Democratic Party Establishment finds fault in everyone except themselves

Dear Friends,

The leadership of the Democratic Party has not changed much since Bill Clinton was elected President in 1992.  Unfortunately the Democratic Party and its influence has been greatly diminished since that time.  Here is a little comparison of political control by the Democrats.

Senate Seats:              1992               Democrats 56  Republicans 44
                                   Post 2016       Republicans at least 51
House Seats:              1992               Democrats 267 Republicans 167
                                   Post 2016       Democrats 193 Republicans 239
Governorships           1992               Democrats 28 Republicans 20
                                  Post 2016        Republicans at least 33
State Legislatures     1992                Democrats 26 Republicans 7  Split 16
                                  Post 2016       Democrats 14 Republicans 32 Split 3
Since 2008, the Democrats have lost control of 30 State legislative chambers (910 seats) and 11 Governorships.

During that same period the Democratic Party Establishment led the Democratic Party further and further to the right as it became Republican lite and courted and did the bidding of Wall Street and the economic elite.  The Democratic Party Establishment became more and more out of touch with the traditional base of the Democratic Party.  It ignored the rapidly diminishing middle class and the working poor.  It failed to fight for unions and trade policies that established level playing fields.  It embraced the military industrial complex and the constant pressure for more militarization to feed the profits of that complex.

When the Democratic Party Establishment had the opportunity to return to its roots and embrace its historic values by endorsing Bernie Sanders, it doubled down on its move to the right and selected Hillary Clinton, one of the leaders of the Democratic Party Establishment who epitomizes the rightward movement of the Democratic Party and its too cozy relationship with Wall Street and the military industrial complex.  Now that she has been defeated by a racist, misogynist, homophobic, islamophobic, egotistical demagogue, the Democratic Party Establishment is finding fault in everyone else except themselves.

In an interview with Chris Hayes (here) Senator Harry Reid, retiring Democratic leader in the Senate for years, said,

She would have won this election without any problem if Comey had not been the Republican operative that he is...He is the reason she lost the election.

He went on to say, "I want everybody in America to understand if Harry Reid can make it in America, anyone can...it doesn't matter what your race is, it used to but it shouldn't anymore".  Harry Reid was born into a very poor family and has been a great success, but he was born a white man in America.  For him to say that because a white man can overcome birth into a poor family any black man can do the same shows how out of touch with the real America he is.

Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House for the last 16 years said

...We cannot be taking the full responsibility for what happened in the election. We have to do our after-action review thoroughly and see what we could have done differently. But a lot of it was beyond our control.

Senator Chuck Schumer who will replace Harry Reid as the Democratic leader in the Senate was probably the most honest when he said, "we needed a much sharper, bolder, stronger economic message".  Senator Schumer was not taking any responsibility for the fact that the Democratic Party has "needed a much sharper, bolder, stronger economic message" for a long time during which he was in a position to promulgate that message but instead he helped move the Democratic Party to the right.  He voted for NAFTA, he voted to get rid of Glass-Steagall, he voted for the Iraq War, he voted for the Patriot Act, he protected Wall Street, etc.

The Clinton campaign continues to refuse to acknowledge that Hillary and her campaign were completely out of touch with the economic woes and anxiety of the country.  Sure, they moved to the left when forced to by Bernie Sanders, but it was not believable particularly in light of the decades during which the Democratic Party Establishment ignored the middle class and working poor.  In an interview on CNN (here), Karen Finney, a spokesperson for the Clinton campaign had a whole list of reasons why Hillary Clinton lost, including sexism, voting rights act, third party candidates, FBI Director Comey, media coverage and Bernie bros.  Interestingly enough, she did not mention the lack of an economic message to address the economic woes of the middle class and working poor.  When she was pointedly asked what mistakes the Clinton campaign made, there were none of significance.

In fact it is probably true that the Clinton campaign did not make too many mistakes.  The problem was that Hillary Clinton was the wrong candidate, and she could not overcome the fact that the Democratic Party Establishment had ignored the middle class and working poor and moved the party to the right for the last several decades.  Probably the best analysis of the election that I have seen was the op-ed in The New York Times by Naomi Klein entitled "Trump Defeated Clinton, Not Women" (here).  You should read it, if you have not already.  I selected some of my favorite paragraphs.

Voters chose a loose cannon of a man with zero government experience over a calm, collected and supremely qualified woman. The root cause of this injustice, many have suggested, can only be sexism — proof that the glass ceiling protecting the highest reaches of power cannot yet be shattered.
The reaction is understandable. It’s also wrong and unnecessarily demoralizing.

...

Yes, she had a gold-plated résumé that more than qualified her to be president. But that overlooks an important fact: Virtually everything about Mrs. Clinton’s biography made her uniquely unsuited to draw blood where Mr. Trump was most vulnerable.
This election needed a Democrat who could call out, again and again, the myriad hypocrisies and absurdities of Mr. Trump’s claim to be a hero for the downtrodden working class. In the debates, Mrs. Clinton landed points when she exposed Mr. Trump’s history of outsourcing and tax dodging. But by then Mr. Trump had already spent the summer mocking his opponent for her private parties with oligarchs, painting her own lifestyle as profoundly out of touch with ordinary Americans (which it is).
In short, she landed on many of the right messages, but she was the wrong messenger.

...

Here is the biggest problem with elevating sexism to the defining explanation of Mrs. Clinton’s loss: It lets her machine and her failed policies off the hook. It erases the role played by the appetite for endless war and the comfort with market-friendly incremental change, no matter the urgency of the crisis (from climate change to police violence to raging inequality). It erases the disgust over Mrs. Clinton’s coziness with Wall Street and with the wreckage left behind by trade deals that benefited corporations at the expense of workers.

...

That Mrs. Clinton could be defeated by the likes of Mr. Trump remains disgraceful. But Mrs. Clinton was too flawed a candidate for this disgrace to go down in history as a defeat for her gender.

The Democratic Party needs new leadership and needs to return to its core values.  Keith Ellison is running for head of the DNC and even Senator Schumer understands that he needs to support him.  Tim Ryan is challenging Nancy Pelosi for leadership of the House Democrats.  The traditional values of the Democratic Party should not simply be relegated to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, they should be the values of the entire Democratic Party.  We need new leadership to reclaim the Democratic Party.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

The Democratic Party needs to look inward to understand why we lost

Dear Friends,

The United States of America is a country where racism and misogyny are fully institutionalized and rampant.  This racism and misogyny existed long before this election cycle, and long before Donald Trump said things out loud that had only been said with dog whistles and in private before.  These pre-existing conditions and their exposure to all those who had previously ignored them cannot explain Hillary Clinton's loss in this election.  The mainly white, more often males, who voted for Donald Trump were no more racist and misogynist this election cycle than they were in prior ones.  So why did so many of them desert the Democratic Party this time when they had not done so in such huge numbers in the past?

My thesis is that historically the Democratic Party was the champion for these people, and they voted their economic interests over their racist and misogynist feelings.  The Democratic Party lost most of these people in the South with the voting and civil rights legislation of the early 1960s.  Unfortunately, the Democratic Party Establishment since the election of Bill Clinton in 1992,  has  attempted to become Republican light and do the bidding of the monied interests and has deserted the poor and middle class.

It was Bill Clinton who fought for and signed the revised NAFTA into law in August 1993.  NAFTA caused a significant loss of good jobs in the United States.  Since NAFTA, low wage workers have seen their compensation decline.  It was also Bill Clinton who supported and signed the repeal of the Glass Steagall Act which was one of several steps at deregulating Wall Street that helped to produce the Great Recession.

Many of the Trump voters lost their jobs, theirs houses and their self-respect in the Great Recession.  Wall Street was bailed out, and there were no prosecutions for any of the wrongs that were done, even when President Obama took over. While many jobs have returned under Barack Obama, they are lower paying jobs with little or no job security or upward mobility.  In 2007 Candidate Obama promised to walk the picket lines with the workers whenever the right to organize was being challenged.  He broke that promise in 2011when Governor Walker in Wisconsin was passing legislation designed to kill unions and thousands of people were protesting.  President Obama, along with the rest of the Democratic Party Establishment, remained silent and certainly did not join the picket lines.  He let them fight alone.  Is it any wonder that Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania all voted for Donald Trump?

Not only has the Democratic Party Establishment turned their backs on the working people of this country, they have sent their sons and daughters to unpopular wars where both sides are using arms supplied by the US arms industry with support and encouragement from the United States government and in particular from President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.  To make matters worse, the Democratic Party Establishment supports and nominates Hillary Clinton who is clearly a hawk.

The Democratic Party Establishment courts the oligarchy and takes their money in the form of political contributions, charitable contributions and paid speaking engagements at the same time that it ignores the plight of the working class.  The wealth and wage inequality continues to rise and the rich and powerful are treated differently from the working class.  Is it any wonder the working class is angry?

It is not just old white men that the Democratic Party Establishment has turned its back on.  Blacks, Hispanics and other minorities most of whom are working class have been hurt even more than the old white males.  As hard as it is to believe, Donald Trump did better with these groups than Mitt Romney did.  Hillary Clinton got 6 percentage points less of the Hispanic vote than President Obama did and 7 percentage points less than Bill Clinton did. I am convinced that part of this reduction in support is the result of the failure of the Democratic Party Establishment to stand up for and with these minorities.

The former white Democrats who flocked to Donald Trump in this election did so because they could no longer see any hope of the Democratic Party Establishment helping them economically.  While at the same time they saw a "strong" man who was standing up for them and giving voice to their racism, misogyny and economic fear and anxiety.

What can I do?  First and foremost, as a person of great white privilege, I must actively, publicly and boldly stand with my brothers and sisters who are the focus of Donald Trump's racism, misogyny and hatred, and I must actively, publicly and boldly protect the earth.  I must also work and organize to reclaim the Democratic Party.  It must be restored to the party that protects those least able to protect themselves, that fights for justice for all, that protects the earth and that demonstrates true love, compassion and empathy.  The Democratic Party has lost its way, and Donald Trump's victory is just the latest proof of that fact.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

Vote for Hillary Clinton

Dear Friends,

I have been trying to figure out how to write a post in support of Hillary Clinton.  As you all know, I would have much preferred Bernie Sanders, but that is not a choice now.  I thought that Bernie's speech at the convention was great.  He has now written an op-ed in the LA Times (here) entitled: "Bernie Sanders: I support Hillary Clinton.  So should everyone who voted for me".   It is similar to his convention speech and outlines very clearly not just the reasons why Donald Trump should not become President, but why we should support Hillary Clinton.

As he says in the final paragraph

I understand that many of my supporters are disappointed by the final results of the nominating process, but being despondent and inactive is not going to improve anything. Going forward and continuing the struggle is what matters. And, in that struggle, the most immediate task we face is to defeat Donald Trump.

While I disagree with many of Hillary Clinton's policy positions, have concerns about her tendency to slide to the right, do not believe that her incrementalism is what the country needs right now and am very concerned about her hawkish foreign policy, I also agree with many of her positions.  We should all focus on the reasons that we can support her.  Despite her incrementalist tendencies, she is clearly moving in the right direction on healthcare, the economy, education, Wall Street reform and trade.  Her nominees for the Supreme Court will be important proponents of getting the money out of politics and preserving a woman's right to choose as well as being intelligent and thoughtful people.

Much has been written lately about how Secretary Clinton should campaign in light of how Donald Trump campaigns. While she needs to point out how incredibly bad he is, I think that she should be making the positive case for why we should support her.  She needs to generate enthusiasm to vote for her not just getting people to vote against Donald Trump.  If she is clearly pushing the truly progressive policies that she adopted during the primary,  she should be able to gain support from Bernie's supporters.

We need to keep the revolution moving forward.  We need to elect Hillary Clinton.  Then we need to hold her accountable and work to get true progressives elected at all levels of government.  This plan is one that I am looking forward to working hard on.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal