Home | About | Donate

An Ossoff ‘Victory for the Ages’? No, Not Quite. Not Yet


An Ossoff ‘Victory for the Ages’? No, Not Quite. Not Yet.

Jay Bookman

“A victory for the ages,” Democrat Jon Ossoff called it last night.

But it wasn’t. Not quite and not yet. You could call his showing a surprise, a success, an achievement, a signal of deep public discontent … sure, it was all that. It was also a confirmation of Democratic enthusiasm and passion.

But victory? No.

Then again, Ossoff wasn’t the only one to get a little carried away and claim a win when there wasn’t one.


Yeh, this is "democracy" in the good ole USA alright. We have a "horserace" between a yuppie neoliberal Dem and a right-wing Rethug whose main claim to fame is for attacking Planned Parenthood and abortion rights.

This is what you get when you run "elections" in Georgia suburbs: neofascism v. neoliberalism. Voters have a right to "choose" though millions of girls and women don't even get that.


Exactly. And, in the meantime, can we have a moratorium on the misuse of the word "progressive?" This little twit is anything but.


In a deep red district, one a democrat hasn't won since the late 70s and hard-right Republicans regularly win by double digits, we are going to beat up a competent, center-left candidate--"twit"--because he's not "progressive?" Sounds like a winning strategy!


I also propose a moratorium on the use of the word "left" for people who are nothing of the sort. You are obviously still caught up in the tweedledee/tweedledum dog-and-pony show, and want your "team" to win, so you can ignore my observations if you so wish. I want to upset the whole apple cart, as I've long concluded that nothing else can stop the cycle of death and destruction.

Ask yourself whether the people of Syria, or Yemen, or the Sudan, or Libya, think that Osoff's "victory" will change anything for them. Or whether the poor blacks and poor whites of the Georgia's countrysides and inner cities care about the election of a bourgeois middle-of-the-road white boy. That might help you to understand what I'm saying.


It's one congressional election, not the be-all-end-all of world peace. Would you like to put a check on Trump's impulses as president? How is that done in our system? Historically, it's been by electing people to Congress who differ from the president. Does that promise an end to all bad things? No. But it's one step toward putting some balance in our government at the moment, which is controlled by right wing idiots and a president who only cares about himself.


Maybe if you repeat that enough, it will come true.


Uh, I don't get your point. Don't work to elect people who are at least sympathetic of your views so others adamantly opposed to all your views can be elected? Sounds like a loser argument to me, particularly in a deep red district.


I think if you watched less TV and read less mainstream "news," you might (I repeat, might) be able to see events for what they are, without the spin. Every single one of your posts expresses the binary ("red state"/"blue state" etc.) view of politics that is the sham of our pseudo-representative system of government, when a nation as vast and diverse as the US should have many, very many, parties to represent the plurality. As long as you're stuck on the binary paradigm, you will get nowhere, we will get nowhere. The two parties are merely the Janus-head of a corporate oligarchy. And this Ossoff twit is just one of the minions of the status-quo brigades. (Incidentally, my comments on this thread notwithstanding, I would have voted for Bernie, had he been the Dem nominee, instead of the symbolic Jill Stein, in the general election. But, in perfect illustration of my point, the oligarchy would not let Bernie get his hands on the reins, for fear that he might give the game away. More's the pity.)


There is nothing "left" about Ossoff. He's the hand-picked candidate of the Pelosi/Clinton neo-liberal faction, who will be a toddy for the Party's current "owner", rabid, radical Zionist billionaire Haim Saban. He was the reason that Hillary called all of us who support the sanctions movement against Israel "anti-Semitic", and totally pissed me and millions of other progressives off. We're done with the Dems. Go Green! #Demexit 2017!


Funny because I don't have cable and like to read articles and comments here at CD. Maybe my views are grounded in the reality that our 435 congressional districts aren't filled with "progressives" who are just missing out on the "truth" only folks like you seem to know. In my district, a very red one, I'd love it if we could get a Sanders clone elected, but the person who came within a 1000 votes of knocking off our tea party Congressman most recently wasn't. Every candidate to his left has absolutely been trounced. So, I've decided to put my purity cup away and work to get whoever is most progressive, most reasonable, elected to Congress, even if I don't agree with him on every issue. I'll let you demand litmus tests on every issue and look down on folks who don't while complaining about the "system."


The Clinton campaign is a perfect example of why democrats can't win. YOU HAVE TO STAND FOR SOMETHING. And Ossoff looks a lot like Clinton.


Ossoff nearly won a district that Republicans have won steady since the late 70s. Moreover, he got basically half the vote in a district Tom Price won by over 60% regularly. This doesn't mean he'll win the runoff, but it does indicate you are reacting via your predispositions and not facts on the ground.


Good point, Clovis. Ignore the DNC Damage Control.


And by following the strategy you've laid out for us repeatedly, you'll keep on getting a repeat performance of the same results: one D-Party butt whooping after another.

From my standpoint, if your party has to be the half of the duopoly who implodes first, so be it. The rebuilding of something more responsive can start from there.


Well said, TJ.