There are just too many questions that have gone unanswered.
8 years is a long time, and political views can change dramatically in that time period. I know I am a very different person than I was 8 years ago. Eleven years ago I voted for GW Bush. So I can understand how ones views can change dramatically in a relatively short period of time, especially if you are young.
But something smells fishy here.
But why did the Facebook page and social media presence of Johnson’s faction BLM Seattle did not exist until the day of the rally?
Why is it that they said Martin O’Malley’s name several times through out their protest speech?
Questions that will likely never be answered.
I appreciate that when Bernie Sanders is interrupted by protesters, he lets them speak. He could have security escort them out the building, like many other politicians have done over the years.
But he realizes that this rally is not really his, it is the peoples.
possibly win the nomination,” is the phrase heard most often when Washington
insiders mention either Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders.
enthusiasm for the bombastic billionaire and the socialist senior continues to
build within each party, the political establishment is mystified.
Political insiders don’t see that the biggest political phenomenon in America today is a
revolt against the “ruling class” of insiders that have dominated Washington
for more than three decades.
In two very different ways, Trump and Sanders are agents of this revolt. I’ll explain the two ways in a moment.
confuse this for the public’s typical attraction to candidates posing as political
outsiders who’ll clean up the mess, even when they’re really insiders who
contributed to the mess.
new is the degree of anger now focused on those who have had power over our economic
and political system since the start of the 1980s.
are presidents and congressional leaders from both parties, along with their
retinues of policy advisors, political strategists, and spin-doctors.
remained in Washington even when not in power, as lobbyists, campaign
consultants, go-to lawyers, financial bundlers, and power brokers.
half of the ruling class comprises the corporate executives, Wall Street chiefs, and
multi-millionaires who have assisted and enabled these political leaders – and
for whom the politicians have provided political favors in return.
has long had a ruling class but the public was willing to tolerate it during
the three decades after World War II, when prosperity was widely shared and
when the Soviet Union posed a palpable threat. Then, the ruling class seemed
benevolent and wise.
the last three decades – when almost all the nation’s economic gains have gone
to the top while the wages of most people have gone nowhere – the ruling class has
seemed to pad its own pockets at the expense of the rest of America.
witnessed self-dealing on a monumental scale – starting with the junk-bond
takeovers of the 1980s, followed by the Savings and Loan crisis, the corporate
scandals of the early 2000s (Enron, Adelphia, Global Crossing, Tyco, Worldcom),
and culminating in the near meltdown of Wall Street in 2008 and the taxpayer-financed
Along the way, millions of Americans lost their jobs their savings,
and their homes.
the Supreme Court has opened the floodgates to big money in politics wider than
ever. Taxes have been cut on top
incomes, tax loopholes widened, government debt has grown, public services have
been cut. And not a single Wall Street executive has gone to jail.
seems rigged – riddled with abuses of power, crony capitalism, and corporate
In 1964, Americans agreed by 64% to 29% that government was run for the benefit of all the people. By 2012, the response had reversed, with voters saying by 79% to 19% that government was “run by a few big interests looking after themselves.”
Which has made it harder for ordinary people to get ahead. In 2001 a
Gallup poll found 77 percent of Americans satisfied with opportunities to get
ahead by working hard and 22 percent dissatisfied. By 2014, only 54 percent
were satisfied and 45 percent dissatisfied.
fury at ruling class has taken two quite different forms.
right are the wreckers. The Tea Party, which emerged soon after the Wall Street
bailout, has been intent on stopping government in its tracks and overthrowing
a ruling class it sees as rotten to the core.
Republican protégés in Congress and state legislatures have attacked the
Republican establishment. And they’ve wielded the wrecking balls of government shutdowns,
threats to default on public debt, gerrymandering, voter suppression through strict
ID laws, and outright appeals to racism.
is their human wrecking ball. The more outrageous his rants and putdowns of
other politicians, the more popular he becomes among this segment of the public
that’s thrilled by a bombastic, racist, billionaire who sticks it to the ruling
left are the rebuilders. The Occupy movement, which also emerged from the Wall
Street bailout, was intent on displacing the ruling class and rebuilding our
political-economic system from the ground up.
didn’t last but it put inequality on map. And the sentiments that fueled Occupy
are still boiling.
Sanders personifies them. The more he advocates a fundamental retooling of our
economy and democracy in favor of average working people, the more popular he
becomes among those who no longer trust the ruling class to bring about necessary
the growing revolt against the ruling class, it seems likely that the
nominees in 2016 will be Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. After all, the ruling
class still controls America.
But the revolt
against the ruling class won’t end with the 2016 election, regardless.
means the ruling class will have to change the way it rules America. Or it
won’t rule too much longer.
Donald J. Trump’s suggestion that a Fox News journalist had questioned him forcefully at the Republican presidential debate because she was menstruating cost him a speaking slot Saturday night at an influential gathering of conservatives in Atlanta. It also raised new questions about how much longer Republican Party leaders would have to contend with Mr. Trump’s disruptive presence in the primary field.
Continuing his complaints about Megyn Kelly, one of the moderators of the debate, in an interview on CNN Friday night, Mr. Trump said, “You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever.” The remark prompted Erick Erickson, the leader of RedState, the conservative group, to disinvite him.
“If your standard-bearer has to resort to that,” Mr. Erickson told hundreds of conservative activists in a packed Atlanta hotel ballroom on Saturday, “we need a new standard-bearer.”
With Mr. Trump at center stage Thursday in Cleveland, Fox News shattered television viewership records for a primary debate: Nearly 24 million people watched. But any hopes that Mr. Trump, the real estate developer and television celebrity, would try to reinvent himself as a sober-minded statesman, or that he would collapse under scrutiny and tough questions, vaporized in the opening minutes when he refused to rule out running as an independent candidate for president. His remarks Friday only furthered the impression that he also had no intention of speaking more carefully. Mr. Trump denied on Saturday that he had been implying that Ms. Kelly was menstruating. “I think only a degenerate would think that I would have meant that,” he said in an interview, insisting that he had been referring to Ms. Kelly’s nose and ears.
But as his latest eruption rippled through Republican circles, the conversation turned to whether the party, and his rival presidential contenders, should continue to accommodate his candidacy, quietly hoping that this would be the moment he burned out — or whether they should try to run him out on a rail.
If party leaders saw danger in provoking a breakup — and no small advantage to be seized from the ratings bonanza Mr. Trump showed himself capable of delivering — there were signs that other influential Republicans would tolerate only so much of Mr. Trump’s behavior.
“Come on,” Jeb Bush, who has campaigned as the adult among the party’s 17 presidential candidates, said in his remarks at the RedState gathering. “Give me a break. Do we want to win? Do we want to insult 53 percent of all voters? What Donald Trump said is wrong.”
Carly Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard chief executive, who delivered perhaps the most assertive turn in Thursday’s debate among the candidates trailing in the polls, posted on Twitter: “Mr. Trump: There. Is. No. Excuse.” Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina went further, saying, “Enough already with Mr. Trump.”
Yet in a sign of the lingering reluctance among some in the field to anger Mr. Trump’s supporters, other candidates, including former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, would not condemn Mr. Trump’s comments.
Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, in an interview to be broadcast Sunday, praised Ms. Kelly but stopped short of calling on Mr. Trump to apologize. “I’ve made a decision here with Donald Trump, you know, if I comment on everything he says, my whole campaign will be consumed by it,” he said. “That’s all I’ll do all day.”