Roger L. Simon:
Chuck Schumer has been much remarked upon, even praised in many quarters, for stating the obvious – that Hillary Clinton should stop blaming the sun, moon and stars, and, of course, Russia for her demise and look to herself for her failure to win the presidency. She was a wretched candidate with the no obvious reason for running. Indeed, the Wikileaks from her campaign operatives are rife with emails searching for some justification for her candidacy other than gender.
The New York senator is clearly correct in his criticism but he has a larger unacknowledged problem that is ultimately far more serious: Hillary’s loss didn’t occur entirely due to her own ineptitude. She is not alone. Her party has no useful programs anymore. As Gertrude said of Oakland, there’s no there there. All they have is Trump bashing and, with the help of their media pals, that’s all they do – and the country knows it.
Yes, as we also all know, the Republicans have their issues, to put it mildly. For a party controlling practically everything, they are remarkably inept and self-destructive, but at least, beneath it all, they have the potential to come together and move forward. (Who knows if they will?) For the Democrats it is another matter. They are hamstrung on all sides.
On the left, they have the Bernie Sanders contingent. At first glance these people are stuck in 1968, but in truth they are stuck in (roughly) 1932 or is it 1867? (The publication of Das Kapital.) Bernie’s ideas are ye olde and moribund. He doesn’t even seem to understand (or admit) that the Europeans – whose version of socialism he continually touts – have been deserting that system right and left for years, going more free market than the USA currently is, particularly in the area of corporate taxes.
Bernie is Margaret Thatcher’s admonition about socialism eventually running out of other people’s money writ large. Sure, some young people are seduced by his seemingly idealistic palaver (actually it’s the reverse) but if he – or a younger clone – does run in 2020 one word will spell disaster for them: Venezuela. All socialist roads sooner or later point that way or to something even worse – The Soviet Union, China, etc. It doesn’t take a genius to point that out, nor to demonstrate the catastrophic deficits his proposals engender. (Hillary, scared of alienating his supporters, was terrible at this.) And the young people who vote – those concerned about jobs, not the sad Social Justice Warriors who have, unwittingly, already given up on life – will react accordingly.
This reliance on reactionary identity politics is the root of the Democrats’ problem – a Faustian bargain that like all such agreements turns out badly in the end. LBJ’s original plan may have worked for the party (until now) but it has been a disaster for African-Americans whose communities and family life have been hurt significantly rather than helped.
Chucky Sleaze to Hillary the Hag Pot and Kettle time folks
I guess, when all else fails, tell the truth (to a point). I have to wonder, though, if the Democrats have this “Better Deal” to unleash on the American people, why didn’t they do so throughout the last 8 years?
@Bill… Deplorable Me:
Well, actually they did try for the last 8 years (albeit rather spinelessly) but Rs wouldn’t let them because of their hatred of Obama and strategy to unseat him as well as their loyalty to their corporate donors.
Remember, Ds wanted a MW increase and Rs said no. They wanted infrastructure investments for jobs and Rs said no. They wanted equal pay for women and Rs said no, sick pay and Rs said no, worker protection and Rs said no, a focus on pay equality and Rs said no, a more worker friendly SCOTUS and Rs said no, and on and on.
So this supossably new message of a “Better Deal” sounds more like to me that they’re promising they’ve now grown an actual spine. Or something.
But the it raises the question of who’s side the Rs are really on and it obviously isn’t (nor ever has been) the American workers.
And on another note, it was strategically wise for Chuck to diss Hillary as she is so toxic to his party. Distancing themselves from her while making this new promise was just smart.
@Ajay42302:
You mean the Republicans wouldn’t let them enact all their “Better Deals” while the Democrats had full control of both Houses and the White House? Nor for the years while they controlled the White House and Senate? Oh, MY!! How terrible!!
Minimum wage increase is a poor substitute for a thriving economy, something your Democrats could not manage to attain.
In those liberal enclaves where they enacted increases, they are shedding jobs… just as predicted.
Obamacare killed the economy and turned full time jobs into part time jobs… or no no s at all.
The “Better Deal” is just more of the SOS deal; tax and mandate in lieu of success.
No, thanks.
Yes, distancing from Hillary is the wise thing to do. She’s toxic and a loser. Which begs the question, why would anyone place their full faith in such a corrupt, incompetent liar in the first place?
@Deplorable Me: Perhaps you’re actually right. They had controll for 2 years (only about 5 month filibuster proof). They spent that entire time on ACA when they should have wrapped it up in less than 1. And then they were busy helping the country rise above the Bush ashes, saving an economy in freefall-much dealing with a defiant GOP.
But aside from a rather full plate those 2 years, you’re correct that they failed to do much else to help American worker’s.
Now what all has the death panel Trump/McConnell/Ryan team accomplished?
The rest of your rant was just your usual gibberish.
That situation—a Democrat in the White House, and Democratic majorities in both Houses of Congress—existed only during the first two years of the Obama presidency. During that 2 year period Obama was dealing with the lingering effects of the disastrous 2007-2008 recession and two ongoing foreign wars. In spite of that, the Obama Administration pushed through health care reform, consumer protection, banking, and credit industry legislation, and equal pay for equal work legislation—all without having a 60-vote super-majority in the Senate. The recession was ended, the skyrocketing unemployment rate was reversed, and one of the nation’s biggest auto industries was saved from collapse.
From year 3 onward, a republican House majority obstructed every legislative effort and did their damnedest to undo what had already been accomplished. Now, controlling both the House and Senate, they’re obstructing themselves and their own party’s President, which is a much worthier endeavor.
@Ajay42302:
Please explain what they did to address the economic crisis generated by the liberal social engineering failure we know as the Community Reinvestment Act? Besides taking a trillion dollars and spreading it out among the Democrat campaign supporters (“I guess they were not as shovel ready as we thought. Ha, ha, ha, ha”), what attempts at economic recovery were made? Did plowing money into failing green companies help? Nope. Supporting the energy sector, where well-paying jobs are waiting to be filled? Nope. Lowering fees, taxes and regulations to encourage business growth? Nope.
So, what DID they try to do that was so meanly obstructed by those mean old minority Republicans?
What has Trump accomplished? He has opened up energy production. He has wiped out thousands of Obama-era economic restrictions. He has pulled us out of the Paris boondoggle. He has authorized the construction of pipe lines. He has reinvigorated the coal industry. He is bringing manufacturing jobs BACK to America. He is reducing the number of illegal immigrants you liberals enjoy exploiting so much. He has done more to rebuild the economy than Obama did in 8 years or would have done if he had 8 more.
Democrats had the opportunity to create an economic growth surge that would have entrenched them in power for decades. Instead, they decided to take a giant leap towards socialism and economic ruin. Oh, but THIS TIME, it’ll be different, won’t it?
@Greg:
He wasn’t dealing with anything. The top priority was to socialize health care as quickly as possible and that is ALL they did. What they accomplished in those two years assured there would be no growth for the following 6 and, as a result, Democrats are on the outside looking in, whining, stomping their feet and trying to prevent Trump from showing how really incompetent they were.
No, once the Republicans took the House and began submitting budgets and economic policies, Harry Reid and the Democrats made sure NO Republican initiatives came up for a vote. Over 600 bills were shelved by Reid. No, the Republicans weren’t the obstructionists… that was the Democrats and they are STILL at it.
The thing you liberals fear most is Trump succeeding and he is liable to do that DESPITE your worst efforts. STILL waiting for the first shred of evidence of ANY collusion by Trump. All we have seen uncovered is Democrat hanky-panky.
Only in your alternate, right-wing propaganda universe. A lot was accomplished. You just don’t like any of it. And the slow-but-steady economic growth we saw during Obama’s time in office was certainly far better than the prolonged recession and negative growth rate that preceded his inauguration.
Succeeding at what?
You’ve got republican majorities in both the House and the Senate and a republican President in the White House. Any problems they’re having getting things done are their own damn fault, and nobody else’s.
@Greg:
No, I DON’T like any of it. I prefer national security and economic growth and prosperity, not idol worship.
Obama’s term WAS a prolonged recession. 1% growth was only steady in it’s lack of progress. The only steady growth was the growth of the numbers in poverty, on welfare and on food stamps. He also accomplished a growth in racial rancor and violence.
Indeed, let’s have us some more of that.
@Bill… Deplorable Me:
Not to mention that when Obama took office, the unemployment rate was 7.8. It continued to rise, and remain higher than that, under the Lightbringer for almost four years after he took office. The measly 1% growth resulted in higher government spending, greater national debt and NO jobs. Consequently, he never reached the pre-recession unemployment levels.
Of course, via his “pen and phone” he threw money at “green” projects, only to have many of them go belly up at the expense of the American taxpayer. Setting the tone for racial strife, with his “the police acted stupidly” and “If I had had a son, he would have looked like Trayvon Martin” created what in the days of honest reporting would have been called race riots. TARP money being spent on sidewalks to nowhere in Oklahoma and new door knobs for county offices in Mississippi along with $200,000.00 to a county historical society that did not create so much as ONE job.
Yeah, Obama accomplished a lot, if you were a fellow Socialist. But none of it was good for America.
Gee it’s interesting reading libs here fussing about Republican obstruction and saying no the everything Obama wanted. Now with Trump in the White House the Democrats are doing the EXACT same thing and not a peep out of these lemmings.
It’s just fine with them now.