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.

Kamala Harris Is New Coke

W.J. Astore

And the DNC is Bill Cosby

I’m old enough to remember when New Coke was introduced in 1985. Coke had been losing market share to Pepsi (you might remember all the “taste tests” back then that Coke was allegedly losing to Pepsi). So the execs made New Coke, a sweeter, blander, version of “old” Coke, and hired Bill Cosby (yes, that Bill Cosby, before we knew he was a sexual predator) to sell it to the world as the new and very much improved version.

It flopped.

I remember trying it soon after it came out. No matter what Bill Cosby said, few people liked it. They wanted the “old” Coke back, so Coca Cola had to save face by reintroducing it, rebranding it as “Classic Coke.”

I know it’s not a perfect analogy, but the New Kamala I’m being sold by the DNC (and many, many, others) reminds me of the New Coke sold to me by Bill Cosby back in 1985. A lot of hype, many millions thrown at advertising, but in the end I’m left with a bad taste in my mouth.

Coincidentally, I just saw this in my New York Times news feed this morning:

Today’s Videos

How Kamala Harris Found Her Footing in the Spotlight

The vice president long had a reputation as an uneven political messenger prone to missteps. That has steadily been changing.

*****

See what I mean? In the past, she’s been “uneven” and “prone to missteps” but now there’s a New Kamala who’s “found her footing.” How so?

To my knowledge, Kamala has yet to hold an unscripted press conference and has yet to sit for an extended interview. Yet she’s “found her footing” because she can attend political rallies and read from a teleprompter. Oh, and she’s brat!

She’s also good at telling genocide protesters to shut up, warning them that Trump will win if they continue to protest mass murder and atrocity in Gaza.

Kamala is being sold like a new and improved commodity by cynical sales people who’d make Bill Cosby look slightly less menacing and predatory.

Standard Disclaimer: This is in no way a promotion for another overhyped, oversold, and dangerous product, one commonly known as Trump.

“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!

Did Biden Drop Out or Was He Dropkicked Out?

W.J. Astore

A Palace Coup in DC

Amazingly, it remains unclear whether Joe Biden dropped out of the 2024 race on his own initiative, or whether he was dropkicked out by various DNC and DC swamp creatures.

When LBJ said he wouldn’t run for the presidency again in 1968, he gave a speech to that effect to the American people. Biden (apparently) tweeted a letter that wasn’t on White House stationery. Even the signature on the letter looks a bit dodgy.

As late as Sunday morning, members of the Biden team were insisting he was staying in the race. Biden campaign events were being planned for this week. Then, apparently, a sudden change of heart by Biden, captured in the aforementioned letter. Meanwhile, Biden remains in seclusion (or isolation), recovering, it is said, from COVID.

Fading into the background

I happen to think Biden reached the right decision, but that’s assuming it was really his decision. I can see where he may have dug in his heels, refusing to drop out, hence a palace coup. I’m guessing (and I stress here that this is a guess) that if you put Biden before a camera right now, he might say he’s still running in 2024.

Replying to a comment I made on Chris Hedges’s site, one reader put it well:

He was absolutely kicked out, delusional right up to the very last minute on Sunday morning. The last straw was the donors refusing him more money.

Another savvy reader replied that:

[This isA message to anyone still foolish enough to think the D party can be reformed or do anything contrary to the wishes of its donors and the DNC ruling elite. Bad enough what was done to Bernie, but he was an outsider to them. This is explicitly about who rules; even conformist figureheads aren’t exempt. The Democratic party ceased to be democratic decades ago.

Remember how Democrats kept repeating “democracy is on the ballot” this fall? The hasty coronation of Kamala Harris as the Democratic candidate for POTUS, after the rigged primary anointment of Joe Biden as that candidate, is decidedly undemocratic.

I wonder what the DNC will force Joe Biden to read from the teleprompter when he finally returns from Delaware. Perhaps a deal was struck for Biden to remain president for the rest of his term, which would allow him to pardon his son, Hunter. Somewhere, Jill Biden is unleashing primal screams.

Say what you will of the Republicans and Trump, but they managed to hold a contested primary where Trump beat a serious challenger, Nikki Haley, followed by a national convention that was “normal” for what passes as our democratic political process.

Interestingly, some commentators have suggested Kamala Harris won’t be the Democratic candidate, that someone else will emerge from whatever sham convention the DNC manages to throw together. But I think Harris has a hammerlock on the campaign funds, plus she’s pliable and therefore easily manipulable by the powerbrokers who surround her.

If Democrats are fated to lose this fall, why not with Kamala, who will be sold, of course, as the first Black and South Asian woman to run as president. Her loss can always be blamed on voter racism and misogyny, and, if that proves unconvincing, there’s always Putin.

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.

Refreshing the Tree of Liberty in America

W.J. Astore

How much blood will it take?

Why are progressives so powerless in America? Is there any hope for radical reforms here that favor the 99%? Stimulated by a question from Jeff Moebus, here’s some thoughts on this crucial issue, lightly edited from the comments section of a previous article:

As a kid, I loved to collect stamps, and I still have a small collection

jg moebus

I’m curious, Bill: What do you think the RNC’s Main Goal is?

In any event, given that that is the DNC’s Main Goal [suppressing progressive voices and power within the Democratic Party], why haven’t the Principled Progressives of America formed their own political party so as to give Americans that choice for Systemic Reform come election time?

Is at least part of the problem that a significant number of Americans disagree with and, in some cases, categorically reject the principles, policy proposals, and promises of Progressivism? Which may explain why there are no “Progressives” in Washington, eh?

Bill Astore

Jeff, the RNC seems content to ride the Trump wave, knowing that Trump can be controlled and perhaps coopted as well.

Trump lacks core principles, so I think the RNC’s main goal is to shove Trump in directions that are consistent with RNC imperatives, such as lower taxes on corporations, financial deregulation, and the dismantling of the welfare state and anything that smacks of socialism.

What do you think?

jg moebus

I agree completely with your assessment of the RNC, Bill. Especially the part about Trump being controllable and cooptable. If he wasn’t, he would have never become a President who completed a full term in office.

In any event: Do you have any thoughts as to why the Principled Progressives of America have not formed their own political party so as to give Americans that choice for “Systemic Reform” come election time?

Bill Astore

Damn good question.

My guess: lack of money. Corporate cash isn’t flowing to progressives. Plus some progressives have been coerced, manipulated, or otherwise propagandized to believe they can “push” Biden (or Harris etc.) in progressive ways. Of course, it’s total BS.

Recognize as well that progressives were burned by both Obama and Bernie. Finally, progressive energy is sapped by “woke” cultural issues rather than focusing on class issues and an antiwar agenda that would also prove attractive to some on the Right as well.

That’s my quick take. Of course, the other part is the corporate media that smears progressives as “far left,” Putin puppets, and therefore untrustworthy and unelectable.

jg moebus

That’s a pretty good quick take.

So the problem, basically, is that there are not enough Americans ~ especially those with money to spend on politics ~ who agree enough with the proposals of Progressivism to actively support it and actually work to make it happen.

Can you think of any way to change that?

Bill Astore

Strangely, Jeff, I wrote a reply and it disappeared on my own site!

Here’s what I think I wrote: What we need, as Bernie said, is a political revolution, but then Bernie decided not to lead it.

How do you effect this “progressive” revolution? It’s extremely hard because so many powerful forces are arrayed against it:

1. Both major political parties in America are against progressive reforms.

2. Corporate elites are against them.

3. Corporate media is against them.

4. Coercive forces such as police forces of all stripes are against them.

What is required is a mass movement willing to be disobedient organized along class interests. A movement of left, right, and center. A movement of the 99% against the 1% (and the .1 -.01%).

Rich and powerful “citizens” (and recall that corporations are citizens now) will not simply hand over power. They will have to be persuaded, convinced, and possibly coerced.

Also, the rich and powerful know how to divide, distract, and demobilize the masses, while keeping the many as downtrodden and debilitated as possible. Hence all the “unhoused” people we see, all the immigrants, all the poor people suffering. Those poor unfortunate souls are partly there to scare the rest of us.

Thomas Jefferson famously opined that “The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” (That’s from memory.) Who is willing to bleed, and how much blood must flow, and even then, will it get any better?

It’s easy to be cynical and pessimistic here, but those are paralyzing forces. Instead, we have to be optimistic or at least determined, else the USS America will continue to slip under the waves of mass corruption and bottomless bankruptcy. And by “bankruptcy” I mean spiritual and moral as much as financial.

What say you? Is there any hope for meaningful change in the USA, and how can that be implemented without violence?

******

Rather than putting the onus on Jeff Moebus, what about you, loyal readers? Can meaningful change be effected in America that actually helps the 99%? That moves the country into less militaristic waters? That restores liberty and power to the people? If so, how, and at what price?

One essential step: campaign finance reform. A country where money=speech is by definition a plutocracy. Another essential step: a radical downsizing of empire and a Pentagon budget reduced by 50%. But with a corrupt Congress that loves money and the military, how are these changes to be made?

Trump Paying Stormy Means Biden Wins?

W.J. Astore

The Absurdity of Democratic “Strategy”

The vacuity of Democratic strategy is astonishing if you take at face value the claim that a Trump victory this November will “end democracy.” Apparently, Trump paying Stormy Daniels $130K in hush money, after which some creative accounting obscured the source of the payoff, renders him “unfit for office.” And that claim is now a “top 2024 issue” for Democrats, as The New York Times notes here:

Democrats Push Biden to Make Trump’s Felonies a Top 2024 Issue

Interviews with dozens of Democrats reveal a party hungry to tell voters that Donald Trump’s conviction makes him unfit for office, and hopeful that President Biden will lead the way.

Meanwhile, this was the lead headline in the NYT “top news” send-out this morning:

A Felon in the Oval Office Would Test the American System

Some are wondering how the Constitution’s checks and balances, meant to hold presidents accountable, would work if the next president elected were already a felon.

“Some are wondering”: What a vapid phrase!

I think there are more severe “tests” of the “American system.” How about a president enabling a genocide in Gaza, for example?

If you want to beat Donald Trump this November, how about running a more attractive, more dynamic, more charismatic, more populist and popular, candidate? Whatever else Biden is, he is very much lacking in dynamism even as his actions render him increasingly unpopular among key segments of the Democratic base.

My wife jokingly said today: Just what we need, another election featuring two tired and seriously old white guys. She has a point. It’s not that Trump is now a felon that renders him allegedly unfit. Trump is, in my view, constitutionally unsuited for the presidency. Biden, in contrast, is a fading political hack who will be 82 years of age at the end of this year. Yet, this is what the “American system” produces. Maybe that “system” needs an overhaul?

So, which tired and seriously old white guy do you want to vote for this year?

JFK in 1963. Read his famous “peace speech” at American University

It seems hard to believe that in my lifetime we had a young, dynamic, and visionary president, JFK, who was 43 years of age when elected. A president who grew in office, rather than fading. A president who in 1963 made a commitment to pursuing peace with the Soviet Union. A man with flaws, but also one with potential.

Of course, the DNC with its superdelegates has created a system to deny anyone like a JFK (or even RFK Jr.) any chance at securing the nomination. Only corporate stooges need apply. That has allowed a populist-fraud like Trump to emerge from the right, a billionaire who poses as a man of the people. That Trump’s claim is plausible to so many is a measure of how far the Democratic Party has fallen.

It’s already been a very long election cycle, and it’s only early June. Five more months of total BS to go, America.

Not-So-Super Tuesday

W.J. Astore

A Grim Repeat of Biden Versus Trump Looms

Today is Super Tuesday in America, where sixteen states go to the polls, including mine. At the presidential level, the expected winners are Joe Biden and Donald Trump, setting up a grim rematch of their 2020 contest, won by Biden, who campaigned mostly in Covid lockdown from his basement.

Down in the basement, we hear the sound of machines …

The revolution America needs, of course, isn’t going to take place at the ballot box. The big money and powerbrokers make sure of that. The DNC has acted to ensure a one-horse race for Biden, as Marianne Williamson has noted. Biden should perhaps be put out to pasture, if not sent to the glue factory, but the horse is not dead yet. Even if it stumbles to the finish line in November, losing to Trump, that’s still a win for the DNC, whose main job it is to ensure no progressive Democrat ever wins the nomination. No matter who wins in November, with Biden the DNC has already won.

On the Republican side, Trump should win easily over Nikki Haley, who’s basically a younger female version of Biden when it comes to fighting wars, kowtowing to Israel, and serving Wall Street and big finance. A conundrum in American politics is that a Con Man is the most genuine mainstream “big party” candidate, the one most likely to blurt out uncomfortable truths. 

Speaking of Con Man Trump, he said something the other day that was so outrageously Trump that I had to laugh. Naturally, it was about immigrants (recall in 2015 how Trump said Mexico was sending drugs, crime, even rapists, to America, but “some I assume are good people”). This time he hit a Trumpian home run describingthe languages young immigrants speak in New York schools:

“Pupils [come] from foreign countries,” Trump explained, “from countries where they don’t even know what the language is. We have nobody that even teaches it. These are languages that nobody ever heard of.”

Something about “languages that nobody ever heard of” tickled my funny bone. OK, maybe if these young people were from previously uncontacted tribes deep in the Amazon rain forest, or perhaps from the lost island of Atlantis…

I know, maybe it’s not that funny, but if I couldn’t laugh I’d go insane, to quote the late great Jimmy Buffett.

Rigging the Primaries for Biden/Harris Has a Serious Drawback

W.J. Astore

Iowa and New Hampshire get sidelined in the cause of propping up Joe Biden

This past week’s Iowa Caucuses ended with a clear winner, Donald Trump, over the undynamic duo of Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis. Meanwhile, nothing happened on the Democratic side. The same is likely to be true next week, when New Hampshire goes to the polls. The DNC is refusing to recognize the NH primary; Joe Biden isn’t even on the ballot, though there is a campaign to write-in his name.

You’re not doing America (or “democracy”) favors by propping them up

The first primary that matters according to the DNC is South Carolina on 2/3, followed by Nevada on 2/6 and Michigan on 2/27. These states are supposedly more representative for the Democratic Party than Iowa and NH, meaning they are more racially and ethnically diverse, though to my mind any candidate running for president should be seeking to put his or her best foot forward in all fifty states. No matter. Apparently, the DNC believes this is the best way to shore up support for the Biden/Harris ticket.

Perhaps the DNC is right, but their plan has a serious drawback. If the DNC had kept the old schedule of Iowa and NH, and Biden had performed poorly in both states, it would have allowed the DNC more notice and time to pivot, or perhaps to craft a message more appealing to voters.  Privileging states that are expected to support Biden, in contrast, may breed overconfidence that his support remains strong and his candidacy remains viable against the clear Republican frontrunner, Trump.

If you really want to defeat Trump in November, you need the most rigorous vetting process for the Biden/Harris ticket.  Rigging the primaries for Biden by deleting Democratic rivals from the ballot, as the DNC has done in Florida, North Carolina, and elsewhere, while effectively throwing out results in Iowa and NH, may ensure both that Biden/Harris win renomination and lose the general election in November.

At which point the DNC will likely blame Jill Stein, RFK Jr., Susan Sarandon, Vladimir Putin, and white supremacists, instead of blaming themselves for putting forward a losing ticket.

Trump is not to be underestimated. The time to discover that Biden/Harris just don’t have it is now, not in October. If Trump is THE existential threat to democracy that the Democrats claim he is, why are the Democrats rigging the field to put forward what may prove to be a weak and losing ticket against him?