This post was inspired by Katrina vanden Heuvel’s most recent WaPo column to which I won’t even bother to link because it’s paywalled. In it she characterizes the Democratic Party establishment as “panicking” because two of the three leading Democratic presidential aspirants, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, are not part of the club. She goes on to mention a dinner at which various names, e.g. Michael Bloomberg, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, were mentioned as possible last-minute saviors.
Ms. vanden Heuvel assumes facts not in evidence namely
- That Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren could become the eventual nominee and
- That either one of them could be elected.
I don’t think the Democratic Party can afford to have Bernie Sanders as its standard bearer but, to paraphrase Harry Truman, given a choice between a real socialist and a fake socialist, will Democrats still pick a real one every time?
Both the Democratic and Republican establishments are panicking but not for the reasons Ms. vanden Heuvel suggests. Each of our political parties has two wings. Among the Republicans it’s their ideological wing (whether libertarian or “conservative”) and their operational or establishment wing. The Democrats have their progressive and operational or establishment wings.
The temperaments and motivations of the ideological and operational wings are completely different. Members of the ideological wings of their respective parties do not have the interest or patience to deal with the boring, repetitive, mindless minutiae of actual governing. The members of the operational wings have clear, compelling motives to do that. They are thoroughly corrupt. They are motivated by personal gain.
The reason that the establishments are panicking is that the ideological wings of the two parties, largely due to the general incompetence of the operational wings, are gaining in influence at the expense of the operational wings and the corrupt operational wings realize that the gravy train is running dry.
One theme I return to frequently, especially at OTB, is that Democrats are infected with the same miasma that broke up the GoP. The main difference is that the GoP is patient zero. The Democratic nomination will be a big test of that theory.
A basic difference between the two parties is that the GOP is healthier at the state level than it is either at the local or national level.
The largest city with a Republican mayor is San Diego. Big city Democratic mayors outnumber their Republican counterparts by more than 2:1 and most of the big city Republican mayors are either in Florida or Texas.
The states in the worst fiscal health tend to have Democratic governors and legislations. I attribute that to the collaboration between public employee unions and Democratic politicians at the state level. As I’ve pointed out frequently, there is an inescapable conflict of interest.
“The states in the worst fiscal health tend to have Democratic governors and legislations.”
But you are still a Democrat. Why so?
Trump is hated and feared by the operational wings of both parties(which includes the military and intelligence services), because he threatens their corrupt incomes.
‘Trump is hated and feared by the operational wings of both parties(which includes the military and intelligence services), because he threatens their corrupt incomes.’
Which he likely wouldn’t have threatened had they accepted the peace offering he gave them after the election. Remember, this is no choirboy we’re talking about, he ran with a pretty rough and corrupt crowd in NYC. But no, they were so convinced that he would do unto them what they planned to do to him even after the election (recall the infamous Plouffe quote) that they simply converted the stop-Trump-from-being-elected operation into the get-Trump-out-of-office operation. And thus are bringing about their own destruction. And good riddance. The only reason why these incompetents are still at it is because their shenanigans are either ignored by or willfully aided and abetted by most media outlets. Can’t Schiff get at least one secret witness to testify who isn’t thoroughly corrupt, compromised, or tangletongued?
” because he threatens their corrupt incomes.”
Nonsense. Go ahead and cite any instances of his presidency hurting any corrupt politician or rich person. Heck, he filled his cabinet and brought in advisors who made it a point to use their office for personal gain.
“Can’t Schiff get at least one secret witness to testify ”
You do realize Republicans are going to the depositions so these arent secret? Also, one must ask why Trump was appointing corrupt people to ambassador positions? Why were they choosing corrupt Army officers to work at NSC (which Trump has authority over)?
Steve