Democrats Just Gave Donald Trump a Win

Democrats Just Gave Donald Trump a Win
February 25 21:04 2017 Print This Article

Donald Trump is gleeful at the prospect of getting reelected, and it’s all because of a choice made by Democrats.

The election of the Democratic National Committee’s chair was constructed as a re-litigation of the Hillary Clinton vs. Bernie Sanders contest. In some ways, this is certainly true. After Hillary’s resounding and largely predictable defeat, Berners were looking to take the party in a new direction with Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison, a Sanders supporter who predicted Trump’s ascent.

As Nathan J. Robinson of Current Affairs writes:

In an era where Democrats are losing incredibly badly at every level, they needed someone who could motivate people and them to organize. They needed someone who would harness the force that led to Bernie Sanders’ massive rallies, an enthusiasm that Hillary Clinton could never generate. With a significant segment of those people seeing their candidate yet again blocked (this time by an even more absurdly undemocratic process, in which ordinary party had absolutely no say), it’s hardly likely that Perez will be able to energize those same forces. Electing Ellison was essential because it could have kept more left-wingers from quitting the party in disgust, and helped bring back some (much needed) robust grassroots organizing.

 

Now, progressives in the party are further alienated. Good luck getting them to vote for Democrats. No matter how many people may have insisted that Ellison/Perez wasn’t a replay of Sanders/Clinton, it’s impossible to deny that in some ways it was. The progressives needed to receive some kind of gesture. And they have received one: an enormous middle finger.

Instead of reinvigorating the party with Ellison, neoliberal Democrats recruited former Labor Secretary Tom Perez to run against him. Ellison lost to Perez, and no one could be happier than President Donald Trump.

view more articles

About Article Author

15 comments
Johnw11
Johnw11

While Rep. Ellison does not have a perfect "progressive" record --  for example, supporting Clinton's 2011 war on Libya, which resulted in racial genocide against Blacks in that country costing thousands of Black lives at the hands of Arabs -- he at least is better than Perez on most other issues.

What Perez's selection means is that Dems have no intention of changing, and that the right-wing, corporatist, faction of the Dem outfit is still in firm control. They have no intention of abolishing "super delegates," whose role is to ensure that only corporatist / "Third Way" Dems such as Clintons and Obama are nominated at the presidential level. Their talk of "diversity" and "inclusion" and other rhetoric, is just that -- rhetoric.

What is not often discussed is that the current right-wing DLC (Democratic Leadership Council) derived dominant faction of the Dem outfit was itself brought about in the 1980s (led by the Clintons and funded by the Koch Brothers) to appeal to more conservative white voters at the expense of Black interests. That's why Blacks have only gotten "vapors" since then from Dems. The only tangible things Blacks have received from them are pain: mass incarceration, welfare and adoption reform, job off-shoring (NAFTA), increased poverty, wealth lost, and increased unemployment, privatizing of public assets, etc., resulting in at least two-thirds of Black communities being in ruins or near ruins. No one can rationally contradict that fact.

One reason for Clinton's 2016 lost to Trump was her overly relying on attracting "disaffected" with Trump white GOP voters at the expense of concrete policy prescriptions for Blacks. The failure of that strategy "predicted" her lost. The GOP voters stayed with Trump, and the Blacks stayed home.

The unwillingness of Dems to return to their FDR / LBJ policies that attracted Blacks from the GOP to Dems in the first place, is proof that they do not take Blacks seriously. While Bernie Sanders keeps telling them that they must change in order to meet todays voter aspirations, they arrogantly ignore him.

They are trying to make a "one-trick" pony do two tricks.

They delusively believe that if they can keep the 2016 campaign (one they already lost) going forward against Trump they can win come next mid-terms and in the 2020 presidential. That is why, unlike previous elections, the 2016 campaign is still ongoing. It has not ended. The idea is to continue using "useful idiots" to oppose Trump on frivolous things as distractions, while Dems quietly support him on corporatist polices.

Meanwhile, no Dem is talking seriously about the existential economic crisis African Americans are in. In their view, they don't have to. Instead, they pay Black "leadership" and media to viscerally (emotionally and anti-intellectually) distract Blacks with the "ongoing" 2016  "boogieman" campaign rhetoric against Trump . They hope that it will last until next election. It will not. If so, to no avail.

Although Trump has offered an economic plan for Blacks, the assigned role of the Dem employed Blacks is to keep Blacks away from Trump at all times. So when one hears these people talk obsessively about Trump, as if the election didn't end on Nov. 8, 2016, it is not so much that they are insane as it is that they are working. Their job = keep Blacks away from Trump and on the Dem plantation for future elections.

However, they are out-of-touch: everywhere, many Blacks have begun to demand that the "unelected" leaders sit down, shut up, and find another hustle. And that the "elected" leaders meet with Trump, review the advantages and disadvantages of his plan, and end the economic sufferings or prepare their own resumes for future employment elsewhere.

aiscoconut
aiscoconut

@Johnw11 So what is the alternative to the Democrats that you're suggesting? 

Johnw11
Johnw11

@aiscoconut  Thanks for your question. In my view, the alternative is for African Americans to put their collective interest first, prioritizing  neither Dem nor GOP's interest above that of Black America's. One suggestion may be the development of a separate party, with leveraging power in the interest of Blacks with either of the current major parties, or another viable party that may come about as a result of political currents (as of now, this seems highly likely). By leveraging power, I mean using Blacks' votes to get Blacks' material needs met, and not behaving like children voting against the "Boogieman" or the "Wicked Witch of the West," etc.

In this regard, I'm not talking about "identity" politics, but "group" interest politics. My definition of identity politics may differ from others of which I am conversant. To me, identity politics, at least at the voting booth level, is voting for someone's personality, race, gender, age, etc., rather than the policies they represent. Group politics, at the voting level, is casting for a candidate whose policies meet the socio-economic needs of African Americans -- that improve Blacks' quality of life.

Right now, Black America's loyalty to the Dem outfit is both self-destructive and politically unwise. Self-destructive because Blacks' lives only get worse whether Dems are in power or not -- a party doesn't feel obligated to do anything for those it knows it already owns.  It is politically unwise because Dems as a party are going only downhill. Thus, holding no future promise of viability to help Blacks even if they wanted to. (See: The Democratic Party is Facing a Demographic Crisis," Counterpunch, March 3, 2017). As the referenced article noted, Dems are losing the demographic battle among whites, and even immigrants tend to think and vote like other whites, i.e., GOP. In fact, according to the 2010 census, only 2.5% of the 54 million Mexicans in the U.S. self-identified as "Black" or "Afro-Hispanic." The remaining 97.5% self-identified as "white."

Since 2009, Dems have lost control of 18 state legislatures, a dozen governorships, 63 U.S. House Members, and a dozen U.S. Senators. This puts Blacks in a position to either drown with the Dems by continuing current practices, or take advantage of the fact that Dems need Blacks now more than ever and leverage that power. But that will never happen with the current Black leadership or Dems for whom they work. The election of Perez to DNC's top position means that Dems are going for the Hispanic vote as a future constituency, and that they don't have faith in their Black employees to turn-out Black voters as was evidenced in the 2016 presidential election.

The Dems' problem is they are out-of-touch with the majority of the American public, including Blacks ("popular vote" win in California not withstanding).

It is also not wise for any group to follow "leadership" that is more loyal to a political party (Dems) than they are to African American interests. No example is better than the current hysteria about Trump. But where's the Dems' "New Deal for African Americans"? I'm not saying that Trump's plan is all good. I'm asking, "where is the Dems' plan?"

Instead, Dem employed Black "leadership" is obfuscating the fact that their bosses' don't have a plan by diverting the discussion to "private prisons," etc. Falsely claiming that the Obama administration had "ended" private prisons. Not true. The Obama order -- itself a campaign for Hillary gimmick, given that private prisons' federal funding and stock values increased almost every year during his tenure --  only affected about 13 private facilities and about 22% of those housed in federal private prisons. It also did not end private prison detention for Immigration and Customs Enforcement or the U.S. Marshall service. ("Justice Department Will Again Use Private Prisons,"  Feb. 23, 2017.)

But that's how these misleaders -- some of them worth millions of dollars, and are richer than some top rappers, athletes, other Black entertainers and businesses persons -- are playing African Americans with their Dem derived propaganda. 

So what do they care if nearly two-thirds of Black America is in ruins or near ruins; largely a result of their leadership. They are themselves rich -- resulting from their roles as "Black leaders." Those are facts.

I know I digressed a bit, but perspective is important.

Lisa Spears
Lisa Spears

Notice the attack on black men, with the best picture going to a movie about gay black men. The breakdown of the black person in America is complete. Liberals have done, what no man has been able to do for centuries.

Mac Hill
Mac Hill

It's hard for me to believe that the entire Democratic party can be this obtuse.  From sinking the Sanders campaign, to allowing a 70 year old Republican to have a better social media campaign, to this recent decision, the entire party has been akin to a 3 stooges blooper reel.  The only logical explanation I can think of for this dumpster fire is that the party is being destroyed on purpose, and this recent election marked the end of the two-party system as we've known it.  There is simply no recovering from this type of incompetence and ineptitude.  The only hope for anyone who considers themselves a "Democrat" is for Bernie Sanders to chair, and endorse a Liberal candidate in 2020.  Anything short of that, will be pointless.

Lisa Spears
Lisa Spears

What if Trump is the best choice for the black community? What if he actually helps black communities?, What if jobs come back to the black youth? Schools improve? More blacks get out of poverty? I think you are going to be surprised..

Todd Pouliot
Todd Pouliot

Perez named Sen. Ellison his deputy. His voice will be heard in the DNC

Raymond Smith
Raymond Smith

That's bs and this will be the reason they lose once again. Chasing the demographic they lost to Trump is a F!!! boy errand.

Sheila Stephen Watkins Bryan
Sheila Stephen Watkins Bryan

This is a crock. If u want to win, you vote Dem. period. Full stop. Sanders supporters are either Dems or not. If not, then move over so we can take back the country.

LeQuisha Price
LeQuisha Price

The Democratic party destroyed itself with lies and corrption. They have exploited us and their time is up.

Rob Dee
Rob Dee

Considering the alternative, that is a criminally naive statement.

Rob Dee
Rob Dee

Again, considering the alternatives and the current situation, they are petty as hell.

Raiford Anissa
Raiford Anissa

This is thoughtless. And hateful. Win How? Anyone who is paying attention understands the GOP refused to elect a Latino presidential candidate.