mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
Looking Ahead
The Democrats Double Down

The story of 2016 was ostensibly about how political party establishments had become empty vessels, vulnerable to takeover from populists with their own platforms and megaphones. The tumult in the GOP, from successive Tea Party rebellions to the nomination of Donald Trump, seemed to confirm this thesis. And even the Democratic elite showed some signs of weakness, as Bernie Sanders mounted a stronger-than-expected primary challenge to the establishment’s anointed candidate.

But the party’s 2016 collapse followed by the easy re-election of Nancy Pelosi as leader of the House Democratic caucus complicates this narrative. The New York Times:

Ms. Pelosi’s victory over Representative Tim Ryan, a 43-year-old congressman from a blue-collar district anchored in Youngstown, Ohio, ensures that the party will be led in the next Congress by the established “coastal” Democrats who have increasingly defined it — Ms. Pelosi, 76, who represents San Francisco, and Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, 66, who has held various leadership posts since 2005.

Consider: First, the Democratic elite dutifully steered voters to Hillary Clinton, virtually clearing the field for her in the primaries despite what should have arguably been—in retrospect, at least—a disqualifying scandal. And then, after four years of electoral carnage and virtual decimation of the party outside its coastal urban precincts, the Democrats have re-installed a veteran San Francisco liberal as the face of their party’s congressional agenda. To the extent that the rank-and-file has rebelled, it has not been very successful.

As we wrote the day after the election: “Donald Trump won the Republican nomination because the GOP elite’s control over their party was weak. But he won the presidency because the Democratic elite’s control over their party was strong”—so strong that it didn’t need to listen to heed the warning signs about its preferred nominee. Pelosi’s re-election suggests that even the 2016 disaster has not yet weakened the establishment’s iron grip over Democratic power centers.

But its voters will not tolerate losing forever. And as Jeb Bush and Eric Cantor can attest, the perceived authority of party mandarins can evaporate overnight.

Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • Disappeared4x

    When pundit-ing about the neo-Dems circa2016, always follow the donor money trail…

    • f1b0nacc1

      And that really hits the nail on the head. Nancita, whatever her other failings (and they are legion) is superlative at shaking down donors for more cash. Until this changes, her job is safe.

      • Robert

        With the attendant losses.

      • markn95

        Yes, those Silicon Valley billionaires all have their mansions in Pelosi’s backyard. They’re a long way away from Congressman Ryan’s Youngstown district.

  • Beauceron

    Interesting points.
    And the Dem’s are doubling down on their identity politics platform. I read about the post campaign discussion at Harvard yesterday – “discussion” being used as loosely as possible. The Dem strategists and campaign leaders mostly just basically said Trump is a racist who ran a campaign that appealed to all of America’s racists. That’s why you won.”
    That is not just a false explanation, it’s a totally a self-serving explanation that absolves any of the Dem elite from taking a look at themselves and their political priorities.
    And the pushing of Keith Ellison for DNC chair is just mind boggling. You’ve just lost the white middle class, where dozens of counties that voted twice for Obama flipped to Trump, and you’re going to nominate a former Nation Of Islam member– and, to be honest, a guy who is every bit as bigoted as the Dems are accusing Trump of being– to turn things around for you?
    As I’ve said on here before, I think the identity politics coalition the Dems have built and relied on is a winner. I think it means complete control and permanent majorities for the Dems in the future, despite how bleak it looks for them at the moment. But it will shred this country apart. When whites are 40% or so of the country in the next few decades, the Dems will get their permanent majority– but 25% of the country– some 75-100 million people– will hate their guts. They will have complete control, but it won’t be easy for them to govern.

    • Kevin

      I’m not convicted need this future will necessarily arrive. Excepting African Americans (at least so far), most other minorities and especially their multiracial offspring, seem to gradually assimilate into the mainstream of America as the definition of “white” seems to gradually expand over the generations.

      • Andrew Allison

        I agree. As I wrote previously, the fact that 29% of Latinos were willing to admit voting for Trump (which suggests that the real number was significantly higher) is telling. Asian support for the GOP is also increasing. African Americans are a lost cause, but largely irrelevant: as the Hispanic and Asian populations increase, the impact of the reflexive Black vote is declining.

        • Beauceron

          That does not seem to be true.

          While 29% of Latinos voted for Trump, 65% voted for Clinton. I think the Left will take more than double the votes from any group and be happy with it.

          Again, as the demographics begin to change even more rapidly than they have even over the last 30 years (with the baby boomers dying off), the identity politics begin to really pay off. It’s why the Dems are doubling down on it even after a loss like this one. They know they have a winning hand. They just have to sit on it.

          The future belongs to the Left.

          Do you honestly and seriously see conservatives (not necessarily Republicans, but conservatives) ever scoring more than 51% of the Latino or Asian votes?

          Never going to happen– or at least not as long as they have a political party that puts their race at the forefront of their policies.

          I can see that changing once whites become 40% -30% of the population, which is set to happen in around 30 years or so. Once you’re actually in charge, things look a bit different. If you think the identity politics folks are crazy now, wait until they start using the language of apartheid and the oppressive white minority.I suspect whites will be hauling their butts out of the country by then.

          • John Stephens

            That’s certainly their plan, anyway. Mike Tyson’s remarks are instructive.

          • Johnathan Swift Jr.

            No, I suspect if the eliminationist politics now embraced by the extreme left and the Democratic Party they own are put into government action there will be a civil war long before all the “whites” move out of the country.

    • Disappeared4x

      The winds are shifting today against Ellison as DNC chair, from CNN and the ObamafiedADL.

      • f1b0nacc1

        True enough, but I wonder how much impact will have. In the identity-obsessed Democratic party, even this isn’t a mortal sin.

        • Disappeared4x

          Yeah, and the puzzle continues in that Schumer STILL supports Ellison.

          • f1b0nacc1

            Not really much of a surprise, to be honest with you. Ellison is black, muslim, and has a (D) at the end of his name….what’s not to like? Anyone who decides to challenge his fitness for the position would inevitably be subjected to the usual barrage of vitriol and abuse by the usual suspects. HRC (and her surrogates) are *STILL* arguing that she was the victim of sexism, and few people inside the Democratic party are willing to treat those claims with the contempt that they deserve.

            Lets be honest, if Ellison was white, Jewish, or a (R), he would be on his way to a quick retirement in (well-deserved) disgrace.

          • Disappeared4x

            if Ellison was a Jewish ‘friend of Farrakhan’, a SorosNGO would give him a job.

            This is what a now former democrat, possibly the last white male Protestant to attempt a run for the Dem nomination, is saying:
            Jim Webb, former senator and secretary of the Navy, gave
            this keynote address at The American Conservative’s “Foreign Policy in America’s Interest” conference on November 15, 2016.

            http://thefederalist.com/2016/12/01/jim-webb-addresses-americas-elites-donald-trump-foreign-policy-keynote/

    • ctobserver

      If the Dems continue to rely on identity politics, they will find that it’s a dead end. Identity politics might make a small group cohesively support them, but it’s just not possible to assemble a consistent majority that way. Once the minorities become the majority, they’ll find that they don’t all share the same interests, and the coalition will splinter. The US is too large, and too diverse, to govern that way.

    • John Stephens

      The Dem strategists and campaign leaders mostly just basically said Trump is a racist who ran a campaign that appealed to all of America’s racists. That’s why you won.” https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/65cef35949343061c7910b52bde829ddeb4ce76b78a84a89734a7b0952910f68.jpg

    • Johnathan Swift Jr.

      In a two party system in a country that spans a continent, both parties must assemble broad coalitions in order to win national elections. Such coalitions are in a constant state of flux, so the notion that anyone can predict the future based on current demographic or cultural trends is simply wishful thinking.

      The simple minded notion that all African-Americans will forever vote as a block based on inner city policies is nonsensical. The notion that Hispanics will vote as a solid block based on shared values, or mass dependency on government support or any other factor as they assimilate into the American mainstream (despite the best efforts of the multiculturalists) is preposterous. Much of the Democratic Party’s appeal is that they offer those who are dependent on government programs more than the Republicans, but if at some point their dependent class becomes independent, they may leave the Democratic Party. And while many Asians have not been particularly interested in electoral politics, they may become more involved and their voting patterns may diverge from those of blacks and Hispanics, which have been two of the Democratic Party’s most stable voting blocks.

      And of course, the more the allies of the Democratic Party preach the racist hatred of “whites” and speak about eliminating white males in particular, the more they drive white voters into the arms of the other party. And, the reality is that there is and will be a white majority for some time to come and as the left’s hatred of whites becomes more and more extreme, it will simply send more and more of them into the ranks of the GOP.

      Identity politics is of course not a “winner” but a cynical loser, a noxious and pernicious evil because it simply means Balkanizing the country into opposing camps and enclaves who see that there interest lies in a group identity – black, Asian, Hispanic, Sunni Muslim, Shia Muslim, rather than people who share a national identity and a common cultural tradition. Once the Democrats fully manage to force the white majority into the same sort of identification that they push on the minority groups, there will be no turning back, the concept of a nation built on shared ideas will be over, but that of course is clearly what you desire, a hellish future of each against the other.

  • Andrew Allison

    The story of 2016 is change or die. Republican voters chose change, and the Dems died. The fact that Pelosi was re-anointed — although not, as incorrectly stated above, easily (not only is a challenge unprecedented during her reign, but the challenger got one-third of the votes) — suggests that things can only get worse for a sclerotic Democratic Party.

    • Kevin

      The losses among moderate Democrats over the last six years have pushed their House caucus far to the left. Pelosi probably does represent the median Democratic House member, but not the median member of a hypothetical Democratic House majority. It takes leadership talent/vision to recognize that you need to pitch your leadership not to the demands of the current members of a minority caucus but to the future me bers you need to have a majority.

      (For all their unpopularity with conservatives, Ryan and McConnell probably are closer to the median members of their chamber’s majority. Schumer, who is himself pretty left wing, has often behaved in his leadership functions closer to the median member of a majority of that chamber than has Pelosi – he was very effective as the head of the DSCC a few years back. Dean showed a similar tendency as the head of the DNC.)

      • xpatinafrica

        Are you a statistician by any chance? Median this, median that. Your opinion based on statistical BS is as valid as the polls that showed Mr. Trump losing by 10-12 percentage points days before the election. Sorry, why don’t you just look at the reality? The commie Democrats are in a very welcome self destructive mode. And if the weak-kneed McConnell and Ryan allow them to survive then Mr. Trump will go to the people that elected him and most certainly prevail. The non-ideological tidal wave that is sweeping the country says that American workers come first. Free trade is not the objective. Trade that benefits the Americans is the objective. We hold the cards and we finally have someone who recognizes that fact.

        The Democrats are so far out of touch that it boggles the mind. The identity politics and the “This is not who we are” crap is done, finished.

        As to immigration: what we are experiencing is not immigration. It is invasion. The invasion by people who hate our way of life and our freedoms, and our guts. The Democrats adamantly despise this veiw and will suffer for it.

        • rheddles

          Thanks for letting us know you don’t understand the concept of a median. I guess African roads don’t have them.

    • f1b0nacc1

      One need only look at Labour in the UK to see where this goes…

      • Andrew Allison

        Fingers crossed [grin] Meanwhile, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/12/02/give-him-credit-trump-carrier-deal-puts-shareholder-obsessed-ceos-on-notice/ is pretty amazing. The WaPo giving Trump credit for something? You don’t suppose that Bezos had figured out the damage that’s been done to the WaPo brand?

        • f1b0nacc1

          One never knows. Interesting that we now have a president (or will have soon) that understands the difference between negotiations and proclamations.

          But wait…we have all been conned…right?

          • Andrew Allison

            The LSM (Left streaming media) is all of a twitter that Trump called the President of Taiwan and China might be cross. I think it was a message (that somebody with a pair is about to take over).

        • Johnathan Swift Jr.

          No, remember just a week back they published a “report” from a anonymous band of Ukrainian “experts” that declared much of the media, left right and center were publishing “fake news” and Russian propaganda.

    • sciencebob

      The 69 Democrats that lost their seats with Pelosi in charge were not available to vote for change. Lose another 60 and she can run it (into the ground) for life.

  • Dhako

    I am not sure that the reading (or the implication) of this election has the dire tone for the Democrats as this article purport for it to be. And in that sense, granted, the unexpected win of Trump was something of a thunderbolt from the blue; even if he is still short of 2 millions in popular vote in comparison to Hillary. Of course, what counts is the Electoral collage. And even here if you look the numbers of three mid-western Rustbelt states, that has delivered the final coup de grâce electoral victory to Trump, you will see that all told he has only less than around 100 thousands votes to his name.

    Which means, if Hillary could have spared herself 200 thousands or so of her so far 2 millions tally in popular votes, and were those numbers have been scattered across the Rustbelt, then today we would have been talking about the complete collapse of Republican party as a Presidential-level party, which can be expected to win power across the country, instead of only winning a congressional and state-houses in its traditional red-state.

    Hence, I am not sure the picture of the democratic party is as dire as the denizens of the Republican’s party likes to makes it out to be. Moreover, leaving aside the gerrymandering propensity of the Republican party in their Red-State, one can see a situation in which Trump’s legions of “unfulfilled promises” has so tarnished the Republican brand (and GOP in general) in the next two years that enough mid-western’s voters will see that they have been sold a bill of goods by Trump and his “Alt-Right-headbangers”. Whereby come the congressional election of 2018, there will be enough voters who sheepishly (and perhaps with sufficient remorse) will go to the voting booth to elect their Democratic congressional members, at least in sufficient numbers in the Rust-Belt region, so that the slim majority of the house and the senate in which Republican hold now could be over-turn like it have happened back in 2006.

    Furthermore, even if that scenario does not turn out to be correct, what then is on the card is that Trump will be such a “wild card” who will offend enough voters (particularly those who never voted before) that by the time the congressional election of 2018 comes around, all of those lazy-non-voters, who never thought that elections matters will see how things could get very bad for them, especially if Republican party under Trump, McConnell, and Ryan, proceed, as they have always been salivating ever since the modern movement conservatism came about to dismantle the welfare state, by root and branch.

    Which means, two years of “let-them-eat-cake” from the Republican’s party (who has a complete power to do as it pleases in the mean-time) who in turn is the sort of party who never saw a welfare state that it didn’t think was ripe to be done in, will assuredly awaken the sleeping voters, who lazily always thought that Democrats and Republican are essentially a two side of a same political coin.

    Subsequently, I would wager a bet in here. And I would say, that Mr Trump and his merry-men of Wall Street running the show in Washington, aided and abetted, of course, by the congressional Republican party, who always dance to the tunes of their “libertarian-minded” donor-class, indeed has the whiff of a political fin-de-siècle and an end of an era, than the democratic party with its multitude of unsuspecting and often nonvoting citizens.

    And by this I mean, all these democrats (and would-be democratic) voters need is a bit of sharp kick to the groin and a political whiplash to be delivered to them by Republican party. In particularly with its desire to re-arrange the federal government into a small little kitten that can then be “submerged” into a full bathtub (as certain Mr Grover Norquist have always fantasized about it).

    Which means, two years of cut here, little dismantling there, a bit of demolition over there, denial of federal service in that state or two of them, and all manner of Republican’s slush-and-burn across the federal behemoth, oiled with a handsome bit of tax-cut-give-away to all of well-healed financiers in which Trump Administration could find it in Wall-Street, will ensure democratic voters, particularly those who were self-serving (or self-indulgent) as not to bother to turn up and vote in this past November, to see the error of their ways.

    So, I am rather not too disheartened by the turn of events and the election of Trump into power. Since I believe the best teacher of all (at least in politics) is that of learning the hard truth of power at the hands of those who never would stop to consider what their politics will do to you, if they have the power. And it seems, that is what the Republican party are intend to do those who always thought in modern America, political power and which party that wields it, has no bearing on them. But we shall see.

    • Anthony

      Dhako, that last paragraph brings it all to a head (and says it better than any American partisan or self-serving bias contributor could or would have). Eyes sans interests directly lend a comparative look. Yes, the best teacher sometimes is that of learning the hard truth.

      • Dhako

        And the interesting thing is, the Republican party, can’t help themselves in here, particularly when it comes to over-reaching themselves. Moreover, with congress and the Senate firmly in their hands, with Jeff Session being the chief law officer of the land, can be expected to look the other way when the GOP state’s houses decides to go over-board with their restriction on the voting rights.

        And, of course, the deportation of all illegal aliens (as Mr Trump had promised) will mean, even the wavering Latinos (and those who thought to vote the GOP this time around) will now have a genuine “hard lesson” of politics, come around the 2018 congressional and senate election as well as 2020 presidential election.

        So, all in all, I very much hoping the GOP and Trump administration will be true to their “agenda”. For that will be what the country need to know what “hard politics” will mean, if you are not minded to be GOP voter. All in all, it’s a good experiment of electoral politics (and what power can do) will be heading the US, for the next 2 to 4 years.

        • Anthony

          Keep your eyes on what’s important – and it’s not Twitter!

          “The party that needs to search its soul about whether it has the capacity to govern competently is not the one out of power. And what should concern Democrats is not whether they’ll get back in power but what will be left of the country when they do.”

          • Dhako

            Granted, the issue will be what shape and form the US will be in by the time the Trump’s administration and its congressional outriders finish their demolition job. And, in that sense, I agree with you the inherent danger pregnant in that scenario. But, still, I expect, the Media and most sensible voters to be on their guard for the next 2 years.

            Of course, the bulk of Obama’s administration agenda will be demolished, such as ObamaCare, Consumer protection Agency, various EPA’s regulatory policies, And, of course, the DOJ (under Jeff Session) will simply abdicate any sense of holding the line against any state who may decide to restrict the voters right to participate the electoral policies.

            However, the issue of the Welfare state, such as Medicaid, Social Security, and Medicare, will have to be protected by any parliamentary tactics (including a rolling filibuster at the floor) by the remaining Democratic legislators in Congress till 2018 mid-term election. And, if that fails, then, the administration must be tied up, endlessly in courts, till time time. Of course, the GOP will scream blue murder, but that is basically what one should expect from them. And, remember, Mr Trump do not have a mandate to dismantle the FDR new deal welfare state, since he didn’t campaigned to do so. And in fact, he said it the opposite, which was he wil protect them.

            So, I think the Democrats will be within their right to go to mat with the GOP in protecting the FDR’s national inheritance. So, all in all, the fight just gone from being the usual belt-way’s partisan skirmishes to a genuine existential fight for the soul of the nation. And, in that sense, it’s historically important that the Democrats and all those who wish the “better angel of America” to prevail, not to be found wanting, as much as Lincoln’s union forces were never found wanted when it matters the most to America.

          • Anthony

            Paragraph #1, agreed.

            Paragraph #2, agreed.

            Paragraph #3, the reduction, elimination, consideration of issues you reference will elicit a hew and cry from many – not just those who voted against the President-Elect. Such action, even contemplated, will impact lives of U.S. citizens who, yes, may feel compelled to consider 2018 elections, despite prior apathy.

            Paragraph #4, probably not a factor – but anything is possible.

            Paragraphs #5&6, will there be a political backlash (Better Angels), maybe. But the populace cannot allow themselves (and by implication their Representatives) to be distracted by “side shows” to obscure some of the potential ill effects of the change you refer to. That is, news coverage has to deal with real impact of proposals/laws/acts/etc. and not be inveigled by something speciously alluring like the Carrier deal. Still, with our media you never know – most importantly if what you describe occurs, the reality of its National impact (for U.S. citizens) cannot be diverted by changing of subject via the usual finding of enemy scapegoats. Overall, yes, the point is to keep one’s eye on what’s important to the genuine health of the Nation – its citizens, all 320 plus million.

    • JR

      BOOOOOOOOOOORING!!!! Too long, did not read.

      • Dhako

        JR, you still here, mate. I thought that by now, Homer Simpson’s intellectual discourse from his cartoon channel, would have by now dissuade you to give us a miss around here. Lets hope, tomorrow’s offering from that channel will be suitably arresting for your tiny mind to the extend that you will scarcely find the need to be visiting us in here.

        • JR

          Still here buddy. I guess I just enjoy making fun of boring windbags such as yourself. It’s one of those little things that brighten up my day.
          “I thought that by now, Homer Simpson’s intellectual discourse from his cartoon channel, would have by now dissuade you to give us a miss around here. ” Too many uses of the word “by now”. You overuse that phrase a lot. Clean that up. Also, use past tense for the very dissuade. That is just a basic grammatical mistake.
          “Lets hope, tomorrow’s offering from that channel will be suitably arresting for your tiny mind to the extend that you will scarcely find the need to be visiting us in here.” No need for apostrophe in the word “tomorrow”. You also meant to the extent, not extend.
          Overall, I have to give you a C. You seem to fall in love with some phrases and repeat them over and over again. Work on that. I’m here to assist in any way I can.

          • Dhako

            Hey, mate, as for me, every time I see your mean intellect in action, I keep thinking that old proverb, which was: “there but for the grace of God go I”.

          • JR

            I’m glad I make you think of God. If tolerating your long-winded unreadable diatribes is the price I have to pay for turning you into more of a God-fearing man, I say it is worth it.
            Do take a look at my edits. Don’t let your pride (one of seven deadly sins, no less) blind you. God bless….

          • Dhako

            Actually, your pitiful stupidity makes me to count my blessing. So, I suppose you could call that a sort of tolerable price you are minded to pay at my behest.

          • JR

            Stupidity? Which of my statements do you consider stupid? I’m always thriving to improve myself.

          • Fred

            Thriving to improve myself! That’s great. I wonder if Dhako will get it.

          • JR

            I’m just trying to see how he responds when confronted with responses outside of his immediate training.

      • Disappeared4x

        JR: I forced myself to read Dhako again. Let’s see if he responds to me, although perhaps there is a censor standing next to his keyboard.

        Dhako: does China’s history and culture lead to a complete inability to understand there is an America where the individual citizen has rights that are NOT bestowed by the government?

        Try this, a synthesis of America’s founding, the only nation created by an idea, not a tribe.
        Senator Ben Sasse is an historian:

        http://amac.us/in-7-quotes-sen-ben-sasse-gives-history-lesson-on-american-exceptionalism/

        “…5.“Fundamentally, the American founders understood that throughout human history almost everyone had been wrong about the nature of government.”

        6.“People have been wrong about the nature of government and the nature of freedom, and we the people in America believe that our rights come to us via nature, and government is our project to secure them, so we the people give the government enumerated powers. We don’t ever wait for the government to give us any rights. We claim those by nature.”

        7.“The Constitution is the best political document that’s ever been written. The Constitution is just a list of powers that we decide to give the government, and when that list ends, the government has no further powers. The Constitution is not some list of the limited rights the people have. The government is limited, and the people’s rights are limitless.” …”

        [and, yes, I know Senator Sasse is #NeverTrump. That means nothing – another impossible to understand concept for many.]

    • ——————————

      “even if he is still short of 2 millions in popular vote in comparison to Hillary.Of course, what counts is the Electoral collage. And even here if you look the numbers of three mid-western Rustbelt states, that has delivered the final coup de grâce electoral victory to Trump, you will see that all told he has only less than around 100 thousands votes to his name.

      Which means, if Hillary could have spared herself 200 thousands or so of her so far 2 millions tally in popular votes, and were those numbers have been scattered across the Rustbelt, then today we would have been talking about the complete collapse of Republican party as a Presidential-level party,”

      I am so tired of hearing this lame nonsense from the left.
      Look, the object of the game is to win the battleground states and mostly ignore the rest. That is what both campaigns try to do and their strategies are based only on ONLY that. If the object was to win the popular vote then we don’t know who would have won because the whole game would have been played differently by both campaigns. When I lived in California I never voted because why bother, as it will go blue anyway. And there are many Dems who live in Texas who probably don’t vote because Texas will go red no matter what. If it required a popular vote to win then all that would change too.
      So the campaigns would change their tactics, and also, the amount of people who vote would change.

      Those angered and whining (or even commenting) about who won the popular vote in a contest to win the electoral vote, is like the fisherman in a fishing contest whining about the fact that he caught the most fish in a contest where the winner is determined by catching the biggest fish…and everyone was using techniques and baits to catch the biggest fish.

    • SDN

      Two million with an asterisk for all the fraud we have Hillary’s staff on tape arranging.

  • klgmac

    The relelctio of Pelosi shows what can happen when one extreme state controls out of the electorate. Thank God for the Electoral College.

  • Brook River

    Who wrote this? Are you ashamed to put his/her name on this column?
    Was it Walter Russell Mead?
    Walter Russell Mead voted for Barack Obama both times.

    Walter, why did you do that?

  • Johnathan Swift Jr.

    The Democrats are the party of the future! Fresh faces: Nancy Pelosi (76), Steny Hoyer (77), Chuck Schumer, (69) Dick Durbin (72) and of course their illustrious candidates, Hillary Clinton (69) and Bernie Sanders (75).

  • Jacksonian_Libertarian

    Historically the Party holding the Presidency loses seats for as long as they do so. But, this time the Democrats are doubling down on failure, and if Trump is successful in helping the working class, the 2018 midterm will tell us if a Historical realignment has occurred.

    Reagan used to say that he didn’t leave the Democrats, they left him. And the Politics of the Democrats have been taking a hard left turn for decades, leaving the American Culture which created the most successful country in history behind. Most people recognize that it’s stupid to “mess with success”, especially when the changes the Democrats are making, have resulted in such spectacular failures as Venezuela.

    • OrionJeriko

      No, the Democrats took a hard right turn with the Clintons who out-Republicaned the Republicans with disastrous results for 8 years. After the failures of NAFTA, GATT and the repeal of the Glass-Steagal act, the Democrats nominated the moderate conservative Gore who was so unpopular that the village idiot George W. Bush was able to steal the election from him. The hard right turn of the Democrats continued with their spineless capitulation to Bush’s insane invasion of Iraq following the colossal disaster of 9/11 (worst breach of national security ever) and the Obama deception which resulted in the continuance of the failed foreign policy mistakes of the damnable Bush years for another 8 years while the economy continued to melt-down and Wall Street made record profits at the expense of working families. The Democratic base rejected the right wing Hillary Clinton when the more popular Sanders ran against her in the primaries, then the DNC helped her steal the nomination, cementing the election of the more liberal Trump, a populist demagogue who panders to the lowest common denominator of racist hooligans, brain-dead hillbillies and normal people legitimately fed up with establishment corruption and lies.

      • solstice

        What is truly insane is your ilk’s obsession with identity politics and political correctness, its zeal for censorship (particularly on university campuses), its pandering to Islamic terrorists, its lack of concern about exploding levels of debt, and its enthusiasm for European-style open borders and multiculturalism that has made Europe a hotbed of crime and jihad. My advice for your kind is to continue to double down on this “strategy,” nominate a Hugo Chavez-like candidate of your liking in the next general election, and continue, in your abundant tolerance, to label those who disagree with you as village idiots and racist hillbillies. Now that’s what I call a winning strategy for the next election.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service