Let’s start on a positive note, which is a campaign advertisement for Randy Bryce, who is running as a Democrat for Paul Ryan’s House seat:
I like this ad, and I like this guy. He seems authentic. He makes me think of my dad, a machinist, and a lot of his friends who were blue-collar guys. I hope he intends to wrap Donald Trump around Paul Ryan’s neck.
Compare/contrast to the recently defeated John Ossoff, who ran a hyper-cautious, centrist campaign for a House seat in Georgia against far-right wackjob Karen Handel. This is from Paste:
I mean, when the New Yorker wrote about him, the piece was titled, “Jon Ossoff, With Election Day Looming, Explains His Cautious Politics.†The entire piece is cringe-inducing—this is a man who refuses to say anything with any passion or real belief, a bloodless suit mindlessly mimicking Barack Obama‘s gestures—but my favorite part came when he refused to attack after his opponent ACTUALLY UTTERED the following sentence at a debate: “I do not support a livable wage.†…
… The strategy here was clear—Georgia’s sixth is a moderate Republican district, Mitt Romney country, and Ossoff tried to win by running as a moderate Republican. Which, again, is right in line with what the ruling corporate wing of the Democratic party has been doing since the ’90s. But it’s stupid, and you know why?
There’s already a Republican party.
You cannot out-flank these people from the right. If there’s a mantra the left should internalize, it’s this: Republicans beat centrist Democrats. Always. And the crazy thing is, moderation never saves the Democratic candidate from being portrayed as America’s answer to Che Guevara. Ossoff is basically a Republican, but look at the ads they ran against him! They either paint him as Nancy Pelosi’s no. 1 San Francisco latte butler or imply that he’s Osama bin Laden’s second-in-command. There’s a wonderful irony here—the further you drift from any appearance of socialism, the more viciously Republicans will smear you as the reincarnation of V.I. Lenin.
I’ve made this speech before, but here it is again: The Republicans are now an ideologically right-wing party. The Democrats, however, are not an ideologically left-wing party. Instead, they seem to be trying to broker interests among a lot of constituencies, including urban minorities and the business community. Â They are perpetually threading fine policy needles so as to not anger any particular group, but in doing so they becomes champions of nobody.Â
Yes, Democratic policies, on the whole, are at least sane and generally beneficial to most Americans, which is not something you can say about Republican policies. But too often when a Democratic politician tells voters “I’ll fight for you,” what that means is something like “I’ll save you some leftovers.”
Paul Kane’s article in WaPo is headlined “Ossoff chose civility and it didn’t work. How do Democrats beat Trump?”
In Ossoff, Democrats hoped they had found a potential new path to defeating Republicans with a message of peace and civility. They calculated that the fiery rage, often associated with supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), would not win over moderate Republicans and centrists, whose support Ossoff needed to have any chance to win a district that Tom Price, the six-term congressman who is Trump’s health secretary, won by more than 20 percentage points in November. …
… This was the beta test for the DCCC’s theory of the 2018 case that well-educated, suburban voters who swung away from Trump last year would reject GOP candidates for Congress.
What they don’t get is that there’s a big difference between inchoate rage and fire in the belly. The latter is what’s missing from too many Dems. It’s not enough to put up pleasant candidates who at least don’t scare the chickens. The electorate isn’t in the mood for “safe.” Bleeping stand for something, Democrats!
Maybe, once in a while, ask “What would Harry Truman do?” Would Truman have let a line like “I do not support a livable wage” pass without remark? I don’t think so. They didn’t call him “Give ’em hell, Harry” for nothing.
What would Truman say about the current state of the Dem party? Nothing good, I don’t think.
Jon Ossoff was a very sincere candidate, and he seems like a nice young man. Running for office in today’s climate is a brave thing. But I listened to an interview that he did with NPR on Tuesday morning, and by the end I practically wanted to gouge my eyes out. It was the some of the most insipid, focus-group-tested-and-consultant-approved meaningless happy talk I’ve ever heard from a Democrat, which is saying a lot. He wanted to bring tech jobs to Atlanta, and cut wasteful spending. Health care needs to be — somehow — “affordable.†Ossoff and the Democrats couldn’t have run a more effective “show about nothing†if Seinfeld’s Larry David had been their show-runner. No wonder voters curbed their enthusiasm.
Why can’t Dems grow a spine? Paul Waldman wrote this about the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (emphasis added) —
When I asked Jeff Hauser, the director of the Revolving Door Project and a former Democratic operative who has been critical of the DCCC, to lay out this case for me, he argued that the organization shapes how individual races play out, especially in their early stages. Here’s part of the email he sent in reply:
- The DCCC recruits candidates and influences primaries by signaling who is viable or not to donors and state and local party actors.
- Mega-donors and independent expenditure groups take cues about which races matter and which messages work from the DCCC.
- Young but experienced political staff are often directed to campaigns by the DCCC — there are a lot of arranged staffing marriages where candidates and staff, even campaign managers, barely know each other.
- And candidates pick and choose messages with an eye toward being in line with the DCCC’s thinking, as they know direct contributions and independent expenditures go to campaigns in line with the DCCC.
- When Ossoff went wholly bland and didn’t run on Trump, Russia, or almost anything else readily identifiable as an issue, that represented a campaign following DCCC directions.
- If you are a Democrat and think Ossoff blew an opportunity and fear more of the same in 2018, you need the DCCC’s theory of the electorate to improve.
Hauser said that as important as those broad national factors are, “the difference between a great and poor DCCC could easily be 20 seats won or lost.†If that’s true, it’s the difference between not taking the House and taking the House.
In short, the donors, “expenditure groups” and lobbyists pick the candidates. But the problem with that is that the donors and lobbyists have their own agendas that don’t exactly match what’s going on in real-world America. Lee Fang writes at The Intercept that several people who were behind Hillary Clinton’s campaign last year are now trying to cash in on the Trump agenda:
Lobbying records show that some Democratic fundraisers, who raised record amounts of campaign cash for Clinton, are now retained by top telecom interests to help repeal the strong net neutrality protections established during the Obama administration.
Others are working on behalf of for-profit prisons on detention issues, while others still are paid to help corporate interests pushing alongside Trump to weaken financial regulations. At least one prominent Clinton backer is working for a health insurance company on a provision that was included in the House Republican bill to gut the Affordable Care Act.
While Republican lobbyists are more in demand, liberal lobbyists are doing brisk business that has them reaching out to fellow Democrats to endorse — or at least tamp down vocal opposition to — Trump agenda items.
Again, these are the people who help pick the congressional Democratic candidates.
I can just about guarantee that the DCCC will fail to support Randy Bryce in Wisconsin next year, while Ryan will have all the cash he wants from the GOP and Wall Street. In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if the DCCC tries to kneecap Bryce in the primaries to run a nice, pleasant, centrist candidate who looks better in a suit in the general election against Ryan. I hope I’m wrong.
Dems need to rebuild their party for the ground up!
In South Dakota, the bipartisan Government Accountability and Anti-Corruption Act was a proposal to prevent political bribery, improve transparency, and increase enforcement of South Dakota’s ethics laws. It passed. But then the Republican governor repealed it, going directly against the will of the people. The Democratic Party could have taken full advantage of that one, even as a ‘safe experiment’ in a relatively minor state.
But apparently, like the Republicans who dissed the Act, they’d rather remain allied with wealthy and corrupt corporations. How much did Obama get for his Canter Fitzgerald deal?
The Represent.us people continue to believe that decent citizens can simply go around both parties. But we’ll see.
I clicked the cnk guy link. Trump? Around here no less?
Bill — I deleted the link.
With “friends” like the DCCC, what liberal needs Republicans to fuck-up elections and policies?
They’ll gladly blow them for us on their own, thank you very much!
In a race between a real Republican, and a Democrat running a “Republican-lite,” that real Republican will always beat the “lite” version.
If you’re in a state of mind – or literal state with no minds (“Hi!” I’m looking at you, KY, TN, GA, LA, etc…) – and want a nut-and-bolt chewing, blood-of-the-innocent drinking, conservative socio/psycho-pathic Republican candidate, why would you change your “mind” and vote for an omelette-nibbling, Bloody Mary-sipping Democratic sheep in a wolf’s outfit?
I’d rather die standing for something tangible, than die defending “Centrism.”
And I’m NOT alone, DCCC.
I no longer contribute to the DCCC. If I have enough cash – little as that may be – before Election Day, then I send that money directly to the candidate I support in my area, or would support if I lived in XYZ state.
There are US Senators who are examples of what most Democrats stand for. I’d say Warren, Brown, and Al Franken head that list.
There are others in the HoR’s.
Use those as models.
And blow-up the DCCC. It’s about as useful as mammaries on a male bovine.
Great column. Lee Fang is a worker, a digger for facts. I’ve heard him discuss the information-gathering process at the Tucson Book Fair. I am not surprised at the corporate whoring of the HRC staffers. They have jobs, not commitments.
maha – Link not yet deleted as of now.
Bardi — refresh your browser.
I have noticed that there are two kinds of anger. One makes a person blunt and stupid; the other makes a person sharp and smart. The R’s specialize in the first; I recommend the second.
One other thing that I’d like to bring up:
After paying for far larger deductibles, and monthly health insurance payments and pharma costs – and hospitals, mortuaries, grave-diggers, and tombstones – where do our genius corporate giants think we’re going to get they money to buy the shit they’re they’re fucking selling? *
It’s elementary, my dear (even non-IBM) Watson’s, that the less money the poor and the last remnants of the middle class will have to spend on non-essential things like shelter, food, water (and/or alcohol 😉 ), and emergency medical/dental care/supplies, the quicker we get another major recession/depression!
Oh wait, silly Victor.
My guess now is that IS part of the plan!
All the more to put on the shoulders of that Kenyan SocialiFasciCommuniHeatheMusliAtheist Usurper, President Obama, his the “Democrat” Party, and “oui” coastal Europeanized Libtards!!!
Right after the new massive recession/depression hits, look for a series of “Open Year-long Seasons on Liberals – With No Limits!”
I’m older, disabled, overweight, and can barely move – but I’m still large, as befits a former HS football player, catcher, heavyweight wrestler, and later a bartender/bouncer in some pretty bad ass areas in NY City. So if you’re with me when they start shooting, look which direction it’s coming from, and get on the other side of me. Maybe I can save a person or two by shielding them with my body.
I’m joking, if course.
I am.
I am, aren’t I?
Joking?
Hmm…
I’m not so sure anymore…………
*And yeah, I know they won’t give a crap, because they’ll still be able to sell their shit to another countries middle class – at least until that new countrues filthy dirty rich MFers decide to perform their own “Shock Doctrine st home, and bankrupt their countries workers for shits-and-giggles, and fun and profit!
PS:
If there is intelligent life on Mars, I hope it lies low until the greedy MFers here on Earth destroy and kill one another off trying to see who can die with all of the remaining toys, with no humans, animals, fish, plants, or trees, to impede their view of the utter destruction their greed “accomplished.”
Otherwise, Martians, they’ll come to “Shock Doctrine” YOUR planet!
OT, a great piece of photo journalism!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/is_fighters
It’s going to be a tough row to hoe for Bryce. Paulie has already been deified by the GOP as a supreme policy wonk, number cruncher, and serious thinker. Although he’s a complete fraud his image as somebody of stature is well cemented and to overcome that illusion is going to take some doing. Aside from that his position as Speaker of the House is something that many Wisconsinites are going to want to protect just by the fact that one of their own holds that position of power.
I’d love to see Paule get the boot because I can see him for what he is, but unfortunately the recent political history and voting trajectory of Wisconsin voters leaves me with a feeling that it’s going to be an extremely tough uphill fight to unseat the GOP’s darling child.
If Paulie was a constellation he’d be the Bag o’ Shit minor.
Swami — Paulie may be vulnerable next year, but there’s no polling yet —
https://www.wiscindy.com/2017/03/paul-ryan-actually-vulnerable-2018/
As Doug wrote the other day, violence is the enemy of democracy. This seems indisputably true, especially when you are on the receiving end. But, next in line, is money. At this stage of development capitalism and Democracy were an combination because each balanced and limited the other. But, that balance can be disturbed by precisely the kind of mindset that gave rise to to “Citizens United.” Our system balances money against numbers, and since the 1980s, numbers have been in retreat. We have “the best democracy money can buy,” (H/T Greg Palast) which is saying, hardly a democracy at all.
Somehow, we always seemed to limp forward, but, sooner or later comes the trip, stumble and the fall. It’s not going to be pretty, and of course, we’ll all be pointing fingers at each other until the blame sticks on something. Unfortunately, there doesn’t have to be any logic or evidence involved in the blame game, and we seem to be experiencing a kind of mass pathology. So, the prognosis is guarded, but, we still have a chance.
One more thing, I don’t know how the scenes from the protest at Mitch McConnell’s office is playing. In any decent society, in any decent time, it would be a truly sobering moment.
I spent most of my working life working with and for people with disabilities. I haven’t dared to watch the videos, but, the still photos and the accounts are enough to make me deeply ashamed of what we have become, but, filled with admiration for the bravery of the people who put their fragile bodies at risk so that their voices might be heard.
I agree with the premise. Democrats should run as democrats not watered down republicans. We are all in this one together and as C u n d gulag wisely states, no one gets to take it with them. Everyone deserves an opportunity for a good life. Merit, not inherited wealth, is the proper path to a successful country. How hard is it to see that too much power and control is in too few hands? How hard is it to see that those of inherited wealth are blind to much of what makes this county work? Might I point out an “experiment”, dismally failed, in which some inherited wealth bought all control in a state and failed miserably. It is easy to misjudge what will work, when you try to rule from an ivory tower with a bad elitist ideology. Power and control they crave, but they are ill-bred and ill-trained to learn from and accept their own failure. They might think they are being good elitists, but lack class and a proven track record from my vantage point.
It was Truman who said this: “Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the timeâ€
“After paying for far larger deductibles, and monthly health insurance payments and pharma costs – and hospitals, mortuaries, grave-diggers, and tombstones – where do our genius corporate giants think we’re going to get they money to buy the shit they’re they’re fucking selling?”
Gulag, they’re working towards the point where they won’t have to sell the US consumer much of anything other than the basic necessities. They’ll just take the money directly via “health insurance” scams like the AHCA, tax cuts and deregulation of the mortgage, insurance and finance industries that legalize hustles to rip off working stiffs by making the victims totally responsible for getting ripped off.
We’re already at the point where more and more people are struggling just to afford the basics. Hence the focus on “emerging markets” which is about getting ready for the day when American corporations not only make most of their stuff overseas, they’ll sell most of it over there too.
Why would they need to sell us anything when they can just attach themselves like leeches and suck the lifeblood right out of us?
“I can just about guarantee that the DCCC will fail to support Randy Bryce in Wisconsin next year, while Ryan will have all the cash he wants from the GOP and Wall Street.”
Thanks to party leadership, when it comes to “Make America Great Again” and all the devastation that entails, the democrats function as accessories after the fact.
The DCCC & the DNC absolutely and literally would rather lose elections than cede political power to progressives. It’s all about the money – don’t bother looking for something subtle or ideological. Wall Street and K Street will pay democrats AND republicans to block people power. (This goes for the Tea Party voters, too.)
The Tea Party believes in low taxes because they think that in a free market the capitalist system can fill all needs. If they had their way, they would attack monopolies and the Wall Street domination of Washington with a vengeance. I don’t agree with their ideology, but I think Dave Brat and a lot of the members of the Freedom Caucus are sincere and there’s more than a little evidence that the RNC and Trump hate them.
Go to the other end of the political spectrum where I am more at home. Progressives generally believe that the free market needs the government to referee the game, to protect consumers from pure greed and the abuses of capitalism. Some things belong in the private sector – others belong in the government sector. Progressives are also a sincere threat to the status quo.
Management from BOTH parties are sold out – they get paid and paid WELL to keep grass roots movements from power. Keeping populists from power is the main function of BOTH parties. The DNC and the RNC would rather lose elections than elect populists, conservative or liberal, who would cut the profits of big business. Barbara pointed out – the parties back the candidate who will ‘play ball’ – and they actively sabotage a populist who won’t take orders from the party. That’s where the money is for the apparatchik – and they are ONLY in it for the money. If you lose an election with an establishment candidate – you (as a party high mucky-muck) have job security. If you WIN an election with a populist candidate, big money will mobilize against you. And you won’t be a high party mucky-muck.
I know people don’t read my long-ass editorials, but here’s the weakness in the system – in three words. It’s the primary. If we identify on a bi-partisan basis that we are going after the sold-out incumbents on a national basis, rather than one election at a time and we cede and support the republican populist in a bright red district, we can elect a bi-partisan majority opposed to the corruption. Yeah, we’d need the Tea Party to sign on with the reciprocal but I think they would, at the voter level. I’ve interviewed with them.
Ouch. Thank you for writing one of the top two or three infuriating documents I’ve seen since the election.
I needed it. Somehow the complete vapidity of our potential Congrass-savior in GA had escaped me. Surely it must have been discussed at my favorite Signifiance Political Blog, but I seem to have missed it, perhaps during a brief trip out of the country. What WAS in that blog in endless venomous pissing contests, was the complete awfulness of both of the major Demo factions, according to each other. Not that one of them is *not* worse than the other, but can people just STFU when the world is at stake?
@c u n d: Since you’re in top form here, I’m glad to assure you that I have followed your policy of no contributions to official Dem organizations for the last few elections. As you say, if you have a buck to give, you can give it to a damn sight better cause than whatever the D-whatever-C will.
I’m thinking of including a card with every campaign contribution I make from now on. I don’t know whether it will be a choice from half a dozen versions or one with fill-in or cross-out options. But the gist:
I have enclosed $—- for your House/Senate campaign. This would have been smaller by **** [I omit an actual number here] if you had/hadn’t been supported by the DCCC/DSCC?/DNC.
Porlock — As usual, you manage to miss the point. Had I lived in that Georgia district I would have voted for Ossoff. I suspect all the regulars here would have voted for Ossoff. But I’m not aware of any of us living in that district, and in fact, Ossoff lost what looked like a winnable election. I’ve said nothing about Ossoff on this blog before this post because, believe it or not, I am not a one-person news bureau. I have a lot of other things going on beside this blog. I make a point of writing four or five posts a week, on whatever is on my mind at the time, but I don’t comment on everything going on because I don’t have time. And I hadn’t personally read a whole lot about the race in Georgia except to glance at the polls. And now I’m quoting other people’s comments, because to me they say something about the failing Dem approach to elections. So bleep you, and whatever your issues are, kindly take them somewhere else.
Oddly enough, you completely missed *my* point. My fault for writing obscurely. Your posting was infuriating because I had *not* encountered this material, even on the large and widely circulated leftish blog that I alluded to; *this* lack was kinda irritating to me. I do not in fact expect coverage of everything via this more concentrated and much less-staffed blog. Hence my actual appreciation of your bringing the material out where I saw it. But in any case, what difference does it really make?
My favorite blog for good bile about the DCCC (+ ilk) is
DownWithTyranny!
(not imbedding Link, because it seems impolite here? but it’s easy to find)
They are heavily into Act Blue, and very strong on D-Party Inside Baseball. They can be crude/offensive, and a little too strong (IMHO) on the criticism of the Identity Politics side of the Dems, so the site isn’t for everybody, but they’re not afraid to Name Names about which Dems bear the most blame in losing so many elections.