After McGovern and Carter

The Democratic Party does not care about beating Donald Trump. It didn’t in 2016, and it doesn’t now. What it cares about, all it has ever cared about, is preserving the status quo.

We may have moved past the party’s ability to clear the field for its preferred frontrunner, as it did for Clinton, but make absolutely no mistake: after McGovern and Carter, the “party of the people” will never, ever again allow the people to decide a candidate.

If it comes down to Bernie and somebody else in the primary, you know in your bones the corporatocracy ain’t ever picking Sanders.

The specter of superdelegates

“The specter of superdelegates deciding the nomination, particularly if Mr. Sanders is a finalist, is highly unappetizing to party officials. “If we have a role, so be it, but I’d much prefer that it be decided in the first round, just from a unity standpoint,” said Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan.”

Sure, it’s in Stabenow and the rest of the superdelegates’ interest to spread some bullshit about “party unity” in interviews. However, don’t think for a second that this talk of party unity will stop superdelegates from nuking Bernie’s candidacy, if he comes into the convention as the front-runner. And, sure, since @EIWBM_Cat started saying it, I agree with her that the DNC doesn’t have the political capital to engineer a coup. Nina is probably right that the DNC couldn’t engineer its way out of a paper bag, right now. But with Stabenow saying this, out loud, now – “if we *have to have a role*, so be it” – don’t think for a second that superdelegates won’t pick the candidate if handed the opportunity. And right now, it looks like they probably will.


We warned you

We warned you that this is what they were doing.

A widely shared New York Times article about the growing nervousness Democratic Party bosses have about Bernie Sanders includes one comment from a superdelegate that may prove controversial.

If we have a role, so be it, but I’d much prefer that it be decided in the first round, just from a unity standpoint,” said Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan.

Oh, WaPo, don’t you go changing

Ah, yes, Washington Post, please tell me some more how “we should totally uphold the existing class system” is such a well-known “progressive” talking point.

Pete Buttigieg is a conservative. He ALWAYS has been. The DNC is running him to mollify conservative, wealthy idiots, as usual.

That he’s got a D attached to his name, or has a husband doesn’t magically make his politics “lefty.”

Just because you and the rest of mainstream, billionaire-owned media want to paint Buttigieg with a progressive brush, that doesn’t have a damn thing to do with making him an actual progressive.

Americans who have a college degree earn more than Americans who don’t. As a progressive, I have a hard time getting my head around the idea a majority who earn less because they didn’t go to college subsidize a minority who earn more because they did.


It’s not hard to understand

Look, folks, it’s not hard to understand why Republicans are blocking an unredacted Mueller report from ever being released.

The President has shitty, barely-legal business dealings with Russian oligarchs, and that’s just the shit we’ve known about all along. The reason the Special Counsel investigation sought a couple dozen indictments was because folks lied before Congress, or lied in their testimony before the Grand Jury about those business deals.

They lied to protect the President from facing any legal consequences for fraud and illegal business practices, just like Donald Trump has engaged in for his entire career.

If there was anything, anything at all that was going to serve as the slam-dunk evidence, which they promised all along was coming, of collusion with the Russian government to tamper with the election, Mueller would have indicted people for it.

Stop pretending like we don’t already know what this shit is, and what it isn’t. We know. We’ve always known. We just don’t want to accept that that’s what it is, and people voted for him, anyway, or that Democrats ran a candidate they *knew* wouldn’t get the coronation she wanted, but they expected black voters and progressives to dutifully support Grandma Pinochet anyway. They knew that Obama-to-Trump voters were going to be a thing, and they ran Hillary, and her batshit stupid campaign anyway.

Stop pretending any of these people have your interests in mind. They do not.

Not the Republican party, not the Democrats, and not the media that’s colluded with them both to hype this bullshit.

This year Medicare for All has the greatest support it’s ever had

This year Medicare for All has the greatest support across the country that it has ever had.

If we had a Congress that wasn’t bought-off, that support would translate into political action to save American lives.

No one is suggesting growth is impossible

For those of you telling me that you think Tulsi Gabbard’s apologies for her past hideousness on LGBT issues and toward queer people are sincere, well, that’s nice for you. But I came out as a baby fag in 1984 right in the middle of an entire society was more than content to let us all die, hearing how their god was visiting his wrath upon the country because I existed. I’ve been down this road before, and I know precisely how conditional so-called “tolerance” from christians is really is. Y’all wanna crow about her endorsement from HRC, feel more than free, but I remain suspicious, because hard experience has taught me that it’s fucking stupid to do anything else.

Precisely no one is suggesting that it’s impossible for people to change their minds, and to grow. But if that “growth” is conveniently timed with your run for Congress, and you’re reminding everyone how much you’ve “grown” now that you’re running for President, well… that ain’t growth, folks. It’s political expediency. If you’re smart, you’ll trust that that’s only ever going to last long enough for Gabbard to “evolve” into something else.

It’s worth noting that despite fawning praise from zillionaire lobbies like HRC, Gabbard is more than willing to point out that her “personal views” haven’t changed a bit.

A 2016 profile of the combat veteran published in Ozy suggests otherwise: “She tells me that, no, her personal views haven’t changed, but she doesn’t figure it’s her job to do as the Iraqis did and force her own beliefs on others,” noted reporter Sanjena Sathian.

You guys want to trust her? Knock yourselves out.

But don’t expect anyone else to do the same.