Thanks, Democratic Neoliberals — Hillary, Debbie, Donna Brazile, Genderists, Low-Information African-American Voters, DNC Go-Alongers

I can’t let 2016 slip away without offering a final thanks to Hillary Clinton and the corporate-funded, 50-plus, go-along neoliberal DNC establishment machine for ushering in a Donald Trump victory, and in so doing permitting the worst catastrophe since 9/11 to be visited upon the U.S.A. Seriously….thanks, guys! Thanks for refusing to recognize what was going on during the primaries (Trump and Bernie Sanders tapping into the same angry, fed-up voter pool) and willing yourselves into believing that Hillary would somehow marshall that anger and use it to win because it was time for a woman in the Oval Office, when in fact she represented, however ignorantly, what these angry voters were fed up with and wanted to get rid of. Yes, I voted for Hillary in order to deny Trump, but I never liked her, not really. And too many angry, fact-free dumbshits hated her, and that’s why she lost. And now we’re in hell. Thanks, genderists! And thanks, low-information African-American voters for torpedoing Bernie in the southern states because he didn’t have a black-enough vibe…good one! And thanks, Elizabeth Warren, for not challenging Hillary in the primaries — you could’ve been the female Bernie figure and a winner to boot. (Would Jill Stein have run if Warren had landed the nomination? I doubt it.) And thanks, Hillary, for choosing Tim stodgy Kaine as your vice-president instead of Warren or somebody with serious anti-corporate credentials.

  • Charles Peligro

    They would’ve done the same to Warren as they did to Sanders. The Democratic party decided 4 years ago Hillary was going to be their nominee and NOTHING would make them deviate from that plan.

    • From the moment Bill Clinton was elected, the Dems kept telling us that Hillary was going to be president one day, so we better get used to the idea. From the moment she announced her intention to run, many in the party more or less wondered why we should go through the rigmarole of an election — just give her the key to the front door!

    • Dusty Ayres

      Plus, Sanders would have been eaten alive by the GOP for his ‘socialism’ and his love of Fidel Castro if he’d won the nomination instead of Clinton. As well, he’s a shitty politician who never got to any of the heights that Clinton or Obama did as Secretary of State and POTUS, respectively. Why do people like Jeff believe the bullshit they do?

      • Charles Peligro

        The GOP will call the Democratic party nominee a socialist no matter who it is. Democrats need to grow a pair and stop being afraid of their own shadow.

        • Dusty Ayres

          Pegligro, you need to grow the fuck up and stop believing bullshit emoprogressive wet dreams. Bernie would have been eliminated by Trump. Your’s (and others) bullshit belief in Sanders split the party and the vote, and is what got us a Trump win-please deal with reality and not fantasy.

          • Hardcore Henry V

            How come you never, eveeer hear about all the candidates that split the vote and end up winning (like Obama in ’08, for one)?

            I’ll tell you why: conformation bias. That’s why.

            • Dusty Ayres

              Obama was better for the USA (and the world) than a few of the candidates he was running against, as this list of accomplishments show. Clinton could have carried on his achievements, but silly people had to get a hard-on for Sanders and his unrealistic crap, thus splitting the party and the vote and ensuring a Trump win.

              Blaming this on black people or anybody else? GTFOOH, stupid, spoiled, dumbassed, silly extreme left-wing emos did this, along with the racist right; both wanting a Great White Left-Wing (Male) Hope instead of the competent female that would have been better. Now the world’s facing a fascist asshole and his crew of fellow assholes that will fuck up and undo all of the progress that Obama & Clinton achieved domestically in the USA and internationally. And all for what? Because both didn’t achieve the kind of dogmatic bullshit that silly people wanted, and because said silly people ASSumed that both would wave a magic wand and all of the USA’s problems would be solved. Guess what? That’s not how life is, nor is it how reality goes.

              Most of the emoprogs here blasting the ‘Democratic Neoliberals — Hillary, Debbie, Donna Brazile, Genderists, Low-Information African-American Voters, DNC Go-Alongers’ need to read this:

              Milt Shook over at Please Cut The Crap has a great post up titled “10 Things All Progressives Should Understand for 2014 and Beyond.” I strongly recommend reading it. It’s common sense, pragmatic, and straightforward. In that vein, I’m revamping a post that was part of a series back at the end of 2011, the “Politics for the Far Left” series. I’m doing that not (just) because I’m lazy, but because I’m seeing many of the same … idiotic … statements reappearing that I saw back then that caused me to write it in the first place. I often think that it’s not just that they don’t “get it,” it’s that they don’t want to get it. Purity of cause, and nursing of perceived grudges, is more important to them than actually getting the progress towards their goals. When it comes to understanding politics 101, they’ve gotten a failing grade. So here are some remedial lessons.

              #1 – The only time you’re going to agree 100% of the time with a politician is if you are that politician. Otherwise, there’s at least one issue, and probably more, where you’ll have disagreements. If you look back at the past 6 years, at various times the “lefter than thou” blogs have erupted in screaming fury about something that one progressive hero or another has done. They’re usually considered “progressive icons,” except when they’ve cast a vote or introduced a bill or amendment which tramples on whatever is the perceived “true” ideal, and they’ve all done that several times. A politician you agree with 80 or 90 percent of the time is far and away better than the politician who doesn’t agree with you at all.

              #2 – If you don’t vote, you don’t count. The whole notion that you’re “sending a message” by not voting? That the party has to give you what you want, in order to get you to the polls? It’s garbage. The only “message” you’ve sent by doing that is to show that you are an unreliable voter at best, and politicians discount you in a hurry. Nice if you show up, but they’re not counting on it. You can whine and bitch all you want about “corporatist control, etc., but at the end of it all, politicians count bodies in the voting booth. Parties care about what their voters think. If you’re not one of those voters, then politicians and the party don’t care what you think.

              #3 – Threats are meaningless. Promises aren’t. Over the past several years, I’ve heard a lot of talk about primarying some “offending” politician. Various members of the House, Senators, or even the President have had threats of primaries. I lived in a district next to two “offending” House members who were by deity going to get a primary in 2010, according to the far left. They didn’t get one, and that was repeated in districts across the country then, and in the 2012 cycle. Oh, I know some jumped on various bandwagons when there was a primary, but they weren’t initiated by the people making the threats. In the last election, there was a real progressive running in the Democratic primary to go up against a Tea Party Republican incumbent. The amount of help and support he received from the people who had been saying “real progressives should run?” None. So what did you show? Your threats were meaningless noise. A threat is not a promise. A promise is when you actually deliver on your threat. That means something.

              #4 – RTFM! That’s a tech term, meaning read the fucking manual! In this case, do some basic research. The Constitution, the rules of the House and the Senate, and some actual history, NOT the mythology. If you’re going to be a “political activist” or claim to be “politically aware,” you damn well need to know the basic operating procedures of the government you’re claiming you want to change or influence. When you scream your head off about something the President didn’t do, and it was Congress’s fault, all you’ve done is prove your ignorance. If you want to be taken seriously, RTFM.

              #5 – You have to do it yourself. You want a “progressive” candidate? Go find one. You want the party to listen to your concerns? Then get involved with your local party. Don’t expect someone else to do it for you. You ever wonder why various groups are considered “a base” within the Democratic Party? It’s pretty simple. They got involved. They recruited candidates, provided warm bodies for campaign staffs, voter contacts, door-to-door work, raised money, and made sure they got their people into the voting booth. They did it over and over again, until the Democratic Party “got the message.” The current “extreme Left” or frustrati? Nope. You continually gripe about the President “not doing something,” or are saying that the “Party should.” You’re expecting someone else to do that for you. You want it, you’re going to have to work for it, because no one is going to do it for you. Blogging and commenting on blogs isn’t “activism.”

              #6 – You don’t win by losing. There’s an apocryphal story, attached to many politicians, which goes like this: The bright-eyed, idealistic young candidate goes to a party elder to gain their support. The candidate spends a great deal of time telling the party elder all the great plans they have, how they’re going to make things better once they’re in office. The party elder listens patiently, and then says to the candidate: “That’s a wonderful set of ideas. But first, you have to win.” The moral is that you can have all sorts of wonderful ideas – and ideals – but if you’re not in office, or your party isn’t, it doesn’t matter. Think about that. Remember all the ideas that Ralph Nader had in 2000 that made some progressives swoon? They don’t matter, because he lost. Do you know how much Alan Grayson has accomplished legislatively this term? How much progressive legislation has been passed since the end of 2010? None. Why? Because Democrats don’t control the House. The message sent by losing? That you lost.

              #7 – There’s a time and place for everything. There’s a saying I heard years ago: “In the primary, you fall in love. In the general election, you fall in line.” The lesson in that is that it’s expected that you’ll decide which candidate you really want to run on your party line, and advocate strongly for them through the primary. Once the primary is over, you’re expected to back the winning candidate, even if it wasn’t the one you wanted. That’s called “party discipline,” and it’s something that despite moans about the lack of it on the part of the far left, they lack themselves. There is a time when you can advocate strongly for your position, and there’s a time when you need to back off. I pointed out back in early 2011 that they were still complaining about “Blue Dogs” when … it didn’t matter. There was no point in it because Republicans had taken control of the House. That’s just one example of many when the Left have shot themselves in the foot by attacking Democrats when it was either meaningless or would help the Republicans. You also don’t waste effort on what’s not important now. For example, the various frustrati blogs and a large number of “left” media pundits are spending many words on who they want to run for President in 2016. You know what? It’s not important now. What is important is the election we’re having this year. In December, you can start discussing 2016, but right now? No. It’s neither the time or the place to do it.

              As I said back then, this is not rocket science. It is hard work, and things don’t change overnight. That’s what the adults have been telling you. We understand that we’re not going to be 100% happy with any politician, we need to vote every time, that we aren’t going to make meaningless threats, that there are rules we have to follow, we need to do a lot of work, and most importantly, if we don’t win, we don’t get what we want. Until you do that, all you’re doing is throwing tantrums, and no, we’re not putting up with it. If you haven’t been paying attention for the past few years, you’d realize that all you accomplished with your last set of tantrums was to let Republicans start rolling back a lot of progressive gains. Don’t let it happen again.

              Politics 101 For The Left, Revisited

              • Michael Gebert

                Good Lord, what cat barfed all that up?

              • Hardcore Henry V

                I agree with a lot of what you say. But “unrealistic crap” is pretty synonymous with politics these days (or, let’s be honest, ever).

                Obama literally ran on “hope,” right? I mean, I don’t necessarily blame his team for this — after all, a Presidential bid without an easily-definable theme is completely DOA (see Hillary’s campaign, two separate times) — but are we in agreement that it is (and was at the time) pretty fucking ridiculous all the same?

          • Michael Gebert

            I think Sanders was a preposterous figure to run for president, but the idea that Hillary– or more to the point, the Democratic party– needed even less competition for the nomination than it had is crazy. If Hillary had had 5 strong rivals (I don’t know who they’d be, but imagine), there’d be a Democratic president about to be inaugurated. It just wouldn’t be Hillary.

            • Dusty Ayres

              Gebert, you’re only saying that because you hate Clinton due to bullshit you heard about her, and nothing else. What new emoprogressive nonsense do you and people like you have to spew now? She was the best person to take on the GOP and Trump, and you know it.

              • Michael Gebert

                We have not been properly introduced, please call me “Sir.” You can say it like Keith Olberman if you like (“SIRRRRR”).

                “you hate Clinton due to bullshit you heard about her”

                As opposed to what, my personal experiences with all 17 Republicans? You know who’s a sweetheart? George Pataki.

                If she was the best, then they were DOOMED, apparently. (Which, 8 years into party control, they probably were. The Dems haven’t held the presidency for 12 years straight since FDR and Truman.) I can still imagine a sharp, younger and less compromised candidate, even if I can’t name him/her in the real world. Which isn’t my fault.

              • Charles Peligro

                “She was the best person to take on the GOP and Trump”
                Well, I’m going to listen to you because obviously your analysis is spot on.

      • Jeff

        Post Trump the socialism angle doesn’t make as much sense. Trump openly supported Putin and “supported” poor rural whites while living in a golden tower in NYC and carried the religious vote while being married 3 times despite openly bragging about cheating with seemingly no religious affiliation. A charismatic little Jewish atheist wouldn’t suffer for democratic socialism amidst anyone who might actually matter. He’d just enrage the nutter righties who aren’t swing voters anyways. If we haven’t learned it before, it’s clear now, the “cooler” “cult of personality” candidate wins more often than not. Bernie had the likability and charisma to match Trump.

        • Dusty Ayres

          I’m talking about during the election, Jeff, not after Trump winning it. During that race, Trump would have eaten Sanders alive, as would have the news media. You think that what happened to Hillary was bad? The smear tactics against Sanders would have been turned up to 11 and Sanders would have been obliterated by Trump’s team, Fox News, and the rest of the media, as shown here.

          • Jeff

            I just don’t see it. Sanders had the moral high ground and none of the crooked or insider stuff would have stuff and a lot more of the Trump crooked, fraud, misogyny & Wall Street stuff would have landed because Sanders is mostly very clean. Any Democrat or serious opponent to a Republican nominee is going to be unfairly stained by Drudge, Breitbart, Trump and Fox. You are also forgetting the right has spent 25 years making Hillary their number one villain, most people wouldn’t even hear her out because they’ve been conditioned to hate her for most of their adult life. It was a change election and Bernie was a change candidate. Bernie was a populist who could have went toe to toe with Trump in charm and decimated him on morality and Wall Street. He’s also a man so the misogyny would have been nonexistent.

    • Adriannaemendez

      Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj172d:
      On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash172ShopNewGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj172d:….,……

    • Jortandy

      Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj286d:
      On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive if you don’t check it
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash286DigitalWorldGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj286d:….,……

  • Mister Quigley Jr.

    In a couple years “Tim Kaine” will be a pain in the ass Pub Trivia answer.

  • azmoviegoer

    Death strikes again. RIP Debbie Reynolds. Stress of losing her daughter yesterday more than she could bear.

  • Michael Lang

    “And too many angry, fact-free dumbshits hated her, and that’s why she lost.” Lib pap excuses. The harridan lost because she was corrupt and a horrible person. Simple as that.

    • Michael Gebert

      Despising Hillary and what she represents is logical, but voting on that basis makes you a dumbass.

      • Grampappy Amos

        Really, people are “dumbasses” to vote against Trump? I think not, sir.

    • Magga

      That might have been an argument if she lost to someone wasn’t among the worst humans alive.

      • TheRealBadHatHarry

        My God, I’ve no love for Trump, but do you people hear yourselves? “Among the worst humans alive?” Just who the fuck do you think you are? By what credentials do you pass such damning, summary judgement on someone you only know through the filter of a highly suspect media?

        This much I can tell about you: you’re a narcissistic ass with delusions of grandeur and a very tiny frame of reference.

        • Bob Strauss

          In other words, exactly like a Hillary hater.

          • Let’s just give the parties jerseys and start calling the election “The Ballot Bowl.”

        • Eric

          I’ve been called worse.

        • suttercane

          Here is the president elect, on live national television, vowing to commit war crimes and use the US military to assassinate civilian family members of enemy combatants. Twice. The debate was carried on Fox News, and the words are his own and completely indisputable. That may not qualify him for ‘among the worst humans alive’, but it puts him very high in the running for ‘among the worst Americans alive’.

          • Magga

            How dare you judge Trump based on what he says on TV?! Don’t you know microphones and cameras were only invented by the liberal elite to make Trump look insane?

          • Dusty Ayres

            @TheRealBadHatHarry:disqus, try waking up and stop being such a stupid fool.

          • Michael Gebert

            Right, he should just use drones, like his predecessor.

        • Abby Normal

          We also know him through his tweets, no? How do you dismiss the demonstrably untrue, horrible, stupid, narcissistic, petty filth he spews directly to his followers?

          • So he’s basically the Shaun King of politicians.

            That’s why this stuff doesn’t stick. There are a lot of people who don’t believe the folks complaining loudest about this stuff actually care about it, except as a political tactic, and would embrace it if the candidate were more ideologically sexy. A candidate with a background in protest activism could make Trump sound like Mike Brady.

        • Magga

          Sounds to me like I should be President, then

    • Yeah and that Trump guy is an absolute pillar of honesty! Really! Believe me!!!

  • filmklassik

    Trump’s an ignoramus.

    So is anyone who thinks his (batshit crazy) victory wasn’t primarily due to THIS:

  • robert jenks

    When the smartest woman in history needs to be fed answers by Donna Brazile to win a debate against Bernie Sanders, and the woman who logged more air miles in history making the world safe from terrorists is shown collapsing and being tossed “like a side of beef” into her medical van, maybe the Dems should have gone with a replacement. Of course, the Empress would have had to step aside for the good of the nation… Happy New Year!

    • Spicerpalooza

      I’m still amazed that Brazille is still head of the DNC.

      • robert jenks

        crime syndicates always pay for loyalty, as long as it doesn’t cost too much. witness debbie shultz getting bounced from the DNC and going to work the next day for Clinton Inc.

  • taikwan

    Oh for fuck’s sake – you’re blaming Hillary????

    • Pertwillaby

      that was irony, right?

  • This is like Kevin James blaming Steve Carr for Mall Cop not being taken seriously by critics. I mean, sure, but it’s a team effort.

  • suttercane

    It might have been worse if Hilary had won. The prevailing view of her is so crazy – #pizzagate – that you’d have had more yahoos with shotguns making their way to Washington threatening to trigger violent unrest. Trump may well force congress to reign in executive authority, and push the Democrats to realign as a genuinely progressive party. Don’t get me wrong, I wake up every day thinking that this is some funhouse mirror version of America, but there is good that can come out of it. If nothing else, get behind #CaliforniaIndependence – the chances to make real change start there.

    • #CaliforniaIndependence is a right-wing wet dream.

      • suttercane

        That’s why it could work.

  • Randy Matthews

    I agree with most of what you are saying, but I can’t blame Elizabeth Warren for not seeking office (or agreeing to be a running mate), if that’s not what she wanted, no matter how much I wanted her there. I can blame the DNC and the system for not allowing an outsider like Bernie Sanders a fair chance.

    • York Durden

      Maybe him not being a Democratic party member had something to do with it.

      • Randy Matthews

        And maybe that is what we needed. Some with Democratic ideals, who isn’t firmly entrenched into the party. He had a huge following by younger voters, as Obama did, which Clinton was never able to obtain.

        • Joe.Leydon

          Of course Sanders had a huge appeal to younger voters — he was promising them free college tuition. I bet if he’d offered to lower the Social Security retirement age to 55, he would have claimed a significantly higher percentage of older voters as well.

          • Randy Matthews

            Like ALL politicians, Sanders wasn’t going to be able to deliver on all of his campaign promises (especially when many have to be moved through Congress). Hillary made statements she never would have been able to fulfill on. Trump sure as shit has as well. That isn’t really the point.

            The point is the ability to win. What the candidate’s overall ideals are. And who the people want as their candidate. Having a level playing field. Trusting our system that each candidate had a fair shake. Letting the people decide who they want, instead of an uneven playing field created by the DNC.

            Hillary was crammed down our throat. The same could be said in 2008, to a lesser degree, but Obama was able to overcome (once again, largely because of the younger vote). When she lost to Obama, they sure as hell were going to do anything they could to make sure she was our candidate, largely at the expense of the will of the people, in my opinion. I thought that a year ago, and still think it today.

            Then I voted for Sanders in the primaries and did my duty to compel people to vote for Hillary, as I did myself. It wasn’t enough.

          • suttercane

            If he raised their taxes to pay for it, it can hardly be considered “free”. They’d be paying for it out of their own pockets. They’d just be paying less than it costs now, because most people believe that an educated populace is beneficial to the whole society, which is why we offer public education up to grade 12. But high school isn’t free – you pay for it with your taxes. If you increased taxes, and extended public education to grade 16, it wouldn’t be free. And the country would be more educated and more equitable for it, as well as increasing social mobility and decreasing income inequality. That is why he had a huge appeal with younger voters.

            • Joe.Leydon

              There also was a certain amount of bait-and-switch involved. Sanders told students they could attend college for free. He didn’t say they could attend ANY college for free. I think a lot of Bernie supporters heard only what they wanted to hear.

        • York Durden

          Well, right. But the Dem establishment didn’t want him to win. He was nothing to them but a useful idiot (ie, a far-left candidate whose views were useful in making Clinton more palatable to the flyover bubbas they needed to win the general election).

      • Spicerpalooza

        Bernie has caucused with the Democrats since the 90s.

        • York Durden

          I get that. But he is not a member of the party—Bernie Sanders (VT–I).

    • KC

      I think Warren knew that the second she became the nominee, she’d stop being everyone’s Political Girlfriend Who Lives in Canada and get the same treatment Hillary did. I browsed her Facebook page the day after she endorsed Clinton and the gendered nature of the insults was staggering. It was all right there waiting to come out as soon as she did one thing that didn’t play into the desired narrative. I still think she’d make a strong candidate (stronger than Clinton), but I’d be surprised if she wants any part of it, especially after watching a qualified, competent, non-insane candidate like Clinton lose to the least suitable person ever to seek the office.

  • Franny P

    Should probably put the blame on Joe Biden for not running, being a right of center guy I would have voted for him

    • I think we should blame Tom Hanks for not going into politics.

    • Jeff

      I believe he was told not to run by Obama who agreed 8 yrs ago to give her his support so long as she didn’t destroy the party following the 08 primary. It’s a stupid conspiracy theory but it makes everything else that happened in the democratic primary make sense.

      • Joe.Leydon

        Well, to note the obvious: It doesn’t take into account the death of Biden’s son as a deciding factor.

  • childerolandusa

    Because carping at Clinton in the primary didn’t weaken her at all. And calling one of her biggest racial constituencies stupid absolutely made her appeal more to the high-information whites who won Trump the electoral college. Great strategy for 2020.

  • Ben Kabak

    It was obvious after Sanders started beating her in actual states that she was a lousy candidate. But it’s a good thing she campaigned hard and hit a lot of states LOL

  • Lou Rawls’ Ego
  • chien_clean

    “We” are in Hell means people from New York and LA. The rest of the country is gonna be happy having jobs. This is why people cannot take you Liberals who are into movies or spoiled students seriously. You don’t know what hard works means. You don’t work for a living. You travel the World at other people’s expenses and say bitchy things about stars. You don’t like Trump because he said meany things and he has a toupet. And you have daddy issues. Grow Up!