The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

The Mid-Terms

So, the polls suggest the Democrats stand a good chance of winning the House and a small chance of winning the Senate.

Let us hope they win at least one of the two, as a divided government, in the face of Trump, will be a good thing. Trump’s been doing a lot of mean, stupid things, the latest of which are his imposing sanctions on Iran, even though Iran has kept up their end of the nuclear deal, for which sanctions were removed.

I didn’t support Clinton in 2016 because of her anti-Russian hawkism and insane Syria policy (and didn’t support Trump either because he’s an evil douchebag). But Trump is moving towards war with Iran, which would be insanity. Even if war doesn’t happen, the sanctions will hurt and kill a lot of Iranians, are actually hurting their relatively moderate current government, and strengthening Iran’s more conservative forces.

Trump’s a very effective guy in certain ways, but he’s also a moron in a lot of other ways, and a cruel and rather petty man.

Let’s hope Americans put a brake on him.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.


Actual Sovereign Nations and the End of the Unipolar Moment


Dems Take the House: What It Means


  1. XFR

    On the other hand, the dominant position on the Democratic side is that Trump was installed by Russia. I have a hard time seeing how the logical conclusion of that stance could be anything but war.

  2. Adam Eran

    I’d suggest another motive for war with Iran, or at least stepping up the belligerence. Big oil has a lot of oil it can produce economically at higher prices. Threats to the transit points — the Straits of Hormuz in particular — keeps that price high.

    Greg Palast suggest that the war in Iraq had a similar motive. Iraq has the second-largest proven reserves (after Saudi Arabia), but turmoil there keeps it in the ground…and world oil prices high.

    Trump may be a moron, but he’s a moron who knows on which side his bread is buttered.

  3. Bill Hicks

    Since the Dumbocrats winning just means two more years of anti-Russia hysteria, I couldn’t possibly care who wins. My district is represented by Hillary’s Vice President in the Senate (whom I’d love to see lose as he’s done NOTHING for average Virginians in a decade either as governor or senator) and a house Dumbocrat who is and extreme Pentagon whore who has actually said that the country “can’t afford” single payer insurance coverage, let alone Medicare-for-all..

    Then there is the hideous spectacle of handing power back to the awful Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. Nope–I’ll be exercising the “George Carlin option” once again.

  4. Willy

    This go-round, Silver is claiming 7 in 8 odds for Dems taking the house.

    According to the CIA World Factbook (2017), Venezuela is tops in oil reserves with Canada third.

    It needs to be known that “anti-Russians” come in more flavors than just those trying to rationalize Hillary’s loss.

    True conservatives know what it takes to maintain systems as fragile as democracy or meritocratic capitalism. But they’ve pretty much all been banished from mainstream conservatism.

  5. Ché Pasa

    The insanity is pervasive in the US political realm and has been for many a long year. It doesn’t go away because one or the other team wins the Presidency, the Congress, or controls the courts.
    In fact, I’d say the insanity is more and more integral to the character of our ruling classes. That includes — and has always included — Trump and his criminal enterprises.

    If Dems take the House (no certainty given the many means the Rs and others have to re-engineer the results), it’s unlikely there will be anything like Lambertesque gridlock. Rather, the important things on the Trumpist/neoLibCon agenda will proceed apace. The atmospherics will no doubt change a bit, but I doubt the Russia! Thing will go much beyond whatever Mueller comes up with. There are too many other players jiggering election outcomes to maintain an exclusive focus on Russia.

    On the other hand Trump’s (and His Generals) eagerness for War with Iran was plain as day during the campaign. Once he was installed on the Throne, it was a matter of when, not if, he would launch the attack on Tehran. Much as it was a matter of when not if Bush jr would go to war after he and Cheney took the White House.

    Ultimately, the systems by which we are ruled are not particularly amenable to positive change on behalf of the people. Just the opposite. I don’t expect much substantive change after the election. But you never know…

  6. ponderer

    Sadly I’ll note conflict with Iran rules out conflict with Russia. At this point the MIC factions seem desperate for one of three conflicts Russia, China, or Iran. At times I’ve considered Iran might be Trumps sacrificial lamb, but I don’t really know if he has thought that far ahead. Iran is definitely the least crazy of the crazy options because it won’t immediately lead to nuclear Armageddon. I don’t doubt it will break the empire so it might be for the best for the wider world, if really bad for Iranians. It’s hard to see any good coming out of it for the US.
    If the Democrats win there is a good chance things will kick off in Ukraine. More investigations will hobble any dampening effect Trump might have. Russia as already stated they are preparing for War (defensive preparations). It feels like we might be getting close to the end game.
    No matter who wins, we all lose.

  7. @Willy
    I may be mistaken, but I believe Russia has larger reserves than either Venezuela or Canada.

  8. nihil obstet

    Some of the new Democratic candidates look as though they might be an improvement over the neoliberal “centrists” that have infested Congress, especially over the last 30 years or so. If we’re ever going to have a decent government, we need people who will speak of the alternatives now and be experienced for the opportunities of the future. In other words, nothing will change now, but we need to keep trying to position ourselves for hope in the future.

    Meanwhile, they appear less anti-government than we’re used to, so they may be able to slow down the complete jettisoning of protections against corporate power.

  9. StewartM

    Agreed with you Ian.

    As an aside, I think lost among the “Russia!” hubbub is that fact that the Israelis offered the same kind of help to Trump in 2016, and while we don’t know if the offer was accepted, it does seem that Bibi more than Putin got what he wanted from a Trump administration.

    Trump could have broken the Republican Party away from its neoliberal dogma, but instead chose to follow pretty much the boilerplate Movement Conservative party line, just with some more hate of brown people thrown in than usual.

  10. Willy

    Bill H,
    I hope the CIA is still reliable:

    Meanwhile, these fine folks claim the USA is tops in “recoverable reserves”, whatever the hell that means.

    If it turns out the CIA data is part of some covert operation, and “recoverable reserves” is fake oil and gas news, maybe Adam will have the best resource. I dunno. I don’t have the time to go measure myself.

  11. Herman

    I agree. Having a divided government is the best we can hope for right now. I think we might have a major recession within the next year and this will have a big impact on a number of important issues. I could see the push for war with Iran accelerate if the economy goes down. It would be a good distraction for the populace and an excuse for Trump to institute a program of military Keynesianism.

  12. Heliopause

    The Republicans will keep the Senate, maybe even pick up a few seats. Problem there for the Dems is that they need to flip at least two R seats, but they are almost certain to lose North Dakota, so they actually need to flip at least three seats. Arizona and Nevada are possible but are too close to call and nothing else appears within reach. Additionally, they could easily lose several other seats they are defending that are very close.

    The House is harder to predict but the polling is converging around a generic ballot of D+7, which is consistent with results ranging from Rs barely keeping a slim majority to Ds taking a small majority. We may not know for weeks; several of the too-close-to-call races are on the west coast and California is notorious for their slow counting.

    A Dem House would indeed be somewhat of a check on the GOP’s worst excesses but they will be unable to advance a positive agenda of any kind so mostly what they’ll do is hold hearings on people in the Trump orbit. There is talk of impeaching Trump and/or Justice Kavanaugh but I have my doubts that a D majority would be large or crazy enough to go down those paths. Another thing to keep your eye on is budgetary fights similar to those in the second half of Obama’s first term.

  13. I don’t remember how much agreement there was, but I THINK there were at least no dissenters when Trump was described as seduced by the intelligence agencies: Intelligence Assessment with Kevin Shipp Whistleblowers Roundtable with Bill Binney & John Kiriakou
    @ .

    Perhaps if the Republicans lose the House, some of Trump’s base will develop into a more independent political force. They do the “rah rah” at Trump rallies, but appear to have organized basically nothing for long term political power, which isn’t at the mercy of the Republican donor class. Progressive have at least tried to intelligently organize to exert some control over the Democratic Party.

    In fairness to more independent minded Republican types, in their previous incarnations as Tea Partiers, their organizations got targeted by the IRS. Trump, political genius that he is, appears to have done nothing about this. As for the corporate Republicans, they don’t like the Tea Partiers, either, and sabotaged them here and there. Maybe I missed it, but I didn’t notice either Mitch McConnel or Paul Ryan pushing Trump and the DOJ to prosecute any Tea Party persecuters in the IRS.

    Not very impressive, across the board. Too bad Occupy Wall Street was shut down so completely. If it had persisted (but without the intrusive squatting on public properties), citizens who are looking for transpartisan alliances and coordinated actions against the donor class controlled Dems and Repubs might have developed traction.

    The ongoing censorship and suppression of both left and right in the mega social media might force a restarting of the sort of face-to-face, generally polite discussions that one could have at OWS sites. I kind of miss the zombie marches, too…..

  14. Herman


    Part of the problem is that grassroots organizations often get taken over by the wealthy. I might be wrong but my understanding is that the Tea Party originated as a real, organic movement among conservative Republicans but was quickly taken over by members of the Republican donor class and some later Tea Party groups were basically just astroturf organizations. There might be similar examples on the Left too.

    Ordinary people need to develop their own organizations outside of the power, influence and control of the wealthy donor class and the professional/managerial class as well. I posted his article here before but Michael Lind has written about this issue. See in particular the discussion under the subheading “Grassroots Institutions and Countervailing Power.”

    I agree that there is no independent Trump movement, at least not yet. Right now it looks more like a personality cult since it seems to revolve around Trump himself. I am not aware of a Trumpian version of Our Revolution which grew out of the Bernie Sanders 2016 campaign.

    If the Republicans lose the House I expect there to be some infighting within the GOP. Establishment Republicans will blame Trump and his followers for scaring people into voting for the Dems while the Trump supporters will say it is because the establishment Republicans are too weak.

  15. Charlie

    Let’s hope they only win ONE of the two, because if they win both it will be “Russia, Russia, Russia” 24/7 and the rush to WWIII will proceed at breakneck speed. The fact that neocon Republicans would not take a risk on ousting Trump due to punishment from his base would lower that risk significantly. The Dems are still too full of Clintonites and the intelligence arm to be trusted with both branches.

  16. Hugh

    I agree with Ché Pasa that we are on a downward spiral. Divided government may slow the rate of descent, for a year or two. Trump is a disaster, but Pelosi and Schumer aren’t far behind. As usual, the Democrats stand for nothing and what the Republicans stand for is ghastly. So I see this election as principally a reaction to Trump but taking place within a rigged, undemocratic, gerrymandered system where voter suppression is rampant and two worthless, corrupt parties preside, all on behalf of their owners: the rich.

    I used to pay more attention to oil than I do now. It’s important to know the source for proven, recoverable reserves. Most countries tend to overstate their reserves and understate their draw down of these, for economic reasons. There is also the question of what “recoverable” means. As a field is exploited, the “easy” oil is removed first. Then greater efforts, greater costs, greater pollution, is needed to continue production. Even so most of the oil in a field will never be extracted. This is repeated more generally as more marginal fields are discovered and exploited (fracking, tar sands, etc.). Then there is the nature of the oil. Is it sour or sweet (high or low sulfur content)? Is it light or heavy (less or more tarry)? If I remember correctly, most of Venezuelan crude and what remains of Iran’s is heavy, and probably sour.

    Oil is not everything. There is also natural gas. And the three heavy hitters in this area are Russia, Iran, and Qatar, in that order.

    Finally, we should talk about stranding. The world is falling apart because of overpopulation and climate change. I do not think this is reversible because of the complete lack of leadership and action everywhere at all levels. As the global order disintegrates, many of those barrels are going to be left in the ground. Even if the world did mount an effective response, a major aspect of it would be leaving oil and gas in the ground. So I’m not sure how important reserves are going to be in the great scheme of things.

    As for Israel and the KSA, both are eager to fight a war in Iran to the last dead American. I would like to think that people like Mattis are sufficiently adult to steer clear of this trap, but since the last Gulf war my faith in their being adults in the room has been pretty much shot. There are a couple things to consider though. First, a US war against Iran would require a massive buildup of forces in the region. There is no evidence of this, and there really is no place for it to occur. Post-Khobar Towers, post-Khashoggi, mid-Yemen bloodbath, Saudi is out. Qatar leans Iran in the face of MBS’ provocations. Second, the US can’t pivot to Iran as long as it has troops and interests in Iraq and Syria. So while Trump might want to pick a fight with Iran, facts on the ground make this difficult.

  17. bruce wilder

    If the margin of a Democratic majority in the House is small enough the chamber is likely to be run formally by Dems, but on policy substance, conservative Republicans will still prevail in several issue domains.

    The Sanders-inspired are pretty thin on the ground in House races, especially so in Districts where they might win. Military and intelligence resumes, on the other hand, are almost common in the genuinely contested seats. Finance sector money is pouring into Democratic campaign coffers, and it is not buying left-populism of socialism.

  18. @Willy
    Sort of odd to hear “CIA” and “reliable” in the same sentence, but point taken.

  19. Tom W Harris

    And here’s some Dembot advice for all the liberals out here:

    That’s right, just keep votin’ Democrat, yup yup yup. And maybe they’ll brush a crumb off the table for ya. Or not.

    (Actually I DID early-vote Dem. Because divided gubmint seems best, for now. NOT in expectation of anything positive.)

  20. Plenue

    I think there’s precious little evidence that the Dems will put up much genuine resistance to Trump even if they regain one or both houses.

  21. And there are still children in cages. And health insurance that the Republicans will take away if they do not lose at least one house of Congress. Don’t forget the racism and misogyny!

    I get the feeling that most of the commenters here are young to middle-aged white men with decent health plans. The rest of us have a lot to lose.

    I don’t understand why anyone defends the butcher of Chechnya. He (and his government and its reactionary church) are not defensible.

  22. Metamars, the reports are that Trump does but trust any of the intelligence agencies, preferring Fox News.

    I have problems with the various intelligence and police agencies, but at least they try to be loyal. Trump is loyal to no one.

  23. @Herman

    I don’t know about the “quickly” part, but what you describe is basically my understanding. And the key villains – the Koch brothers – are usually named. Another point is that Gary Null, an investigative journalist and health guru, interviewed a large number of Tea Partiers, and found that they their members comprised a wide swathe of American opinion.

    Thanks for that article link. I’ll check it out, later.

    I basically agree with you about building “their own organizations outside of the power, influence and control of the wealthy donor class and the professional/managerial class as well.” Of course, the details are the sticky part. IMNSHO, there should be an emphasis on voting blocs, which aren’t loyal to parties. Also, while a proliferation of organizations at a granular local level is OK, they need to combine their forces when tackling larger entities, like state and federal governments. That implies fewer organizations. Figuring out how to maintain a bottom up control when there’s fewer organizations is that much more important. And difficult.

    “I agree that there is no independent Trump movement, at least not yet. Right now it looks more like a personality cult since it seems to revolve around Trump himself”. 🙂 Right now, it looks A LOT like a personality cult. There’s a tremendous mismatch between what is required to build a serious organization, and the rock star concert atmosphere of Trump rallies. I wish somebody with a video camera would go to a Trump rally, and ask the simple question, of 50 of them chosen at random, “What’s the plan for you guys if Trump suddenly dies while in office?” Since there is no plan – no bottom up plan, anyway, that doesn’t serve the existing power structure – we would then be treated to an amusing spectacle of thoughtless fantasy and on-the-spot rationalization.

    If the Republican lose the House, I believe some Republican insiders will be rejoicing. That will curtail Trump’s influence, and possibly lead to his political demise. See The Deep State, as well as ‘normal’ beareaucracies, share this in common with party outsiders – they can and do outlast politicians, who they’ve seen come and go. They have institutional knowledge about how to accomplish this – it need not be written down.

    Which brings me full circle to grass roots groups. I’ve long advocated taking over the Democratic and Republican parties, from below, as opposed to putting all our eggs in 3rd party baskets. (I still think 3rd parties are important, especially in terms of having somebody to vote for in a general election, if you couldn’t get any satisfaction from trying to disrupt Dem and Repub primaries.) They have all sorts of tricks to frustrate reformers who threaten their power. THEIR DIRTY TRICKS SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED AND YOUTUBED, SO THAT “WE, THE PEOPLE” CAN DEVELOP THE EQUIVALENT OF COUNTERVAILING ‘INSTITUTIONAL’ KNOWLEDGE.

    It’s frankly hard to find the public doing even a tiny fraction of what’s required to seize control of ‘their’ government. I especially blame the activists, who should make it their mission to be smarter than their well-heeled opponents in the sold-out mainstream. Instead, they’ve inspired me to write sarcastic diaries on their cluelessness. You can google “metamars” and “the plutocrats are laughing at you” to find some of these.

  24. ” The Deep State, as well as ‘normal’ beareaucracies, share this in common with party outsiders ”

    should be

    ” The Deep State, as well as ‘normal’ beareaucracies, share this in common with party insiders”

  25. Let me know when you figure out how to drink all that oil.

  26. Willy

    The Koch brothers can turn oil into wine!

  27. XFR

    Right now it looks like the main source of “gridlock” is the division between the “deep state” and Trump himself, with the balance tilting slightly in favor of the former, who at the moment posses fearsome powers of surveillance, bordering on effective omniscience–but as long as Trump remains at least nominally in control of the coercive power of the state, they’re somewhat like the prisoners in the Phantom Zone, able to see almost everything but unable to act directly.

    Ergo putting even a slight amount of additional power in their hands–eg. giving their new best friends in the Democratic leadership control of even one house–might not be a terribly advisable course of action if one is after more “gridlock”.

  28. XFR

    “…possess fearsome powers…”

  29. NR

    The notion that the so-called “Deep State” (however that bogeyman is defined in the Fox News echo chamber these days) is in any way allied with the Democratic party is absolutely laughable. The release of the Comey memo just scant days before the 2016 election, which hurt Clinton and boosted Trump, is the only evidence one needs to refute that particular right-wing fever dream.

  30. XFR

    So is the World Socialist Web Site part of the “Fox News echo chamber” then?

  31. NR

    There is a huge difference between “a lot of former military and intellegence operatives are running for Congress” and “the Deep State is working with the Democratic party to sabotage Trump.” The former is a legitimate political observation, the latter is a complete right-wing fantasy spun by Sean Hannity (who is now openly campaigning with Trump) and his ilk.

  32. Some Guy

    For once, this is not really about Trump – when it comes to foreign policy, no matter who is involved on the U.S. side, the world is better off if the U.S. is as incapable of action as possible, so divided government is a plus.

  33. Heliopause

    Probably a more accurate statement would be to say that there were elements within the so-called “Deep State” that were working against Trump. That shouldn’t be at all surprising, we’re talking about a hydra with thousands of heads and there are bound to be at least a few who acted in that way.

  34. NR

    I’m sure there are career government officials who don’t like Trump. A majority of the country doesn’t like Trump, so saying that isn’t really a stretch. What I haven’t seen is any credible evidence that there’s a “Deep State” conspiracy against Trump, or that any government official has taken any extra-legal action to sabotage him. Those sorts of claims are the province of Hannity and the Fox News crowd, as well as the even nuttier right-wing fringe.

  35. Chipper

    Trump can do enough damage with Executive Orders and tweets. I don’t know if a more gridlocked Congress will really slow things down much. Maybe prevent them from passing a second huge tax cut for billionaires.

  36. Plenue


    The saga of Comey and how he keeps shifting back and forth in the eyes of Dems from ‘horrible backstabber’ to ‘Hero of the Republic™’ is fun to watch.

    In regards to the investigation into Clinton, I distinctly remember him essentially saying that because there was no ‘intent’ to break the law, it was okay and she got a pass. When new evidence came to light, he reopened the investigation (before closing it again soon enough), which is what Dems are actually effectively whining about when they whine about the memo. Far from ‘sabotaging’ Clinton, he gave her special treatment.

    How about, next time, not running a candidate who’s under FBI investigation in the first place? Also, maybe not deliberately conspire against a politician who could actually win to force the nomination of a dead mule?

  37. Heliopause

    “I haven’t seen is any credible evidence that there’s a ‘Deep State’ conspiracy against Trump”

    I haven’t seen anything I would call a wide-ranging conspiracy either, but there’s no question that some individuals have worked against Trump behind the scenes.

    “or that any government official has taken any extra-legal action to sabotage him.”

    There have been a ton of classified info leaks, especially in the first half of 2017, that were certainly designed to undermine Trump. As for whether authorities such as FISA were abused for the same purpose, I’m not at all convinced of that, but neither am I entirely ruling it out.

  38. NR

    Classified info leaks have happened under every president, at least in recent memory. They happened under Obama, they happened under W Bush, they happened under Clinton.

    And I am no fan of Hillary Clinton (any number of other candidates could have easily beaten Trump), but there’s no question that the timing of the Comey memo was intended to hurt her and help Trump. Which is why the accusations of a “Deep State” conspiracy against him are laughable on their face.

  39. Hugh

    The Trump White House leaks worse than the Titanic. In addition, there is the daily chaos of it where Trump tweets shit nonstop and the White House fog machine goes into overdrive to defend, deflect, or obfuscate it. Not sure how the Deep State could compete with all this self-inflected damage.

    The Deep State seems to be whatever opposes or gets in Trump’s way, which comprises most of reality and on many days Trump himself.

  40. Plenue

    Apparently it hasn’t occurred to anyone in the comments here that ‘Russiagate’ itself has been one big two year long attempt to nullify the election. Deliberate collusion between the Democratic party and elements of the ‘intelligence community’ (just saying ‘Deep State’ implies a uniform cohesion that isn’t evident. Different parts of the unelected bureaucracy have their own agendas).

  41. highrpm

    surely you don’t take this white house shit storm seriously, do you? hollyworld loves trump. their political entertainment product streams never has revenue so good as it is now.

  42. NR

    “Deliberate collusion between the Democratic party and elements of the ‘intelligence community’ ”

    I would love to see even a single shred of evidence of this that doesn’t come from Sean Hannity, Alex Jones, or someone like them.

  43. Mallam

    So now that these results are coming in and rural working class whites are showing they don’t give a fuck about “economics”, and Trump’s Strategy of juicing up the racism appears to have worked…the conversation in the last thread is over, right? We admit that it was about racism and xenophobia? Or are we still going to play pretend?

  44. Plenue


    And are you really suggesting that you haven’t noticed the attempts over the last two years by the spy community to set itself up as some kind of Praetorian Guard with veto power over elected candidates?

    Lambert Strether over at naked capitalism had a nice summary of what’s been happening:

    “Since November 8 we’ve had four crises of legitimacy of escalating intensity, each one pointing to a change in the Constitutional order. First, we had Stein’s recount effort, justified in part by a(n unproven) theory that “Russian hacking” had affected the vote tallies. (Recall that 50% of Clinton voters believe this, although no evidence has ever been produced for it, it’s technically infeasible at scale, and statistically improbable.) Since the “Russian hacking” theory was derived from intelligence not shown to the public, the change to the Constitutional order would be that the Intelligence Community (IC) would gain a veto over the legitimacy of a President during a transfer of power; veto power that would be completely unaccountable, since IC sources and methods would not be disclosed. Second, we had the (hilariously backfired) campaign to have “faithless electors” appoint somebody other than Trump to be President. Here again, the change in the Constitutional order was exacty the same, as (Clintonite) electors clamored to be briefed by the IC on material that would not be shown to the public, giving the IC veto power over the appointment of a President after the vote tallies had been certified. Third, we had the IC’s JAR report, which in essence accused the President-elect of treason (a capital offense). Here again the publicly available evidence of that quite sloppy report has been shredded, so in essence we have an argument from IC authority that secret evidence they control disqualifies the President elect, so the change in the Constitutional order is the same. Fourth, we have the “Golden Showers” report, which again is an argument from IC authority, and so again gives the IC veto power over a President appointed by the Electoral College. Needless to say, once we give the IC veto power over a President before the vote is tallied, and before the electoral college votes, and after the electoral college votes but before the oath of office and the Inaugural, we’re never going to be able to take it back. This is a crossing the Rubicon moment. Now, you can say this is unique, not normal, an exceptional case, but “sovereign is he who decides on the exception” (Nazi legal theorist Carl Schmidt). And who then is the sovereign? The IC. Is that what liberals want?”

    It doesn’t help the case that nothing is going on, that there is no concerted effort by spies to undermine Trump when they, er, publicly make concerted efforts to undermine Trump:

  45. Ian Welsh

    The economy is finally improving for ordinary people: wages have started to rise.

    The idea that it was all about racism ignores all the people who voted for Obama in 08/12. They may be racist, but it doesn’t always determine their voting.

    As for the Dems, maybe spending two years squealing about Russia, Russia, Russia wasn’t a good strategy. Didn’t take a genius to figure that out, given all the polls showed ordinary people didn’t give a fuck.

  46. Herman


    What have the Democrats offered in the realm of economics? The Democrats have doubled down on their identity politics strategy since 2016. The battle over Brett Kavanaugh is a great example of that. Instead of going after Kavanaugh based on his support for torture, the imperial presidency and plutocracy they went the #MeToo route. Both the Republicans and the Democrats are playing the identity politics game to the detriment of the country as a whole.

  47. Plenue


    Nope. Because the evidence doesn’t support your position. 200 counties, went to Obama twice, then flipped to Trump. You have yet to offer any explanation other than vague hand-waving.

    Also, I haven’t seen you even attempt to dispute the recent INET paper.

  48. NR


    None of the links you provided show collusion between Democrats and the intelligence community. Try again. Taking advantage of perceived political opportunities when they arise isn’t collusion.

  49. different clue


    Your Clintonite hasbara is not persuading people as once it might have.

  50. Plenue


    Then I suppose I’m in the same boat as ‘Russiagate’.

  51. Hugh

    I much more skeptical about the state of the economy. Net job creation so far this year is OK, not great. And looking at the inflation adjusted wages of the lower 80% (average weekly earnings of production and nonsupervisory employees, 1982-84 dollars, total private, seasonally adjusted), the September over September increase is just 0.75%. And of course, current real wages remain below their 1965-1978 levels and significantly below their 1972 highs.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén