The Decline of the DNC III

[crimsonaudio]

New thread, last one hit the 500 post limit.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

The winner for the Democrats will be the one who can channel the forward-looking optimism of JFK or Clinton and basically pull a Mark McGwire with, "I'm not here to talk about the past" regarding the other things.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

The winner for the Democrats will be the one who can channel the forward-looking optimism of JFK or Clinton and basically pull a Mark McGwire with, "I'm not here to talk about the past" regarding the other things.

How about pulling a "Sammy Sosa" and talk in Spanish?

 

[selmaborntidefan]

How about pulling a "Sammy Sosa" and talk in Spanish?

Not sure if I should say this……pull a Sosa could be a black candidate turning white……..

 

[Huckleberry]

The Atlantic Gift Link

Trying this again (another excerpt from Tapper's book):

The Congressman Who Saw the Truth About Biden
While many Democrats remained in denial, Mike Quigley perceived something painfully familiar.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

And I Have a Bridge in Brooklyn to Sell You: Schumer Suggests that the Administration Caused the Mexican Ship Collision

It has long been a practice for New York sharpies to scam chumps by offering to sell them the Brooklyn Bridge. However, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) tried an even harder scam in selling the idea on S…

jonathanturley.org

Unwilling to let any tragedy go to waste, the Democratic minority leader issued a press release declaring

“We know there has been meddling by the Trump administration into USCG staffing, and we need to know how this might have impacted the events of last night — from a command, communication and local coordination level. There are indications that this service [Vehicle Traffic System] may not be fully or adequately functional in light of a hiring freeze. If this were the case, the Brooklyn Bridge accident would be a national harbinger, demanding immediate attention.”

The Coast Guard was obviously not amused. It issued its own press release Sunday that said that it immediately responded to the scene of the deadly collision:

“Sector New York immediately launched a crew from Coast Guard Station New York to the scene and established a safety zone from the Brooklyn Bridge to the Manhattan Bridge. New York Vessel Traffic Services suspended commercial traffic in the area.”

I think Chuck has eaten one too many raw hamburgers. Clearly he intends to out-Mitch McConnell the actual Mitch McConnell.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

The Atlantic Gift Link

Trying this again (another excerpt from Tapper's book):

The Congressman Who Saw the Truth About Biden
While many Democrats remained in denial, Mike Quigley perceived something painfully familiar.

People appreciated that Quigley was one of the first Democratic officials to publicly call for Biden to step aside. “But it was too late,” one activist told him. She was angry at the party’s leadership, but most of all, at Biden. “They couldn’t let their egos get out of the way,” she said. “He saved our democracy and then he doomed it again.”

Thanks for the gift link; that was an interesting read. Of course, moronic lines like the bolded part in the quote are why I can't read The Atlantic. The media is doing its dead-level best to deflect their role in the cover-up, but I don't think it's working.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

A Judge of Her Peers? Judge Dugan Assigned a Judge Previously Rebuked for Political Comments

Five years ago, I wrote about a federal judge who, in my view, had discarded any resemblance of judicial restraint and judgment in a public screed against Republicans, Donald Trump, and the Supreme…

jonathanturley.org

This week, a judge was randomly selected to preside at the trial of Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan. A critic of Trump’s immigration policies, Dugan is accused of obstructing federal law enforcement and facilitating the escape of an unlawful immigrant.

The judge assigned to the Dugan case? You guessed it. Lynn Adelman, 85.

Adelman was a long-standing Democratic politician who tried repeatedly and unsuccessfully to run for Congress during his 20-year tenure in the Wisconsin Senate. For critics, Adelman never set aside his political agenda after President Bill Clinton nominated him for the federal bench.

Adelman was later admonished by the Civility Committee for the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals for his public political attacks as “inconsistent with a judge’s duty to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary and as reflecting adversely on the judge’s impartiality.”

 

[selmaborntidefan]

The Atlantic Gift Link

Trying this again (another excerpt from Tapper's book):

The Congressman Who Saw the Truth About Biden
While many Democrats remained in denial, Mike Quigley perceived something painfully familiar.

For starters, thank you so much for this article link. I read it, and I digested it.

Anyone old enough to remember the 1992 campaign probably remembers how "old" George H.W. Bush looked in that campaign. He was "only" 68 that June (younger than Hillary in the 2016 election cycle), but he admitted in his diary that the post-Gulf War time frame really depressed him, going from all that activity to almost nothing. I'm still convinced PART of why Bush lost was you had this old guy who may not have had dementia (he was still pretty sharp) but did look old and not exactly enthusiastic competing with this young, handsome, idealist who (yes) was a helluva campaigner (and a liar, but I digress). It was vibrancy of the future versus a tired old man who was still respected even when he wasn't loved.

I keep thinking this thing over and over, but beyond someone having the ability to point to Biden and say, "Look, we your rich donors will not be backing you in 2024, so you need to announce you're not running", I don't know what else would have worked.

I can 100% blame every single person who willingly came forth and lied, especially if they went over the top with it. Or attacked Republicans for daring to suggest it - because it was true and we were seeing it. They could have just said, "I'm a Democrat, I support our President, and I will support any nominee our party nominates."

But I think in the bigger scheme of things, people are forgetting that the moment Biden announced he wouldn't run - had he done so in 2023 - he was at that point a lame duck that nobody in either party had ANY reason to walk over hot coals and defend or support with legislation. Does anyone here really believe that if he had whispered it to a few folks that when the next nominees began moving into the starting gate nobody would have noticed? LBJ - we now know - decided at Thanksgiving 1967 that he wasn't going to run again in 1968, he didn't think he would survive another team (and he was right; he died two days after said term would have ended and that without the stress of Vietnam every day). But he also knew that if he announced it at that time, VIETNAM had zero reason to do anything with him, and if he could then present himself as the President of peace with Humphrey serving to preserve continuity (which is why the myth of RFK winning in 1968 was never gonna happen, not in those pre-primary across the board days).


It's EASY for all of us to say what Biden should have done, but it seems to me that he would have a stronger legacy if he would have resigned over the Christmas holidays in 2023 and turned the country over to Harris - because that would have shown he thought he was RIGHT in choosing her in 2020. She could then run on her own, good or bad.

"I can't run because I'm old BUT I will stay in office" was never going to fly.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

A giant pile of money won't fix Democrats' Joe Rogan problem

Democrats want to spend millions searching for a liberal Joe Rogan. It won't work. "We need our own Joe Rogan," has rapidly become the most important

reason.com

As a result, the Trump media coalition is for people who distrust elite institutions, legacy journalism, and the expert consensus; leftists who wanted to remain true to their anti-establishment brand have found that the audience is simply bigger on the right these days. Meanwhile, the anti-Trump coalition is more or less satisfied with traditional media offerings: print journalism, cable news, etc.

Moreover, if they did somehow find a popular, heterodox podcaster who appealed to young males and possessed the ability to steer them away from Trump, the Democrats would turn on this person the second he called out woke shibboleths or made a serious challenge to the party's establishment. In other words, the very characteristics that make a Rogan a Rogan are anathema to the Democratic Party.

While it's true that Dems wouldn't recognize authenticity if it smacked them over the head with an ironing board, it's not like the Reps are any better. They got lucky timing here. Anti-establishment sentiment is at an all-time high, probably the highest since the days of the Vietnam War. Reps just happen to be on the correct side of it (at least for a little while. They'll screw this up, mark my words.)

 

[selmaborntidefan]

While it's true that Dems wouldn't recognize authenticity if it smacked them over the head with an ironing board, it's not like the Reps are any better. They got lucky timing here. Anti-establishment sentiment is at an all-time high, probably the highest since the days of the Vietnam War. Reps just happen to be on the correct side of it (at least for a little while. They'll screw this up, mark my words.)

Look, ever since Rush Limbaugh hit the airwaves - well, actually it took Clinton winning to make him a big deal - I've heard for 30 years now about how the left need "their Limbaugh." I mean, why? Since people even became all that aware of Rush, the scoreboard reads:

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS
Ds: 5 Rs 3 (he died before the 2024 election, so it's 5-4, and the Rs lost the popular vote, 7-2)

MIDTERMS
Ds 5 Rs 3

So exactly what influence did he REALLY have in determining who won elections? Now, he himself noted, "My success is not determined by who wins elections but by how many people tune into my show." And on that score, he blew everyone away.

It's almost like the problem isn't "we don't have our own Limbaugh now Rogan" but something else.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

It's almost like the problem isn't "we don't have our own Limbaugh now Rogan" but something else.

1000%. If Dems are willing to spend the kind of money they are looking for their "Rogan" it merely demonstrates what we've been saying for months: they are refusing to take an honest assessment of why they lost. They simply cannot consider the notion that a lot of their ideals are losers in the eyes of the voting public. That's why we get ridiculous takes like, "Democrats have a messaging problem." No, they don't. Their ideas just suck.