From the reporter’s email

“The Democratic Party must go through a reckoning. Donald Trump tapped into the profound economic anxiety that so many people feel deeply in their lives. Progressives warned repeatedly that Republicans could outflank Democrats on trade, jobs, Wall Street, and corporate greed — and they did. This race should not have been so close, and Democrats will lose in the future — over and over — if they don’t go through a serious ideological shift and follow Elizabeth Warren’s lead — fighting against the rigged economy in a truly authentic and real way.”

The way forward for the Democrats is more Elizabeth Warren?

Jeebus.

27 thoughts on “From the reporter’s email”

  1. Don’t you get it Tim, being a fake American Indian is A-OK so as long as you have the correct-thought. Actually, everything is A-OK when you have the correct-thought.

  2. AAh, the usual “we weren’t left-wing enough” analysis.

    Whatever the problem, the solution is to be more left-wing. Right…

  3. I feel sorry for the Clintons. Just think – their speaking fees and donations to their “charity” are going to tank.

    At least until they can get Chelsea a safe senate seat.

    But if the repubs have any sense, they’ll set up a full enquiry of the e-mails, the foundation and Hillary’s time at State. Comey probably needs impeachment too. Oh, yeah, that relies on them having any sense… I shan’t hold my breath then…

  4. I feel the next few years could be a bad time for us to be looking for trade deals.

    Unilateral free trade it is then…

  5. abacab
    Real politik would suggest closing the foundation and walking away will be the price of not having it investigated. If you tug on Chelsea’s thread you’ll find Obama at the other end of it. Nobody will want to go there.

  6. @Roue le Jour,

    I’m not sure they’re capable of it. It’s their magic money tree. I guess they’ll think that the media will still cover for them, which they might – but the media have so tainted themselves this election that most people will say “well, they would say that, wouldn’t they”?

  7. Roue – I doubt they will be offered that sort of deal. They may offer to walk away; the prosecutor may not be satisfied unless they are wearing an orange jumpsuit.

  8. Dcardno
    If it was only the Clintons, probably. But a thorough investigation would most likely drag in half the top of the dems and a bunch of foreigners you’d rather pretend to still be friends with. It would be a huge distraction from the president’s program.

    Anyway, the foundation is dead, having no influence peddle anymore, and nobody wants to indict the last black president.
    Just my guess, mind. I could quite easily be wrong.

  9. @David Moore, My money is on Michelle Obama. I wouldn’t rule out a Middle Ages style marriage of convenience between warring families to ensure a smoother transition in the future.

  10. Matthew L,

    “The worst result of this election is an overwhelming rejection of free trade.”

    This could be catastrophic for America for decades. “Hey, we’re protecting jobs” “No, we’re protecting them more”.

    You get into that situation, it takes years, maybe even decades to climb out of it. France has been like this since the late 1970s. And they’re going to elect Le Pen who is going to be as bad. Maybe they’ll fall far enough and get a Thatcher.

  11. I’m not sure that this is wrong – the US swing voter is a poor blue collar worker who is a loser from globalisation. Warren is a “change” candidate. Most polls showed Bernie crushing any republican candidate.

  12. I’m sure that a proper investigation into Clinton affairs would drag in an awful lot of others. That being said, Trump is anything but an establishment candidate. He might be the one prepared to go there. Especially as his own interests depend on neutering the Clinton machine.
    If it be necessary to do a person injury, make certain the injury is such that their vengeance need not be feared.

  13. NielsR

    Actually the Obama hopey changy thing is what won it for Trump. Obama was the originally insurgent change guy. He won because he swung marginal voters (blacks, but also poor whites) to his camp. It did turn out to be nonsense, and he represented the status quo + a big does of extra immigration. Now the poor whites have voted for a right wing changey guy.

  14. Warren would have been a better candidate than Clinton. She came across as more honest than Clinton (despite Fauxcahontas), and a lot more likeable. If the party had taken the time to groom her for the role, she could well have beaten Trump. Instead they foisted Clinton on the country and reaped what they sowed.

    Whether Warren is what the country wants is another matter entirely. Anyway, she’ll be 71 by the next election and there seems to be an unwritten rule that 70 is the upper limit.

  15. Andrew M,

    You might well be right.

    I thought Clinton would win, on the basis of Trump being so awful, but she was always a bad candidate. She’s not likeable, she represents privilege and there’s so many stories about corruption that at least some of it’s got to be true.

    One of the big plus sides is that she doesn’t go into the history books. She isn’t the first woman president. And I’m happy for that to happen, and I’m OK if that’s a democrat. Just, not her.

  16. The next Democrat candidate will be Bernie Sander’s corpse.

    He would still have more appeal and charisma than Clinton. He may be a rotting corpse, but he still wouldn’t stink out the joint as much as Clinton.

  17. “Democrats will lose in the future — over and over — if they don’t go through a serious ideological shift and follow Elizabeth Warren’s lead — fighting against the rigged economy in a truly authentic and real way.”

    Government takeover of the economy to make it fair. Millions will die.

  18. NielsR

    I suspect that Trump is going to do a few things:

    1) Climate change – he’s going to ignore it and build coal fired power stations, no more renewables
    2) Disrupt free trade agreements
    3) Tighten H1B visas to prevent stuff like this:

    http://www.orlandoweekly.com/Blogs/archives/2016/10/25/disney-has-found-yet-another-loophole-in-importing-cheap-labor#

    The main problem is that I dont really see that he’s going to be able to bring jobs back. The key issue is that it isnt just offshoring but also technology that is shafting workers.

  19. ken,

    How exactly is Trump going to build coal plants?

    Most US coal plants are privately owned. The economics needed for FirstEnergy to restart their 11 shuttered plants aren’t there currently. It isn’t like fracking is just going to disappear without government meddling. Even ending the EPA doesn’t make coal a better investment than gas at this point.

    I guess we could nationalize the generating companies or regulate fracking out of existence but neither of those sound like good options to me.

  20. Bloke in North Dorset

    “How exactly is Trump going to build coal plants?

    Most US coal plants are privately owned. The economics needed for FirstEnergy to restart their 11 shuttered plants aren’t there currently. It isn’t like fracking is just going to disappear without government meddling. Even ending the EPA doesn’t make coal a better investment than gas at this point.

    I guess we could nationalize the generating companies or regulate fracking out of existence but neither of those sound like good options to me.”

    He doesn’t have to build them he just needs to get the EPA to take their fingers off the scales and let the market work. This will also save money, not much, but a start.

  21. Pingback: Who will be the Democrats’ Corbyn? | White Sun of the Desert

  22. BiND,

    I am fine with doing away with the EPA completely, as long as I can relatively easily receive compensation for the spillover costs that I pay. Moving the function to the courts would work but in order for the system to be equally accessible individuals can’t be responsible for the costs of lawsuits. A $200,000 legal bill to recover a few hundred dollars simply doesn’t work. Given the sue happy nature of the American public any option I am aware of will be abused. Coal plant operators need to figure out how to dispose of their trash without dumping.

    FirstEnergy does have a plan in place in case they can start spewing pollution again. Hatfield’s Ferry is being examined to determine how best to burn a combination of coal and gas in existing coal power plants. Even if they are allowed to emit unacceptable levels of things like sulfur dioxide again I expect the other 10 plants to also be retooled for mixed fuel. FirstEnergy knows that if Trump does get his campaign rhetoric enacted the blow back will put Democrats in charge of Congress in short order. The smart money is still going to gas because of the fuel cost advantage. Lobbying attempts will be focused on giving mixed use plants a regulatory advantage once TPTB trade places again.

    As long as we are fracking coal is not going to have a major comeback. Industry has billions invested in gas and I simply don’t see a way that those investments wouldn’t be used unless the government bans the process completely.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *