Democratic National Committee

In Midst Of Democratic “Morass”, Could Jerry Brown Come To The Rescue At Age 82, And Unite Democrats In 2020?

In the midst of Democratic Party “morass”, stirred up further by Donna Brazile”s new book, and the lack of leadership and a new agenda, other than to wait for Donald Trump to implode, it is alarming those who want an aggressive approach to revive Democratic fortunes.

The clear need for a new generation of leadership is clear cut, but at this point, some are starting to notice that the Governor of the largest state is actively on the attack against the Trump Administration on the issues of the environment, immigration, gun regulations, and more. He is the great progressive star. Who are we referring to?

We are talking about Jerry Brown, who is 79 years old, and will leave the Governorship a year from now at age 80.

Some are wondering could a 82 year old four time Governor of California, at age 36-44 and then 72-80, actually mount a Presidential campaign for the fourth time, after trying in 1976, 1980 and 1992–so 44, 40 and 28 years ago?

It seems crazy to imagine it, but it also demonstrates how weak the Democrats seem to be, as we start to consider Presidential candidates in 2020 for the Democrats.

All one can say is IF we are to even think about Jerry Brown, then we cannot dismiss Joe Biden (78 in 2020), or Elizabeth Warren (71 in 2020), and even Bernie Sanders (79 in 2020).

But this blogger still feels strongly that a new generation in the 40s, 50, and early 60s is the best route to travel, and would include such leaders as Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Mayor Eric Garcetti of Los Angeles, Senator Kamala Harris of California, likely future California Governor Gavin Newsom, Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, and others not often mentioned.

Good Fortune That Many Watergate Scandal Journalists And Investigators Are Still Alive And Able To Assist With Insight Into Trump Scandals

It has been 45 years since the Watergate Scandal started to erupt, leading to the resignation of Richard Nixon 43 years ago.

Now that we are in the most dangerous constitutional crisis since Watergate, and actually more dangerous than that one was, it is good that many Watergate Scandal journalists and investigators are still alive, and able to assist with their insights and expertise into the Donald Trump scandals.

It is encouraging that Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, who exposed the facts about the Watergate break in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters, are still actively engaged in pursuing the truth.

Also, Dan Rather, formerly the CBS News anchor from 1981-2005, and Ted Koppel of ABC News and “Nightline”, are both still pursuing the facts, and providing their brilliant analysis on what they see as more concerning than even the Nixon scandals.

Several individuals who helped in the prosecution case. led by Archibald Cox and Leon Jaworksi, 35 years ago, also are still alive and well, and able to give their expertise on comparing Watergate to the Trump scandals, with the general conclusion that this present scandal is more dangerous, constitutionally, than what Nixon represented.

Most observers believe that were Nixon alive today, he would be shocked at what Donald Trump has said and done, wondering how he has been able to accomplish so much in his corruption, and how he must be held accountable for his transgressions.

Donald Trump’s Alternate Reality And Inability To Tell The Truth Undermining America Today And In The Future

Donald Trump is clearly a very sick man, mentally unbalanced, and unable to see reality or tell the truth about anything.

We are living through a nightmare, that every morning, we wake up, and want to imagine it is over, but it is NOT over, and after 45 days in the White House, we are living through a tumultuous time which is undermining any possibility of unity, or optimism about the future.

Trump lives in an alternate reality, and is the LIAR IN CHIEF, and anyone with any common sense, can clearly notice that his behavior is far outside the norm, and that he stands out as the worst possible example of Presidential leadership.

Many observers seem to think that somehow Trump can make it through a four year term, but this author and blogger does not see it that way, and believes that if he were to do so, this nation would be so damaged in domestic and foreign policy, that it would take many decades to recover.

Why, oh why, did this nightmare have to occur, and undermine all of the progress in the past century and more under both Democratic and Republican Presidents?

All progressives have to commit themselves to active efforts to end this nightmare by stopping their divisive tactics, as with the Democratic National Chairman election, where some came out of the situation disgruntled.

The fact that Tom Perez asked Keith Ellison to be his deputy should be the first example of cooperation among progressives for the future, or else, progressivism is doomed long term.

Democrats Only Gain 6 House Seats, 2 Senate Seats In 2016 Elections: Can They Recover In 2018?

The Democratic Party, which looked on the edge of becoming the dominant party in America, at least on the Presidential level, now is faced with the possibility of a long term status as the party that can win the coast lines and the majority of the popular vote for President, but still lose the Electoral College again and again, with twice in the past generation, 2000 and now 2016.

By all estimates, in the long run, whatever that means, the demographic changes in America will insure that the Democrats will eventually have a tremendous advantage, but for now, the situation is gloomy, as the Democrats only gained 6 House seats and 2 Senate seats, and the loss of Russ Feingold in Wisconsin and Evan Bayh in Indiana, when both were heavily favored, was startling.

So the job is to recruit a future generation of leadership on the state level as well as the national level, and unfortunately, the Democrats on the national level have just shot themselves in the foot, by electing once again the same old team (all in their mid 70s) of Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, and James Clyburn to leadership of their party in the House of Representatives.

And picking an African American and first Muslim in Congress, Keith Ellison of Minnesota, as the Democratic National Chairman, which now seems inevitable with Howard Dean withdrawing from the race, is not exactly the greatest choice either.

So can the Democrats recover in 2018? They likely would gain some seats in the House of Representatives, but not control, and the Senate will be almost impossible not to lose seats, as 25 of 33 seats up for election are Democratic seats, so the future is gloomy, as the situation now seems.

The Mystery Of 2016: Why Hillary Clinton Has Low Public Opinion Rating, And Bill Clinton Continues To Rate High In Public Opinion!

As the Democratic National Convention begins in Philadelphia, there is much turmoil and rancor over the revelation of Democratic National Committee emails, apparently hacked by Russian state supporters, to harm Hillary Clinton by her connection to now disgraced Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

There is no debate that Debbie has run the DNC poorly, and shown bias toward Bernie Sanders, and it is right that she is not participating in the activities of the convention. She also faces a fight in the primary against a Bernie Sanders supported candidate in the Florida primary on August 30.

Despite that, I have met Debbie a few times, and always thought she was a decent, kind, and competent person, but her handling of the Democratic National Committee activities have besmirched her reputation permanently in history, a tragic development.

But beyond this controversy, the mystery continues to arise. Why does Hillary Clinton have such low public opinion rating, while her husband, former President Bill Clinton, continues to rate high in public opinion, and always has?

Hillary Clinton is one of the most qualified nominees for President in all of American history, but she is not a good politician, in the sense that she has trouble arousing supporters, and is not, as she even admits, the expert communicator that her husband, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama, are.

Clinton has made mistakes, certainly, but so have all Presidential nominees and all Presidents. But much of the attack on Hillary Clinton is manufactured by right wing conservative forces and Republican nominee Donald Trump.

And she is blamed for her husband’s misbehavior, but somehow, that does not affect the popularity of her husband, so this is inscrutable!

There, clearly, is a anti woman mentality among many men, and even a large percentage of women, both of whom seem to feel that a woman is not qualified to be President.

However, the belief is that once Bill Clinton speaks at the convention on Wednesday that he will be able to boost the candidacy of his wife, and that once he goes on the campaign trail in the next months, that he will help to elect his wife to the Presidency.

Bernie Sanders On The Road To Being The Ralph Nader Of 2000! He May Bring Us Donald Trump And A Right Wing Supreme Court!

It looks as if Bernie Sanders is on the road to being the Ralph Nader of 2000.

In so doing, he may bring us Donald Trump in the White House, which would condemn him in history, as Nader brought us George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, and two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, and the disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina!

Sanders has failed to win more than a few primaries, mostly winning unrepresentative caucuses; is more than three million popular votes behind Hillary Clinton; and will not have more pledged delegates than Clinton, but he now says he will fight to change “super delegates”, who have pledged to Hillary Clinton, to switch loyalties to him, which will not happen. He is not lifelong Democrat, but rather a Socialist who was allowed to join the Democratic Party, and now is, seemingly, out to harm them for his own ambitions!

But what it means is that we will have division, dissension, and turmoil at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, rather than unity. Already, Sanders has demanded, which will not happen, to remove Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Congresswoman from Florida as the DNC Chair, and also to replace former Congressman Barney Frank of Massachusetts and Governor Dan Malloy of Connecticut as leaders of the Platform Committee at the convention.

Bernie now comes across as a bitter, nasty, crotchety old man who seems not to care about whether the progressive agenda wins, but only whether his own ego is satiated!

Small States’ (One House Member And Two Senators) Influence In Congress Since 1945

There are seven states that have had only one member of the House of Representatives, along with two US Senators, in the past 70 years. but despite their small populations, these states have had a massive impact on American politics and history!  In addition, for the first few decades since 1945, Nevada also had one House member until growth caused two, and then, three seats in the House.

The seven states are Vermont, Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, and Alaska!

But North Dakota, South Dakota,and Montana had two members of the House until recent decades when reapportionment caused them to lose a second seat.

So only Vermont, Delaware, Wyoming, and Alaska (since 1959) stand alone as consistently having one House member and two Senators per state.

But look at their influence:

Vermont had George Aiken (R) (1941-1975) and has Patrick Leahy (D) for 41 years (1975 to Present) and counting now, and Bernie Sanders since 1990,  who  was the lone House member for 16 years before election to the Senate in 2006,making him the longest serving Independent in the history of both houses of Congress.  Also, Howard Dean, former Governor of the state, was a leading contender for the Democratic nomination in 2004, and then became head of the Democratic National Committee, and helped the rise of Barack Obama with a “50 state” strategy between 2004-2008.

Delaware had Joe Biden as Senator for six terms from 1973-2009, and now as Vice President.  He became one of the longest serving Senators of all time, and sought the Presidency in 1988 and 2008.

Wyoming had Dick Cheney as its lone Congressman for ten years from 1979-1989, before he ended up as Secretary of Defense under the first Bush Presidency, and Vice President in the second Bush Presidency.  Also, Alan Simpson served in the Senate from 1979-1997 as  a Republican, and Gale McGree from 1959-1977 as a Democrat.

Alaska had Ted Stevens in the Senate for 40 years from 1968 to 2009, the longest serving Republican Senator in American history.  Also, Sarah Palin , while Governor, was the Vice Presidential nominee for the Republicans in 2008.

And if one looks at the other states which had one Congressman at least for the last few decades, we have South Dakota and Senator George McGovern (1963-1981), the 1972 Democratic Presidential nominee; Montana, with Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield (D) (1953-1977) from 1961-1977; Nevada with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) (1987-Present) from 2007-2015; and North Dakota Senators Kent Conrad (1987-2013) and Bryan Dorgan (1992-2011).

So the “small” states have really had a major role in American politics, despite their small populations!

Democrats Make Major Blunder In Scheduling Saturday Evening Debates!

Something is seriously wrong with the Democratic National Committee, under Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, in their decision to schedule two of the Presidential debates on Saturday evenings, when most people are not watching television, and particularly the debate scheduled for this evening right before Christmas!

It is a denial of common sense to do this, and will make many think the Democratic National Committee is favoring front runner Hillary Clinton over her two rivals, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley.

And only permitting a small total of six debates altogether is also a blunder!

More exposure in debates is to be preferred, not less, but apparently, despite protests, the schedule is set, and undermines the Democratic ability to get their message out to the voters!

Philadelphia The Site Of The Democratic National Convention The Week of July 25, 2016!

So the Democratic National Committee has chosen Philadelphia, the “City of Brotherly Love”, the city of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitutional Convention, the city of Benjamin Franklin, to be the host for the Democratic National Convention, which will nominate the next Democratic nominee for President of the United States.

The convention will be held in the last week of July, the week after the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio.

So therefore, there will be little time for a “bump” in the polls for the GOP Presidential nominee, and an extra month for the official campaign, which will now start in August, rather than around Labor Day in September.

This author had predicted that Columbus, Ohio, would be the site, and concedes that this time, unlike Tampa and the Republicans in 2012, that he turned out to have predicted incorrectly. The reasoning was that Ohio was in play as a “swing” state, while Pennsylvania is not really such.

However, Philadelphia is a great choice, and the general term “City of Brotherly Love’ actually fits perfectly, as the Democrats are the party of equal rights for gays and lesbians, while the Republicans, with a very few exceptions of office holders, still defy and oppose such equality, including marriage, although it is clear that the Supreme Court is about to declare this June that gays and lesbians may marry everywhere in the United States!

Final Decision On Democratic National Convention Due: New York, Philadelphia, Or Columbus, Ohio?

Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, will be announcing sometime this month where the 2016 Democratic National Convention will be held in the summer of 2016.

The finalists are New York City, Philadelphia, and Columbus, Ohio.

Many might say having the convention in the number one city in America (New York City), or in the city representing the Declaration of Independence and the Constitutional Convention (Philadelphia), would be the best choice.

However, realize that both New York State and Pennsylvania are strongly “blue” states in Presidential elections, and therefore, nothing electorally is gained by choosing either city.

On the other hand, selecting Columbus, Ohio, the capital city of the Buckeye State, is a strategically very smart move, particularly with the fact that the Republican National Convention is to be held in Cleveland.

Ohio is the ultimate swing state, having been with the winner every election since 1964, and it is, certainly, one of only five truly “swing states” up for contention.

The Democrats could win the Presidency without Ohio, but with the GOP in Ohio, and the strong possibility that either Governor John Kasich or Senator Rob Portman could be the Vice Presidential running mate for Jeb Bush or others, and that Kasich himself could run for President, it would be extremely smart and sensible to compete for Ohio in the convention situation, along with the Republicans in Cleveland.

So the Democrats should seriously make the decision to go for Columbus, and make Ohio a true rivalry for party support, and if Ohio went to the Democrats, it would clinch for sure the winning of the Presidency by any Presidential nominee, no matter who it was!

So my prediction is that the Democrats will see the reasoning suggested in this blog entry, and will choose Columbus, Ohio, over New York City and Philadelphia. We shall see how my prediction works out in the next month!

I remind my readers that I correctly predicted Tampa, Florida, as the convention site of the Republicans in 2012!