Home | About | Donate

The Coming Democratic Crackup


The Coming Democratic Crackup

Robert Parry

If the Democratic Party presses ahead and nominates hawkish Hillary Clinton for President, it could recreate the conditions that caused the party to splinter in the late 1960s and early 1970s when anti-war and pro-war Democrats turned on one another and opened a path for decades of Republican dominance of the White House.


My response to Parry's "infuriated Hillary Democrats" will be: every poll since January showed Sanders beating every GOP contender by a wider margin than Clinton, yet you subjected me to your endless mantra that "Bernie can't win against the GOP".

"Its not what you don't know that gets you in trouble,
its what you know for sure that just ain't so."
-Mark Twain


Sanders supporters need to carpet bomb Her Royal Candidate with the message that they do not intend to vote for her.


Number one national security threat is global climate collapse. US government is #1 polluter and the pentagon is #1 in the country.

Will Bernie Sanders be able to make the pentagon stand down? No.

Will pentagonians destroy the goose that laid the golden egg? ¿Quién sabe?

Bernie knows that climate collapse is the #1 security threat. He is also an experienced realist. Start with something small, like putting further regime changes on stand-by for pollution reduction reasons.


Actually they need to do that to the DNC and the news media. Hillary would just sit on the mail or shred it.


Both Parties are on the verge of self-destructing; a Trump presidency may just be the final nail in both their coffins.


Many people also believe he was murdered.


IF Bernie had won DEM nomination.... I would have considered joining them. Looks like the DEMs have and will do whatever it takes to make sure they get HRC.

Both the Republicans and Democrats.... deserve TRUMP. Perhaps this will bring on the formation of a NEW party....


The nasty fight is not ahead anymore; it's on now. The shut-down of the Nevada party convention was nothing short of a coup d'état. The pretense of democratic leanings by the DLC-Democrats has been revealed as a pack of lies.

Now it gets interesting. It's pretty clear that most writers here will not support Hillary, but what about the young people who constitute the rising tide of dissatisfaction with the status quo? Will they consider the cancer-ridden DP to be worth saving, or will they punt? So much of today's politics feels like "Nero fiddling" to me, in the context of climate reality, and I think that the younger generations might well keep that thought in mind more than we here sometimes tend to remember.

Interesting times ahead...


I read an article this morning, No, Hillary Clinton Isn't a Republican, that addressed much of what this article speculates on. Being a "Cold War liberal" means that she is ready, able and willing to use military force wherever she feels necessary to accomplish her goals. And being a neoliberal means that a lot of her goals are that corporation rights supersede any human rights. The people who just took over the government in Brazil are neoliberals. The people who took over in Honduras are neoliberals. Her foreign agenda means that Iraq and Libya are only the beginning. We have a lot more and a lot worse in store for us.


It is NOT just status quo with HRC....
...she will be far worse than Obama --- even if she sticks with the 'promises' she has made in this primary (which is doubtful)....

She was far more Hawkish than Obama.... he followed her lead (as Sec State)....
.... not just re: the middle east.... look at South American 'interventions'...
She has taken more Corporate money....
She has a poor .... and very long history on Trade Policies....
She plans to let Bill take an active part in managing the Economy....at that time economy looked good (during his term)
.... we have history to show us what a mess those policies created (led to 2005 collapse & more before that).

Trump may be a horror story..... but so is she.... not sure who is worse.


I would like to assure the Democratic Establishment and Clinton campaign that plenty of those who oppose war are NOT interested rallying around a warmonger in November, and that includes Ms. Clinton! She has made her comprehensive warmongering, oppressive, regressive agenda clear. Why would those who vehemently oppose her agenda vote for her? Voters are supporting Bernie Sanders for actual, substantive reasons. His agenda is VASTLY different from hers, across the board. Many of us will consider it ultimately more productive, and have clearer consciences staying home, or voting 3rd party, or writing in Sanders than punching a ballot for any candidate who promises to deliver disaster on every front that matters to us.

Furthermore, I am not a "young" voter, but I am in touch with plenty of them. I know that they had already checked out of the "meaningless" political process and were comfortable staying home from elections. They are making it clear they will do so again before they will cast a vote for Hillary Clinton and all that she stands for, which is NOTHING that represents a vibrant future for those who outlive her! Dream on, delusional Democrats!


Warmongering is just one of Hillary's shortcomings. The division between the DNC and the majority of Americans is NOT just one issue. There is health care, concern for the environment, and the economic divide just to name a few. Summing it up in a nutshell, the bottom line is the DNC supports the oligarchy that subjects us all. Endless war is just a manifestation of the oligarchy's need to divide and conquer. If we focus only on war and never address the foundational cause, we'll continue to have endless war no matter how much we protest.


If Clinton gets the nomination it will be enthused/angry Trump voters vs. unenthused/frightened Clinton supporters.

Take away the names and look at the characteristics

Enthused Trumps Unenthused.

Anger and fear are both strong motivators.

Point to Trump.


Didn't Wellstone die in a plane crash along with all the other people on board? If he were murdered by the PTB, it was a terrorist act.


I was ridiculed by a Hillary supporter in another forum for voicing my intent not to vote for Clinton in November. After his attempt to bully me I felt rather good about it and am VERY sure now that I have made the right decision.I am not a child, I am 65 yrs. old and remember a lot of what has happened to the economy since the deregulation and trade deals and it is getting old and it's time for a change. Our future depends on getting people in office that will finally stop sleeping with corrupt donors who dictate to this society. I can not phantom a country as wealthy as the USA having little babies going to bed without food and families living out of the car. It has to stop!


You might wish to correct this to "fathom."

Phantom = a ghost.


The President Clinton and VP Leon Panetta pictured here as they contemplate DISCLOSURE.


I'm still fairly often surprised by the ignorance the liberal bourgeoisie. The Dem voter base began fracturing in the 1980s, with the Reagan Democrats and the start of the real class war. Then, Bill Clinton deeply split the party in the 1990s. That ideological split remains as deep as ever.

Remember Gore vs. Bush? The media people never did quite figure out what happened, and came up with a list of excuses for Gore's defeat -- everything from hanging chads to (black-only) voter suppression to a crisis of lazy people who just didn't feel like voting. Now think a minute: Clinton/Gore had targeted the poor (with some quite ugly results). In Gore vs. Bush, the poor -- and those who get why unrelieved poverty matters -- voted third party or withheld their votes, and the middle class picked Bush. Twice.

The Dem voting base has long consisted of the "masses" -- poor and middle class, workers and the jobless. The poor overwhelmingly voted for Obama on the chance that he could launch a legit discussion about our poverty crisis. He raised the issue a few times, liberals aren't interested, and Democrats in Congress only worsened conditions for many.
We rejected Clinton in 2008. Then, oblivious to broader political perspectives, liberals chose to begin selling the most anti-poor/pro-war Dem pol available, Hillary Clinton.

When the Party is split and the voting base remains at war with itself, how do you think this will all turn out?


Full agreement. Together they constitute a perfect illustration of the duopoly - and its unacceptability.

That's what I meant by the status quo, and particularly, in the context of my personal impressions of what motivates younger voters, its inadequacy to address problems like the climate.

Like tigress2 said so well in the post after yours,

I know that they had already checked out of the "meaningless" political process and were comfortable staying home from elections. They are making it clear they will do so again before they will cast a vote for Hillary Clinton and all that she stands for, which is NOTHING that represents a vibrant future for those who outlive her!