But, Novapsyche, the Democrats are rather cult-like in their lockstep support for genocide. Then there was Russiagate. In both cases, the party refused to take any responsibility for their loss. It’s quite clear that her support for genocide is what lost Harris the election. Has she admitted this? Have any of her handlers?
And Hillary Clinton and her followers are still blaming Russia for her loss, rather than looking to her own missteps. Maybe it’s not a cult—and I agree with you that the Trumpers are a cult. But it’s a distressingly immature mindset.
I hear what you're saying about the Democratic Party and Gaza. Still, I think there are things to consider. First, that lockstep was rather concentrated among elected officials, not the grassroots. I think that's been borne out, both in terms of activism as well as the election returns (i.e., the number of voters who just sat out). Also, many Republicans, too, supported funding the genocide. So it becomes harder to make that case. As for the average American, I think most of us (I'm presuming, here) simply relegate matters of foreign policy to the president and don't think much else about it.
I don't think people can say that Democrats held the Gaza assault as a tenet of their beliefs or values -- but, on the other hand, one could very well say that fundamentalist End-time Christians absolutely hold the expansion of Israel (which subsumes the destruction of Gaza) as part of their belief system, and the majority of those folks identify as conservative and/or Republican. Another point that hopefully brings nuance....
LM1986 also references "Russiagate," which, if I'm understanding correctly, is the idea that there was a witch-hunt -- a "hoax" -- plotted against Donald Trump his first term? This is a highly suspect retrospective look. I don't know if you ever sat down and read the Mueller report. I did. It took me two dedicated days the first weekend it was released. There was interference; even with entire pages blacked out in redaction, it was obvious. Additionally, Trump's efforts to cover up the investigation's findings constituted its own standalone crime.
Perhaps you are referring to something different. As for why Clinton lost, I think that remains a sore subject precisely because there was no real post-mortem done on her campaign. Trump got into office and people immediately shifted their attention. Sanders supporters felt (and feel) that the bureaucratic process of the superdelegate system was used to shaft him; Clinton voters, in their own turn, felt (and feel) betrayed by "Bernie bros" (of which I must be one, though I am female), 12% of whom went onto to vote for Trump. (I am not of that cohort, obviously. But I would venture that those folks were and are probably sexist. They possibly came back into the fold in 2020.)
But Clinton absolutely made mistakes -- most people note that she avoided campaigning in swing states in the home stretch. That's on her.
I think Barack Obama was the closest thing Democrats -- possibly since JFK -- had to a charismatic leader. I think Sanders could have been the same kind of phenomenon, as he was drawing huge crowds, mainly youth; but the party foreclosed upon him. Outside of those people, there has not been a nucleus around which the Democratic Party could have built anything resembling a cult. It's simply not a cult. It's an organization. (On the other side of the aisle, though, we now have a cult with access to all of the organizational power of a political party, and that's what make it so dangerous.)
You think it's an immature mindset? Hmm. I think the Democratic Party has been captured by neoliberal interests -- just as the Republicans have. Both ensnared, our national politics have stagnated, the ideological gap between the two parties growing unreasonably and unsustainably narrow. But whereas Trump came along and put the right side of the Overton window through a woodchipper, nothing like that is going on in the Democratic Party. So we're stuck. That's how I see it, anyway. YMMV!
But, Novapsyche, the Democrats are rather cult-like in their lockstep support for genocide. Then there was Russiagate. In both cases, the party refused to take any responsibility for their loss. It’s quite clear that her support for genocide is what lost Harris the election. Has she admitted this? Have any of her handlers?
And Hillary Clinton and her followers are still blaming Russia for her loss, rather than looking to her own missteps. Maybe it’s not a cult—and I agree with you that the Trumpers are a cult. But it’s a distressingly immature mindset.
Hi, Mary! Thanks for the feedback.
I hear what you're saying about the Democratic Party and Gaza. Still, I think there are things to consider. First, that lockstep was rather concentrated among elected officials, not the grassroots. I think that's been borne out, both in terms of activism as well as the election returns (i.e., the number of voters who just sat out). Also, many Republicans, too, supported funding the genocide. So it becomes harder to make that case. As for the average American, I think most of us (I'm presuming, here) simply relegate matters of foreign policy to the president and don't think much else about it.
I don't think people can say that Democrats held the Gaza assault as a tenet of their beliefs or values -- but, on the other hand, one could very well say that fundamentalist End-time Christians absolutely hold the expansion of Israel (which subsumes the destruction of Gaza) as part of their belief system, and the majority of those folks identify as conservative and/or Republican. Another point that hopefully brings nuance....
LM1986 also references "Russiagate," which, if I'm understanding correctly, is the idea that there was a witch-hunt -- a "hoax" -- plotted against Donald Trump his first term? This is a highly suspect retrospective look. I don't know if you ever sat down and read the Mueller report. I did. It took me two dedicated days the first weekend it was released. There was interference; even with entire pages blacked out in redaction, it was obvious. Additionally, Trump's efforts to cover up the investigation's findings constituted its own standalone crime.
Perhaps you are referring to something different. As for why Clinton lost, I think that remains a sore subject precisely because there was no real post-mortem done on her campaign. Trump got into office and people immediately shifted their attention. Sanders supporters felt (and feel) that the bureaucratic process of the superdelegate system was used to shaft him; Clinton voters, in their own turn, felt (and feel) betrayed by "Bernie bros" (of which I must be one, though I am female), 12% of whom went onto to vote for Trump. (I am not of that cohort, obviously. But I would venture that those folks were and are probably sexist. They possibly came back into the fold in 2020.)
But Clinton absolutely made mistakes -- most people note that she avoided campaigning in swing states in the home stretch. That's on her.
I think Barack Obama was the closest thing Democrats -- possibly since JFK -- had to a charismatic leader. I think Sanders could have been the same kind of phenomenon, as he was drawing huge crowds, mainly youth; but the party foreclosed upon him. Outside of those people, there has not been a nucleus around which the Democratic Party could have built anything resembling a cult. It's simply not a cult. It's an organization. (On the other side of the aisle, though, we now have a cult with access to all of the organizational power of a political party, and that's what make it so dangerous.)
You think it's an immature mindset? Hmm. I think the Democratic Party has been captured by neoliberal interests -- just as the Republicans have. Both ensnared, our national politics have stagnated, the ideological gap between the two parties growing unreasonably and unsustainably narrow. But whereas Trump came along and put the right side of the Overton window through a woodchipper, nothing like that is going on in the Democratic Party. So we're stuck. That's how I see it, anyway. YMMV!