A Week In Democratic Hell

10 Nov

Couldn’t sleep so decided to spend some early morning time on Twitter at about 4:30 this AM.  First thing I have to say is yes, it’s been one HELL of a week.  Seven days of Watching the Democratic party slowly disintegrate.  And in some instances not so slowly as there is  relative minority that can’t wait for it to disintegrate naturally and insist on rendering it to it’s component atoms as quickly as possible.

For example, there was a running thread where in two people I follow, presumably both Democrats since they both appear to belong to the UniteBlue organization, were… probably still are… engaged in one of those juvenile little pissing contests that are part and parcel of social networking or any other form of social discourse that allows two people to interact with each other anonymously without having to be face to face with the people they’re belittling and own the words they’re saying.  Tried scrolling to see what the original argument was about but any indications had long since scrolled out of reach and now it’s the same old Peewee Herman style “I know you are but what am I?” routine extending off to the horizon, both of them claiming some kind of weird “victory” over the other and spewing hate and discontent at a pace even Rush Limbaugh would have a hard time matching.

You’d be surprised at how often that goes on among Democrats.   It’s reached the point where many… in fact most of those I associate with… Democrats on the interwebs spend more time trolling other Democrats whom they feel aren’t centrist or “pragmatic” enough,than they do battling the right wing, which is the ALLEGED “real” enemy.  I don’t suppose there is a metric by which the magnitude of the Democratic Party’s move to the right over the past 30 years can be measured with 100% accuracy but if you deny that rightward movement exists, you’re too much part of the problem to ever be part of a solution.  These Centrists and Blue Dog types are the ones I call the Republican wing of the Democratic party and their sole reason for existence seems to be , having shrunk the liberal movement to the size of Grover Norquist’s bathtub, making sure that liberals and left leaning moderates never again rise to a position from which they can assert any control or even influence over the party’s agenda.

The big takeaways for many Dems of course is that a) the “non-voters” (which for them is a dog whistle for “those damned liberals”) didn’t come out to vote and b) the candidates are to blame because they didn’t let the President do their campaigning for them.  TwitterDems point gleefully to the fact that only one senate candidate campaigned with PBO and he won.  Looking at a) one question immediately  arises.  Voter turnout in general was obscenely low, only 37&.  That means that they didn’t turn out for Republicans either, a fact simply ignored by the Democratic Tweetership.  Of that number barely more than half voted for Republican candidates. and folks, this is par for the course for Off year elections.  The president. whoever or whatever he might be, has traditionally lost congress in the second half of the second term for the last 50+ years.  I know it flies in the face of Mr. Obama’s perceived infallibility and so it’s a pill you find hard to swallow, but it’s just following a pattern that not even personal charisma and cool can overcome..

But for some obscure reason, the Democrats claim that had more people in general turned out, more of them would have been Democrats than Republicans and therefore swung the election to the Democrats.  They offer no empirical evidence for this claim of course, mainly because there isn’t any, but that narrative allows them to go on claiming that liberals and “Emos” are to blame for their humiliation and they’ll spend the next two years getting even (just like they’ve spent the last FOUR years getting even for 2010) even if it costs them the NEXT election also.  Believe me, in terms of fury, hell doesn’t even come close to a progressive Democrat who thinks he’s been scorned.

As for part b) of the equation, I don’t know where they get this notion that only one candidate “allowed” PBO to campaign for him and he won or that Wendy Davis and Alison Lundergen Grimes lost because they “ran away from the president.  I have to wonder, because  This CBS Analysis has been on the wires since the morning of November 5th and I’ve read others that all state pretty much the same thing. Some exerpts:

Wary of President Obama’s low approval ratings heading into the midterm elections, the White House limited his exposure on the campaign trail. Steering clear of the many Democratic Senate candidates running in red states where the president was particularly unpopular, Mr. Obama stuck to only blue states where he was more likely to help rather than hurt.

Hope you all caught that.  The White House itself was the entity that limited his campaign.  What is so hard to understand here? Both Grimes and Davis were running in states where PBO might actually have hurt them more than helped and HE HIMSELF was smart enough to realize this.  His “lone victory” (according to the TwitterDems) was in a state where he enjoyed a higher level of popularity and could actually help the candidate instead of possibly hurting them. But Centrists Dems are no more likely than RWs to let facts get in the way of hype and rhetoric.  As for only one candidate “embracing the president” and allowing him to tun with them, not only did PBO do the selecting of those he would or wouldn’t run with there were NINE not one as claimed by the O-bots on Twitter.

Did the president ultimately hurt the nine candidates he campaigned with in the lead-up to Election Day? That’s hard to say. He certainly didn’t help much: Five of the nine candidates lost their races, and that number could rise to six if Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy does not eke out a last-minute win in his re-election race.

So, by the morning after, Mr. Obama had already lost over half the races he DID take part in.  So much for Grimes and Davis, both running in states where half the population actually hates PBO, “throwing it all away” by “refusing” to let him campaign with them.  I realize people are unhappy about losing, especially a loss of this magnitude but dammit, clapping your hands over your ears and squawking “lalalalala”l every time someone mentions that the Democratic party and you yourselves may have played some small part in the debacle is childish and we already HAVE a party of overgrown juvenile delinquents to contend with.

So whatever Democrats.  I’ve been stomped on and ground down by BOTH major parties for the past 30 years and don’t really have a dog in the hunt anymore.  I don’t have a party and I don’t see either the Democrats or the Republicans backing away from what we might as well call the “Election Industry”  because… when billions are spent for 530 people to get jobs that supposedly pay less than 200k a year…  you can bet Wall St figures on making it back somehow… that’s all the hell it is.  If anyone ever pops up with enough balls to call for sweeping that entire nest of ugly unadulterated venality and graft that we call our capitol and anybody in it off the face of the planet, wake me up on election day and I’ll dutifully cast a vote for that person.  Otherwise, a vote for the lesser of two evils is always going to be a vote for evil and I’m tired of it being the only choice we have.


Leave a comment

Posted by on November 10, 2014 in Uncategorized


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: