consultants are sandburs



Friday, February 10, 2017

July 28, 2016; Crystal-balling of a dubious value: "Chuck Schumer: Democrats Will Lose Blue-Collar Whites But Gain in the Suburbs"

The quote in the above headline is the headline, here.

Tone deaf to the din, or not wanting to hear it? One or the other; neither favorable. Schumer's not had to worry about feeding a family, keeping one housed with the credit card maxed out and the mortgage in arrears. Nor has he had any non-beltway - non-funding experience beyond the feel of power in the US Senate. And other political positions before that. Not a real worlder, not of the people. Privileged not stressed.

In that linked item, the money quote is saved to last:

Schumer’s optimism is driven more by national demographics than by the specific traits of his candidates. He contends that Millennials, or voters aged 18 to 35, will be the largest age group voting in this year’s electorate, even if they don’t turn out in massive numbers.

“The number one factor in whether we retake the Senate is whether Hillary Clinton does well, and I think she’s going to do really well,” Schumer says of his former fellow New York senator. He notes that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell urged Senate Republicans in difficult races to localize their elections, rather than get too tied to Trump’s positions and comments and scoffs, “Sorry, Mitch, this is a national election if there ever was one.”

At least publicly, Schumer has no worries about his party’s dwindling fortunes among working-class white voters. “For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin.”

[emphasis added]

What Schumer does understand, as Senator from New York, is that looking beyond the sinful conduct of Wall Street and his party holding the Justice Department and not putting any of the plethora of crooks who brought down the world economy in the slammer; is that if New York is not the financial preeminent hub, London, Frankfurt, or Hong Kong will be; and that dollar hegemony in pricing oil is a part of that. Progressives need that understanding too, in moving to make their voice and needs the highest voice, echoing the strongest needed goals of national government.

Schumer and Ellison, for now are to be trusted; at arms length, Bernie having made that move by, still a Senate INDEPENDENT, joining Dem leadership, in the minority. Pragmatism does not mean surrender; but demanding a purge of someone like Schumer might resemble the classic maxim of a noseless face being unattractive. Spite being an enemy of reason and conciliation. Conciliation must, however, have its priorities defined dead certain, and secondary allies should be welcome to leading progressive politics.

BOTTOM LINE: The tail's been wagging the dog too long in the Democratic Party; and all the deluded Trump voters may wake up to their result being, in fact, the tail wagging way more, faster and harder, but then the answer to the smug Trump-band of brigand Republicans is to dock the tail.

A Tea Party Republican vs. Progressive Democratic party election would not be at all bad. The worry, faux Tea Party, in a word, Trump, and faux progressive, yet to stand and seek, but watch out, they're out there. Not Bernie. He's legit. But vigilance is no sin. Grayson stepping up saying, "Me," might demand a high level of scrutiny and vetting. There is that offshore hedge fund skeleton. The sez/does conundrum.

Back to Schumer, by now he's realized and indirectly admitted that lost blue collar votes are not too fine an idea. And that folks of the 'burbs can be intransigently and troublesomely ignorant, as well as unwise. I live in Anoka County, Minnesota. I know that last truth first-hand. (Wright County, Minnesota; more so.)

______________UPDATE______________
Schumer has a big rock to push uphill on the issue of no money from tainted interests - see, e.g., this Intercept link. Lots of questions/problems, but he at least is not still attached to past Clintonian error. He hopefully can see a new day, and change to help it happen. If not, primary him even if it has little likelihood of success. A shot across the bow I believe is the naval term.

No comments: