Archive for the ‘Democrats’ Category

Hard Times For Democrats – Daily Caller

5475076

Kellyanne Conway broke the law on live TV. Punish her. Do it now. No, I didnt say that and neither did anyone in the Trump administration in regards to White House Counsel Conways plaintive plea on behalf of Ivanka Trumps fashion line. Thats from Slate; and if you ever find a need to assess the state of psychic inertia and muddled ideology that plagues the Left, you need look no further than the equally muddled, dogs breakfast of a lay-out homepage that passes for an internet periodical.

Where was the Lefts solicitude for the sanctity of the law when favorite presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was recklessly using a private email server to send and receive classified documents. How did we not see liberals demanding punishment for the Benghazi debacle where we were talking about people actually dying and not catwalk politics.

And as for doing any thing now, Democrat apologists just couldnt get their ideological heads around the severity of Hillarys misdeeds as secretary of state and that these were not isolated and obtruded events but chronic and habitual to the core of Clintons political being.

In addition to the casual hypocrisy that usually characterizes left-wing politics, there is a new phenomenon haunting Democratic politics in the three weeks since Trumps inauguration. It is the specter of a desultory, rambling, uncertain political force that appears absolutely rudderless and bereft of leadership. This is probably a direct factor of the party lacking control of the presidency, House and Senate; but it is also a consequence of having personalities like Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Nancy Pelosi in minority leadership positions that are evidently far beyond their intellectual and emotional reach.

I knew there was something horribly wrong with Schumer on inauguration day when he chose to read the famous letter from Maj. Sullivan Ballou, a Union soldier from the Civil War who wrote an eloquent and poignant letter home to his wife, Sarah, just days before he died in the First Battle of Bull Run. The correspondence was popularized by the Ken Burns documentary that virtually rediscovered the War Between the States for an entire generation and anyone who has ever enjoyed the series, is aware of Ballous legacy.

Wonderful letter. But why would you read it immediately before a new president was about to be sworn into office? Is Schumer anticipating another civil war or could he not think of any other thoughts to offer that day? And the tears that he shed for refugees stranded at the airport was really beyond belief. Was he crying every time travelers had to wait 12 hours to get through security?

As for Pelosi she increasingly resembles a sleepwalker whom everybody is afraid to awaken, lest she hurt herself. Not only is she clearly way past her political prime, Pelosi has become the Norma Desmond of American politics, you almost expect her to announce that Im still big: its the politics that got small, in a rather bizarre approximation of the Billy Wilder line from Sunset Boulevard.

This political power vacuum has provided ample opportunities for the really unhinged fringe of the Dems to emerge in efflorescent moments of banality. Witness Elizabeth Warren this week on the Senate floor: was she having a coronary or just trying-out another political skit for a captive audience when she freaked out over the confirmation of new Attorney-General Jeff Sessions. Well, Sessions at least was used to her antics, having just left the Senate himself, so he didnt call for either the cops or a medic.

The Democrats dont seem to know what to do about the violent protest in streets or on the campuses as if there should be any cause for indecision. Should they condemn this anarchy, be mildly opposed to it or heartily endorse the nonexistent right to break the law and destroy property.

Hard choices.

But these are hard times for Democrats.

Follow David on Twitter

Read more from the original source:
Hard Times For Democrats - Daily Caller

Megan McArdle: Democrats have own immigration problems – The Spokesman-Review

We can argue about whether America has an immigration problem. But it seems pretty clear that Democrats have an immigration problem, one theyll have to fix if they want to oppose Trump effectively, much less regain control of the government.

Josh Barro, a senior editor at Business Insider, laid out at length exactly what that problem is. Briefly: The party has relied on opposing Trumps more outrageously exaggerated claims about the criminality and all-around character flaws of immigrants. Thats fine, as far as it goes but as November showed, it doesnt go far enough.

The core problem is that Democrats didnt really make an affirmative argument for an overhaul to U.S. immigration policy that might appeal to voters. Instead, they talked a lot about what great people immigrants are, and how much they benefit from migration. Unfortunately, the clearest group of beneficiaries people who want to migrate, but havent yet gotten a green card cant vote.

Its easy to explain how immigrants benefit from an open door. Explanations of how the rest of us benefit tend to rely on the trivial or on abstract economic arguments that most people dont find particularly intuitive or convincing. Those arguments look even more suspicious because they are generally made by the one group that visibly does benefit from a lot of low-skilled immigration, which provides the nannies, lawn care and food services that high-skilled professionals rely on to allow them to work longer hours.

There is one other group of people who strongly benefit, of course: recent migrants who have relatives they would like to join them. The most recent U.S. Census Bureau data indicate that thats perhaps 6 percent of eligible voters. More importantly, we have to account for the fact that naturalized citizens vote at significantly lower rates than the native-born.

Democrats may have large numbers of people polling vaguely in favor of high immigration levels, but relatively low levels of voter intensity for their position. You can see how these gaps work when you consider what happened on gun control in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook massacre: nothing. Strong majorities polled in favor of tighter restrictions. This support was broad but shallow: When it came to the ballot box, most people were more likely to vote on other issues. Gun owners, on the other hand, were apt to make this one of their top issues and vote accordingly.

Immigration may have a similar asymmetry. Distrust of strangers is a universal human phenomenon, tapping into some pretty deep evolutionary instincts. Once those instincts are aroused, you need very powerful emotional arguments as to why its worth taking the risk.

Democrats seem to appreciate that this is a problem, but instead of solving it, they mostly speak in vague generalities and to avoid concrete questions: What percentage of our society should be foreign-born? How should we choose the people we allow to migrate? Instead of formulating a clear policy, they relied on institutional inertia and lax enforcement to swell the foreign-born population to nearly 15 percent of the country. And Republicans, whose donor class likes generous immigration rules, were happy to go along.

That was fine as long as those groups were in charge of the status quo. Once Trump took over, however, that became infeasible. Trump, and anti-immigration Republicans in Congress, are going to be pushing specific policies to step up enforcement against people who are here illegally, and otherwise curtail legal immigration.

Successfully opposing these moves will require more than saying He called Mexicans rapists! Democrats are going to have to put forward a specific vision of their own for how many people should be allowed into this country, and what kind. And they will need to back up that vision with emotionally salient arguments that convince American voters immigration is as good for them as it is for the newcomers to our shore.

Megan McArdle is a columnist for Bloomberg View.

Published Feb. 11, 2017, midnight in: Democrats, Donald Trump, enforcement, Immigration

See the original post here:
Megan McArdle: Democrats have own immigration problems - The Spokesman-Review

Democrats should think outside the box – DesMoinesRegister.com

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

If the Democratic Party is truly interested in expanding their base, they need to change their rhetoric.

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

Dennis L. Wegner, Ottumwa, Letter to the Editor 6:20 p.m. CT Feb. 10, 2017

On Jan. 21, 2015, anti-abortion rights activists are connected with a red piece of cloth as they stage a "die-in" in front of the White House in Washington.(Photo: AP)

I agree with most ofthe analyses of the media, punditsand the Democratic leaders as to why the GOP won heavily in the November election. However, it's often overlookedthat by constantly emphasizingabortion rights, the Democratic Party scares off many people of faith. While many people of faithendorse the Democrats' social agenda, they are led to believethat Democrats thinkabortion is the only way to deal with an unwanted pregnancy.Therefore,as a matter of conscience, such people who would otherwise vote Democratic organizeand vote for the GOP because they believe that the Democrats are "baby killers."

The Democratic anti-baby image is enhanced because they fail to talk about either closed or open adoption as an option. Many women opt for abortion because they fear having their baby adopted by abusive or unfit parents,not realizing that in open adoption,they would have the right to interview and vet prospective adoptive parents and arrange for visitations. Other pregnant women, who might consider adoption,choose abortion because they lack the money and otherresources to carry their babies to term.

If the Democratic Party is truly interested in expanding their base, they must announce loudly in their campaign rhetoricand party platformsthat theyare truly pro-choice. Pro-choice in thatif a woman decides to carry her baby to term, financial and other resources will be made available for her to do so. I am verydepressed becauseDemocratic Party leaders, to whom I have spoken, have been totally unresponsive to me on this "think outside the box"modification of the party platform.

Dennis L. Wegner, Ottumwa

Read or Share this story: http://dmreg.co/2kvoDnb

3:38

2:31

3:45

1:56

1:47

3:24

3:03

1:24

14:52

3:39

0) { %>

0) { %>

Continued here:
Democrats should think outside the box - DesMoinesRegister.com

Massachusetts Democrats waging resistance to President Trump – Fort Worth Star Telegram


The Hill (blog)
Massachusetts Democrats waging resistance to President Trump
Fort Worth Star Telegram
Beacon Hill is replete with images of Massachusetts' revolutionary past a past that is feeling much closer to Democrats waging their own resistance to Republican President Donald Trump. Since the election, state Democrats have passed through several ...
Trump unfairly critiqued as Democrats' behavior goes unpunishedThe Hill (blog)
Democrats have a focus and a strategy, but do Republicans?Washington Times

all 53 news articles »

View original post here:
Massachusetts Democrats waging resistance to President Trump - Fort Worth Star Telegram

Tom Perez Apologizes for Telling the Truth, Showing Why Democrats’ Flaws Urgently Need Attention – The Intercept

The more alarmedone is bythe Trump administration, the more one should focus on how to fix the systemic, fundamental sickness of the Democratic Party. That Hillary Clinton won the meaningless popular vote on her way to losing to Donald Trump, and that the singular charisma of Barack Obama kept him popular, haveenabled many to ignorejust how broken and failedthe Democrats are as a national political force.

An endless array of stunning statistics can be marshaled to demonstrate the extent of that collapse. But perhaps the most compelling piece of evidence is that even one of the U.S. medias most stalwart Democratic loyalists, writing in an outlet that is as much ofa reliable party organ asthe DNC itself, has acknowledged theseverity of the destruction. The Obama years have created a Democratic Party thats essentially a smoking pile of rubble, wrote Voxs Matthew Yglesiasafter the 2016 debacle, adding that the story of the 21st-century Democratic Party looks to be overwhelmingly the story of failure.

A failed, collapsed party cannot form an effective resistance. Trump did not become Presidentand the Republicans do not dominate virtually all levels of government because there is some sort of massive surge in enthusiasm for right-wing extremism. Quite the contrary: this all happened because the Democratsare perceived with good reason to beout-of-touch, artificial, talking-points-spouting automatonswhoserve Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and the agenda of endless war, led by millionaires and funded by oligarchs to do the least amountpossible forordinary, powerless citizens while still keeping their votes.

What droveBernie Sanders remarkably potent challenge to Hillary Clinton was the extreme animosityof huge numbers of Democrats led by its youngest voters to the values, practices,and corporatist loyaltiesof the partys establishment. Unlike the 2008 Democratic primary war which was far more vicious and nasty but devoid of any real ideological conflict the 2016 primarywas grounded in important and substantive disputes about what the Democratic Party should be, what principles should guideit, and, most important of all, whose interests it should serve.

Thats why those disputes have not disappeared with the inauguration of Trump, nor should they. It matters a great deal, perhaps more than anything else, who leads the resistance to Trump and what the nature of that opposition is. Everyone knowsthe popular clichthat insanity means doing the same thing over and over and expecting different outcomes; it illustrates why Democrats cannot continue as is and expect anything other than ongoing impotence and failure. The partys steadfast refusal to change course even in symbolic ways we hereby elevate by acclimation Chuck Wall-Street Schumer and re-install Nancy Im a-multi-millionaire-and-We-are-Capitalists Pelosi bodes very poorly for itsfuture success.

In sum, demanding that one refrain from critiquing the Democratic Party in order to exclusivelydenounce Trump over and over is akin to demanding that one single-mindledly denounce cancer without worrying about who the treatingdoctor is or what type of research is being conducted to cure it. Trump happened because the Democrats failed. And he and similar (or worse) phenomena will continue to happen until they are fixed.

The obvious determinationof Democratic establishment leaders to followthe same failed and dreary course explains why the race for DNC Chair has become so heated. In reality, that position is little more than a functionary role mostly focused on fund-raising and building the party apparatus at the state level but whoever occupies it does serve as a leadingpublic face of the party.

For the last five years, the face of the DNCwas the living, breathing embodiment of everything awful about the party: the sleazy, corrupt corporatist and centrist hawk Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who as a result of WikiLeaks publication of DNC emails had to resign in disgrace after she gotcaught engaging in sustained cheating in order to ensure that Hillary Clinton would be the partys nominee.

But her disgrace was short-lived: upon resigning, she was quickly rewarded for her corruption by being named to a high position with the Clinton campaign, as well as having the DC establishment Democrats, led by Joe Biden and Clinton herself, support herin vanquishing a Sanders-supported primary challenger for her seat in Congress. As a result of the support from the party establishment (as well as massive funding from corporate and banking interests), she defeated that challenger, Tim Canova, and the nation rejoiced as she returned for her 7th term in Congress.

Wasserman Schultz was replaced as DNC Chair on an interim basis by long-time party operative Donna Brazile, who was quickly engulfed by her own scandal when she got caught secretly passing CNN debate questions to the Clinton campaign, then repeatedly lying about it by denying it and insinuating the emails were forgedby the Russians. For that misconduct, CNN fired her, as anchor Jake Tapper denounced her cheating as horrifying and CNN itself said it made themcompletely uncomfortable.

But Brazile continues to this day to run the DNC. Think about that: her behavior was so unethical, dishonest and corrupt that Jeff-Zucker-led CNN denounced it and publicly disassociated itself from her. But the DNC seems perfectly comfortable having her continue to lead the party until the next Chair is chosen.

Perhaps worse than the serial cheating itself was that it was all in service of coronating a candidate who as many of us tried to warn at the time all empirical data showed was the most vulnerable to lose to Donald Trump. So the very same people who bear the blame for Trumps presidency by cheating to elevatethe candidate most likely to lose to him continue to dominate the Democratic Party. To describe the situation is to demonstrate the urgency of debating and fixing it, rather than ignoring it in the name of talking only about Trump.

Early on in the race for DNC Chair, Keith Ellison the first American Muslim ever elected to the U.S. Congress and an early Sanders supporter who resides onthe left wing of the party emerged as a clear favorite. He racked up endorsements not only from progressives like Sanders,Elizabeth Warrenand Jesse Jackson but also party stalwarts such as Walter Mondale,John Lewis and even Schumer himself, who seems to recognize that throwing a few symbolic crumbs to the Sanders wing of the party is strategically wise in light of the enduring bitterness many of themharbor toward the DNCs behavior and the partys centrist, neoliberal, pro-war policies.

Photo: AP

The knives were then out for Ellison, as operatives began dumping controversial college-age comments about Louis Farrakhan and Israel into the media. The New York Times began running articles with headlines such as Jewish Groups and Unions Grow Uneasy With Keith Ellison a strange headline given that Ellison has been endorsed by multiple unions, including the AFL-CIO, the United Steelworkers, UNITE HERE, and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, among others. Even unpaid parking tickets from the 1990s made an appearance thanks to Democratic slime artists.

The assault on Ellisons candidacy was formalized when the Obama White House recruited and promised to back one of its loyalists, Labor Secretary Tom Perez. As he did with his endorsement of Wasserman Schultz, Biden made the establishments support for Perez official by publicly endorsing himlast week.

Perez isa pleasant liberaland loyal party stalwart: before the first primary vote was cast, he endorsed Clinton over Sanders and became one of her most outspoken surrogates. Despite claiming to be devoted to American workers, he was a loyal supporter of TPP even after Clinton was forced into insincere opposition.

Its not hard to see why the Obama and Clinton circles want him to run the party instead of Ellison. Hes acceptable to big donors. He has proven himself loyal to the party establishments agenda. He is a reliable party operative. And, most importantly of all, he will change nothing of substance:ensuring that the same policies, rhetoric and factions that have prevailed continue to do so, all while protecting the power base of the same people who have run the party into the ground.

Two recent incidents vividly highlight why Tom Perez so perfectly embodies the Democratic Party status quo. The first occurred two weeks ago, when my colleague Zaid Jilani attended an event where Perez was speakingand politely but repeatedly asked him about Israeli human rights abuses which had been in the news that week because of new demolitions by the IDF of Palestinian homes, and because Perez had been asked about his views on boycotting Israeli as a way of stoppingtheir decades-long occupation.

With thedomination by the Democratic Party of Saban and others looming, just watch how this profile in courage who wants to lead the Democratic Partyresponded to being asked about his opinions on this matter:

To ensure there was no mistaking his loyalty oath, he made that last tweet his pinned tweet, ensuring it would sit at the top of his Twitter page. (He also includeda couple of scripted, emptybanalities about the importance of transparency, objectivity, and fighting like hell).

So in Tom Perezs conduct, one sees the mentality andposturethathas shaped theDemocratic Party: a defense of jobs-killing free trade agreements that big corporate funderslove; an inability to speak plainly, withoutdesperately clinging to focus-grouped, talking-points scripts; a petrified fear of addressing controversial issues even (especially) when they involve severe human rights violations by allies; a religious-like commitment never to offend rich donors; and a limitless willingness to publicly abase oneself in pursuit of power by submitting to an apology ritual for having told the truth.

That is the template that has driven the Democratic Party into a ditch so deep and disastrous that even Vox acknowledges it without euphemisms. That is the template that has alienated voters across the country at all levels of elected office and that enabledthe Donald Trump presidency. And it is the template that Democratic Party establishment leaders are more determined than ever to protect and further entrench by ensuring that yet another detached, lifeless functionary who embodies it becomes the nextface of the party.

One can spend all of ones time and energy denouncing Donald Trump. But until the systemic causes that gave rise to him are addressed and resolved, those denunciations will do little other than generate social media benefits and flattering applause from those already devoted to opposing him. Focusing on and attempting to counter the fundamental flaws of the Democratic Party is not a distraction from #TheResistance;it is acentral priority, a prerequisite for any kind of success.

More here:
Tom Perez Apologizes for Telling the Truth, Showing Why Democrats' Flaws Urgently Need Attention - The Intercept