Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
April 23, 2017

Poll: The Democratic Party Is In Deep Trouble

After the presidential election the Democratic Party and its supporting media pushed unreasonable stories of secret Russian support for Trump's election as a main reason for Clinton's loss. The party avoided to discuss the real reasons: an unpopular candidate and its out-of-touch polices.

The diversion attempt failed. That is at least what I read from a just published ABC News/Washington Post poll:

[T]he national survey [...] finds some brighter spots for the president –- chiefly in pushing for jobs and in foreign policy [...]
[The poll] finds no evidence of buyer's remorse among Trump supporters. Among those who report having voted for him in November, 96 percent today say it was the right thing to do; a mere 2 percent regret it.
In March 2014, 48 percent of Americans said the Democratic Party was out of touch with the concerns of most people. Today 67 percent say so. And the biggest change has occurred chiefly among the party's own typical loyalists, with "out of touch" ratings up 33 points among liberals, 30 points among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents and 26 points among moderates and nonwhites alike.
Among Americans who say they voted in the 2016 election, 46 percent say they voted for Hillary Clinton and 43 percent for Trump, very close to the 2-point margin in the actual popular vote results. However, while Trump would retain almost all of his support if the election were held again today (96 percent), fewer of Clinton's supporters say they’d stick with her (85 percent), producing a 40-43 percent Clinton-Trump result in this hypothetical re-do among self-reported 2016 voters.

The people are not falling for the Democratic Party scam of "Russian interference". They obviously see the fault where it belongs. Unless the party shuns its Clinton/Obama legacy and reengages in voter-oriented politics it is likely to fail again and again.

And no - promoting Chelsea Clinton will not do anything good at all.

Posted by b on April 23, 2017 at 14:25 UTC | Permalink


"What do the Democrats stand for ?"

Posted by: Willy2 | Apr 23 2017 14:34 utc | 1

- Great Cartoon:


Posted by: Willy2 | Apr 23 2017 14:47 utc | 2

had always associated Jimmy Dore with TYT which is why I thought he'd be more of that left gatekeeper, blame Russia brigade but having watched a couple of his shows am quite impressed, and his subscriber numbers are probably growing and growing now too.

Posted by: Nick | Apr 23 2017 15:27 utc | 3

There is no Democratic Party. The u.s. are a one party politcal system. Think of a football team in a training camp where the coach says: 'Ok. half of the team now puts on a blue shirt, the other half a red one and then the two parties play against each other.'

Posted by: Pnyx | Apr 23 2017 15:31 utc | 4

good... how about a poll that shows 70% of americans don't believe they live in a free and democractic country anymore, while they are doing those brain massaging polls?

Posted by: james | Apr 23 2017 16:13 utc | 5

Pnyx @4:

Think of a football team in a training camp ...
Not such a good analogy, cause they're not playing against each other - they're playing against *us*. And it's not training, its real.

I think of it like this: the establishment has taken all the healthy snacks off the shelves. Yet they INSIST that:

1. you still have a choice;

2. they are working to improve snacks;

3. critics are just complainers or have a hidden (socialist/anti-American/etc.) agenda; and

4. democracy(!) means that change is possible if enough people want it so STFU.

When (against all odds) a movement to correct some specific grievance succeeds due to the determination and fortitude of the afflicted, establishment politicians are quick to take credit.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Apr 23 2017 16:24 utc | 6

Both parties are "out of touch" with the common citizens.

Congressional representatives must remain out of touch to keep their jobs. Their true employers are corporations and billionaires which pay them directly though baksheesh made legal.

Congressional representatives are paid to enable the theft of the commons by the .02 percent.

The Democrats help the Republicans by providing distractions and cover for Republican theft of resources, materials, enabling the destruction of the environment, public education and social safety net, while funding the MIC, Pharma, Big Ag, Big Oil and wars.

The Republicans are not our friends, either. Mainstream Media conveniently forgets to point that out.

Trump has apparently abandoned any sense of populism he often displayed. He's running (to the extent that he can) a Republican Nut House and Wrecking Crew.

No remorse? Please...

Posted by: fast freddy | Apr 23 2017 16:50 utc | 7

Willy2 @ 1: Bingo! Simple, but, when you're bought and paid for, you MUST be silent.

Thanks for the Dore video.

The "Citizens United" decision MUST be overturned. Otherwise, the Oligarchy continues..

Posted by: ben | Apr 23 2017 16:56 utc | 8

@ 4: One party, yep. The parties for big $..

Posted by: ben | Apr 23 2017 16:59 utc | 9

The best way to express to ordinary people the degree to which the establishment has united against them is to note how well US Corporate Government has served its REAL constituency. Since the end of the Cold War, both major Parties have delivered:

> curtailing civil liberties;

> military adventures/regime changes;

> tax cuts;

> reduced social spending;

> union busting trade and immigration polices.

So b has it backwards. The Democratic Party hasn't FAILed. The Party has SUCCEEDED in serving paying customers (the establishment aka TPTB).

If you don't have a seat at the table, you're on the menu.

Citizens United (the US law that made money speech) put the last nail in the coffin of US Democracy. There may be a few representatives that want to do well by ordinary people but most, if not all, are weeded out so that leadership (of both major parties) is fully pro-establishment.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Apr 23 2017 17:10 utc | 10


Watch Jimmy Dore daily since Nov. 2016, but never TYT - an extension of Democrats.

Never again any Democrats! NEVER is forever

Posted by: OJS | Apr 23 2017 17:29 utc | 11

The Real News Network (TRNN) have a good piece on that bitch Madog Rachel today, a so call progressive democrats...

Real News Roundtable: Maddow Response & Liberal Hawkishness on Russia, Iran

Posted by: OJS | Apr 23 2017 17:37 utc | 12

According to recent a Pew's poll about 43% who voted for Hillary will vote for her again. Democrats are brain dead, just like Nancy Pelosi, Maxim Waters, Chuck Schumer, Howard Dean....!

Posted by: OJS | Apr 23 2017 17:50 utc | 13

Well this is good news. Hopefully this will kill the Clinton machine once and for all.

Posted by: ToivoS | Apr 23 2017 18:10 utc | 14

Just wondering what's your text about?

The people are not falling for the Democratic Party scam of "Russian interference". They obviously see the fault where it belongs. Unless the party shuns its Clinton/Obama legacy and reengages in voter-oriented politics it is likely to fail again and again.

Is this something new?

Your piece presume that there are two DIFFERENT parties in the US. Which is not true. Secondly "the people" are just 300 millions of utterly stupid Amerikkans regardless of their race but mostly comprised of the white shit. Totally stupefied by electronic gadgets, sex and TV.

So what the people are you talking about? There is no people there.

I advise you to read this:

Posted by: AKSA | Apr 23 2017 18:12 utc | 15

Socialist party at 6 % in France, New Labour Socialist party (Macron) leading, at 23% with Le Pen second ca 21%
Next round on 7th May

Posted by: Mina | Apr 23 2017 18:23 utc | 16

On French election:

RT: Liberté d'expression? RT, Ruptly crews blocked from Macron HQ despite press requests

Looks like this former Rotschiald banker, liberal, obamalover Macron is leading.

Posted by: Anon1 | Apr 23 2017 18:43 utc | 17

Bloomberg talking head explained to Francine Laqua that Le Pen has no chance to win second round, because like in US election people have chance to vote against the absolute evil as they perceive it regardless of another candidate program.

Despite Bloomberg attempt to backpedaling the guy called Hillary an absolute evil live on TV.

Fortunately, nobody is watching Bloomberg.

Posted by: Kalen | Apr 23 2017 18:50 utc | 18


Unfortunately they are right, as far as Le Pen will have no chance against the, pro-war, pro-nato, anti-russian, liberal, fmr. banker Macron. This is a candidate that was brought forward just recently basically to stop Le Pen.

Posted by: Anon1 | Apr 23 2017 19:01 utc | 19

Posted by: Mina | Apr 23, 2017 2:23:07 PM | 16

I am confused, these are numbers by a polling institute ipsos according to le Monde?

How can they be so sure?

Counted votes according to Guardian Fillon wins?

Are conservative departments the ones that count fastest?

Posted by: somebody | Apr 23 2017 19:04 utc | 20


Yeah I wonder that too, first I saw that Macron lead Le Pen, then I went to AP and they said and showed that it was the other way around, that Le Pen, some minutes ago lead over Macron.

Posted by: Anon1 | Apr 23 2017 19:25 utc | 21
France's Macron appears set for Elysee in runoff with Le Pen

Posted by: okie farmer | Apr 23 2017 19:29 utc | 22

My personal views.....
Emmanuel Macron more or less another Bernie Sanders or an extension Democrats and Republicans.... I'm for Marine Le Pen.

Viva la France, viva Marine Le Pen, viva Vladimir Putin!

Posted by: OJS | Apr 23 2017 19:41 utc | 23

Posted by: Anon1 | Apr 23, 2017 3:25:22 PM | 21

I understand the Macron lead is based on samples of election results, but this year is unusual for France so predicitions how to extrapolate would be difficult.

Media seems to be sure, Fillon and Hamon seem to have conceded just Melenchon says wait and see.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 23 2017 19:44 utc | 24

Yup, Obamacron it shall be.

Posted by: sejomoje | Apr 23 2017 19:53 utc | 25

add 24

It is not over yet.

21:47 - Première vague de résultats partiels du premier tour de la présidentielle

Le Ministère de l'Intérieur donne les premiers chiffres consolidés, après dépouillement de 20 millions de bulletins de vote : c'est pour le moment Marine Le Pen qui arrive en tête avec 24,3%, devant Emmanuel Macron (22,2%), François Fillon (19,6%) et Jean-Luc Mélenchon (18,1%). Bien entendu, ces chiffres sont partiels et ne prennent pas en compte les résultats obtenus par les candidats dans les plus grandes villes de France.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 23 2017 19:53 utc | 26

polling is an occult science, tred with care.

the Democrats(& Republicans) constitute the grifters club...

in fact, most of them are millionaires.

Posted by: john | Apr 23 2017 20:05 utc | 27


Bernie? Macron is rather another pro-establishment guy. Guy apparently loves Obama. Go figure.

Posted by: Anon1 | Apr 23 2017 20:06 utc | 28

The basic character of the 'washington insider' 'political staffer' is teacher's pet, obedient, following orders type. If they have no leaders, they'll continue blindly forward with neoliberalism, awful trade deals, regime change, and other things people hate. The powers that be will break the backs to prevent an change to the status quo, and the people inside the bubble seemingly can't see outside.

The democratic party is as dead as the whigs if it doesn't co-opt the populist movement bubbling in America. The Whigs died because they tried to be anti slavery in the north and pro slavery in the south. The democrats likewise try to be all things to all people, (except the despised southern white working class). This is a recipe for decline, decay, collapse. The fact that republicans own the vast majority of governance in the US is evidence of their failing.

They don't know how to do politics, they know how to do technocratic bullshit that doesn't work when people are hungry and can't afford rent.

Posted by: Cresty | Apr 23 2017 20:15 utc | 29

Posted by: Anon1 | Apr 23, 2017 4:06:15 PM | 28

Macron will try to modernize/globalize France. Which may be needed or not depending where you stand.

The interesting guy is Melenchon. He seems to have kind of conceded now, so it will be a Macron/le Pen runoff which hopefully Macron will win.

He will meet a lot of resistance in his restructuring project.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 23 2017 20:28 utc | 30

Willy2 2
That was more like Hillary's donkey cart. Barack's cart is attached or nearby, too with sellouts to Goldman-Sachs/Wall Street, more wars (which HRC voted for or instigated), etc.

Her health care plan was going to be a partnership with insurance companies just like Obama's. They said so in 2008. So after complaining about the GOP's Medicare Part D plan being a partnership with lobbyists, the DEMs do the same but on a larger scale.

It sounds like DEMs are starting to figure out their emperors have no clothes (or plans, or integrity, or honor, etc) except more of the same. I look forward to the day when more Americans reject these two corrupted detestable parties.

Posted by: Curtis | Apr 23 2017 20:37 utc | 31

Macron is like France's Tony Blair or Gerhard Schröder (or Bill Clinton).
Good for the 1 %, bad for the rest of the country - that is, if he really delivers what he promised/ threatened. Fortunately, this is far from certain: His austerity policies would impoverish millions, further weaken the middle class, and could ultimately lead to a Le Pen victory in 2022. I hope French politicians are intelligent enough to understand that...?

For now, it's still 'everything but Le Pen'.

Posted by: smuks | Apr 23 2017 20:40 utc | 32

@somebody 30
Let's hope so.
French politics may be chaotic at times, but economic policies are the most responsible among Eurozone states. Spanish (etc.) wages and spending increased too quickly, Germany's too little - France was 'just right' so far.

Also, I don't see how a German-style export orientation could work there, given the structurally very different economies.

Posted by: smuks | Apr 23 2017 20:50 utc | 33

Cresty @29:

The democratic party is as dead as the whigs if it doesn't co-opt the populist movement bubbling in America.
One doesn't have to have too cynical of a mindset to see Obama/Bernie/Trump faux populists as the establishment's answer to popular discontent. Obama's betrayal is clear to most (real) progressives. The hope that Bernie would be different has fadded:
Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders: Sheep-dogging for Hillary and the Democrats in 2016

Bernie Sanders, the Company Man

Can We Finally Get Over Bernie Sanders?

Despite excuses for Trump's "flip-flops" (Deep State FORCED him!), there is plenty of reason to believe that he is a willing participant. The fix was in. Trump stands to make a great deal of money by via Clinton-like pay-to-play schemes.

Time for Direct Democracy? Check out the Pirate Party.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Apr 23 2017 21:09 utc | 34

The average person voting for President was never a good idea, and the electoral college system means the dumbest or least educated voters votes count more, which is why Republicans have done so well post WWII winning 10 of the last 18 Presidential elections . They basically (along with Dark Miney from right leaning foundations) turned Democrats so far to the right in economics and social welfare they are just a different kind of Republican. Republicans have also changed and adopted the Democrats War and Imperialists tendencies. Both parties are corporate lackeys.

Basically both parties have adopted Mussolinis corporatism and the British infatuation for War and Empire. Its a bad combination for Americans and the World especially since our resources, geography and reserve currency means we can't be stopped by anyone except a united and powerful Eurasia , and we will make sure that does not happen as Zbig outlined in the Grand Chessboard. . Basically what all the wars of the past 25 years have been about. I'd probably support it more if they gave more back to the people, buts its been a generation of wiping out the middlle class and poor. Real income down, fertility rates below replacement levels and life expectancy now declining.

Who would have thought the dissolution of the Soviet Union and Communism would be bad for World Peace? The competing ideology of Communism meant we had to af least try to promote Democracy at home and abroad, and the Soviet military threat restrained some of our actions outside of the Americas and Western Europe . Now the mask and gloves come off and we make no effort. Monopoly Power is just as destructive as Monopoly Capitalism.

The polls show the people are clueless and so divided that change is unlikely. The endless propaganda reinforces the status quo, which is a trend to the End of History 1984 style. Looks like Orwell's book was one of the scripts for future. A proposed plan presented as fiction.

Posted by: Pft | Apr 23 2017 21:46 utc | 35

Big organised $ in the form of Corporations is winning the day around the globe. Another centrist in France? Bought and paid for by big $. So sad..

Posted by: ben | Apr 23 2017 21:49 utc | 36

Really? Other than wishing the DPs splinter into as many parts as possible who would ever vote for this corrupt group of self interest A-Holes and pedophiles ever again. Ditto the RPs. Last time the RPs were in power they rolled back the Constitution and appear to starting again where the DPs left off.It is my belief that this conversation on what these two entities-single policy objectives are doing needs to end as it lends credibility to their existence. Perhaps the discussion should begin revolving around getting consensus from the people on what they want for a freaking change! This instead of Trump said this and the DNC said that. This is just setting the stage for another catchy slogan and messiah marketing campaign to sucker almost everyone in the voting public in again. ENOUGH ALREADY....

Posted by: BRF | Apr 23 2017 21:49 utc | 37

After the 1963 coup it was necessary for the Deep State/CIA to control the Democratic Party in order to maintain the illusion of democracy for the American people. In 1968 it involved killing the two exemplars of progressivism, RFK and MLK. Since then they've kept the blood to a minimum, but have successfully taken over the Democratic Party. Key to doing this has been to grow a political class obligated to the Deep State but able to present themselves as "liberal". Hillary and Bill were probably enlisted back in 1968. Hillary's history looks like she may have initially be chosen to do work for the FBI's COINTELPRO, specifically their campaign against the Black Panthers. Bill was identified as CIA by his classmates during his Rhodes scholar time in Britain. A true power couple.

But the illusion is crumbling.

Posted by: Bob In Portland | Apr 23 2017 21:51 utc | 38

Yeah, the pizza loving russophobes are a twisting wreck, no question.

But Obama hasn't gone anywhere. Nope. Neolib scum have strong anchors. His outfit Organising For Action set up his shadow admin in D.C., just a couple of miles down the road from the White House.

Wikipedia gives us the 'non-profit' background of OFA, a successor to the 2012 Obama re-election campaign, itself a successor of the 2008 campaign. A cursory glance elsewhere reveals upwards of 30000 willing foot soldiers ready to 'advocate for the agenda of former' Pres Barry'O.

It was known at Obama For America, the Organising For they really aren't disguising their motives a whole lot with the change up to Organising For Action ...and that'll be nearer to a 9 year old organisation, so not the 4 years as stated below.

It is of course another sign of dem sickness, but when partnered up with George Soros 'Indivisible', make no mistake, this is the hub of the retarded/fake left network we're seeing mobilised. Barry'O trolling The Don so hard.

Posted by: MadMax2 | Apr 23 2017 21:57 utc | 39

I dare say this dismantling of the official story is well known on MoA but just in case ...

Posted by: Anninymus | Apr 23 2017 22:13 utc | 40

Sorry 'b' but I think your reading to way much into one poll. First no party can turn around in 100 days. Second this poll is looking backwards and has no forward intention aspect, especially since we have no idea who might be a contender in the next general or what the policies might be or even what the issues of the day will be. Mean while the Democrats are making moves at the state level which is far more import as it will give them a chance to wind back some the voter suppression laws and gross gerrymandering.

I agree with you that Hillary Clinton is voter repellent, but that doesn't mean liberal values are. They have a lot of work to do but it isn't like Trump has won the 2020 election already and they decided to cancel it. Lets see if he makes it through this week with out stepping on his dick. If the government is shut down at the end of the week the Republicans are going to have a hard time pinning it on the Democrats. Killing people just to kill people is popular with Americans but you can only use that ploy a couple of times. If Americans start coming home in body bags DT tweeting casually about how they were losers to deflect from his part will not play well.

Posted by: BraveNewWorld | Apr 23 2017 23:30 utc | 41

@35 pft

The average person voting for President was never a good idea ... Basically both parties have adopted Mussolinis corporatism and the British infatuation for War and Empire. ... Basically what all the wars of the past 25 years have been about. I'd probably support it more if they gave more back to the people, buts its been a generation of wiping out the middle class and poor.

at least you're honest. that seems to me to be the problem in our us of a all right. 'the people' don't give a damn about who or what gets hurt as long as they get a piece of the action, and 'the people' who are accustomed to getting a taste are the only ones who vote.

same all over the western liberal democracies, the forecast was for an 80% turnout in france, the tnc msm is reporting just under 70%. 55% in the us of a at the last coin toss.

democracy requires engagement. it's not there. atomicity vs polymerization, with atomicity prevalent. there's no demos, i guess. just a bunch of alienated people.

Posted by: jfl | Apr 24 2017 0:06 utc | 42

@40 BraveNewWorld

Yes, liberal values ARE repellent, since they all come back to that a) morality is something that exists outside society b) that humans can be morally perfected ("saved") c) that an exalted class of managers are the instruments of morality and are needed to make "tough choices" (i.e. rape, murder, torture, the usual foreign policy things) on its behalf d) that in "regretfully" doing so, the managers themselves approach moral perfection. No, liberalism, whether conservative, classical, or libertarian, is the same mental illness as any other system of authoritarianism, designed to exploit the people and control them while pretending not to. It's crap, was designed to be crap, and will always and forever be crap. Let us hope that, unlike the Whigs, this bourgeois philosophy will be beaten to death once and for all.

@41 jfl

Who makes the choices of who runs? The Parties, of course. You are merely invoking the doctrine of original sin, as if it were not part of the permanent guilt-trip built into authoritarian society.

Posted by: Jonathan | Apr 24 2017 0:17 utc | 43

Ptf: The average person voting for President was never a good idea, and the electoral college system means the dumbest or least educated voters votes count more, which is why Republicans have done so well post WWII winning 10 of the last 18 Presidential elections.

This is quite wrong. What is the alternative? A rule by a body of responsible elders, all of whom are well learned in the classic of Confusianism or at least The History of Chinese Communist Party? It is not even the case that it never works, but in many cases it does not. And USA has just too few people who understand any ancient philosophy. For example, Strausians (intellectual neocons) simply misused Plato by accepting his fascism but rejecting any notion of ethics.

In other words, it is always necessary to digest your political aims into the form of slogans that the otherwise clueless voters can absorb. Bernie, love him or scorn him, was much better in that respect than Hillary, and the decision of Democratic establishment to bet the farm on Clinton was less rewarding than they hoped.

I admit that Bernie is an old dog that learned his last trick about 40 years ago, but that saved him from droning a mix of technocracy and touchy-feelism enterspersed with feisty exclamations like "you will never see me singing praises of dictators or strongmen who do not love America!".

I actually loved that one. You can sing praises of absolute monarchs who forbid women to drive, fund murderous terrorists etc. Or genocidal strongmen who love America. But somewhere we have to proudly draw the line.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Apr 24 2017 1:15 utc | 44

Every political analysis that starts off assuming Clinton lost the election instead of Trump winning the Electoral College is at best hopelessly confused. Trump was no more the peace candidate than Obama was in 2008. The only difference is that the Trumpery is even more brazenly dishonest that the Obama Nation was.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Apr 24 2017 1:16 utc | 45


Let's not pretend that the word 'liberal' means the same person to person. These words have become so amorphous lately it just sounds silly to come across like it's some constant. If you asked 100 different people to define their one word political philosophy, you'd get a hundred different answers.

Defining others political outlooks in a single word doesn't leave much room for shades of gray.

Posted by: George Smiley | Apr 24 2017 1:16 utc | 46

@42 George Smiley

Let's not pretend that people who simply use the word as a secular version of "holy" or "righteous" or, as in practice, "what my team does", are not shitting in the discourse by mendaciously ignore and invoke over three centuries of poli-sci scholarship and tradition to protect their status and privilege.

> Defining others political outlooks in a single word doesn't leave much room for shades of gray.

Clearly you don't believe that people's posting history, the causes and ideologies they support, etc. have any role in synthesizing an understanding of what they do mean. That's very neoliberal. Regulars either know better or are mendacious exploiters themselves. The responsibility is on them to know what they're talking about and not abet a centuries-old fraud in doing so. If they won't, they discredit themselves and what they presume to represent.

Posted by: Jonathan | Apr 24 2017 1:53 utc | 47

Here is link to WaPo site with complete list of questions and responses.

The question on how well Trump, the gop as a party, and the democrats as a party are "in touch" or "out of touch" are just amazing. According to the poll Trump is closer to the concerns of Americans than either party organization, and the gop is more in touch than the democrats.

Maybe some very revealing trends. It looks to me like the democratic party base is slipping away. Not to the gop, but simply going absent compared to the gop base.

And, while the Russia may be in the news thanks to the obsessive media and democrat party hacks, it is not registering as something the American people at the end of the day think is important to their daily lives. The democrats and the media scream at the top of the lungs RussiaRussiaRussia, and the end result is the poll indicates the dems are out of touch.

The three losses by the democrats of Congressional seats since Trump took office in the barrage of a Russia scandal seems to indicate the Russia is a distraction to the real issues facing Americans.

And it is easy to understand. The whole Russia hysteria at the end of the day has not materially affected Americans. As Greenwald said, Americans are not waking up each day with Russia on their brains.

Posted by: Erelis | Apr 24 2017 2:00 utc | 48

"Bernie is an old dog that learned his last trick about 40 years ago....."

Bernie is the establishment like Emanuel Macron, Benoit Hamon and Francois Fillon. Out all establishments candidates and replace with anti establishments.

Posted by: OJS | Apr 24 2017 2:55 utc | 49

Bernie parked his ass in the Senate, where like a sideshow act, he can be wheeled out to cheer for the common man, woman and child. Nothing of consequence to the benefit of the commons has ever come of it.

He rallied the troops too well and the Party bosses were not able to pull off the switcheroo (Bernie abetted the con) as they had planned. Hillary was overconfident, obnoxious and a proven fraud and warmonger. And Running Mate Tim Kaine? A slap in the face for progressives.

Posted by: fast freddy | Apr 24 2017 3:27 utc | 50

“Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is the numbers of people all over the world who have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their government and have gone to war, and millions have been killed because of this obedience… Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world, in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war and cruelty. Our problem is that people are obedient while the jails are full of petty thieves, and all the while the grand thieves are running the country. That’s our problem… people are obedient, all these herdlike people.” — Howard Zinn (ZeroHedge)

March of Tyranny

Posted by: x | Apr 24 2017 3:42 utc | 51

Emanuel Macron is establishment candidate, "Germany welcomes Macron success in French election first round"

German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel Sunday .... "I am certain that Emmanuel Macron will be the next president of France. Great for Europe," Deutsche Welle reported Gabriel.. had taken the unusual step of endorsing Macron.

Beside Emanuel Macron [aide] blames Russia for hacking French election "Emmanuel Macron aide blames Russia for hacking attempts.. deploying considerable resources to swing the French election"

Overseas French voters can votes twice. "French election farce: Polling card blunder means 500,000 people could vote TWICE and could spell peril for Marine Le Pen"

While in Singapore last week I asked a French lady will she votes for Le Pen? With a strange look refused to give me a straight answered... I conclude Macron did better than Le Pen, double voting.

Posted by: OJS | Apr 24 2017 5:00 utc | 52


Why call him another Bernie then? Bernie claimed not to be part of the establishment, this sleazy guy Macron does not do that. He is proud to be part of the establishment, like Merkel, Obama, MSM etcetera.

Posted by: Anon1 | Apr 24 2017 5:35 utc | 53

Dutch banker exposes - in a gripping interview - the dark Luciferian nature of the 8,000 to 8,500 who control the Western world:

So presumably a few of these 8,500 are at elite levels of most major political parties, especially including the US Democrat and Republican parties.

Posted by: Anoncommentator | Apr 24 2017 6:28 utc | 54

"Bernie claimed not to be part of the establishment" He is part of the establishment, switched, campaigned and voted for Hillary in 2016..... and you probably can find more about this "this sleazy guy".

Emmanuel Macron... "this sleazy guy" Socialist Party (PS) 2006 to 2009, was appointed deputy secretary-general under François Hollande's first government in 2012..... Minister of Economy, Industry and Digital Affairs in 2014 under the Second Valls Government, pushed through business-friendly reforms. He resigned in August 2016.

Labeling is not a sure ways identify a candidate, however there are many tell-tail signs... blames Russia or Putin for hacking French election, DNC servers etc.

Posted by: OJS | Apr 24 2017 6:43 utc | 55

The difference between the Democrats and Republicans is the difference between being dragged down by a crocodile or an alligator.

Posted by: Michael McNulty | Apr 24 2017 10:14 utc | 56

The Dems have nobody but themselves to blame for their lowly status. Sanders could of beat Trump easily and even helped take back the House, but stupidity, greed and arrogance made them bow to the vile Hillary, and they sabotaged Sanders primary campaign.

The Dems have nothing to offer people, only more of the same BS the Repubs offer; tax cuts for the rich and austerity for the people, gutting Wall Street regs, more money to the Pentagon and endless wars for Israel.

They need to crawl off and die somewhere so their bloated carcass doesn't stink up the place anymore than it already does.

Posted by: Greg Bacon | Apr 24 2017 11:51 utc | 57

While it seems likely that Sanders could've beaten the trump, am I the only one who wonders that if he had we would be having exactly the same conversation about how Trump shoulda won cos Bernie has just sold the planet down the river after a stern talking to followed by Sanders spineless collapse in front of the old boys who actually run amerika?
We need to remember that sanders has had his snout in the senate trough for a few decades and altho he voted the 'right' way on some bills that were gonna get through with or without his support he never did anything to endanger his seniority with the usual crew of dem hack pols.

I don't really trust Bernie and have to say that his missus/campaign manager has a really hack vibe about her that seems pretty much par for the course with the spouses of careerist hacks rather than the power behind the throne of the socialist revolution.
Maybe it was a good thing bernie didn't win - the young firebrands are still in place; for the most part their purity of purpose hasn't succumbed to cynicism yet and altho the bern is flashing his wrinkled ass wherever he can, by 2020 even he will recognise he's just too old now and the gang need to grab a sincere electable younger candidate to hang their hats off of.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Apr 24 2017 12:22 utc | 58

Have we officially started the 2020 U.S. presidential campaign already? Lordy, Lordy, Lordy! Not even a hundred days into this half-assed administration and the cry: MOAR Politics! Can this be the next fatal disease equal to the Black Death? but one where sanity dies? At best this is one way to occupy idle minds, at worst: is a new definition of sanity needed?

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Apr 24 2017 13:29 utc | 59

How does the fact that people are unhappy with the Democratic party (DP) lead to the conclusion that they are not buying the claim of Russian interference (RI)?

People are unhappy with DP for a lot of reasons. My guess is that RI is very low on the radar for most Americans.

Posted by: Khalid Shah | Apr 24 2017 14:12 utc | 60

Voting / Democracy- Most successful scam in human history.

Posted by: Ken M | Apr 24 2017 15:42 utc | 61

The people do typically vote for and elect their local idiots - mayors, city council members, sheriffs, perhaps. And these municipal representatives typically do things that the people don't like. And I say that - like their high level counterparts - they appear to be "on the take".

Voting gets away from the people the higher up it goes.

Posted by: fastfreddy | Apr 24 2017 16:03 utc | 62

We are very obedient. Anarchy and protesting is for the young and the consequences are severe. What motivation have the young to institute radical change? They're born, raised and indoctrinated with bullshit. Did you know that The smartest (and the dumbest) American children are tracked by the Federal Government?

No such tracking exists for the average students.

Posted by: fastfreddy | Apr 24 2017 16:12 utc | 63

Fast freddy 50
Bernie in the Senate sounds like Warren. They can get talking points out and put on a show but it winds up bark with no bite.

Pnyx 4, Jackrabbit 6
It looks like football with the appearance of two teams. That suckers people in. But then they play and it's more like professional wrestling (as Jesse Ventura has pointed out).

Posted by: Curtis | Apr 24 2017 16:58 utc | 64

Formerly T-Bear says:

MOAR Politics! Can this be the next fatal disease equal to the Black Death?

certainly politics, as embraced by so many, simulates a plague. the fever isn't exactly lethal, but it's steady, chronic, and like the Black Death did, the bacteria afflicts somewhere between 75 and 200 million people.

Posted by: john | Apr 24 2017 17:54 utc | 65

My conclusion French election: EU (establishment) vs Marine Le Pen.

Posted by: OJS | Apr 24 2017 19:10 utc | 66

Anninymus | Apr 23, 2017 6:13:01 PM | 39 -- Thanks for the link to a good lists of symptoms and good refutation of the Trump administration's very fast determination that the attack was by the Syrian gov't and was sarin.

But, since the MCM (Mainstream Corporate Media) is now parroting whatever the President and his spokespeople tell them about Syria, the lies are being cemented into the "conventional wisdom."

Today, Trump's secretary of the Treasury, announced economic sanctions against 271 Syrian gov't workers that the administration "knows" were involved in the chem attack.

Jonathan Swift wrote in The Examiner, Nov. 9, 1710: “Falsehood flies, and the truth comes limping after it.” And today, lies never seem to be refuted, they just become CW.

Posted by: jawbone | Apr 24 2017 19:51 utc | 67

@66 OJSimpson
You have that correct. It is the latest edition of the Corporate State (neoliberal, centralising agenda) VS the Nation State (sovereign, decentralised agenda). Game over for the EU if Le Pen wins...which is what needs to happen and would actually be a godsend for Europe.

The Maastricht Treaty, with its lack of any real framework or foresight for true monetary union, can hardly be blamed for failure... as today, with hindsight, it appears destined to do exactly that. Although, when you take a look at Greece, one can only wonder if long term financial terrorism wasn't a goal.

From 1992:

Posted by: MadMax2 | Apr 24 2017 20:21 utc | 68

You should all read this interview with journalist Robert Fisk:

Posted by: John Greva | Apr 24 2017 21:08 utc | 69

While it seems likely that Sanders could've beaten the trump, am I the only one who wonders that if he had we would be having exactly the same conversation about how Trump shoulda won cos Bernie has just sold the planet down the river after a stern talking to followed by Sanders spineless collapse in front of the old boys who actually run amerika?

Posted by: Debsisdead | Apr 24, 2017 8:22:10 AM | 58

Jill Stein would have problems too. You need specialists to run those things, and they would have mostly worked for the ancien regime. Here and there there are competent academicians, which of course means that they could not get anywhere close to anyone who is close to Trump, and with Bernie and Jill, who knows.

Back to the problems of Democratic party. One of cardinal domestic issues is healthcare that consumes increasing share of GDP, by now above 17%. Only Tuvalu has a higher percentage (by 0.1%). [Another reason why USA will not be a number one country until it invades Tuvalu.] Any attempt to reform it in a rational manner that the public would understand, i.e. "single payer" is viciously opposed by people who make millions and billions under status quo, and this is several time more money that is churned by military industrial complex. Republicans are totally corrupted on the issue and Democrats, just enough to produce very mishappen and eventually unpopular piece of "progress". Advantage: Bernie.

Second issue are the financial companies that produced the economic crisis of 2008/2009. Democrats totally fell into "technocratic trap", in a nutshell, the matter of finance are complex and any plan has to be designed by the people in the know who accidentally work for Goldman Sachs. Even Al Franken, somewhat shallow as political thinker figured that the public craves some bold action concerning rapacious banks, like getting rid of ATM fees. Advantage: Bernie (as a poll he must be a bit of a hack, but in Vermont that means supporting dairy farmers and gun owners).

Third issue is free trade. Another great prescription for loosing popularity among the "deplorables" who are simple unable to understand benefits of new improved treaties.

Russian threat is simply a way of talking less on the issues which are actually undermining the Democratic Party.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Apr 25 2017 4:46 utc | 70

@Piotr Berman #70

Trump's inability to change obamacare neatly illustrates the problem that pols of all stripes face when trying to change anything about a DC constructed trough. As much as all republicans claimed they wanted to get rid of that half assed hot mess which doesn't go anywhere near far enough in ensuring basic equity in healthcare, by the time they got to vote on it the trough that had been constructed outta obama's bribes to health insurance corps had been around long enough to have become indestructible. Everyone making a good earn outta Obamacare set up/hired lobbyists to protect their interests and republicans found all sorts of diverse self serving excuses to make sure abolition just didn't happen.

Dems may be happy about that outcome but oblamblam built a badly conceived inefficient mess which exists solely because it advantages the assholes. Worse, it serves as proof that once DC creates something that costs a lot and leaks cash out to the corrupt corporations it becomes impossible to get rid of the damn thing even if all it does is leave a stinking mess on the rug. e.g. subsidising Israel or the most blatant example the MIC created during ww2 which has gone from strength to strength increasing costs well ahead of inflation or any other reasonably objective yardstick.
My point is that Sanders didn't strike me as the type of person who would confront this problem which lies at the heart of every issue amerika must confront and deal with - from the privatisation of education to the growth of the incarceration industry.
Nothing exemplifies his lack of ideals more than his weak kneed acquiescence to the ClintonCorp primary gerrymander and it has me conclude that the best which could have been hoped for from a Sanders prezdency was a sort of holding action whereby some of these frauds upon the citizens would have been forced into stasis. Not curtailed merely held at their current size until Sanders left office. The bulk of em, the MIC, Israel funding & corporate ripoff of health would have continued to expand once a handful of smaller bugbears were forced into stasis.
Even those rorts held in stasis would have only been permitted if Sanders also agreed to kicking off an expansion to at least of one of the many conflicts which so enriches the few. It doesn't have to be Syria sure but the Syria story is suitably opaque to most citizens that using it as a vehicle for stealing tax dollars is a lot easier to sell than some new blue.

pols say all sorts of things to all sorts of people, but few of their grandiose undertakings are ever realised - when they are it is because the citizens have been lucky and smart - lucky to have someone who can devise strategies which paralyze the forces benefiting from the current situation running in the contest, and smart enough to elect that person.
Right now everyone is acting as though amerikans just weren't smart enough to have elected Sanders, but the issue is actually that they weren't lucky enough to have had any candidate in any of the primaries who was capable of taking on the status quo and winning.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Apr 25 2017 8:05 utc | 71

I actually came by here tonight because I'm concerned about a story on the front page of that pseudo humanist shit rag of a fishwrap, the Grauniad.
The headline reads Donald Trump summons entire Senate to White House briefing on North Korea now I'm not gonna waste time analyzing the bucket loads of distortions and lies which that media whore has attached underneath cos the chances are it is just a word for word repetition of some junior MIC press secretary's bulldust.
Of course what ever Trump's warmongers say at this meeting of the neocons matters but the graun is unlikely to tells us that even if they knew.
What is important is that it is the senate which, according to that worn out chunk of sodden toilet paper, the amerikan constitution, has the power to declare war on another state.
Trump may have called this as part of a bluff or he may have considered his options plus feedback from his Syrian adventure and decided there is less baggage going to war with Korea than getting into it with Syria.
It is worth noting that Israel hates the idea of any unwhites owning nuclear weapons - The zionists blather about North Korea & Iran in a conspiracy of radioactivity from time to time, so they are unlikely to object to war dollars being spent in asia for a time (not too long a time of course but they may rationalise once trump is killing yellafellas no one will notice an big increase in brownfellas half a world away getting knocked as well).

The real issue with korea is that trumpCo claims talks have broken down but amerika has been studiously avoiding talking to North Korea for more than a decade,
Talking would fix this in a flash but no one wants that since it is tough to earn from a bunch of people sitting around yapping. Real men make money building & selling weapons.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Apr 25 2017 8:40 utc | 72

One observes France has produced that country's very own Barak Obama to derail La Pen's attempt at the presidency of the 5th Republic. The parallels are striking, both:

matriculated from elite schools (with little record of academic accomplishment to produce).

hazy after graduate employment (one community works, other a Rothschild 'banker').

obscure support to fill some public office (one a state senator of no accomplishment, the other a minister of economics also having no discernible effect)

crypto funding involved in their presidential campaigns (one beneficiary of citizens united, the other privately funded).

both inculcated into the neoliberal theologic orthodoxy (one legal, the other economic).

Both empty suits, no discernible record of either having backbones, neither having public records that provide handles to their characters.

(Likely many more similarities as well).

Voters of France - Beware!

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Apr 25 2017 10:37 utc | 73

Formerly T-Bear 73
Interesting parallels to Obama. I wonder if he's connected to a particular city's political machine like Obama with Chicago (Pritzker, etc).

I noticed Warren talked of a shift and that people say the game is rigged. True people say this, think the DEMs are fighting it, vote for them, but then discover they've been had, and get disgusted again.

ABC news last night said Trump's approval at 42% was the lowest for any Prez since 1945. Not true! Bush was lower and Obama had some times in the low 40s too and this according to Gallup. But our "news that is faked" MSM delivers as always.

Posted by: Curtis | Apr 25 2017 12:44 utc | 74

Warren, like Sanders (and the rest of the fake left US Congresspersons) is a proponent of the fabricated endless War On Terra and they are also Zionists.

Posted by: fastfreddy | Apr 25 2017 17:01 utc | 75

A declaration of war has to be approved by majorities in both Houses of Congress, not just the Senate. Been so long since that dead letter has been applied that memories are hazy.

Posted by: lysias | Apr 25 2017 17:12 utc | 76

only Tulsi Gabbard can save the the Democrats...and they are too busy trying to butcher her

Posted by: brian | Apr 26 2017 5:49 utc | 77

- I posted in post #1 a link to a video in which the question was asked "what do the Democrats stand for". This DOES NOT mean that I approve the Republican policies.

Posted by: Willy2 | Apr 26 2017 16:39 utc | 78

The comments to this entry are closed.