Reply to This latest Time magazine cover pretty much summarizes the state of the Democratic party

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "This latest Time magazine cover pretty much summarizes the state of the Democratic party"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Did you actually read the article? I'm guessing not, because despite the clickbait cover, it's really just a sympathetic profile of Chuck Schumer. Yes, Democrats have some challenges. Are they going to be lost in the wilderness forever? Of course not.

And I didn't know that Trump was a Schumer donor!
Despite their spats, Trump was a regular donor--he saw it as the cost of doing business in Manhattan. In total, the Trump family has given more than $80,000 to Schumer's electoral efforts over the years, according to federal records, which is not a huge amount by political standards, but not token either.

http://time.com/4664998/chuck-schumer-president-donald-trump/?xid=homepage&pcd=hp-magmod[/quote]

Yes, I did read the article and the relationship between Trump and Schumer is not a revelation. As Trump said repeatedly during the campaign, he used to contribute to both parties.

The cover personifies the current state of the Democratic party. Will it change down the line? I am sure it will though I doubt if we have hit bottom because there is remarkably little introspection within the party as to what happened over the past eight years for us to have been literally decimated in individual states. We just rely on convenient explanations of gerrymandering, racism, uneducated voters, Putin, Comey and so on. Not a prescription for a turnaround, IMO.[/quote]
[b]
What is your evidence that there is no introspection? Serious question. The fact that you are conflating the Presidential election (Putin, Comey) and the state-level dynamics makes me wonder if you know what you are talking about[/b]. The Presidential election was actually a very near miss for the Democrats despite the crowing on DCUM. 80,000 votes in a handful of counties is not very many, as you know. Especially as these seem to be economy/jobs/healthcare voters who are not likely to find solace during this interval of Republican domination.[/quote]

First, with regard to "conflation",  my point is that Democrats have generally been inclined to blame the factors that I mentioned for the loss at presidential, federal and state levels.

With regard to the lack of introspection can you point me to any reasoned analysis by Democrats in a leadership role or who are significant players within the party  that attempts to explain our decline from the dominant position we held as of 2008 to where we are today? [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics