Home | About | Donate

For Republicans, Fear and Loathing is a Winning Message

For Republicans, Fear and Loathing is a Winning Message

Leonard Pitts Jr.

A little context is critical here.

It would be too easy to dismiss Donald Trump’s Commission on Electoral Integrity as superfluous evidence of the intellectual erosion of the Republican Party. As a Twitter observer who styles himself LOLGOP quipped last week when the commission held its first meeting: “All the evidence in the world won’t get the GOP to accept climate change but no evidence is necessary to stop black people from voting.”


Good column, Mr. Pitts! I have enjoyed reading your work for many years. Thanks for calling this a soft coup, for it surely is!


As much as I love you and your work the title is what the demodogs ran also

1 Like

So what? Even if a Democrat says something that is true, it doesn’t matter?

1 Like

The Repubicans’s southern strategy failed to take into account changing demographics, They have therefore been forced to bolster it by adding voter suppression. The strategy could now be called southern strategy plus. And they are also using enhanced gerrymandering which doesn’t stop African Americans from voting but puts them into specially drawn districts which diminishes the number congressional districts where their votes can play an important role.

1 Like

“What do you expect the party to do when faced with a rising electorate of rainbow colors, ages, religious philosophies, and sexual identities?” Well, wither and die for one thing…

The R’Con “winning message” is a fallacy, they did not “win” the other party through arrogance, rigidity, and stupidity lost…lost the trust and respect of the electorate for their corporate servitude and own profits uber alles dedication, pandering to identity politics and a cynical “Southern Strategy”.

43% of eligible voters didn’t even bother to cast votes for either Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dumb… HRC was/is almost on a par with trump in being loathed and despised, but the DINO DNC wing ran her anyway - the only candidate trump could have Beaten - HRC installed as candidate thru machine politics, deceit, and fraud instead of the native and true challenger candidate, Bernie Sanders…so much for the “opposition” party and also for the “winning message”…


Two things should be remembered:

!) HRC got more votes than any white man ever did in a presidential election.

  1. Trump ran against and beat a lot of Republicans. This “Sanders would have won” line is a statement of absolute faith, with no facts at all, but it has the advantage of making people feel good (especially Stein voters) while being unprovable.

And I’ll throw in a third for free: More Americans voted for HRC than Trump, just like they did with Gore. If you want to defend the remnants of our slave past that is the Electoral College, go for it.


A link isn’t an argument. A link supports an argument. No thanks. (And remember, the GOP didn’t spend months destroying Sanders. And there were no Trump/Sanders debates. It’s a matter of faith, entirely.)

1 Like

Some group like ( FAIR? ) said; the cost to get your identification, paperwork, fees, etc. to actually register properly to cast a legal ballot, could cost close to $500.00. The elderly and poor, in states with these laws, simply cannot afford this hidden poll tax.
The way SCOTUS and Congress works, they’ll need the grocery money more.


Of course Sanders vs Trump is hypothetical. We will never know who would have won. Neither of them were into releasing tax returns. Trump still has never released any returns despite promising to do so and Sanders released returns for only year. It is hard to believe Trump isn’t hiding something, probably financial connections to Russia, and Sanders may be hiding something as well, possibly to do with his wife’s job at Burlington College and that is currently being investigated. It remains unknown what the effect of Sanders being Jewish would have been. There could have been a lot of voters hiding their anti-semitism. Clinton had trouble getting the African American vote out in the general election and she was much more popular with African Americans than Sanders. Surely there would have been fake news about Sanders that many people would have believed. This hurt Clinton. Also, Clinton did extremely well in all three debates. Sanders may have not done that well. You could argue that the strongest Democratic candidate in the general election would have been Martin O’Malley. He accomplished many things as governor of Maryland. He did well in some of the debates against Clinton and Sanders. He also is a less polarizing figure. Clinton seems to be disliked by almost everyone except Democrats. Sanders claiming to be a socialist would have been strongly opposed by conservatives. I would say the Democrats ran their most qualified candidate. The fact is she lost to the least qualified candidate ever to run for president. This shows that our democracy is in serious trouble. In a healthy democracy there is no way an ignorant buffoon with zero experience in government would have defeated a brilliant candidate with experience in the White House, Senate, and State Department.

Sen. Sanders is a Social Democrat. That’s harder to explain to Americans than Democrat, which means " boot kisser " in Slovenia and Estonia. So, he told me he went with Socialist.

Republicans feed and depend on ignorance, hate and nationalism. Democrats feed and depend on identity politics, false promises and Wall street backing. Both parties support endless war and corporate domination. Meanwhile, the ruling class has the rest of us fighting over false team loyalties – but not the most informed. Something else is taking shape, as I wrote recently in a local paper.

Any information on how that adds up? I think I paid $30 for my last license renewal, and I think it’s illegal to charge money for the voter registration itself.

He has called himself a socialist and was known as the socialist mayor of Burlington. But he has explained what he is really a democratic socialist which is the same as a social democrat. But in the campaign he switched to progressive. I think they all mean something like Denmark which he said should be the goal of the US. Of course many Americans do now want to pay something like half of their income to the government like the Danes do so that could be a tough sell.

They factored in the time and other efforts like tracking documents, courthouse visits, etc. What if you took a week off from your other responsibilities to track down paperwork, etc.? Lawyers charge by the 1/10 of an hour, in some instances. Time is money, right?
This was an interview on my local community radio news station. They are widely respected for their accuracy. Look it up online, it’s KBOO.
But, that’s not what Mr. Pitts is really getting at here.