• The Democratic Party Has One More Shot at Relevancy

    January 8, 2019

    Tags: , , ,
    Posted in: Democracy, Trump

    Elizabeth Warren, in the final hours of 2018, announced her candidacy for the Democratic nomination for president. She stands at the precipice with a Democratic Party that must hold the primaries in 2020 it should have held in 2016 to remain relevant.
    Among the 30-some people the New York Times says may seek the Democratic nomination, almost all the serious candidates should have run in 2016, including Warren, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and Cory Booker. Instead the fix was in; who doesn’t believe Obama pulled Biden aside to say “Kid, this ain’t your year.” Warren, et al, either had their own come-to-Obama moments or were smart enough to back down with dreams of Clintonesque Cabinet positions dancing in their heads. They reassured themselves they would still have time to run after Hillary wrapped up her eight years in office and before it was Chelsea’s turn.

    Old Man Bernie likely never imagined he’d do much more than use his primary platform to air out his signature issues of healthcare and economic reform. That’s why in the beginning he didn’t run against Hillary as much as he ran alongside of her, always gentle on her tender spots like those damn emails. But there was a hunger among some Democrats to confront Wall Street excesses and income inequality. Bernie caught a tailwind and when he did, we all know via the leaked DNC emails and some tell-alls how the Party took him out of the race with super delegates, rigged debates, ad buys, and did other dirty tricks we’d see more of later. Did you know he honeymooned in Russia?

    The primary season was to be little more than a warm-up for Hillary, with her Scooby van listening tour and her book tour and her staged “debates” with Official Party Cuck Martin O’Malley playing the role of the Washington Generals to Hillary’s Globetrotters. How’d that work out anyway?
    While no candidate this year has the power Hillary held in 2016, the temptation by the Party to rig the primaries again is great; why spend all that money on a long series of ho-hum votes, and why hand Trump footage like Harris calling Warren ineffective in some debate when the winner can be pre-determined? If Dems grant the media, currently operating with the hive mind of a 24-year-old Brooklynite who owes her parents money, too much influence, it’ll be some accomplishment-free shiny object like Beto for Trump to treat as a political chew toy. Give the voters another rigged primary – make it another her’s turn again – and you likely give America another four years of Trump.

    The Democratic Party in 2016 engineered defeat by not letting the process do what it is designed to do: weed out the weak and their weaknesses. Instead, every weakness was meant to be swept under the rug: Hillary Clinton was the archetypal 21st century candidate, a perfectly-formed tool of the oligarchy, all appetite. Never mind the emails, the Clinton Foundation, Hillary’s warmongering record, and most of all her lack of answers to the questions the electorate wanted answered. The voters knew Obamacare often failed them by providing health insurance they could afford but not actual healthcare they could afford, and that they were being left behind in an economy fueled by inequality. People with kids dying in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and elsewhere were unsure why. Meh, her turn, deal with it.

    These shortcomings would have been exposed during a real primary. Instead they were left to fester in voters’ minds, and Trump happened. Yet the after action reports on 2016 mention none of this. Instead, supposedly Trump won because of Russia and racist redneck misogynists. Anyone working to elect a Democratic president in 2020 who isn’t willing to consider that by rigging the 2016 primary they ran a weak candidate is being foolish. The only answer is a free-for-all primary, where the ideas that roil the Democratic party, the push and pull of what has come to be called “progressivism,” are allowed to slug it out.

    Because if the primaries don’t wash out the weaknesses, Trump most certainly will use his honed predator’s instincts to do it in the general campaign. Did you know Beto’s wife is part of a billion-dollar real estate family in Texas, making him more Jared than caped crusader? The primary needs to poke at Warren’s bizarro-world claims the system is rigged while it was the same rigged system that allowed her to rise into a position of prominence, what one commentator described as “a curious vision coming from a person whose life story, like that of tens millions of Americans who have risen far above their small beginnings, refutes her own thesis. It was curious, also, coming from someone who presumably believes that various forms of rigging are required to un-rig past rigging.’”

    And how much emphasis will voters place on blud purity? After years of bleating about diversity, what to do with Old White Straight Men like Biden or Michael Bloomberg in all this? Will Sanders’ supporters come home to the Party, or will they remember Bernie humiliated into a little nobody helping nominate someone at the Democratic Convention he clearly loathed? The primaries must above all else settle the question of whether or not Bernie is the divisive element a Democratic party already showing its cracks does not need in 2020.

    What will a sharp look at Cory Booker’s time as photo-op mayor of Newark and his warm relationship with Wall Street money reveal? What about Kamala Harris’ complex history of supporting some progressive causes while rejecting others as California attorney general? Why didn’t she prosecute Steven Mnuchin‘s bank? Meanwhile, how much time and money will be wasted on political fluffers like Beto, a guy who lost in his home state, one of the most important in terms of electoral votes?
    This is not to over-focus on any one candidate at this point; quite the opposite. It is to point out the kinds of issues that demand an aggressive, unfiltered, unrigged primary process to address, because nobody in the Democratic Party leadership knows the answers. The goal is two-fold: how will the candidates handle their past decisions and future plans in front of the public, and how will voters react to those attempts.

    No one can win against Trump in 2020 simply by being Not Trump. Never mind the Blue Wave in the House, it is the map which allowed the Republicans to grow their Senate majority in 2018 that controls the Electoral College. Trump is the natural end point of 17 post-9/11 years of keeping us afraid. He is the mediagenic demagogue a country gets when it abandons its people to economic apartheid. He feeds off being Not Not Trump. Every time someone says “well, that’s the end of Trump” after some outrageous statement, Trump needs only to top himself in the next tweet and the process restarts.
    Let the primaries get rough; the winner will need the experience to rise above Trump while simultaneously standing up to him. To beat Trump is to offer a counter-vision under fire. The primary process has to sort out which of the Democrats looking at the White House might be able to do that. Because if the Democratic Party again does not allow the primaries to do their job, Candidate Trump most certainly will. Again.


    Related Articles:

    Copyright © 2020. All rights reserved. The views expressed here are solely those of the author(s) in their private capacity.

  • Recent Comments

    • Chucknobomb said...


      Boycott Nancy & Chuck, and BDS etc.. Wage Peace….

      01/8/19 11:39 AM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...


      Will Obama tell the Democrats it is still Hillary’s turn since he takes a large part of the blame for her loss in 2016 and also for jumping the line in 2008? How Obama got Biden to stand down in 2016 baffles me. I never believed Biden’s explanation that he wasn’t up for the rigors of campaigning due to the loss of his son Beau. His son’s dying wish was probably that his dad would run to defeat Trump.

      01/8/19 12:19 PM | Comment Link

    • chuck nasmith said...


      Helen Thomas…To Obomber…At first press gathering for “O”. Mr. President… Are you aware of any Middle East country that has Nukes? (something like that). Obomber ” I won’t speculate on that Helen” (something like that). Do Russians & Israeli’s try to propagandize and buy control of the U.S.? Does the U.S do this & what do they spend? Who of the two (Russia & Israel) spend more, benefit more etc. ? I Love Jews, BDS. Did Russia spend 100 million to build a place like AIPAC HQ in D.C.? Will Chuck Shoemer be the Prime Minister in Israel in the future? What country do you support? Wage Peace…

      01/8/19 12:48 PM | Comment Link

    • Chucknobomb said...


      Do dual citizens in U.S. Congress vote for another country than the U.S.A. ? Why are they allowed? Donations? Blood? Gene’s? Greed? Capitalism? Enjoy… BDS

      01/8/19 12:51 PM | Comment Link

    • chuck nasmith said...


      Phone #’s and addresses are good. Try to ban me from Twitter and Facebook?! Text me… (got rid of my cells 10 years ago). PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP’s

      01/8/19 1:44 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      “No one can win against Trump in 2020 simply by being Not Trump.”

      Let US hope Trump is still walking around free to run in 2020. He did a great job getting out the vote in 2018. Here’s hoping the Deep State doesn’t deepsix the conartist before he does real damage to the Repugnicans in 2020.

      01/8/19 1:58 PM | Comment Link

    • Chucknobomb said...


      Simone Sanders worked for Bernie as Comm. Director or something. A friend met her & thought she was nice! Now works for CNN and is on Zionist video after trip to Israel (FREE?). Wow, will Bern hire her for 2020 or Wolf? Enjoy! Sheeples unite.

      01/8/19 2:02 PM | Comment Link

    • Chucknobomb said...


      Did De Blasio ever change his name? Why? Russians killed JFK! Good night. I like Blacks etc..

      01/8/19 2:22 PM | Comment Link

    • chuck nasmith said...


      Has the U.S, ever share intelligence with another country? 5 IIIII’s

      01/8/19 2:29 PM | Comment Link

    • Chucknobomb said...


      What is the best U.S. strategic nuke or country with Nukes? Is it like a base, and hopefully will the U.S.A. eventualy say “You deserve the bird” and we love Jews. Enjoy. Time out real soon BB. Remeber the Liberty or be a fool.

      01/8/19 2:38 PM | Comment Link

    • Chucknobomb said...


      Sorry Peter. Are the DEMs protesting the Walls in the West Bank & Gaza? Working for Human Rights? Let’s make it Illegal to BDS!!!! Keep amerika and Israel free for Capitalist PIGS. They will try to sneek anti BDS in something Bill. And then….

      01/8/19 2:45 PM | Comment Link

    • Chucknobomb said...


      I Like Blacks. My children are Jewish!

      01/8/19 2:46 PM | Comment Link

    • chuck nasmith said...


      Obama is a War Criminal. Killery/2020

      01/8/19 2:51 PM | Comment Link

    • Chucknobombc said...


      Mueller said there were WMD. Was he looking in the mirror?!!! Trust the FBI.

      01/8/19 2:56 PM | Comment Link

    • chuck nasmith said...


      I my home town, blacks, Jews, Whites etc. were people. Power to the People. Join u.s. to save our country.

      01/8/19 3:23 PM | Comment Link

    • Chucknobomb said...


      Plainfield NJ, home of Glenn Ford! Enjoy, Wake up. Riot if needed. Wage Peace.

      01/8/19 3:27 PM | Comment Link

    • Chucknobomb said...


      Hope to see u in the streets. Vote? Wake up. I have known BS for over 20 years. Maybe 50!!

      01/8/19 3:28 PM | Comment Link

    • chuck nasmith said...



      01/8/19 3:36 PM | Comment Link

    • Chucknobomb said...


      Boeing and Airbus earnings look good. How is the maker of F’35 and BS doing? Jobs for PeACE R nEEDED.

      01/8/19 3:56 PM | Comment Link

    • chuck nasmith said...


      Does Biden’s son work in Ukraine for a Company?

      01/8/19 4:09 PM | Comment Link

    • Chucknobomb said...


      Does a bank working with Israel work with The Don … Signiture

      01/8/19 4:12 PM | Comment Link

    • teri said...


      I had to look up the word “blud”. [“And how much emphasis will voters place on blud purity?” – from article.] I thought maybe it was a misspelling of the German word “blut”, which means “blood” and which would have fit reasonably in the sentence. Turns out “blud” is a slang word in the UK used like we would use the word “buddy” or the like. Here’s the urban dictionary definition:

      “Blud is ‘Mate (from blood brother).
      “Originally a Jamaican swear word ( see bludclot), picked up on in the UK and used incorrectly as a term of endearment in the same way as Bredren.
      “The term Blud is now used in a same way in The UK as ‘Nigga’ is used in the US, but without the racial stipulation, its freely used by white and black youths to define friendship.”

      Well, okay, maybe that doesn’t fit as well as “blut” would. Maybe it is a misspelling, after all. Or maybe “blud” means “blood”, but is not from the German, but some other language. Anyway, I learned a new word out of it, whatever the case is.

      But to refer to O’Malley as a “cuck”? [“Official Party Cuck Martin O’Malley” – from article.] I know that word alright. I don’t mind foul language, god knows I use enough fucking bad words to make anyone blush, but here you are picking up a word from the Steve Bannon/Rush Limbaugh alt-right racist camp. It’s not just a nasty bit of slang from those over-compensating neanderthals – it’s a signal of your stance on certain things.

      Is this who you are now, or who you have been all along? I’m wondering, because to find this particular word used so casually and meanly in one of your articles is really shocking. I don’t shock easily, but this is really beneath you. Perhaps revealing, and not in a good way.

      There is nothing wrong with O’Malley. We Marylanders were pretty much okay with him. He is a nice guy, a little too much to the “center” for the more liberal among us, but was a fine governor. Marylanders who liked O’Malley have been surprised to find out that Hogan (a Republican) is doing a suitable job, too, and both these guys are liked by people of both parties. (I guess Hogan is somewhat “left” of the usual Republican.) In any case, O’Malley had some good ideas in his 2016 bid, but was quickly tossed aside by the relentless Clinton people. I do see you are trying to make the point that O’Malley, like Sanders, wasn’t man enough to stand up to Clinton, which is kind of a dubious point anyway, given the massive Clinton machine in control of the DNC that overwhelmed every single one of the Democratic candidates….and the Green and Libertarian candidates, too. The failure to withstand it was not a testament about anyone’s manliness; it was a testament about how money buys placement. But using that particular word is nasty as shit, unnecessary, and makes you sound like a member of that slimy ultra-right, white-real-men-only club.

      WTF, Peter?

      01/8/19 5:20 PM | Comment Link

    • wemeantwell said...


      I used BLUD as in Blud (Russian: Блуд), one of the Slavic fairies in Slavic mythology, is an evil-deity that causes disorientation and leads a person aimlessly around and round. It was a play on the German BLUT, blood, from the Nazi days when ideological purity was so important.

      I called O’Malley a cuck (we agree on the definition) because he allowed himself to be used by the Clinton campaign, pretending to be a real candidate so she could have some free punches. No disrespect intended against Marylanders.

      01/9/19 3:13 PM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...


      Teri- I attribute PVB’s coarse remarks at times to frustrated career aspirations. It can lead to bouts of self pity and make one pretty mean and petty, I speak from experience.

      01/8/19 6:59 PM | Comment Link

    • Tom said...


      “Anyone working to elect a Democratic president in 2020 who isn’t willing to consider that by rigging the 2016 primary they ran a weak candidate is being foolish.”

      Yes. This.

      01/8/19 10:44 PM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...


      Peter- I think Democrats fear the prospect an all out primary slugfest even though Trump’s approach garnered him a victory. The country may still be convinced an all out bare knuckles cage fight is the best way to determine the best “man” for the job of leading and protecting them. They may only abandon Trump when he is bested by a more vicious opponent. The Democrats may not allow such a person to prevail in the primaries.

      01/9/19 10:10 AM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...



      Please refrain from using words like Democrats. It plays into the mass delusion there is a real choice for the Dumbest Country on the Planet. IF a leading candidate in either party espoused a real choice- restoring tax fairness so the rich don’t end up with all the toys and cutting the military-surveillance-industrial complex down to the size of the combined Chinese- Russian military budget, Americans’ votes would be worth a damn. Of course, this person would be considered an Enemy of the State and be discredited immediately or eliminated by the Deep State.

      Now back to the delusion…

      01/9/19 1:05 PM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...


      Bauer- Would you prefer “oppositional party”? That too is lame. Yes we live under a false adversarial system. Both so called parties have agreed that one leads at times while the other drafts. They have learned to power share in a fairly orderly sequence which I guess is as good as it can get for this nation.

      01/9/19 5:11 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      The MSNBCs, CNNs and the rest are paid to suppress any real threat to the status quo. Hey, ratings are up. They are all getting rich playing this opposition party game. And the rest of US can pound sand.

      01/9/19 5:18 PM | Comment Link

    • teri said...



      I did find that Russian definition of “blud” (an evil fairy who disorients people) on the internet, but in the modern Russian slang, blud means fornication. Either way, it doesn’t really work in your sentence there, while your other note about using the word to invoke the idea of the Nazi purity word, “blut”, does fit into the meaning of the sentence. Lots of people are aware of the Nazi slogan Blut und Boden (blood and soil), especially with the rise of the neo-Nazis and alt-right recently in the US. So your comment just reinforces the impression that you intended to call to mind these far-right images.

      As to O’Malley and the use of the word “cuck”, I am not offended as a Marylander or as an O’Malley supporter, which, BTW, I wasn’t. I am offended because some words are only used to identify membership in a certain group and that particular word signifies that one is a part of the alt-right crowd. Nobody else uses the word – except perhaps to point out, like I just did, that it is a word used by the white alt-right movement. To give other examples as to what I mean by this: if I hear my neighbor use the words “niggers”, “kikes”, or “spics”, I can correctly assume she is a racist. She self-identifies as a racist, and doesn’t care who knows it. People who disdainfully call the computer challenged “luddites” identify as part of the tech savvy crowd; even thought the word is not offensive the way racist labels are, it is still a self-identifier. (And I have no objection to its usage, to be clear – I am just making a point about how people sometimes choose words.) This is not unlike the Valley Girls with their “beeotch” and “grody”. Not offensive, but, like, TOTALLY a way to signify which group they belong to. (Trying for some humor here.)

      I object to “cuck” because it is used as an acknowledged self-identifier of the alt-right and neo-Nazis. They invented the word, claim the word, and proudly use it to identify themselves as members of the group. The Blut Und Boden slogan is theirs now too; they love to fly that banner to carry on the Nazi traditions. Interesting that you wanted to bring that to mind on purpose.

      So why use it? You could have said, “O’Malley allowed himself to be used by the Clinton campaign, pretending to be a real candidate so she could have some free punches.” No reason to identify yourself to the reader as a member of the Breitbart alt-right wing nuts. I mean, unless you are. In which case, carry on, good sir. Free country and all that.

      I just wanted to let you know the impression it leaves, that’s all. I wouldn’t have bothered to comment if I didn’t usually find your articles free of that sort of phraseology.

      01/10/19 7:25 AM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...



      I doubt Peter chooses to hang with the alt-right crowd. While he may have a skin head, he couldn’t choose his genes. Peter’s present course of discourse is “a plague on both their corrupt houses.” Government is a pay-to-play fornication and you peons ain’t invited to the party.

      Speaking missing in action, whatever happened to Moscow Mitch?

      01/10/19 11:48 AM | Comment Link

    • wemeantwell said...


      Thank you for getting this. I am sick of people labeling me in any way, but especially sick of people who insist I must support Trump because I point out those, especially in the media, who have lost their minds over his presence. I initially supported Bernie in 2016 and when it became clear the fix was in against him by the Dems, I ended up voting Jill Stein because I was not going to chose among grifters Trump and Clinton. I have seen issues that mean so much to us all, and to me personally, like unfettered free speech, morph into “alt-right.” Because today if you support as I do free speech you are said to be a nazi lover. Anti-war on Syria? Apparently that makes on a Trumpist. In favor of diplomatic negotiations with North Korea? Trump lover! Give me a break.

      01/10/19 3:15 PM | Comment Link

    • teri said...


      Oh, stop. I get the “a pox on both their houses” stuff. I get the refusal to condemn any Trump action because he is “no worse than the one who preceded him” (although I find that to be a weak argument, frankly; every president is responsible for his own actions, say I, and needs to be held to account when he is wrong).

      I do NOT think that taking these stances makes you a Nazi or a Trump lover. I DO think that adopting the coined trigger words of the alt-right makes one appear that s/he favors or approves of that mindset.

      I couldn’t stand Obama. I did not start throwing around words like “nigger” or “chimp” to make that point. My right to free speech notwithstanding.

      If this were the only Van Buren article I had ever read, I would assume you to be at least sympathetic to the alt-right viewpoint. As a writer, your choice of words presents a snapshot of you to the public. There are a couple of words in this article that don’t offer a flattering picture. That’s all I was saying.

      In case you missed it, I did not find fault with the article as a whole or criticize your views as presented in the article. I just found the inclusion of the one word to be weird and not typical of what I think I know of your views on the universe and everything in it.

      01/11/19 3:23 AM | Comment Link

    • Chucknobomb said...


      I love watching Black Hispanic Jewish Christians Gay Bi Tri White/Colored Women Men etc. and Pigs on M$NBC and other channels that all seem like AIPAC lobbyists or MIC talkers, maybe Both or more! Have a nice whatever.

      01/12/19 2:16 PM | Comment Link

    Leave A Comment

    Mail (will not be published) (required)