Tag: Democratic Party

How Democrats Can Win in 2028

Hint: Select Someone Like Bernie Sanders

BILL ASTORE

OCT 12, 2025

How can Democrats win in 2028? Not by doing what the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has been doing—chasing corporate money, currying favor with AIPAC, and catering to the donor class. That may enrich the DNC, but it’s not a winning strategy.

Winning elections requires inspiring people to vote for you—to believe you’ll actually fight for them. Kamala Harris lost in 2024 because too many people stayed home. Many of those same voters had once turned out enthusiastically for Joe Biden in 2020 and Barack Obama before him.

Nominating “Cheney-adjacent” Democrats—candidates who sound like Republican-lite fiscal conservatives and foreign policy hawks—hasn’t worked. These are candidates who embrace militarism, defend Israel no matter what, and cater to big money interests. That’s the path Kamala Harris chose in 2024, and even she later admitted it likely cost her the election. Establishment Democrats keep chasing the mythical “moderate Republican” who dislikes Donald Trump but could be persuaded to vote blue. It didn’t work for Hillary Clinton in 2016, and it failed again in 2024.

The reasons for the 2024 loss aren’t mysterious. Democratic leaders lied about Biden’s fitness for another term. They betrayed their base. They allowed the party to be captured by moneyed interests. And they ran a hollow campaign—focused on the “joy” of Kamala rather than on real issues like raising the federal minimum wage, reducing student debt, or protecting workers and the middle class.

Today’s Democratic leadership—an aging, entrenched gerontocracy—is out of touch. Obsessed with fundraising and self-preservation, they offer no charisma, no moral courage, and no compelling vision. Yet America desperately needs a strong, principled Democratic Party to counter Trumpism. What we have instead is a party that’s too old, too corrupted, and too timid to resist it effectively.

Democrats need to rediscover the spirit of Robert F. Kennedy Sr., George McGovern, and yes, Bernie Sanders. Remarkably, Trump now seems to many voters more “worker-friendly” than the average Democrat politician. He’s seizing traditional Democratic issues like lowering prescription drug prices while Democrats, paralyzed by caution, are doing little to challenge him.

Sanders himself has said the Democratic primary process is rigged against candidates like him. Voters recognize when they’re being sold a false bill of goods. When they feel manipulated, they stay home—or worse, cast protest votes for demagogues who seem more “authentic.” Sanders has also called both major parties “largely corrupt,”and sadly, the Republicans—corrupt as they are—are currently better at winning than the Democrats.

For his honesty, Sanders deserves respect. He’s one of the few major politicians willing to say plainly that the Democratic Party has become an obstacle to genuine democracy—rigging its own primaries and processes to favor establishment figures like Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris, while marginalizing the progressives who actually energize voters.

As Sanders noted in a recent interview (see above, after the 40-minute mark), the Democratic Party would rather lose an election than risk upsetting the status quo. Which brings us to 2028: it’s easy to imagine the DNC once again anointing someone like Gavin Newsom (handsome but hollow), Pete Buttigieg (a corporate technocrat who happens to be gay), or Josh Shapiro (a reliable Zionist), all while ignoring the lessons Sanders tried to teach.

And when President J.D. Vance takes office in 2029, Democratic leaders will once again blame the voters—never themselves.

Meet the New Centrist Democratic Party

Same as the Old Centrist Democratic Party

BILL ASTORE

OCT 11, 2025

Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-Michigan) is a rising star in the Democratic Party. In July she denied Israel’s genocidal intent in Gaza and deflected criticism of AIPAC and its role in American politics. Earlier in March, she gave the Democratic response to Trump by citing with approval, I kid you not, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. In the early weeks of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, she called for increases to Pentagon spending and more U.S. troops to be committed to Europe.

Elissa Slotkin: Let’s criticize Trump by praising Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush

Slotkin checks just about every box the Democratic establishment loves: a woman, Jewish, former CIA officer, veteran of the National Security Council and State Department. She’s the military-industrial complex softened by a woman’s touch—a reassuring smile masking a hardened national-security mindset. I can easily imagine her as vice-presidential material in 2028.

And who might lead that ticket? My bet is on Josh Shapiro, Pennsylvania’s governor. Like Slotkin, he’s Jewish, firmly pro-Israel, and rooted in a swing state Democrats must win. A Shapiro-Slotkin ticket—lawyer and intelligence officer, both hawkish, both “safe” for the donor class—would symbolize how far the party has drifted from its old progressive soul (think here of FDR and George McGovern).

Shapiro–Slotkin: the likely face of Democratic centrism in 2028.

And I know what my Democratic friends will tell me in 2028: No matter how pro-Israel and pro-Pentagon these Democrats are, they’re better than Trump or his successor. So hold your nose and vote blue no matter who.

Let’s not forget the time Josh Shapiro signed an artillery shell to be used against Russia. From Pennsylvania with love?

Israel, Gaza, and Moral Collapse

The Democratic establishment’s moral confusion (and collusion) over Gaza’s destruction is a measure of serious moral drift. Previous talk of a “partial offensive weapons boycott” against Israel was pure political theater, since Israel defines every weapon it uses as defensive. Even Iron Dome missiles—marketed as purely protective—provide cover for Israel’s ongoing offensive operations.

Let’s be honest: even Israeli human-rights organizations now call what’s happening in Gaza a genocide. The term “war crime” implies a conventional war, with atrocities committed in battle’s chaos. But Gaza isn’t a battlefield—it’s an occupied territory subjected to systematic destruction. Israel’s goal is transparently obvious: mass death and displacement. How can mainline Democrats support this? In fact, how can anyone with a heart support this?

A Party I Once Belonged To

I say this as someone who once called himself a Democrat. I voted for Obama twice and stayed registered with the party until 2016. I even received my share of glossy mailers from the Biden campaign in 2020 and 2024 before it all went down in flames.

So yes, I’m a winnable voter—someone who could still be moved by a Democratic candidate like Bernie Sanders, Dennis Kucinich, George McGovern, or RFK Sr. But that kind of Democrat, a principled progressive, a friend to the working classes, has vanished from the party’s upper ranks.

Since the Clinton years, the DNC has courted and served Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and the Pentagon with equal zeal. The result is a party that preaches “diversity” while funding foreign wars, that champions “equity” while enabling wanton Israeli aggression.

If Democrats nominate yet another national security hawk in 2028—someone who kneels before Netanyahu and calls it diplomacy—I’ll vote third party again. But if they rediscover their moral compass and nominate a candidate with real progressive convictions, I’ll be the first to sign up.

Remembering What Democrats Once Were

I invoke names like Geroge McGovern and RFK Sr. not out of nostalgia, but to remind us that the Democratic Party once stood (however shakily) for peace, diplomacy, and courage. These were leaders who challenged militarism and believed America could be a force for good. Think of JFK’s brilliant peace speech in 1963.

Today’s Democrats, with few exceptions, are indistinguishable from John McCain when it comes to their enthusiasm for war and weapons. They celebrate “defense spending” as if it were a patriotic sacrament, while the Pentagon drains over a trillion dollars a year from our treasury.

I’ve supported Bernie Sanders since 2015 and still respect his attempt to challenge this militaristic drift, though I’ve been disappointed by his compromises. Sanders in particular has been slow to denounce Israel’s genocidal crimes in Gaza. I find myself in broad agreement with commentators like Caitlin Johnstone, who call out Israel’s genocide and the U.S. government’s bipartisan complicity here. Her critique of American empire resonates because I still believe in a constitutional republic with a citizen-soldier military focused on defense and domestic health.

That vision once animated much of the Democratic Party. Today, it feels like a very distant memory.

The Democrats Boldly Respond to Trump by Citing–Ronald Reagan

W.J. Astore

Trust me, I’m ex-CIA!

I confess I didn’t watch President Trump’s address last night nor the response from the Democrats. I’ve heard enough of Trump bloviating and I’ve had my fill of Democrats and their “resistance.”

Checking my news feed this AM, I see that the Democratic response was given by a “moderate,” Senator Elissa Slotkin of Michigan. She’s an ex-CIA agent, so I guess that means we can trust her? And she served alongside troops in the disastrous Iraq War, so I guess she’s patriotic and smart?

Here’s the link to her address.

Senator Slotkin tackled Trump not by citing progressive ideas and Democratic worthies like FDR and George McGovern but by applauding a Republican President, Ronald Reagan. President George W. Bush also got a positive mention.

Her main complaint was the “chaos” unleashed by Trump/Musk. She made a big deal about protecting the “homeland” along with immigration reform. She dropped a lot of buzzwords. She stressed that Trump apparently doesn’t think that America is theexceptional nation. And that he’s too cozy with Russia and Putin. The usual charges.

What was missing was vision, especially moral commitments to peace and justice. I heard nothing concrete about enlarging unions, boosting wages, affordable health care for all, serious student loan debt relief, or putting a stop to genocide in Gaza.

We’re still exceptional. Apple pie!

Slotkin’s speech was a perfect product of the corporate Democrats, or, more accurately, the uniparty and the national security state. She’s for “responsible” change. She’s for the middle class. Even apple pie got a mention!

Apparently, the Democratic plan to win back the presidency in 2028 is to reanimate the body of Ronald Reagan with apple pie as his running mate. How’s that for “resistance,” America? 

Bonus Lesson: Slotkin said America’s “superpower” is that we’re a nation of “strivers” and “risk-takers” who are “never satisfied.” I guess other nations and peoples don’t have innovators with ambition, or maybe they’re too easily satisfied, unlike Americans?

The Decline and Fall of the Democratic Party

W.J. Astore

Further Thoughts on Tulsi Gabbard’s Confirmation Hearing

JAN 31, 2025

Tulsi Gabbard, once the darling of the Democratic Party, now viewed with scorn by Democrats

Once upon a time, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard was the future of the Democratic Party. Born in American Samoa. A woman of color. A military veteran who’d served in the Iraq war. A Hindu. She represented diversity, equity, and inclusion. Her politics were broadly progressive. And thus she was quickly given a position as vice chair of the DNC. That’s where the trouble began.

Because Tulsi believed in an equitable and fair process for the 2016 presidential campaign, when the DNC then was controlled by Hillary Clinton and her acolytes. The primary process was, in a word, rigged, with outsider candidate Bernie Sanders never having a fair chance to win the nomination despite his enormous popularity. So Tulsi resigned her position as vice chair even as she backed Sanders, earning the unending enmity of Hillary Clinton and the entire DNC establishment.

Tulsi was a candidate for president in 2020 in the Democratic primaries, where during one debate she demolished then up-and-comer Kamala Harris, another Clinton acolyte. Harris fizzled as Tulsi endured, despite smears by the Clinton wing that she was a Putin puppet. Tulsi never had a chance, of course, as Barack Obama intervened to throw the primary to Joe Biden, already a man in physical and mental decline.

After that, Tulsi sought another way, becoming an independent until she decided, obviously because she’s politically ambitious, to endorse Donald Trump and to turn Republican. I can’t say that I blame her. When Democrats are suggesting you’re a possible traitor to your own country, or at the very least a useful idiot for Putin and Assad, even as you wear the uniform of the U.S. Army as a lieutenant colonel, what was she to do?

As I watched yesterday’s confirmation hearing for Tulsi, I was once again struck by her intelligence, knowledge, and poise. A skilled speaker, she thinks well on her feet. Her answers are direct and clear: no “word salads” like Kamala Harris, no evasiveness, no laughing or giggling when she doesn’t know the answer. If Joe Biden had picked Tulsi as his running mate in 2020, and Tulsi had run against Trump last year, my bet is that America would now have its first woman—and woman of color—as President.

I recently read an article that listed the Democrats’ top presidential candidates for 2028. Not surprisingly, mediocre white males dominated the list: Josh Shapiro and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania (both fanatical Zionists) as well as “Mayor” Pete Buttigieg. The one female with a reasonable chance, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, has a standard background as a lawyer and a Christian. Most importantly, she’s a party loyalist, so look for her in 2028 as the “diverse” candidate of the DNC.

Of course, Democrats used to have a truly diverse, highly capable, and charismatic candidate in Tulsi Gabbard. She may yet emerge as a strong candidate for the presidency in 2028—as a Republican.

Much like RFK Jr., Tulsi is now hated by the Democratic Party for her nonconformity to corporate interests. Those interests have torn the heart out of the party of JFK, LBJ, and George McGovern. Only a corporate shell (and corporate shills) remains at the national level. And that is truly a shame for democracy in America.

Blaming the Voters

W.J. Astore

Democrats Return to What They Do Best

The Democratic Party is returning to what they do best: blaming the voters for their defeat.

Why did Kamala lose? Racism and sexism. Duh. And white women. And Hispanics. And Black men. They just didn’t do what they were supposed to do, which was to vote for Kamala. After all, she was the candidate handpicked for you by the DNC elite. Geez, what more do you want? Look at the joy below!

You expected them to dazzle? Shame on you!

Remember Michelle Obama wagged her finger and scolded you not to expect Kamala to “dazzle”? Remember her husband berated Black men for not having Kamala’s back? I’m amazed that didn’t convince you to vote for Kamalove and Kamalot. Haters, all of you.

Of course, I channeled my hatred of women and Jews by voting for Jill Stein. But as a cis white male, nothing better was expected of me; I was always a lost cause. And by voting for Jill Stein, a Jewish woman dedicated to peace and against genocide in Gaza, I was obviously really voting not for Stein but for Trump. Duh.

I’m deplorable. I’m garbage. I’m a bad person. The only good people are those who voted for Kamala. End of story.

One thing is certain: It can’t be the candidate. It’s not her fault that she couldn’t inspire more voters to cast their ballots for her. It’s not her fault that she embraced the Cheneys. It’s not her fault she touted the “lethal” U.S. military and supported Israel and its genocide in Gaza. It’s not her fault that her track record in 2020 for winning support at the national level was abysmal. It’s not her fault she lost all seven battleground states despite more than a billion dollars spent on her campaign. It’s not her fault—it’s your fault. She didn’t deserve to be repudiated by voters—and you’re going to deserve your fate under Trump since you rejected her.

Some of you still want a populist like Bernie Sanders, don’t you? Sorry, that’s never going to happen. We the DNC would rather lose with a Cheney-endorsed neocon genocide-enabler like Harris than win with a principled populist like Sanders. Not just in 2016, not just in 2024, but in 2028 and all future elections.

Either you vote for the DNC Republican we give you or you get the RNC Republican we all deplore. Got a problem with that? Have you thought about leaving the country?

Addendum: If Democrats truly believe democracy dies in darkness under Trump, was a mediocre vice president with less-than-stellar political and speaking skills the best person to challenge him? If Trump=fascism, was anointing Kamala as the candidate without primaries the best way to demonstrate Democrats’ commitment to a fair process open to everyone within the party? Are voters really to blame when you give them no choice, no say, and no real power?

Donald Trump Wins Again

W.J. Astore

An unsurprising election result

I woke to the news that Donald Trump is the projected winner of the 2024 presidential election. What that means for the country and the world remains to be seen. Why he won, and why Kamala Harris lost, will surely be analyzed deeply.

It didn’t end well …

Readers here know my take. I didn’t think Harris was the best candidate for Democrats to run for several reasons:

  1. She was selected by the DNC rather than going through the normal primary process. In 2020, her campaign for the presidency flamed out quickly without her winning a single vote or delegate. She needed time to hone her message and develop her political chops, but she didn’t have that time.
  2. Her total support of Israel and her embrace of the Cheneys and Republican dissenters from Trump estranged her from progressives within her own party. If people want a Republican, they’re most likely to vote Trump, not a Cheney-endorsed Democrat.
  3. Harris had a muddled, “soft sell” message. It was unclear what she truly stood for. Words like “forward” and phrases like “We’re not going back” were vague to the point of meaninglessness.
  4. Harris was perhaps most closely associated with women’s rights, especially reproductive rights, but it’s hard for me to discern other issues that she well and truly believed in, issues she was willing to push for.
  5. She gained a reputation as a flip-flopper on issues like fracking and medicare for all, and her time as the immigration “czarina” connected her to a highly complex failure.
  6. She was far too closely linked to the doddering efforts of the Biden administration, and indeed she said she couldn’t think how she’d be different from Biden except for her pledge to put a Republican in her Cabinet. Again, if people want Republicans, they can vote for them.
  7. Too much of Harris’ message was focused on how she’s not Trump. We didn’t get a clear sense of what she stood for, what she was going to champion, how she was going to make America a better place. In the end, Harris didn’t communicate her message well enough to persuade enough voters to cast their ballots for her.

That’s my quick and dirty take. Before I’ve had my coffee! Readers, what do you think?

P.S. Apparently the Republicans have won the House and Senate as well. A rather stunning repudiation of Democrats and their shenanigans.

Raining on the Democrats’ Parade

W.J. Astore

A Few Sobering Reminders

Last night was Obama night at the DNC as both Barack and Michelle Obama spoke to endorse Kamala Harris while denouncing Donald Trump. Perusing my various media streams this AM suggests they did a bang up job of it. Perhaps a few sobering reminders are in order:

  1. Obama promised in 2007 he’d codify Roe v. Wade into law as his top priority. Once he won the election, he did nothing; in fact, he said it wasn’t among his top priorities.
  2. Obama himself admitted that his administration, politically speaking, could best be described as moderate Republican. Here he was honest, for Obama was pro-corporate, pro-banks, pro-war, pro-Big Pharma, and pro-Wall Street.
  3. Obama gave us a corporate-friendly health care plan without a single payer option. Thus, Americans continue to pay more than double what people in countries like Germany and France pay for their health care.
  4. Obama “surged” in Afghanistan with military forces, prolonging a lost war in that country.
  5. Obama, with Hillary Clinton by his side, overthrew Libya, leaving that a country a wreck. Open slave markets, anyone?
  6. Obama, by his own admission, became very good at killing people, especially via drone assassinations.
  7. Obama, after winning a Nobel Peace Prize for not being George W. Bush, promised a muscular U.S. foreign policy supported by military operations to protect vital U.S. (corporate) interests.
  8. Obama bailed out the banks while allowing them to foreclose on millions of homeowners.
  9. Obama admitted “We tortured some folks” and then held no one accountable except for the brave whistleblower, John Kiriakou, who helped to expose the torture regimen (and regime).
  10. Obama said we had to look forward, not backward, so no one was held accountable for the disastrous Iraq War.

That’s just ten reminders, off the top of my head, so I wouldn’t get too excited by soaring rhetoric from the Obamas about saving democracy.

The main point here isn’t to bash the Democrats or to rain on their parade. It’s to realize where the corporate-aligned Democratic Party really stands on issues like war and economic fairness, to take that knowledge in fully, and then to use it to change the Party.

And the time to do that is now, when Harris/Walz need your vote. It’s too late to wait until after the election, which Harris just may win (a big reason why, I think, is Trump fatigue, as Americans ponder what another four years of the Trump circus may be like).

A Sign You Didn’t See Inside the Convention Hall

Democrats tell me not to attack or criticize Harris because when I do I’m helping Trump. But not to criticize politicians, not to make demands of them, is tantamount to surrendering to authoritarianism even before it’s taken hold. No one is helped in America by surrendering to a politics of joy or for that matter the MAGA crowd.

For I guarantee you, the corporate Democrats will tell you the time is NEVER right to challenge their power and agendas. The time is wrong now because of Trump. The time will be wrong in 2025 because Harris/Walz deserve a honeymoon. The time will be wrong in 2026 because of Congressional midterms. The time will be wrong in 2027-28 because of the threat of a “new” Trump (Ron DeSantis? Tom Cotton?).

One example from the Obama years. My friend and colleague, Matt Hoh, resigned from the State Department to protest the Afghan War surge. He came to Congress and spoke to Democrats. He persuaded many to take action. And then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stood up. Literally. She said Democrats had to support Obama’s expansion of the war because of a bigger fight, Obama’s fight for the Affordable Care Act.

That’s right: the time was wrong to save American and Afghan lives in a lost war because Pelosi said Obama couldn’t afford dissension within the ranks as he “fought” for the corporate-friendly ACA, most commonly known as Obamacare.

The corporate Democrats will persist in telling you the TIME IS ALWAYS WRONG to challenge them because of Trump, new Trump, some legislative priority, perhaps a foreign leader like Putin, etc. It’s total BS. The best and only time you can push them is when you have real leverage, and that’s now, before you give them your money and votes.

After all, if you don’t speak up, it’s guaranteed no one will hear you. Dare to speak up, Democrats, for what you believe in. For that is what Democracy truly is about.

“I don’t even know what that is, but I like it”

W.J. Astore

Kamala Harris Secures the Democratic Nomination

Kamala Harris is officially the Democratic nominee for the presidency. As Lee Fang has noted, it’s not wise to underestimate her, as she’s savvy at “messaging” and positioning herself among party elites. In this interview between Fang and Glenn Greenwald, it’s almost conclusively shown that Kamala doesn’t have a progressive bone in her body. What she is most of all, perhaps, is an opportunist.

It’s interesting to see how my local paper, The Boston Globe, announced her nomination:

Vice President Kamala Harris, a daughter of immigrants who rose through the California political and law enforcement ranks to become the first female vice president in US history, formally secured the Democratic presidential nomination on Monday — becoming the first woman of color to lead a major party ticket.

A lot of boxes are being checked there. She’s “a daughter of immigrants.” She rose through the ranks, with an emphasis on law enforcement. She’s the first female VP and now the first “woman of color to lead a major party ticket.”

Her positions on most of the leading policies and topics of the day, however, are largely unknown. Meanwhile, rank-and-file Democrats didn’t have a chance to vote for her or against her in the primaries. She’s been selected by party insiders, not elected by party voters.

All this brings to mind a snippet of conversation I overheard at a coffee shop this weekend. Three young women were ahead of me in line, talking about some offerings at the shop, and one said: “I don’t even know what that is, but I like it.”

You could say something similar of Kamala: “I don’t even know who she is or what she believes, but I like her.” It’s the ultimate triumph of image over substance.

So, for example, you might ask Kamala why the Biden/Harris administration is complicit in genocide in Gaza, and the answer might be: “She’s a daughter of immigrants!”

Or you might ask her to support single-payer health care and a higher federal minimum wage, and the answer might be: “She’s BIPOC!”

Kamala isn’t going to cut off the flow of weapons and money to Israel no matter how atrociously the Israeli government acts. She isn’t going to fight for affordable single-payer health care or for a higher federal minimum wage. She’s savvy, i.e. a cynical instrument of power, and she knows what to do and what to say to raise money and secure the support of the powerful.

Kamala wouldn’t have been selected (again, she wasn’t elected) by powerful corporate interests if she wasn’t sympathetic and obedient to them. In fact, the DNC has shown how it treats true progressives like Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kucinich. Kamala is on top because she’s willing to afflict the powerless for the powerful, and that’s not a formula that promises any change in a progressive direction.

Whether you believe the corporate-owned Democratic Party is less bad than the Trump-dominated Republican Party is a separate question, but let’s not kid ourselves about what Kamala represents.

Update: Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is Kamala’s VP choice! I thought Walter Kirn’s description of Walz was telling. Kirn, talking to Matt Taibbi, described Walz as a “county fair huckster,” a sort of “white hick” who balances the urban BIPOC Harris. Kirn and Taibbi speculated that Democrats are trying to outflank the Republicans and their choice of J.D. Vance, i.e. Walz is even more of a flannel-wearing Midwesterner, and he has more military experience to boot.

VP choices often don’t matter that much, until they do. Just look at Kamala. She basically didn’t matter until she did.

As Walter Kirn also noted, Democrats are now spectators in their own party. You don’t get to choose your president or VP candidates; you have no say; yet you’re expected to cheer those candidates selected for you by the DNC and big donors.

Hooray, Harris/Walz! We didn’t get to vote for you, we had no say in your nomination, but we love you anyway!

The Distraction of Joe Biden

W.J. Astore

What genocide? What war? What militarism?

Joe Biden has become a major distraction. Much like Donald Trump, he’s demanding far too much attention.

As genocide continues in Gaza, as war continues to rage in Ukraine, as America continues to pursue militarism both at home and abroad, all the press can talk about is whether Biden should stay or go.

The answer is obvious: he should go.

Sure, Biden remains capable of having a “good” day in the sense of doing OK at a rally while reading prepared remarks from a teleprompter. Yet it’s impossible to ignore brain glitches where he introduces Zelensky of Ukraine as President Putin and suggests his vice president’s name is Trump instead of Harris.

America faces serious issues, especially working- and middle-class Americans who are struggling to make ends meet. Their stories are rarely told in the corporate-owned media as Biden’s flubs and stubbornness and Trump’s lies and showboating grab nearly all the attention.

A new (and desperate) ploy I’ve seen on Twitter/X is Biden supporters arguing that a failing older man is better than a lying one as president. That argument assumes Biden has a strong record as a truth-teller when it was gratuitous lies and flagrant plagiarism that ended his presidential campaign in 1988. Besides, is it really true that Biden, a man visibly in mental and physical decline, is the only choice Democrats can muster to defeat Trump in 2024?

Let’s look at one chart that shows Biden’s record. Since he became President, military spending has soared as social spending has dipped.

And this man, Democrats say in reverent tones, is the new FDR?

I suppose their counter would be: Trump will be worse! So, it’s the old “lesser of two evils” argument.

Biden and Harris continue to run a campaign devoid of any message other than vote for us because Trump will be worse. That empty message, and Biden’s visible decline, produce images like this:

Exactly. Which “job” is the Biden/Harris team so intent on finishing? No one knows since they’re not saying. Vague messaging and a confused candidate are almost certain to lead to a Trump victory in November.

And if that happens, those to blame will be clear, starting with Biden, the DNC, and all the scheming powerbrokers behind the scenes like the Obamas and the Clintons.

Democracy, but not Biden, is on the ballot?

W.J. Astore

The bizarre opening weeks of the Democratic primary season

Democracy, President Joe Biden has said, is on the ballot this year. But often his Democratic rivals won’t be on the ballot, nor is Biden himself officially on the ballot in New Hampshire in two weeks. (Indeed, the DNC refuses to sanction, i.e. support, the NH primary.) What gives?

Next week (1/15), the Iowa caucus for president is being held for Republicans and Democrats. Apparently, official results for Democrats won’t be available until March. Then there’s the famous New Hampshire primary, always the first in the country and this year on 1/23; Biden’s name isn’t even on the ballot for Democrats there.

The first Democratic primary that apparently counts for the DNC is in South Carolina on 2/3. Why is that?

You’ll recall that in 2020 Biden lost the Iowa caucuses to Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg. In New Hampshire in 2020, Biden came in a distant fifth. But he was able to win in South Carolina with a big push from Barack Obama and Congressman James Clyburn, a major powerbroker in SC, even as other candidates like Buttigieg were pressured to drop out and throw their support to Joe. (Buttigieg’s reward was a cabinet post as Secretary of Transportation for which he is eminently unqualified.)

The fix is in for Biden in 2024, to state the obvious. Iowa and New Hampshire are both being sidelined because the DNC knows Biden is vulnerable in these states. But South Carolina, the DNC believes, can be controlled, can be counted on for a decent showing for Old Joe. Thus South Carolina was moved up in the 2024 primary calendar precisely to demonstrate allegedly strong support for Joe.

This weekend, Biden was in South Carolina, the only primary that seems to matter

I was listening to a podcast with Matt Taibbi and Walter Kirn as they discussed some of these Democratic (but not democratic) machinations:

Matt Taibbi: And by the way, not just with Trump, with people like Marianne Williamson and Dean Phillips. I mean, they just got wiped off the ballot in Florida, which seems crazy to me. Then there were these other machinations going on in the Democratic side with New Hampshire and Iowa. The Iowa caucus results. The Iowa caucus is the easiest thing in the world. It used to be the simplest, most beautiful, I think, expression of democracy in America. You could go to it. You could sit there and watch people argue and horse-trade and do all that stuff, and everybody would move to one side of the gym, and then there’d be other crowds in other places.

And then at the end of the night, they would call up one phone number and there would be a human being at the other end of the line who would tabulate a pretty small number of districts, and you would get a result. And there’s absolutely no reason why that should take a lot of time. Now, they’re announcing that they’re not even going to have results for the Iowa caucus until March 15th or some ridiculous thing.

Walter Kirn: Who announced that?

Matt Taibbi: Iowa.

I hadn’t heard that Biden’s two main Democratic challengers, Marianne Williamson and Dean Phillips, had been “wiped off the ballot in Florida.” But it’s true: Biden’s name was the only one submitted by party apparatchiks there. 

Biden just might win the Democratic primary in Florida. Ah, sweet victory, and against such long odds!

As Biden claims “Democracy is on the ballot” in 2024, the DNC and establishment Democrats are doing everything in their power to deny democratic choices to their voters.

Are you confused? Deflated? Tired of the BS? Look over there: Trump! Bad! Vote for Joe: he’ll save “democracy” from Trump! 

As my dad taught me, sometimes you have to laugh to hide the tears.