The Bankrupt Democratic Establishment

Cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump presents a grave threat to the democracy of the United States. However, Trump does not exist in a vacuum. He is only able to implement his autocratic rule due to the complicity of many others. In that regard, there is plenty of blame to go around and among those responsible is the Democratic Party establishment. Former Vice President Kamala Harris ran for President on the message that Trump constituted an unprecedented danger to our system of government. So important did Harris consider countering the threat of Trump that she campaigned side-by-side with former Republican Member of Congress Liz Cheney. Harris and Cheney together attempted to convince voters that our country could not risk a second Trump term. Yet, when Trump prevailed, the Democratic establishment reacted as if Harris's and Cheney's warnings were nothing but hollow campaign slogans. For the establishment, it was business as usual. The result has been a nearly complete dereliction of responsibility bordering on collaboration.

The biggest problem facing Democrats at the moment is a lack of leadership. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries are clearly not up to the moment. Neither is in tune with the party base and both are far too wedded to large Democratic funders. Both are more likely to stand in the way of efforts that might inspire Democratic voters and cooperate with efforts that depress them. For instance, when Senator Chris Van Hollen travelled to El Salvador to meet with Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident who had been wrongly renditioned to El Salvador's notorious Terrorism Confinement Center or CECOT, it coincided with a drop in Trump's approval rating on immigration. Jeffries, rather than embracing Congressional focus on Trump's unpopular actions, discouraged Democrats from continuing to bring attention to those held in El Salvador.

For his part, Schumer is continually out-maneuvered and fails to use the leverage available to him. His most clear-cut failure involved the continuing resolution that Republicans had to pass in order to keep the government open. Schumer appears to have been surprised when the measure passed the House, seeming to have believed that intra-Republican fighting would tank the resolution. Therefore, he was caught flat-footed when the resolution arrived at the Senate. Schumer could have withheld Democratic votes in order to bargain for concessions favorable to the Democrats. However, that risked shutting down the government. Showing no taste for a fight, Schumer completely capitulated, casting his own vote in favor of the Republican bill and not receiving a single thing in exchange. This was a complete and total failure to exploit one of the very few opportunties available to Democrats to pressure Republicans to negotiate.

As for Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin, he has mostly devoted his time to ousting David Hogg. Hogg launched an effort to challenge longtime Democratic incumbents who hold safe seats with the goal of electing younger, more vigorous candidates who are better suited to challenge Republicans. Already in this Congressional term, three geriatric Democrats have died, depriving Democrats of three votes in a Congress in which every vote matters. This is a problem that Schumer, Jeffries, and Martin seem unwilling to address. So, of course, they ousted the one person trying to do something about it. Now Martin, someone of whom most people have never heard, is getting publicity due to his whining about how hard his job is and for the empty DNC coffers that he has been unable to fill.

There was a momentary bright spot when Senator Cory Booker took the floor of the Senate with the intention of speaking longer than former Senator Strom Thurmond had when he set the record for the longest filibuster. Booker would ultimately exceed Thurmond's time, spending more than 25 hours on the Senate floor. This resulted in a wave of enthusiasm among Democratic voters who had not had much for which to cheer. However, like far too many efforts by Democrats these days, the effort was purely symbolic, had no real results, and was not even what it appeared to be. First of all, Booker was not filibustering. A filibuster is aimed at preventing a vote on legislation. Booker chose to start speaking on a Monday where the next thing on the agenda was a vote on the nomination of Matthew Whitaker as the ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Booker did delay consideration of that nomination, which ultimately passed, but surely that was not the goal of his effort. Booker did not make any concrete proposals or offer any ideas for legislation that could be used to rally Democrats. Instead, after spending a day criticizing the Trump administration for corruption and speaking in lofty terms about a better country, Booker voted against blocking $8.8 billion in new arms sales to Israel and voted in favor of the nomination of Charles Kushner, Jared Kushner's father, to be the Ambassador to France. Kushner famously had been jailed for, among other things, hiring a prostitute to lure his brother-in-law into an encounter that was recorded with a hidden camera in revenge for his brother-in-law cooperating in a federal investigation of Kushner. Kushner then sent the video to his sister, the man's wife. After 25 hours of condemning corruption, Booker voted in favor of this guy.

Democratic leaders have largely been silent when it comes to Israel's genocide in Gaza and the U.S. attack on Iran. I follow the news very closely, especially on foreign policy issues, and I am at a complete loss to determine whether Democrats support or oppose the bombing of Iran. Schumer released a statement that appeared to be an attempt to have it both ways. He criticized Trump for "erratic threats and no strategy" and demanded "strength, resolve, and strategic clarity." This could almost be read to suggest that Trump had not bombed enough. As for Gaza, other than arms sales to Israel that most Democrats, including the leadership, support, you would hardly know that anything was happening. For the most part, Democrats seem to believe that silence is golden.

One of the most egregious derelictions of duties involved a recent vote on the GENIUS Act, a bill addressing a type of cryptocurrency known as stablecoins. Stablecoins have been a leading source of corruption for Trump and his family, allowing wealthy individuals and foreign governments to buy influence with the Trump administration. The GENIUS Act is a boon for the stablecoin industry, allowing investors to reap benefits while largely putting risks off on taxpayers. Democrats were well aware that the bill would be of tremendous benefit to Trump and further his corruption. Nevertheless, 18 Democrats joined with Republicans to approve the bill. Just as in the case of the continuing resolution, Democrats received absolutely nothing in exchange for their votes. At one time, Democrats considered offering purely symbolic amendments that they knew would be defeated. Ultimately, Republicans would not even toss them that bone. Among those voting to enable Trump's corruption were Cory Booker. Imagine spending more than a day on your feet complaining about corruption and then casting this vote?

An even more cynical ploy is being attempted by Senator Adam Schiff. Schiff is another Democrat who chose to ignore Trump's stablecoin corruption and vote to pass the GENIUS Act. Now, Schiff has introduced the "COIN Act" that he claims will "put a stop to this corruption in plain sight." However, this bill will go nowhere. It will not even get a vote (and, if it did, it would be defeated). It is a symbolic gesture that will simply allow Schiff and other Democrats the chance to virtue signal that they are against Trump's corruption while not doing anything about it. Schiff thinks we are all stupid. He believes that this meaningless gesture will take attention away from his meaningful action to further enable Trump. Don't be fooled. Schiff is essentially a co-conspirator in Trump's corruption.

A final example of the near-total bankruptcy of the Democratic establishment is today's New York City mayoral primary election. The top two candidates are former Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York State Assembly Member Zohran Mamdani. Cuomo has a long history of corruption and was forced to resign as governor due to credible allegations of sexual harassment. He is exactly the opposite of what Democrats need in a candidate if they want to oppose a President who is corrupt and was found liable for sexual assault. But, Mamdani is a Democratic Socialist in the mold of Senator Bernie Sanders and, apparently, as far as the Democratic establishment is concerned, that's worse. Almost the entire Democratic establishment of New York, including many politicians who had previously called on Cuomo to resign due to the sexual harassment allegations, have thrown their support to Cuomo. Even former President Bill Clinton — someone who probably deserves an "X Days Without a Sexual Assault Allegation" sign — has come out of hibernation to endorse Cuomo. Even the "liberal" New York Times which less than a year ago announced that it would no longer make local endorsements, gave a backhanded endorsement to Cuomo. There is literally no value that Democratic leaders are not willing to set aside in order to stop a populist candidate.

The mayoral race is somewhat reminiscent of the 2006 Senate election in Connecticut. When Ted Lamont defeated incumbent Joe Lieberman in the primary, Lieberman ran as a third-party candidate. A large number of Democratic Senators and Representatives, as well as the Washington Post, supported Lieberman. Lieberman went on to win the general election and became a regular thorn in the side of former President Barack Obama, single-handily obstructing many Obama initiatives including a public option for Obamacare. Lieberman would go on to seek positions within the first Trump administration. It would be very easy to see Cuomo following a similar path. 

In November 2024, Democrats suffered terrible losses. They woke up the morning after the election facing Trump as President and a Republican-controlled House and Senate. Some reflection was definitely in order. But, the best that Democratic leaders would come up with was to abandon trans people. Other than that, the plan seems to have been to hide in a cave, emerging occasionally to support Republican initiatives. The only signs of resistance have come from Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and, to a lesser extent, Senator Chris Murphy and Representative Maxwell Frost. Otherwise, there is little indication that most Democratic leaders actually believe that Trump is a serious threat to our democracy.