The Demo­cratic Party’s Gong Show

Jour­nal­ists and lead­ing Democrats weigh in on why the party of Hil­lary is tank­ing

The Washington Times Daily - - OPINION - By Tammy Bruce Tammy Bruce, au­thor and Fox News con­trib­u­tor, is a radio talk show host.

“[T]he Demo­cratic Party is ex­tremely weak and in­ca­pable of or­ga­niz­ing people.” — Sen. Bernie San­ders, April 3, 2017.

Fi­nally, the Democrats ad­mit it wasn’t the Rus­sians, James Comey or sex­ism that brought Hil­lary down. We are now told by jour­nal­ists, lead­ing Democrats, and even a former Demo­cratic pres­i­den­tial can­di­date, that it was the in­ept dys­func­tion of the party it­self, Hil­lary Clin­ton, and her abused and fright­ened team that has re­duced them all to ir­rel­e­vant, va­pid po­lit­i­cal busy­bod­ies.

The poor sops. For such a long time, they told us they were be­set by evil Rus­sians, a das­tardly FBI di­rec­tor and that ubiq­ui­tously hideous misog­yny. Such drama and in­ter­na­tional in­trigue. But we now know the Demo­cratic Party’s woes are not, at all, akin to a James Bond movie. Alas, they’re more like the Gong Show.

The other week, Hil­lary Clin­ton made much of a book she’s work­ing on that, she at­tests, pins the blame for her fail­ure on the Rus­sians, Mr. Comey and sex­ism. Sadly, some­one beat her to the real story, and ac­tu­ally reports the truth of the mat­ter.

In “Shat­tered,” au­thors Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes spoke with more than 100 people in­volved with the cam­paign, which they de­scribe as “mis­er­able even be­fore it started.” In great de­tail, they de­scribe a dys­func­tional cam­paign, dis­con­nected can­di­date and cam­paign teams wracked by in­fight­ing.

In a re­view of the book, En­ter­tain­ment Weekly notes, “Although ‘Shat­tered’ is filled with ex­am­ples of bad de­ci­sions and mis­han­dled crises, it posits the Clin­ton cam­paign’s main fail­ure was Hil­lary’s in­abil­ity to ex­plain “her mo­ti­va­tion for seek­ing the pres­i­dency.”

Oh, so it was her fault? That’s go­ing to leave a mark. Un­less, of course, Mr. Allen and Ms. Parnes are ac­tu­ally Rus­sian agents. Or work­ing for Mr. Comey. Or maybe they, too, are souped-up misog­y­nists be­ing paid by the Koch Brothers. Or some­thing.

The blame game, how­ever, is now so dead, even Sen. Bernie San­ders and new leftist lead­ers of the Democrats are ad­mit­ting in pub­lic that the party is in trou­ble.

On CBS’ “Face the Na­tion” Mr. San­ders was blunt: “Well, I think what is clear to any­one who looks at where the Demo­cratic Party to­day is, that the model of the Demo­cratic Party is fail­ing,” he told host John Dick­er­son. “Clearly, the Demo­cratic Party has got to change. And, in my view, what it has got to be­come is a grass­roots party, a party which makes de­ci­sions from the bot­tom on up, a party which is more de­pen­dent on small do­na­tions than large do­na­tions, a party, John, that speaks to the pain of the work­ing class in this coun­try.”

Fas­ci­nat­ingly, Mr. San­ders rec­og­nizes it’s the party it­self that is the prob­lem, but then in­ex­pli­ca­bly goes on about chang­ing the de­ci­sion-mak­ing process and how they get their money, still re­fus­ing to ad­mit that af­ter eight years we didn’t want any more of what lib­er­als were sell­ing.

The Democrats’ prob­lem isn’t cos­metic; re­ar­rang­ing the deck chairs on the Ti­tanic wouldn’t have kept her from sinking. Mr. San­ders’ com­ments of­fer up a shock­ing rev­e­la­tion: The Democrats still don’t un­der­stand what hap­pened in 2016 and they have no idea how to adapt.

The issue isn’t about “bot­tom up” de­ci­sion-mak­ing, it’s the fact that they can’t even be­gin to ad­dress the eco­nomic and na­tional se­cu­rity is­sues which mat­ter most to Amer­i­cans. Mr. San­ders pan­der­ing about their party needing to “speak to the pain of the work­ing class” of the coun­try is also an in­sult.

It was the Demo­cratic Party and Barack Obama that in­flicted that pain on ev­ery class of Amer­i­cans. And yet here is Un­cle Bernie try­ing to pre­tend the Democrats have been dropped onto Earth from Mars, re­ally, re­ally outraged about who­ever it was that set this coun­try on fire.

Rep. Keith El­li­son, the deputy chair­man of the Demo­cratic Na­tional Com­mit­tee, made his feel­ings clear about who’s re­spon­si­ble for the de­struc­tion of the party it­self. He blames Barack Obama. At a Univer­sity of Min­nesota event he noted, “Barack Obama could have been a bet­ter party leader. … Given that we lost a lot of state­house seats, gov­er­nor­ships, sec­re­taries of state, his true legacy is in dan­ger. I think he can’t say that he wasn’t part of those losses. … He’s re­ally good at get­ting him­self elected. … Your legacy is not a build­ing that he’s go­ing to con­struct in Chicago hous­ing his pres­i­den­tial pa­pers,” re­marked Mr. El­li­son. Ouch.

Fi­nally, some­one in the party is ad­mit­ting the ob­vi­ous, even if it was cau­tiously stated: Barack Obama de­stroyed the party while cre­at­ing his own cult of per­son­al­ity. This is so ob­vi­ous, Josh Earnest, Mr. Obama’s former press secretary and now a con­trib­u­tor at MSNBC, said this: “What Deputy Chair­man El­li­son just said is true. Barack Obama didn’t run to be a party leader, he ran to be pres­i­dent of the United States.”

But then Mr. Earnest ad­mit­ted this dis­as­ter was on Mr. Obama’s mind be­cause, “There are con­se­quences for this de­te­ri­o­ra­tion of Demo­cratic strength all across the coun­try for the pres­i­dent’s legacy.”

This was a per­fect sum­ma­tion of the in­ept malev­o­lence of Barack Obama, the man. His en­ablers and syco­phants ad­mit that only Mr. Obama mat­ters, and in their scramble to “fun­da­men­tally trans­form Amer­ica” he may have dam­aged the United States, but in true ma­lig­nant, nar­cis­sis­tic fash­ion, his last­ing legacy is the de­struc­tion of the Demo­cratic Party.

With nary a Rus­sian in sight.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.