s article continues, saying “The family was plenty busy elsewhere. A litany of court documents accuse them of bankruptcy fraud, life-insurance fraud, tax fraud and extortion. Abid Awan, a brother, ran up more than $1 million in debts on a failed car dealership he somehow operated while supposedly working full time on the Hill. One document ties the family to a loan from a man stripped of his Maryland medical license after false billing. Capitol Police are investigating allegations of procurement fraud and theft. The brothers filed false financial-disclosure forms, with Imran Awan claiming his wife had no income, even as she worked as a fellow House IT staffer.”

What’s cute is what Debbie Wasserman-Schultz said in defending her decision to keep Imran Awan on her staff:

Ms. Wasserman-Schultz made this foolish statement:

If there’s one thing that I’m going to make sure and maintain, it’s maintain my integrity.

That’s hilarious, especially coming from the woman who rigged the Democratic primaries to guarantee that Hillary Clinton won the nomination. The thought that Ms. Wasserman-Schultz thinks she’s got an ounce of integrity left is gut-busting laughable. This isn’t laughable:

Yes, it is weird that Ms. Wasserman Schultz continued to shield Imran Awan to the end. Yes, the amounts of money, and the ties to Pakistan, are strange. Yes, it is alarming that emails show Imran Awan knew Ms. Wasserman Schultz’s iPad password, and that the family might have had wider access to the accounts of lawmakers on the House Intelligence and Foreign Affairs committees.

It’s sad that people elected to represent us chose to protect fraudsters.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

In Salena Zito’s article, she writes about “Marcia Wilson, who chairs the” Democratic Party in New Oxford, PA. She writes that sometimes “her biggest challenge in the process of winning over voters is not Republican elected officials or their supporters, but members of her own party.”

That mission was made difficult when DNC Chairman Thomas Perez said pro-life Democrats weren’t welcome in the Democratic Party. That drew Jeanne Mancini to write “Last weekend, Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez made it clear that this community, even the vehement Democrats among us, is not welcome within the Democratic party. As he demanded that unwavering support for abortion is “not negotiable” for “every Democrat,” Perez made the conscious decision to alienate the 23 percent of Democrat voters who identify as pro-life.”

In 2016, Democrats did poorly with blue collar workers in America’s heartland. Thomas Perez’s initial solution to that problem was to tell pro-life Democrats, many of whom are blue collar workers, that they aren’t welcome in the Democratic Party.;

At Evergreen College in Washington state, liberal Professor Bret Weinstein is being ostracized by students and faculty for voicing a slightly contrarian opinion. Calls for his termination are daily.

Zito writes that Jon Ossoff might win in the special election in Georgia because he hasn’t talked about Trump. That’s possibly true but it’s also a short-term fix. The Democrats’ biggest litmus test is on the environment, not the Second Amendment. They’re still the pro-ACA party, too. Until the Democratic Party dumps those litmus tests, they’ll still be a coastal party.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

This article confirms what I’ve thought for a couple of weeks. It verifies with quotes from Democratic politicians that Democrats are waging a scorched earth campaign.

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee told Politico that “They were entitled to a grace period, but it was midnight the night of the inauguration to 8 o’clock the next morning, when the administration sent out people to lie about numerous significant things. And the damage to the credibility of the presidency has already been profound. They were entitled to a grace period and they blew it. It’s been worse than I could have imagined, the first few days.”

According to the article, “In legislative proposals, campaign promises, donor pitches and even in some Senate hearings, Democrats have opted for a hard-line, give-no-quarter posture, a reflection of a seething party base that will have it no other way.”

This isn’t surprising. Democrats have been displaying their anger over losing the election since the day after the election. They’d felt certain that Mrs. Clinton would win handily. To lose by a fairly wide margin stunned them.

The other contributing factor to the Democrats’ scorched earth campaign is the fact that that’s what they specialize in. That’s who they are. They’re all-but-officially the over-the-top party:

At a forum this week for candidates running to be the next DNC chair, the very idea that the party should try to work with the new president was dismissed as absurd. That’s a question that’s absolutely ridiculous,” said New Hampshire party Chairman Raymond Buckley, when asked whether the Democratic Party should try to work with Trump where it can find opportunities.

Television commentator Jehmu Greene offered: “If you saw the millions of people who marched in the streets this weekend and participated in it, they are looking to the Democratic Party. We have an opportunity as a party to be that place of resistance. So we have to form a solid resistance as a party. And no, it is not about working with Donald Trump.”

What’s ridiculous is the notion that a formerly major political party refuses to put their big boy britches on and act like adults instead of acting like spoiled brats.

In his campaign to become the next chair of the DNC, Rep. Keith Ellison wrote this op-ed, which Time Magazine published. It’s a publication from La-La-Land.

For instance, Rep. Ellison wrote “Take labor protection and environmentalism, two core Democratic values. Republicans claim you can’t both have clean air and grow jobs. This too is a false choice.
Unions and environmental groups recognized this ten years ago when they formed the Blue-Green Alliance to build a clean, fair economy for all. You don’t often think ‘environmentalist’ when you hear ‘steelworker.’ But David Foster, their first Executive Director, left his post with United Steelworkers District 11 in Minnesota to take on the task of bridging the divides he often saw with environmental advocates. In fact, the two current co-chairs are Leo W. Gerard, the International President of the United Steelworkers, and Michael Brune, the Executive Director of the Sierra Club. The Democratic Party needs to follow the lead of folks like David, Leo and Michael by showing where we can find common ground and standing up to attempts to drive us apart.”

While it’s true that union leadership signed off on this coalition, the rank-and-file didn’t. That’s why President Trump won the votes of tons of white working class voters. There are a handful of union leaders, compared with hundreds of thousands of union workers. It isn’t difficult to do the math.

Rep. Ellison didn’t help the Democrats’ cause when he wrote “We are the party that fights to raise the minimum wage, guarantee high-quality education, and provide affordable health care.” Blue collar workers are infinitely more worried about creating high-paying job than they’re worried about raising the minimum wage. The minimum wage simply isn’t a rallying cry.

What we need is a Democratic Party that is willing to listen to everyone and organize conversations that bring people together.

This is coming from the party that’s shouted down dissenting voices like Bill Kristol, Ann Coulter and other conservatives. This is coming from the party whose activists blocked traffic (multiple times) on major Minnesota highways. That’s rich.

It’s who we are. And it’s how we take our country back.

Here’s the truth: It isn’t the Democrats’ country anymore. Their contamination is pretty much restricted to areas of urban blight and college campuses. Finding Democrats in rural areas is as easy as finding capitalists in Vermont and Massachusetts.

It isn’t surprising that the AP is reporting that Keith Ellison will miss Friday’s inauguration of President-Elect Donald Trump. That’s as surprising as reports that Donald Trump is rich.

What makes this information newsworthy, in my opinion, is Rep. Ellison’s statement on why he isn’t attending. The AP quotes him as saying “I will not celebrate a man who preaches a politics of division and hate.”

Presumably, that’s said after offering the ‘I supported Louis Farrakhan’ exemption. This article hits Ellison right between the eyes, saying “In Ellison’s attempt to distance himself from past actions and move up in the Democratic Party he has said that he has ‘long denounced’ Farrakhan and called him ‘a hater,’ but Muhammad said that this is not the Ellison that he knew. Muhammad said that he met with Ellison personally during his years of association with the Nation of Islam and that there was ‘no question’ that Ellison, who at the time went by Keith Ellison-Muhammad, supported Farrakhan’s work.”

This might be the most lucid thing David Schultz has said as a political commentator:

Schultz says the last time the United States had a significant number of lawmakers boycott the presidential inauguration was in March 1861 when Abraham Lincoln took the oath of office. Schultz adds boycotting Trump is a win-win for Ellison specifically because his district is so overwhelming only democratic and because of his goals to become the next Democratic Committee Chair. “I suspect by boycotting this he integrates himself with the real liberals of the party and with the people who are saying what the Democrats really need to do is fight,” said Schultz.

Democrats come across as petty by skipping the inauguration:

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,