More than a dozen progressive activists stormed Sen. Chuck Schumer's (D-N.Y.) office on Thursday morning, demanding he drop "Trump-apologist" Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) from the Democratic party leadership team.
Apparently the protesters have not yet learned that the Dums are no longer relevant. They are merely 'placeholders' ostensibly representing ordinary Americans while marching to the corporatist tune. They are there to make it look as though we have some 'choice' in the way this country is being run.
Dems are watching to see if they can maintain and retain without changing anything. They would love to get credit for talking that 'we are on your side against the republicans' talk but like always, they are only concerned with maintaining the status quo and retaining those lucrative campaign donations. The Dems function as the Decoy Party whose job it is to sound like they oppose the oligarchic agenda that they have had an equal share in establishing.
The Phony Democrat Manchin is just too obvious for the Phony Democratic Party tastes. Right now their planning likely includes keeping themselves in office by verbally opposing Trump but otherwise doing little else to remove him. I do remember Repubs seeking to impeach no matter the cost and Repubs obstructing everything Dem with appalling consistency. Somehow 'our' Dems having already explained to us how they are powerless but fighting for us just the same (as always) feel that is sufficient. Seems every cockamamie notion Trump proposes or unsuitable appointee gets a quick approval and sails on through. That is our Dems for the most part.
Do we have a democracy anymore?
My advice is to not ask that question of the Dems. They will assure us all with a glib answer that >>> "Of course we do! Don't you see how we oppose Trump on the airwaves but there isn't anything that we can do!"
We agree about the Dems. However it has never been this bad. You almost get the sense that the Dems have been betrayed by the Trump Repubs and that the usual 'arrangement' between the two parties is no longer in force. Trumpists no longer need the Dems and instead are installing the oligarchy officially while leaving the pseudo Everyman representation game behind them.
The Dems no longer know how to actually run things anymore. They are too used to pandering to big money contributions to be much different than are the Repubs.
Both parties willfully created the impending oligarchy and Trump is just the one who is blatant about it.
The democrats are, with very few exceptions, corporate, corrupt, stooges who support the war party and the trillion $ war budget. They have conned the American people into believing that they are the opposition party. The fact that they had Bernie, a man with some integrity, to whom I would argue, would have buried Trump for POTUS and choose HRC tells you all you need to know!
We need a new progressive party. The democratic party needs to go the way of the Whig party.
The lady holding the sign in the above picture that says: YOU WORK FOR US, is correct if you are very naive, because most know that is a bogus lie that we were told in grade school!
WeWillReplaceYou.org- (a PAC created to oust Democrats who won't fight Trump)
Now, I like the sound of that!
Listening to Schumer tell NPR this morning that "me and my daughter, who worked on the Clinton campaign, were shocked when Democrats did not win the White House and control of the Senate. We can attribute those loses to not having a populist message".
The Democrats DID have a populist message until the DNC hobbled and muzzled the messenger.
And removing republicans who do support Trump?
True, the democrats did have a populist messenger until the DNC threw Bernie under their most corrupt bus.
Phony Democrats? Please! Their whole party is phony, and that includes Schumer!
On "Stay[ing] United"
Trump is being so scarily right wing, that, if we stay "united" now, we could "take back the Senate," Schumer says.
Kind of like how Trump was so scarily right wing before the election that progressives were urged to stay "united" behind the Democrats' loser candidate?
Kind of like how progressives were told Trump was so dangerous, that it was crucial to walk out of the Democratic hall "united" after the Democratic establishment muscled in the unpopular and right liberal Perez?
Sounds kind of like how progressives have always been told they had to capitulate to the right liberal, politically unpopular, losing policies of the Democrats in return for...nothing...because otherwise the right would win.
As I've often written, the Democratic establishment will never learn. Not until progressives form a bloc and declare refusal to support the DNC unless it enters into a formal and binding power-sharing agreement with its large left wing - as in parliamentary coalition govts - not unless that happens is there a chance of shifting them left.
As a number of commentators have said in one way or another, the controlling bloc of the Democratic Party would rather lose at the polls than give up its institutional power within the party; not unless the DNC perceives its 'stay united against the scary right' strategy will no longer work - that progressives will only support them under a democratic power-sharing system - is there a chance to change that.
Right now, Manchin is working with Sherrod Brown to try and protect union miners' pensions in West Virginia and Ohio. He got the protection extended last year, but Mitch McConnell is blocking it now because he wants to break the unions. This is an issue that will come to a head, Manchin is serious about it. He has many faults, but is pro-labor and pro-Social Security and is popular in West Virginia. He's the exact kind of person who could battle with McConnell and Trump and have credibility in this region. On a more important level, McConnell is enabling his Republican friends to rob these miners:
Before we crucify Manchin, I think it's worth thinking about the above. Is giving him a leadership spot that's nothing more than a title really that big of a deal?
so because Manchin is right on one issue we should support him? No.
In the Charleston Gazette-Mail, WV's biggest newspaper, there was an article about this with Manchin being quoted as saying he's not gonna change, and inviting an opponent to "go ahead an primary me" and asking if the guy had voted for Bernie. "he isn't even a Democrat," crowed Manchin when the guy said yes. There were a lot of naughty Democrats in West Virginia last year, so many that BERNIE WON ALL 55 COUNTIES. But the proper respectable grownup Democrats like Manchin fixed things--we actually sent more Clinton delegates to the Convention, thanks to the Superdelegates, the party fixtures.
So I'm all for tossing Manchin, but I also agree with the posters who point out that the Democrats no longer represent anyone but the rich anyway. Had Clinton won, we wouldn't have the overt racism and sexism, but we'd have a lot of the same policies, and quite possibly we'd have war with Russia, stupid madness. As it is we may have war with Iran, also stupid immoral madness--but we might have had that with Clinton, too. Maybe she'd have gone for both at once, just in case she had only one term to slake her thirst for blood. And likely the reviving of the TPP. But keep your eye out for TISA--that may be how they sneak TPP in...
Democrats and liberals work hard to disregard a critically important issue. The Dem Party had long represented the masses -- poor and middle class, workers and the jobless, for the common good. The Clinton wing split this voting base wide apart in the 1990s. The past eight years confirmed that this split is permanent.
Actually, Sanders was an Independent, but had to register as a Democrat to run on the Dem Party ticket.
"Populist: a member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people."
How would one define a populist agenda today? How would we define "ordinary people" in a country that's deeply divided by class, rich vs. middle class vs. poor?
Yeah but he caucused with the Democrats, and he DID run as a Democrat--they were fine with him running as long as he didn't win. he performed his sheepdog role well.
I never said you have to support him, but think booting him out of leadership, to the extent he's actually a "leader," deserves a bit more thought. He's not who I'd elect, but he's from West Virginia.
Simply put, the system is completely rigged-- and not in your favor.
The sooner we let go of any illusions that you or I can affect it in any way, politically, the sooner we'll be able to concentrate our energies and put them towards strategies that might actually work.