2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhat's Really Going On In Our Nation?
The Republican Party is split into:
a. The Republican Establishment. I 've read that they are trying to get some leading
politician to start a "Third Party," but so far there are no takers. Can this mean that
the Corporatists are losing their grip on the Republican Party?
b. Donald Trump is nominally a Republican, but basically he seems to be his own man.
He doesn't take orders from anybody, not even the Corporatists -- but he is now
the Republican nominee for the presidency.
The Democratic Party is also split:
c. The Democratic Establishment. Hillary Clinton is ahead in the presidential race, and
the Democratic Establishment is backing her up all the way. The Corporatists have
both of them under control. So has the Democratic Establishment now taken over the
place that the Republican Establishment used to have?
d. Bernie Sanders is anti-Corporatist and anti-Establishment. He is a Progressive/
Liberal. If he should lose the Primaries, will he join Hillary or not?
The American people in general:
e. All national polls since the summer of 2015 show that Sanders is the favorite of the
American people for president -- he is way ahead of both Clinton and Trump. But it
looks like he will be losing in the Primaries to Clinton, and Sanders won't be able to get
to the General Election.
f. Polls show that Clinton and Trump are the two presidential candidates with the
lowest favorability rating ever in the history of the U.S. The majority of the American
people simply have a highly negative opinion about both of them, yet Trump has
already won the his Party nomination for president, and Clinton will likely win also.
With our present Election System, the will of the people never did count for much.
Edit: And the majority of the American people are totally fed-up with the present
state of affairs.
What could possibly be the out-come of the above mumbo-jumbo mix-up of events?
1. Could the Democratic and Republican Establishments unite and become one?
2. Could Trump and Sanders become leaders of their own supporters and separate
into new Parties -- In which case there would be 3 or even 4 Parties?
3. Could this be the beginning of the end of the Corporatists' death-grip on
our nation?
I am sure there are other possibilities of what might happen. Your guess is as good
as mine -- but CHANGE IS IN THE AIR.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
wendylaroux
(2,925 posts)Cal33
(7,018 posts)wendylaroux
(2,925 posts)either side wants to acknowledge.
Response to Cal33 (Original post)
carolinayellowdog This message was self-deleted by its author.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)a second term without substantial cheating. The two of them have the highest unfavorable
ratings among presidential candidates in the history of our nation.
Response to Cal33 (Reply #20)
carolinayellowdog This message was self-deleted by its author.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)I think if Bernie should win, he and Elizabeth's priority would be getting more Progressives/
Liberals into Congress. Even though I expect Dems. will get back the Senate in November,
I don't think Bernie would be able to get the big jobs through Congress for the first two
(if not four) years. Once he'll have enough Liberal senators and representatives, then
things will start humming!
speaktruthtopower
(800 posts)not the least of which is how we are going to tackle the national debt and who wins and who loses when that happens.
The investors with the best connections tend to come out on top in such situations.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)1) You assume that the establishments uniting would be preferable to the current situation for them. It's not. The faux-choice of the "dueling" establishments is part of their strategy. Democrats have made a Faustian bargain with the corporatists. Heads I win, tails you lose.
2) This will not happen; the American people are not independent enough yet and the media conglomerates are still too powerful. This shift may occur, but not in the short-term, and not in any time frame which will allow Sanders to capitalize on the gains he has made. There will be others.
3) As the zen-master said, "We'll see". Arguments can be made for both sides here. Myself, a pessimist, I cannot imagine the true owners of this country really allowing non-corporatists to be elected and wield actual power in congress and the executive branch.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)1) Could the Democratic and Republican Establishments unite and become one?
Your reply: "You assume that the establishments uniting would be preferable to the current situation
for them. It's not. The faux-choice of the "dueling" establishments is part of their strategy.
Democrats have made a Faustian bargain with the corporatists. Heads I win, tales you lose. "
I was thinking that the Democratic Establishment has gone so far over to the right
in their ideology, that they have become indistinguishable in the ways they think,
feel and behave. One example: The way and extent to which the Dem. Establishment
people cheat at their elections - it used to be done only by the Republicans. They are
so much alike now that they could be considered as one and the same.
You brought up the important point that it could be the strategy (of their common boss,
the Corporatists?) to keep up the appearance of being two separate and "dueling"
establishments. It certainly would be of benefit to the Corporatists to continue having
one foot in both Parties -- if they can. The Repub. Establ. seems to be rebelling against
the Corporatists right now with their looking for someone to lead a Third Party. This
could be a ruse, too.
The fact remains that members have been leaving the Republican Party by the
millions in recent years. The same thing with the Democrats. People have
become sick and tired of their Party leaderships, and both parties are under the
domination of the Corporatists. People want change, and Sanders is leading the
Progressive/Liberal movement for change in the Democratic Party. And Trump is
his own man, not beholden to the Corporatists or anyone else, and he has already
won the Republican nomination.
So, the power of the Corporatists is taking a heavy toll.
2) Could Trump and Sanders become leaders of their own supporters and separate
into new Parties -- In which case there would be 3 or even 4 Parties?
Your answer: "This will not happen; the American people are not independent enough yet
and the media conglomerates are still too powerful. the shift may occur, but not in the
short-term, and not in any time frame which will allow Sanders to capitalize on the gains
he has made. There will be others."
I agree that the majority of the American people are not independent enough, but those
millions that have left their Parties certainly are. Their numbers are still too small to form
a new party, and it will take time. On the Democratic side, Eliz. Warren and Sanders
already have started their movements. Even if Sanders loses the nomination, I believe
the movement he started will continue. And the movements of Warren and Sanders
could very well unite. Their political views are so much alike. Unlike the Repub. and
Dem. Establishments, Warren and Sanders are independent and do not have the
Corporatists as the "real" boss.
3) Could this be the beginning of the end of the Corporatists' death-grip on
our nation?
Your rely: "As the Zen master said, "We'll see". Arguments can be made for both sides here.
Myself, a pessimist, I cannot imagine the true owners of this country really allowing non-corporatists
to be elected and wield actual power in congress and the executive branch."
I really don't know the answer, but I know this: There is great dissatisfaction among the
American people. The Corporatists can't help but see this. They may not be wise, but they
are intelligent enough to know, that something has to give. Up till now, they have - through
deception and trickery - always succeeded in making the 99% do the giving. Now the 99%
have been pushed close to the boiling point. And the Corporatists are not stupid. They know
it. I also believe that nothing on this planet of ours is permanent -- everything is temporary.
Changes come and go, come and go. They always have, and they always will - whether
anyone likes it or not.
PJMcK
(21,992 posts)a. Yes.
b. Mr. Trump's support is the reason the Corporatists are losing their grip, namely, it seems they finally became aware that the Republicans have been lying to them and grifting them for decades.
c. Yes.
d. He should. As flawed as Secretary Clinton is, she's head and shoulders above any Republican.
e. The only polls that matter are the results of the ballot boxes.
f. Both Secretary Clinton and Mr. Trump have seemingly won their races and the people have voted. Whose will didn't count?
1. No.
2. Probably not. It's too expensive and far too complicated to organize a national party at this late date. Historically, it has taken several election cycles for a new party to emerge.
3. God, I hope so.
You've raised excellent questions, Cal33. Thanks for the thoughtfulness and I hope my replies don't seem snarky. (wink)
Cal33
(7,018 posts)d. I can see Sanders helping Clinton to win over Trump, because I see Trump as capable of doing
more harm to our nation. But beyond that, the ideologies of Sanders and Clinton are so very
different.
e. It's becoming more and more clear that fraud has been going on in the elections of almost
every single state. I've thought that systematic and nationwide cheating at the elections was a
refined specialty of the Republicans. Apparently it has now spread beyond the Republicans.
f. The will of those who were prevented from voting. And there are so many different ways of
doing this - some subtle, and some less subtle.
MFM008
(19,803 posts)National Nervous Breakdown.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)remain silent, there is a giant target on my back and the arrows have begun to sting a bit to much now to take yet another one just yet.
The thing is, you don't need much help! You have the basics down, and you have them correct, you need only expand a few things. The information is out there, you will find it, I have every possible bit of faith in you.
Again, well said! Well needed to be seen! keep up what you're doing until they point the arrows at you, then pass the baton for a time and the full truth will get out there.
I could not recommend this post enough!
PJMcK
(21,992 posts)Your posts are often excellent reads and your writing is thought provoking. Don't let the "police" keep you from expressing yourself!
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)Cal33
(7,018 posts)understand. Would love to hear what you have to say whenever you are ready.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Clintons => print, broadcast
Trump ==> cable
Bernie ==> Reddit, Twitter
I guess we'll see how it all shakes out ... 
Rebkeh
(2,450 posts)Three scholars of American politics and history consider whether we're on the verge of a fundamental realignment.
By Danielle Allen, Rick Perlstein and Daniel SchlozmanMAY 5, 2016
Cal33
(7,018 posts)Cal33
(7,018 posts)Vote2016
(1,198 posts)of the Democratic party.
Realignment is afoot.
Trump is trying to re-brand the Republicans as the party of populists promising change while re-branding the Democrats as elitist establishment-types defending the stauts quo.
Looks like he's making progress on that front and Hillary is making it easy for him.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)of the Democratic Party, but they have no control over the Progressive/Liberals, of
which Bernie is the leader. A lot depends on whether or not Bernie decides to continue
in his movement, even if he should lose his bid for the presidency.
If so, I hope his supporters and the supporters of Elizabeth Warren would unite. They
are so much alike in their political views.
highprincipleswork
(3,111 posts)candidate or one that is even seen as Establishment.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)Cal33
(7,018 posts)Conservatives. Then, over the years, things got turned around, and Democrats became the
Liberals. Are things changing again right now?
Come to think of it, what's in a name? Not too much. It's what a person believes in and
stands for that really count.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)They have the power to see for themselves what the reality of politics in America is and don't much care for what they see. They can see the pandering, lies, deals, payoffs, favoritism, back slapping, and corruption unfold before their eyes almost daily.
The obedient sheep have grown claws and teeth and are fed up with excuses, apologies, and "this time it will be different". Empty promises of "change" no longer suffice in the information age.
The parties, as they now exist, will either evolve and act rationally or ignore the tide and drown.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)becoming so -- the more, the better.
AgerolanAmerican
(1,000 posts)I believe they already did that about a quarter century ago. Bush the First's "compassionate conservatism" was the slogan under which the merger was completed.
2. Could Trump and Sanders become leaders of their own supporters and separate
into new Parties -- In which case there would be 3 or even 4 Parties?
Trump will run the GOP, so if there's a third party coming from there it will be the establishment side breaking off. I think they're trying and not finding many takers (since they don't have actual popular support and are merely manipulation experts finding themselves in a world where people are more and more aware and desensitized to manipulation). Trump's hyper-populist GOP is a more formidable opponent than the previous abortion-and-war version.
Sanders, on the other hand, does have the option to break off and form a third party, since he does represent a popular, nationwide movement with serious numbers behind it - enough numbers to make it viable.
3. Could this be the beginning of the end of the Corporatists' death-grip on
our nation?
It could be. Or it might just be a temporary breather before the grip tightens even more, if we allow that to happen.
Lodestar
(2,388 posts)Cal33
(7,018 posts)a ruse on the part of the Corporatists, so that they can continue to have a foot in both
the Republican and Democratic Parties. The Democratic Establishment is under the control
of the Corporatists, but Sanders' Progressive Movement is not.
2. The Democratic Establishment has more members, but Sanders' Movement started from
scratch, and he is attracting large numbers of followers in such an incredibly short time
(1 year). This is because of the fact that the number of dissatisfied Americans who are
catching on that they are being fooled by both "Establishments," and they have been
leaving these Establishments by the droves. They were ready for someone like Sanders.
I, too, think that Sanders will leave a viable movement behind, after he will have
passed from the political scene.
Trump seems to often let out the first thought that comes to his head. Much of the
time he seems to be a person who reacts impulsively to whatever emotion he has at
the moment, rather than having well though-out ideas. This seems to be the way the
Tea Partiers are. At any rate many of his followers are Tea Partiers. They seem to be
attracted to him. Of course, they are not the only ones. It's highly unlikely that Trump's
movement will last for any length of time, after he will have passed from the political
scene. But, if Trump should become president, he sure can do a lot of harm to our nation!
3. The end of the Corporatists' death-grip on the nation will come neither easily nor
agreeably. Their greed knows no end, and they have no conscience to guide them. It's
not something pleasant to think about.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)police militarized from coast to coast? Does America really need to become a
Police State? Does the average American want or see the need for one.
Well, after the events of Occupy Wall Street (in 2011) when peaceful protesters
in NYC as well as other cities were brutally treated and many were jailed by the
police, the answer became clearer. It's quite possible that the militarization of
our police in America might have been called for by the Corporatists.
What do you guys and ladies think?
hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)That's basically what we have right now in both parties.
The republicans claim we are in some sort of a recession or that unemployment is super high which it's not. The stock market is doing well.
The democratic party, outside the Sanders camp thinks that the economy is some how out of whack and if we just make GDP higher or tweak something it will all be ok. For instance during the Clinton admin we had bad inequality but the low unemployment caused wages to tick up slightly so people didn't light the torches and pick up the pitchforks.
However what the voters are feeling while most don't want to admit it is that They are all way poorer and less secure than their parents were.
The GOP says get gov't out of the way and cut taxes and deregulation and that will help. But that will only help the rich. I mean the GDP has ticked up the markets are ok and nobody is making any more money or getting more benefits.
The Democratic Party thinks that maybe they can do a repeat of Bill Clinton and kick up the economy, make the rich way richer but some of the crumbs will fall to the middle class.
I think the GOP idea has been PROVEN not to work and the Clinton grow the economy and the poor will get the crumbs that fall off the filled table of the rich too late.
So we are left with the gov't TAXING the rich more and then redistributing it, creating programs to fill the parts of the social safety net that used to be provided by companies. OR we need to revitalize the union movement by repealing Taft Hartley and installing other protections so that workers can claw back some of the things they gave up in the 80's and 90's when times were bad.
Neither party seems to be willing to admit that it's not the economy exactly. It's that people aren't paid enough.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)politicians they put into high office to enact laws favorable to the rich, can't help being crooked
because a high percentage of them are socio- or psychopaths. Lying and stealing come as
naturally to them as breathing. The only thing that will stop them from stealing is fear of
punishment. They will never stop on their own as long as they can get away with it. Their
sense of morality are at the stage of development of that of the small child. They have never
advanced further than that.
Here's an article on how the super-rich are receiving government subsidies and getting away
with paying little or no taxes:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-quigley/ten-examples-of-welfare-for-the-rich-and-corporations_b_4589188.html
Demsrule86
(68,456 posts)St. Bernie has lost the nomination and you all can't stand that...so you have to invent all sorts of silly reasons for it...when really , we just don't like him...millions more of us than you.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)his campaign only a year ago. Few people had heard of him when he started. Of
the 3 presidential candidates remaining, polls show him to be the only one with
a positive favorability rating. Hilary and The Donald both show negative ratings.
So, what were you saying about not being liked?
Response to Cal33 (Original post)
Corruption Inc This message was self-deleted by its author.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)"tearing down" the Corporatists will not be an easy thing to do - the Corporatists have a lot of power.
This is where we don't know how things will turn out.
