Thursday Reads: What Do We Do Now?


Good Afternoon!!

I’m feeling even more confused than ever today. I hope I can think clearly enough to get some kind of post up. I can’t say I’m surprised, but it appears that Congressional Democrats have decided to try to “work with” incoming POTUS Trump.

NYT: Senate Democrats’ Surprising Strategy: Trying to Align With Trump.

Congressional Democrats, divided and struggling for a path from the electoral wilderness, are constructing an agenda to align with many proposals of President-elect Donald J. Trump that put him at odds with his own party.

On infrastructure spending, child tax credits, paid maternity leave and dismantling trade agreements, Democrats are looking for ways they can work with Mr. Trump and force Republican leaders to choose between their new president and their small-government, free-market principles. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, elected Wednesday as the new Democratic minority leader, has spoken with Mr. Trump several times, and Democrats in coming weeks plan to announce populist economic and ethics initiatives they think Mr. Trump might like.

Democrats, who lost the White House and made only nominal gains in the House and Senate, face a profound decision after last week’s stunning defeat: Make common cause where they can with Mr. Trump to try to win back the white, working-class voters he took from them, or resist at every turn, trying to rally their disparate coalition in hopes that discontent with an ineffectual new president will benefit them in 2018.

Mr. Trump campaigned on some issues that Democrats have long championed and Republicans resisted: spending more on roads, bridges and rail, punishing American companies that move jobs overseas, ending a lucrative tax break for hedge fund and private equity titans, and making paid maternity leave mandatory.

Some Democrats are even co-opting Mr. Trump’s language from the campaign. “Every single person in our caucus agrees the system is rigged,” said Senator Debbie Stabenow, Democrat of Michigan.


That’s just great. Trump’s infrastructure plan is nothing but an attempt to enrich himself with government funds, Ivanka Trump’s child care proposal will benefit only the wealthiest families who itemize their taxes, and Trump’s plan to install tariffs on foreign imports would bankrupt all of us. Not to mention the fact that Trump is reportedly considering a “Muslim registry” and quickly deporting or “incarcerating” up to 3 million immigrants.

And this garbage about winning back the white working class is hopeless and sickening. Without the support of people of color, the Democratic Party is history. The white working class men who supported Trump want to hold onto their white privilege a lot more than they worry about economic inequality. But the media and quite a few Democrats are focused on regaining the Reagan Democrats.

Joshua Holland at Rolling Stone: Stop Obsessing Over White Working-Class Voters.

Amid a spate of brutal hate crimes against people of color – with Muslim women shedding their hijabs to avoid random attacks, and the word “nigger” making an ugly resurgence in our discourse – the political press appears to have coalesced around the idea that we really need to understand the pain felt by the white people who elected Donald Trump.

It’s clear that white working-class voters in the Rust Belt provided Trump with a razor-thin margin of victory in the Electoral College, despite losing the popular vote by historic margins. The data show that Trump won a number of Midwestern counties with lots of blue-collar whites that went for Obama in 2012, in some cases by large margins.

But how we interpret that data has important ramifications for how the Democratic Party moves forward. If, as a New York Timesheadline blares, Trump’s win was in large part a result of non-college educated white voters who supported Obama in 2012 defecting to the Republicans – perhaps for good – then the logical conclusion is that Democrats have to reach out to this group specifically or face the prospect of future losses. And that means speaking not only to their economic anxiety, but also appealing to their cultural and social grievances. It might mean, for example, moderating the party’s support for gun safety measures, which are an important wedge issue for many rural white people in those key states Trump flipped. The last time the party decided to chase blue-collar “Reagan Democrats,” it resulted in Bill Clinton’s push for welfare reform.

If, on the other hand, Trump energized just enough Republican-leaners who stayed home in 2012, and Hillary Clinton failed to turn out just enough Democratic partisans, then we can attribute this disaster to factors that aren’t specific to this group. It may be that she was an unpopular candidate who faced a perfect storm of media coverage tainted by a tendency toward false equivalence, hackers releasing her campaign’s internal emails, a clumsy intervention by FBI Director James Comey and latent misogyny – all of that while running against a celebrity who dominated nearly every news cycle. If that’s the case, then the solution, whatever it is, should be the same for blue-collar white Democrats as it is for Democrats in general – running a better candidate who’s more focused on a progressive economic agenda, for instance – and we shouldn’t indulge in a lot of handwringing over this one group of white people.

Based on what we now know, there’s good reason to believe this last analysis is the correct one.

Please go read the rest.


It seems to me that a better project for Congressional Democats would be to investigate the Russian influence on our election and on the man who will be POTUS. There are a few who are interested in doing that.

David Corn at Mother Jones: Senior House Democrat Calls for Congressional Probe of Russian Meddling in 2016 Election.

On Tuesday, the chief of the National Security Agency, Admiral Michael Rogers, said a “nation-state”—meaning Russia—had intervened in the 2016 elections “to achieve a specific effect.” He was referring to the hacking of Democratic targets and the release of the stolen information via WikiLeaks. And on Wednesday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) called for a congressional investigation of Russian meddling in the campaign. On Thursday, the call for a Capitol Hill inquiry gathered momentum, with Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the ranking Democrat on the House government oversight committee, publicly urging the committee’s chairman, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), to launch such a probe.

In a letter sent to Chaffetz and released publicly, Cummings noted that he and Chaffetz had discussed opening such an investigation on Wednesday and that Chaffetz had told him he was “open to considering such an investigation” but wanted Cummings to “show the evidence” that Russia had tried to influence the election. Cummings did so in this letter, citing Rogers’ statement. Cummings also pointed to a statement issued on October 7 by the Office of Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security, which said, “The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.”

Read the full letter at Mother Jones.


CNN: GOP senator: Investigate Russia.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and one of the chamber’s most experienced foreign policy hands, said the attempt by a foreign country to interfere with the US voting process needs better understanding and a vigorous response.

“Assuming for a moment that we do believe that the Russian government was controlling outside organizations that hacked into our election, they should be punished,” Graham told reporters Tuesday. Referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Graham added that, “Putin should be punished.”

Graham, who wants the hearings to examine all Russia’s “misadventures throughout the world,” has the support of colleagues on both sides of the aisle. As other Republicans issued warnings about Russian activities, the hearings could become a source of tension between the GOP and the new President.

“You could see, going forward, a Congress that’s really at loggerheads with the White House on policy toward Russia,” said Angela Stent, director of the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies at Georgetown University.

More at the link.

The biggest piece of news this morning IMO is that DNI James Clapper has announced his resignation. He’s not going work with Trump on the transition.

We’ll have to wait to see why Clapper resigned, but I have to wonder if it has anything to do with the apparent war between the FBI and the Intelligence community that has been the backdrop to this election. Once he out of the government, Clapper would have more ability to speak out publicly (or leak privately) about what has been going on behind the scenes.

I’m running out of space, so I’ll just give you two more links to check out.


Joshua Foust: This Is Not Normal.

About the nicest thing you can say about President Trump’s incoming administration is that it is without precedent. But there is another way of looking at it: it is not normal.

Normal, you might argue, is a bad thing when people are hurting. In fact, there is enough polling about why people voted for Trump to suggest that a vague “need for change” was a powerful motivator. Though opinions about what needed to change varied widely — from economic issues to vague fears of a wrong direction to naked white supremacy — the fact is enough Americans did not want a “third term” for Obama and voted the Democrats out of power. (That many did so apparently uncaring about the consequences for minorities is its own, separate discussion.) ….

“Normal,” as a concept, matters. The old adage that it is just the setting on a dryer is not just wrong but misleading. When something is abnormal it is important to understand why. If a person is not normal they could be brilliant or they could be sick, and knowing the difference is the distance between life and death. In politics, too, there is normal and there is abnormal. An insurgent candidate swinging a party or the country right or left is normal — Marco Rubio winning the GOP nomination and the general election would have been normal, for example. But Donald Trump is not normal. In fact, the things he represents, the decisions he has made and is continuing to make, and the entourage he has surrounded himself with, are not normal. They are so abnormal that they look like the opening stages of authoritarianism — something those of us steeped in the study of authoritarian countries recognize like a flashing light at a railroad crossing.

The one thing authoritarians want you to do is to accept that their conduct is normal, even when it is not. They do not want you to yearn for a freer, less oppressive and less corrupt time, and they do not want you to think it odd when, say, a government agency is purged or a bunch of protesters are arrested and vanish into the prisons without ever seeing trial. They want you to think it is normal when the President is openly selling your interests out to a foreign power, or when he is using the levers of government to materially enrich and empower his family. The presumption of normality during abnormal times is one of the most powerful weapons the authoritarian has, and that is why it is so important to recognize how profoundly abnormal Donald J. Trump will be as president. So I assembled a list.

Please go to the link and read the list ASAP.


Matthew Yglesias’s hair is on fire: We have 100 days to stop Donald Trump from systemically corrupting our institutions.

The country has entered a dangerous period. The president-elect is the least qualified man to ever hold high office. He also operated the least transparent campaign of the modern era. He gave succor and voice to bigoted elements on a scale not seen in two generations. He openly praised dictators — not as allies but as dictators — and threatened to use the powers of his office to discipline the media.

He also has a long history of corrupt behavior, and his business holdings pose staggering conflicts of interest that are exacerbated by his lack of financial disclosure. But while most journalists and members of the opposition party think they understand the threat of Trump-era corruption, they are in fact drastically underestimating it. When we talk about corruption in the modern United States, we have in mind what Andrei Shleifer and Robert Vishny define as “the sale by government officials of government property for personal gain.”

This is the classic worry about campaign contributions or revolving doors — the fear that wealthy interests can give money to public officials and in exchange receive favorable treatment from the political system. But in a classic essay on “The Concept of Systemic Corruption in American History,” the economist John Joseph Wallis reminds us that in the Revolutionary Era and during the founding of the republic, Americans worried about something different. Not the venal corruption we are accustomed to thinking about, but what he calls systemic corruption. He writes that 18th-century thinkers “worried much more that the king and his ministers were manipulating grants of economic privileges to secure political support for a corrupt and unconstitutional usurpation of government powers.”

We are used to corruption in which the rich buy political favor. What we need to learn to fear is corruption in which political favor becomes the primary driver of economic success….

This is how Vladimir Putin governs Russia, and how the Mubarak/Sisi regime rules Egypt. To be a successful businessman in a systemically corrupt regime and to be a close supporter of the regime are one and the same thing.

Those who support the regime will receive favorable treatment from regulators, and those who oppose it will not. Because businesses do business with each other, the network becomes self-reinforcing. Regime-friendly banks receive a light regulatory touch while their rivals are crushed. In exchange, they offer friendly lending terms to regime-friendly businesses while choking capital to rivals. Such a system, once in place, is extremely difficult to dislodge precisely because, unlike a fascist or communist regime, it is glued together by no ideology beyond basic human greed, insecurity, and love of family.

All is not lost, but the situation is genuinely quite grave. As attention focuses on transition gossip and congressional machinations, it’s important not to let our eyes off the ball. It is entirely possible that eight years from now we’ll be looking at an entrenched kleptocracy preparing to install a chosen successor whose only real mission is to preserve the web of parasitical oligarchy that has replaced the federal government as we know it. One can, of course, always hope that the worst does not come to pass. But hope is not a plan. And while the impulse to “wait and see” what really happens is understandable, the cold, hard reality is that the most crucial decisions will be the early ones.

I’ve quoted more than I should, but this is vitally important. Now please head on over to Vox and read the rest.

Post your thoughts and links in the comment thread. I’ll be adding more too. Take care Sky Dancers.

53 Comments on “Thursday Reads: What Do We Do Now?”

  1. bostonboomer says:


    Not every congressional Democrat shares leadership’s desire to work with Trump

  2. Pat Johnson says:

    Our republic will soon become an autocratic oligarchy within the next few months.

    We have a man who has escaped paying taxes. Failed to produce his tax records. Is the subject of 65 lawsuits regarding his business dealings. Has identified himself as a sexual predator. Has been married 3 times. Speaks demeaningly of women. Insults minorities. Mocks the disabled. He lies, lies, lies. You cannot trust a word he says.

    He has no core values. He lacks intellectual curiosity. He admits to never reading book. He has shown his vindictiveness. Is a score keeper. Has threatened the press. Bears grudges. Is undisciplined. Is unfamiliar with the US Constitution.

    But most troubling of all he has a shady relationship with an enemy country run by a dictator with designs upon world wide domination. A man who jails and is suspected killing his opponents.

    This is who will sit in the WH. This is who must not be “normalized”. He is surrounded by some very shady people steeped in bigotry. Others who are wholly unqualified for the jobs he is intending to rewarding them with. His circle is small but deadly.

    I will never get over this travesty. But I will never consider this man my president. He is a stain on humanity.

  3. bostonboomer says:

    Leonard Pitts:

    I’m not in the mood for ‘unity.’ At the end of the day, Trump’s still a bigot

    Read more here:

  4. bostonboomer says:


    • NW Luna says:

      …one of the oldest and vulnerable, electronic voting machines in the United States (among other places it’s deployed in Louisiana, New Jersey, Virginia and Pennsylvania

      Pennsylvania jumped out at me.

  5. Minkoff Minx says:

    I’m just now getting out of bed. I don’t know if I can make it out of this funk.

    • NW Luna says:

      I am having near-continuous migraines. I think it’s still worth it to haul oneself out of bed and go through the motions, if only as an eff-you to those who want to destroy us.

      Are you doing any spinning or weaving, JJ? That’s what’s helping me. I’m planning a weaving to express some of what I feel….so far some sketches and am part-way through spinning 2 of the fiber colors. Can you PM me on Rav?

  6. janicen says:

    I don’t understand the motivation behind the Vichy Democrats, especially Elizabeth Warren. After she said she would oppose Trump at every turn, it seems like Bernie got to her and they settled into some sort of alliance. What’s their end game? Does Bernie honestly think he is the one to lead the party? I’m hoping its a rope-a-dope to keep the Trumpsters distracted while the real Democrats take our country back. I know it’s a pipe dream, but it’s all I have.

    • Pat Johnson says:

      Call me a heretic but they will sell us out in a minute. Perhaps not even that long.

      I am not seeking to “unify” with that crowd. They want to take away our social safety nets, our right to choose, gay rights, and we are expected to “give him a chance”? Come on!

      The Dems should be shouting from the rafters now, not wait until the crazy is sworn in. This election was rigged. I am now convinced more than ever. Russia, Assange, Malafort, Flynn and Comie saw to it.

      We should be marching on DC knowing all this but instead we wait breathlessly to see who makes the final cut in the circus of fools in this make believe administration. The Dems need to use the McConnell Model of obstruction with this gang of thieves..

      Am I bitter? Do ya think?

      • NW Luna says:

        We have a lot to be bitter about. Anyone not bitter is not paying attention.

      • jan says:

        I think our crazy long campaigns have led into this. People listen to Iowa etc being treated as extra special for almost 2 years, and then after the election we are supposed to keep being hyped up. So we spend most of our time tense over who will be president and at least one party is using outright lying propaganda to sway voters. Is it little surprising that some citizens have their lowest instincts appealed to in order for horrible politicians to win a White House?

    • NW Luna says:

      Smacks of Neville Chamberlain and appeasement policy.

    • bostonboomer says:

      Honestly, I’ve never trusted Warren. She’s fine on the banks, etc., but otherwise she’s not that liberal. Like Bernie, she doesn’t seem to get intersectionality.

      • janicen says:

        I’ll be honest, what pissed me off during the campaign was the way she was kicking Trump’s ass on twitter UNTIL Clinton picked Kaine. Then Warren went silent on twitter for a long time. She was actually effective and then she stopped. I know she campaigned for Clinton but it seemed half hearted.

  7. purplefinn says:

    Sobering. Thanks BB. It’s everything I feared in the early morning of Nov. 9. So important to not go into denial.

  8. Ron4HIlls says:

    I had an e-mail that said. SHOP.HILLARYCLINTON.COM Still FiredUp blahblah blah.

    It was a virus scam.


    They said call this number blah blah blah total bullsh!t!

  9. MsMass says:

    Here’s the type of opposition I ‘d like to see from our party:

    This Irish politician just said what many American leaders are too scared to say about Trump— NowThis (@nowthisnews) November 17, 2016

    Hope it works.

    • NW Luna says:

      Powerful! Wish our Reps and Senators would do this. More letters, emails, calls to make!


      • Minkoff Minx says:

        I know Luna. Fucking hell. And it is really becoming a fascist state. He is meeting prime ministers in his NY apartment with the son in law (unpaid advisor) and daughter (another unpaid advisor?) it is like he is holding court. Or bringing the American government into his lair. What the fuck? Aside from the fact that Russia could have his whole place wired. Trump is Putins asset. This all makes me sick.

        • Enheduanna says:

          Apparently it is illegal for a sitting President to accept “free” stuff – not sure about a President-elect. It’s quasi-illegal and just plain wrong.

  10. Pat Johnson says:

    After repeated chants of “lock her up” we now find out that David Petreaus is in line for a cabinet position. He gave away military secrets to his girlfriend!!!

    We are also knee deep in hypocrisy. No wonder JJ refuses to get out of bed. We are living in Alice in Wonderland.

  11. William says:

    I have no idea what the Democrats are doing. They haven’t had coherent leadership for years. One of the problems they did not cause, is that the media is absolutely pro-Republican; and thus everything Democrats ever do, is criticized by them. Don’t cooperate, and they are out of touch, sore losers. Cooperate, and they are cowards. Even the NYT constantly spins against Democrats. So that is part of the problem. The other part is their own confusion and temerity.

    The truth is that the Democratic candidate won by about 1.5-2 million votes. Democrats did actually pick up two Senate seats, and a few House seats. But the media spins this as an absolute repudiation of Democrats. If the stupid Sanders people had voted for Hillary in reasonable numbers, she wins. If the Republicans don’t kick a million people of the rolls, she wins. If the Russians don’t insert themselves into the process, she wins. If the FBI doesn’t do sometthing unconscionable, she wins. None of this was Hillary’s doing; unless someone wants to argue that the very progressive platform, all spelled out on her site, turned off the Sanders voters who preferred spitefulness to saving the country from fascism.

    But we have seen this for decades. Every time a Republican wins, Democrats rush to work with him. Every time a Democrat wins, Republicans oppose him from the first day. They were announcing beforehand that they were going to have multiple Hillary invesitigations, that they wre not going to bring any of her Supreme Court nominees even to the floor. For this outrageous insult to constituionality and governing process, they never pay a single price. Democratts (and this includes the president that so many Democrats just had to have instead of Hillary in ’08), may mutter a few things, but they basically let it go. And then we rather inevitably get to the poin of now, where we may have lost our democracy forever.

    My recommendation to them is that they fight every single one of Trump;s and Ryan’s proposals The Republicans are planning to vastly reduce taxes on the wealthy, and then borrow to finance a massive infrastructure bill, designed to insure a permanent Republican majority. They are going to go after Medicare and then Social Security, with the debt they caused being their excuse. And of course their stacked Supreme Court will make sure that there is massive suppression of any future votes. So unless the Democrati leaders don’t care about any of this, and just want their haircuts and their fancy meals, they should loudly bring this alll up to the public, and not support any of it. And blaming it on Hillary, the winner of the popular vote, with about 62 million of the non-suppressed votes, is cowardly, wrong, and entirely unhelpful.

    One last thing: Sanders wants to be the candidate in four years, and everything he does is for his own benefit. Warren is a somewhat more appealing version of the same ploy. Neither is presidential. Schumer is an inside player, and I have no idea what his long-term plan is. Then we have a Democrtic Party which is at risk of being frayed into various ethnic and even gender parts, each wanting their own spokesperson and candidate. The only person who could have held them together for the next four or eight years, is Hillary. The entire rest of them are lightweights compared to her. There are a few good people in the Congress, but no one who obviously has the ability and stature to form a unified group which fights Trump and fascism, starting right now. Maybe someone will arise, if Sanders and Warren and the anti-Hillary Left like Grijalva doesn’t drown him or her out.

    • Pat Johnson says:

      I agree with your hypothesis. You said exactly what I have been thinking but unable to articulate it as well.

      The sooner we,accept that both parties are corporate owned the better off we will be since it eliminates the guesswork of why they do what they do.

    • janicen says:

      It seems appropriate that Sanders work with Trump. They worked in tandem to bring Clinton down. Honestly, I hate Sanders more than Trump.

    • Riverbird says:

      I agree, William. Thank you.

    • ANonOMouse says:

      I have a different view about whether or not Democrats should find places to work with Republicans.

      I don’t want the Democratic Party to become the obstructionists the Republicans were. Decisions to obstruct legislation should be connected to policy only, not to Trump. There are plenty of ways to neuter Trump without becoming what we loathe. We have to STOP changes to the Safety Net programs and have to protect all laws that ensure our Freedoms. We have to make those fights loud and public. The American people need to know what we’re fighting to save and why we’re fighting to save it.

      No privatization of SS
      No privatization of Medicare
      Save Medicaid
      Save the AFA/With fixes to AFA that are long overdue
      Save UI
      Save Foodstamps
      Save all programs that assist low income families/Seniors and single mothers
      NO changes to our tax structure that are likely to cause inflation. Which basically means you can’t lower taxes on the rich and big business. They’ve proven they will not reinvest in the USA or bring their money back into the USA. We already tried this with Reagan with trickle down and GW Bush. It’s a losing proposition and we have plenty of historical data to prove it.
      NO exporting 11 million undocumented workers
      NO crackdown on Muslims/No Registry
      No Stop & Frisk
      Save the EPA
      Save the CPA
      Save ROE
      Save Marriage Equality

      And work our butts off to demonstrate to the country that we will not let legislation pass that will take away their opportunities, their safety net programs, their freedoms, their families, their marriages. That is how we hold it in the road until the mid-terms. If we lose Senate Seats in the mid-terms and cannot maintain the headcount necessary to Filibuster, we’re sunk, literally. Everything the GOP wants to do will be done.

      We cannot become everything that we’ve hated about the GOP. If that obstruction becomes the way Congress operates, in perpetuity, then OUR country will quickly descend into turmoil and chaos. If that happens they win because that is exactly what many of Trumps supporters want. Unless you believe the answer is 21st Century revolution, like Susan Sarandon, then we have to find a way that is smart, strategic and worthy of our Democracy. I’m not turning my back on the Democratic members of Congress until I know they have turned their back on us.

      In the interim we have to Stay in the streets. Every time the GOP Congress tries to push some unconscionable piece of legislation through we need to get into the streets by the 10’s of thousands. Nothing will shake up members of Congress quicker than their constituents on the doorsteps of the Capital. Every time Trump makes a move that is unconstitutional, illegal, unseemly, preposterous we have to scream at the top of our lungs as a people.

      As for Bernie, he lost, his supporters need to stop stirring the “he would have won” pot because there’s simply no evidence to substantiate that claim. Hillary was gracious in working with Bernie to incorporate his ideas into the Party Platform. This isn’t the party of Bernie, Bernie has no party and that was/is his choice. He was given a leadership role post election he can pontificate from that position. And he will never be POTUS. He’ll be 79 years old in 2020. Everyone over 70 knows what happens to your body in your 70’s. I still have confidence in Warren, but only as a Senator.

      As for the future of the Party…..We have to find younger candidates, that’s the bottom line. I think we have a pool of prospects, but they haven’t had enough face time or National exposure to seem viable. But we have 4 years to work on that as we fight to stop Donald Trump, if he isn’t impeached. So we can’t despair, we have to keep moving forward and believe that if we stay engaged and enraged we’ll get there one way or another.

    • joanelle says:

      Perfectly said, William. Thank you

  12. NW Luna says:

    • Enheduanna says:

      Very interesting about abortion rights in other countries – I didn’t know Netherlands had the lowest rate but I’m not surprised.

      I’ve never understood why men aren’t more active in the fight for Roe. You can’t TELL me they want more kids.

    • janicen says:

      You know, I’m just not going to get hysterical over every Trump appointment and nomination from now on. What did we expect? I wouldn’t be shocked if he tried to have Putin as his national security advisor. The press would call him a controversial firebrand or some other BS label. Remember the fucking right wing and the press going crazy over Valerie Jarret? But now we have Trump’s kids running his businesses and sitting in on meetings with heads of state or trying to get security clearance to sit in on the PDB. A fucking Tea Party darling will head the CIA. And Bernie is taking a victory lap over a goddamned $10 minimum wage! He excoriated Clinton for wanting a $12 minimum wage. That made her a Wall St. shill but $10 is now an accomplishment. I live in a state where the minimum wage is $7.25/hr and it’s very hard to find a job which pays that low. Most of the PT jobs pay $9.50-$10/hr. So Bernie accomplished nothing. Absolutely nothing. I give up. I’m going to stop bitching because I know there will be so much more to bitch about in the days to come and nobody will hear us because nobody is listening.

    • Enheduanna says:

      This is the guy who called an AA colleague “boy”. This is one the Dems need to fight.

    • NW Luna says:

      Notice the calm, false-equivalencies tone of the NYT article as it reports “concerns” over this “well liked” senator who is a racist bigot.