Blind rage betrays the Democrats

An old saying about priorities captures the problem the Democrats face: "if everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority."  The party, with its base outraged over everything President Trump does (because they don't think he should be in office), is stuck.  Anyone who puts aside one issue to focus elsewhere risks a primary opponent sponsored by whichever group feels neglected.

Andrew Malcolm, a genuinely wise longtime observer of American politics, has written a  column for Hot Air that Democrats would be well advised to heed (but will ignore):

If you oppose everything, you stand for nothing. And that's the muddy path that Democrats Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and their Gang of No has taken.

They didn't pick two, maybe three Trump Cabinet nominees to scrutinize closely and predictably oppose. In fact, they didn't select anybody. They opposed pretty much every single Trump nominee, even walking out on committee votes to show something.

President Trump understands this perfectly.  I strongly suspect that during his long business career he has used what Fay Voshell aptly called a blitzkrieg approach to overwhelm his opponents.

… the unpredictable media magnet Trump has lit so many fires that Democrats under their elderly leaders can't decide which to fight. So, they're fighting them all, none effectively. Everybody watching the not-exactly spontaneous protests and the on-camera anger has their own tolerance level for outrage. But at some point, everybody has one.

The Democrats are, to use an Obama expression, "acting stupidly."  The geographical concentration of the left in major metropolitan areas and college towns, combined with their reliance on (and faith in) left-wing mainstream media, blinds them to the practical results of their attitudes and behaviors.

Malcolm has found at least one Democrat who gets it:

"We need to be guided by a positive message about economic growth for everybody and a country that includes everybody," Connecticut's lonely Democrat Sen. Chris Murphy said sensibly. "We can't respond to everything. You have to decide what to respond to based on what your vision for the country is."

Have you seen Senator Murphy's wise message picked up by the MSM?

Me neither.

An old saying about priorities captures the problem the Democrats face: "if everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority."  The party, with its base outraged over everything President Trump does (because they don't think he should be in office), is stuck.  Anyone who puts aside one issue to focus elsewhere risks a primary opponent sponsored by whichever group feels neglected.

Andrew Malcolm, a genuinely wise longtime observer of American politics, has written a  column for Hot Air that Democrats would be well advised to heed (but will ignore):

If you oppose everything, you stand for nothing. And that's the muddy path that Democrats Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and their Gang of No has taken.

They didn't pick two, maybe three Trump Cabinet nominees to scrutinize closely and predictably oppose. In fact, they didn't select anybody. They opposed pretty much every single Trump nominee, even walking out on committee votes to show something.

President Trump understands this perfectly.  I strongly suspect that during his long business career he has used what Fay Voshell aptly called a blitzkrieg approach to overwhelm his opponents.

… the unpredictable media magnet Trump has lit so many fires that Democrats under their elderly leaders can't decide which to fight. So, they're fighting them all, none effectively. Everybody watching the not-exactly spontaneous protests and the on-camera anger has their own tolerance level for outrage. But at some point, everybody has one.

The Democrats are, to use an Obama expression, "acting stupidly."  The geographical concentration of the left in major metropolitan areas and college towns, combined with their reliance on (and faith in) left-wing mainstream media, blinds them to the practical results of their attitudes and behaviors.

Malcolm has found at least one Democrat who gets it:

"We need to be guided by a positive message about economic growth for everybody and a country that includes everybody," Connecticut's lonely Democrat Sen. Chris Murphy said sensibly. "We can't respond to everything. You have to decide what to respond to based on what your vision for the country is."

Have you seen Senator Murphy's wise message picked up by the MSM?

Me neither.

RECENT VIDEOS