I wonder why you skipped Gaza? On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 2:59 PM Charles Keener via groups.io <ckeener20005= aol....@groups.io> wrote:
> Opinion | Six Ways the Democrats Elected Trump... Again | Common Dreams > <https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/how-democrats-elected-trump> > > It didn't have to be this way. And yet the Democratic Party's failures > were easy to see every step of the way. Let us count the ways. > > As the MAGA troops dine, dance and saunter into the White House, we have > to ask how one of the most unpopular presidents in U.S. history triumphed > yet again. Yes, Trump is a gifted entertainer with an incredibly loyal > base. But he could not have won without Democratic Party malfeasance. Let > us count the ways: > 1. Biden’s Ego > > You don’t get to be president without an enormous ego, so large that it’s > very hard to imagine not getting exactly what you think is your due. Even > though Biden *told his advisors* > <https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/11/biden-single-term-082129> in > 2019 that he would serve only one term, he changed his mind, or rather his > ego demanded four more years. Biden liked the job he had spent his life > pining for, and damn anyone who thought he wasn’t up to it. > > The combination of ego and power meant that those around Biden were loathe > to suggest that maybe, just maybe, he shouldn’t start a second term at age > 82. The closer his advisors were to power, the less likely they were to > risk losing their access by pointing out that Biden looked his age and then > some, and that an *overwhelming majority* > <https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/poll-americans-on-biden-age/story?id=107126589> > of > voters thought he was too old to serve again. That Biden was having > difficulty putting forth coherent sentences in public was studiously > ignored. Biden was told exactly what he wanted to hear. Run, Joe, Run! > 2. Liberal-Left Complicity > > Everyone who was awake, except Biden and those dependent upon him, knew > that he was too old to run again. On November 20, 2023, Biden’s 81st > birthday, I wrote , “*Happy Birthday Joe: Please Don’t Run* > <https://lesleopold.substack.com/p/who-has-the-courage-to-tell-joe-biden?r=222my>!” > I took a good deal of criticism, even from close colleagues. Didn’t I know > that there was no way he would agree to step down? Didn’t I realize that if > someone challenged him the Democrats would lose, just as in 1968 when > Lyndon Johnson was forced out? Didn’t I realize that Biden was the best > president for workers since FDR, maybe even better, and had therefore > earned a second term? > > I was stunned especially by the FDR claim. That one only works if you live > in the Washinton bubble and are blind as a bat (without a bat’s stunning > radar.) > > - FDR, through his fireside chats, was an enormously gifted > communicator. Biden during his presidency has been one of the worst. > - FDR’s massive public works programs engaged millions of people in > highly visible ways each day. Biden’s infrastructure programs were nearly > invisible, and severely hampered by his inability to promote them. > - FDR’s changes in labor law legalized unions and led to an explosion > of successful organizing, full of posters with FDR saying, “If I went to > work in a factory, the first thing I’d do is join a union.” While Biden did > go on a picket line and put pro-labor appointees into key regulatory > offices, union density barely budged on his watch. > > The voters of Mingo County, West Virginia could tell the difference. FDR > in 1936 got 66.1 percent of their vote. Biden received only 13.9 percent in > 2020. (See *Wall Street’s War on Workers* <https://amzn.to/3tcgRae> for a > closer look at Mingo County and the collapse of the Democrats.) > > By 2024, the rise of inflation and Biden’s feeble demeanor, during the > rare times he was let out in public, augured for a sizable Trump triumph. > Democrats who feared a second Trump term should have demanded that Biden > step down long before he fell flat on his face during the June 2024 debate. > > Where were AOC and Sanders? In Biden’s pocket. As late as the middle of > June 2024, *AOC said* > <https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/09/us/politics/aoc-biden-2024-election.html> > *:* > > Joe Biden is our nominee. He is not leaving this race. He is in this race, > and I support him. > > Even after the worst debate performance in presidential history, Bernie > Sanders <https://www.commondreams.org/tag/bernie-sanders> *chastised > Biden’s critics:* > <https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/13/opinion/joe-biden-president.html> > > Enough! Mr. Biden may not be the ideal candidate, but he will be the > candidate and should be the candidate. > > No doubt AOC and Sanders saw what I saw a year earlier--- that Biden > really was too old to serve a second term. But they kept silent. They were > not about to give up their influence over Biden’s agenda, an agenda they > can kiss good-by during the coming four years of Trump. > 3. The legal cases > > If you’re going to put a former president on trial, one who desperately > wants to run again, you had better do it long before the next election. > Instead, Attorney General Merrick Garland fumbled around for two years > before appointing a special counsel to investigate Trump’s attempt to > overturn the 2020 election and his hiding classified documents in his > bathroom. The delay allowed Trump to run out the clock and avoid any > punishment, despite 34 felony convictions in the New York State business > records case involving the adult film star Stormy Daniels and campaign > finance laws. > > Clearly, Trump’s legal woes didn’t wound his election chances and may even > have helped to solidify his base. While progressives were titillated (me > included) by each new legal revelation about Trump’s malfeasance, the > public at large cared much more about leadership, change, inflation, and > the economy. > 4. Anointing Kamala Harris > <https://www.commondreams.org/tag/kamala-harris> > > Kamala Harris was a very poor candidate in 2020. She withdrew after *polls > showed* > <https://rollcall.com/2019/12/03/kamala-harris-drops-out-of-2020-presidential-race/> > her > at 3 percent. Yet, by waiting until after the 2024 debate debacle, Biden > ensured that the Democrats had no choice but to rally around Harris. She > was the incumbent vice-president and not doing so would have been viewed as > a slap in the face to women and people of color. > > But they had a choice if they had acted sooner. Had party leaders forced > Biden out in early 2024, later than they should have, there was time to > hold at least two primaries that would have put Harris to the > test—primaries that would have let voters register their preferences, > perhaps finding the best candidate and giving more legitimacy to whomever > was selected. > > Taking away that vital phase of the democratic process, the Democrats > neutered their own claim that Trump was an enemy of democracy. Whether or > not those acts are parallel in anti-democratic gravity is irrelevant. More > than a few voters thought that Democrats did not have the high moral ground > on democracy issues. > > And blaming the Harris loss on racism and sexism is a poor excuse for a > party desperate to prevent Trump from stomping all over democracy. If the > Democrats really believed that racism and sexism would defeat Harris, why > nominate her? > > In the end she could not compete with Trump on two key issues—leadership > and change. On the *exit poll* > <https://www.cnn.com/election/2024/exit-polls/national-results/general/president/0> > question > of the candidate's "ability to lead,” Trump received 66 percent to Harris’s > 33 percent. On “Can bring needed change,” it was 74 percent for Trump to 24 > percent for Harris. > 5. Anti-working-class campaign > > Nevertheless, Harris was a much stronger campaigner in 2024 than in 2020. > She exuded energy and certainly was far more coherent than Biden. The spark > needed to attract support was there. But by that point the problem was > substance, not style. Harris is a corporate Democrat, and she wanted to > gain the support of Wall Street as much if not more than she wanted to be > the party of the working class. > > While independent polls, like those from the *Center for Working Class > Politics* <https://www.workingclasspolitics.org/press-publications>, > showed that the Democrats needed to campaign on a strong anti-corporate > populist message, especially in Pennsylvania, Harris chose to emphasize her > opponent’s threat to democracy. Further, she went out of her way to *raise > money from Wall Street* > <https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/22/us/politics/harris-fundraiser-wall-street.html>, > to campaign with Republicans, and to make her campaign *palatable to them* > <https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/14/business/harris-economic-plan-wall-street.html> > both. > > For me, the defining moment came in the response to the John Deere and > Company’s announcement moving 1,000 jobs from the Midwest to Mexico. In > June 2024, right here on the pages of *Common Dreams*, *I repeatedly > begged the Biden administration > <https://lesleopold.substack.com/p/come-on-joe-stop-john-deere-from>* to > stop the carnage. Deere was the poster child of a greedy corporation that > was using job cuts to move money to Wall Street through stock buybacks, an > artificial means of boosting the share price to enrich a company’s richest > investors. In 2023, Deere logged $10 billion in profits, paid its CEO $26.7 > million, and conducted $12.2 billion in stock buybacks. As I pleaded then: > “Come on Joe, go to bat for these workers and show the working class that > you’re tougher than Trump when it comes to saving American jobs.” > > The greatest president for labor since FDR did nothing. When more layoffs > were announced in the fall, Trump jumped on it, calling for a 200 percent > tariff on John Deere imports from Mexico. > > Here was the chance for Harris to strut her pro-working-class stuff. > Instead, her campaign committed political malpractice. They recruited Mark > Cuban, the TV star billionaire, former principal owner of the Dallas > Mavericks basketball team, to attack Trump’s plan. He called the proposed > Deere tariffs, “insanity.” He criticized Trump’s worker-friendly proposal > rather than Deere’s attempt to kill workers’ jobs. Cuban is *on record* > <https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/3-reasons-why-mark-cuban-thinks-buybacks-are-bad-for-employees> > saying > stock buybacks are bad for employees, but he said not a word about Deere’s > abuse of them. And most importantly, neither he, nor Harris, nor anyone > else in the campaign said a word about the 1,000 jobs that would be lost. > > That’s because they are corporate Democrats who refuse to interfere with > corporate decision making. Job loss is inevitable and necessary, they > believe, and only can be confronted by the vague promise that new jobs will > be created elsewhere within the prosperous “opportunity society.” Instead > of stopping needless mass layoffs, the Democrats prefer to shower > corporations with public money to “encourage” them to create jobs, which > are nearly always for someone other than those who are losing theirs. It’s > not hard to see why workers like those at Deere might think Trump would > fight harder for them. > 6. Inflation > > The rise in prices negatively affected the vast majority of voters and it > happened on Biden’s watch. To say it was not as bad as in the rest of the > world was a feeble response, as was blaming Covid supply chain > transformations. Whatever truth there was to these claims, what voters > wanted to see were actions to stop prices from rising and attempts made to > lower as many as possible. > > This would prove to be a heavy lift for Harris. She needed to attack the > major corporate cartels that jacked up prices, which would mean breaking > with the Biden administration (something she pointedly *refused to do* > <https://www.cnn.com/politics/harris-2024-campaign-biden/index.html>). > She would have to call for investigations about price gouging, and even > demanding price controls to prevent the food and drug producers form > profiteering. It would also mean proposing new laws to prevent Wall Street > and private equity firms from buying up millions of homes, a practice that > was putting upward pressure on home prices and hurting even workers with > decent-paying jobs. In short, it would mean breaking from Wall Streeters > and turning public ire against them. She early on made some noise about > price controls, but as the campaign proceeded, a populist message didn’t > happen and realistically could not have happened given the Democrats’ > immense entanglement with their Wall Street financiers. > > Of the voters who said inflation has caused their family “severe > hardship,” 76 percent voted for Trump according to *exit polls* > <https://www.cnn.com/election/2024/exit-polls/national-results/general/president/0>. > Of those who said inflation caused “no hardship,” 78 percent voted for > Harris. So why would you do anything serious about inflation if your real > base of support, upper income voters, don’t feel any pain? > > Chuck Schmer enthusiastically *summarized* > <https://x.com/HeerJeet/status/943119232417521666> the new class politics > in 2016: > > For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will > pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you > can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin. > > Now, didn’t that turn out to be the perfect strategy for four more years > of Trump? > > Les Leopold > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#34672): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/34672 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/110654124/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: marxmail+ow...@groups.io Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
