Maine on Thursday became the second state to bar Donald Trump from the 2024 primary ballot over his actions related to the Jan. 6 insurrection. Several Maine citizens challenged Trump’s eligibility for the presidency under the Constitution’s 14th Amendment. Secretary of State Shenna Bellows (D) reviewed the Jan. 6 record and found the reasoning of the Colorado Supreme Court to strike Trump from the primary ballot there “compelling.”
“The U.S. Constitution does not tolerate an assault on the foundations of our government, and Section 336 [Maine statutes] requires me to act in response,” Bellows writes. “I am mindful that no secretary of state has ever deprived a presidential candidate of ballot access based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. I am also mindful, however, that no presidential candidate has ever before engaged in insurrection.”
Trump will appeal both the Maine and Colorado decisions.
So many court cases, so little time
California gets in on the action, says nope (New York Times):
Hours later, her counterpart in California announced that Mr. Trump would remain on the ballot in the nation’s most populous state, where election officials have limited power to remove candidates.
The Michigan Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that Michigan’s secretary of state lacks the authority to remove Trump from the primary ballot, writing, “At the moment, the only event about to occur is the presidential primary election. But as explained, whether Trump is disqualified is irrelevant to his placement on that particular ballot.”
Ron Fein, the legal director of Free Speech For People, which filed the lawsuit seeking to disqualify Mr. Trump, said the Michigan Supreme Court ruled narrowly, sidestepping the core questions at the heart of the case.
But, he noted in a statement, “The Michigan Supreme Court did not rule out that the question of Donald Trump’s disqualification for engaging in insurrection against the U.S. Constitution may be resolved at a later stage.”
“Oregon Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade announced on Nov. 30 that she does not have the legal authority to remove Trump from the primary ballot,” reported the Central Oregon Daily News on Thursday.
“I understand that people want to skip to the end of this story. But right now, we don’t even know who the nominee will be,” said Secretary Griffin-Valade in the statement. “When the general election comes, we’ll follow the law and be completely transparent with our reasoning.”
With felony charges to fend off in four jurisdictions and efforts countrywide to bar insurrectionists from state general election ballots, Donald Trump may have trouble finding time to actually campaign for president. Or one can hope.
He’ll fundraise the hell out of them all, naturally.
It never fails. The man simply cannot be a decent human being.
After months of Lieberman saying that there was no way that No Labels would do anything to help Donald Trump get a load of this:
Tensions flared around No Labels, the quixotic third-party operation attempting to place Joe Manchin (or another centrist-ish candidate) on 2024 ballots. On Wednesday, the group’s founding chairman, Joe Lieberman, hit back at Democratic anguish over the group’s spoilsport campaign, tellingThe Wall Street Journal that “Right now, looking at the polling, it’s not No Labels that’s going to re-elect Donald Trump… Right now, it looks like it’s Joe Biden who’s going to re-elect Donald Trump.”
Lieberman’s out-of-right-field attack isn’t shocking; after losing the 2006 Connecticut Senate primary, he left the party and successfully ran as an independent, while still caucusing with Dems. Two years later, he crossed party lines to campaign for John McCain, cementing his apostasy with a speech at the Republican National Convention.
But the comment is nonetheless extraordinary. For one, Lieberman served for 20 years with Biden, in a chamber and at a time when insults were watered down, indirect, and aimed toward colleagues described as “my friend.” And for all of Lieberman’s beef with Democrats, it’s hard to find much public friction with Biden. Moreover, it’s worth asking how Lieberman squares his current advocacy for a third-party ticket with his own painful experience in 2000, when Ralph Nader vaporized his vice presidential aspirations.
I don’t have the energy to dredge up the mountains of posts I’ve written over the years about this egomaniac. His hatred for the left is so overwhelming that it rivals Donald Trump’s at this point. I honestly believe that he would be happy to see Biden fail at his hands just to teach the Democratic Party a lesson.
I don’t know what can stop these craven No Labels grifters and saboteurs but I certainly hope something does. This is not time for Joe Lieberman’s outsized ego to get another 15 minutes.
You’ve already heard about the head of the Republican Party down in Florida who is accused of raping a woman with whom he and his wife, a founding member of the far right, anti-LGBTQ “parental rights” group Moms for Liberty, had previously had a three way sexual affair. It turns out that they aren’t the only hypocrites in the GOP. (Ya think????)
A former Pennsylvania lieutenant governor candidate and outspoken voice in the conservative “parental rights” school movement has been charged with punching a teenager while hosting an underage drinking party at her Bucks County home in September.
Clarice Schillinger, 36, is facing criminal charges of assault, harassment and furnishing minors with alcohol during her daughter’s birthday party, according to the case filed in late October. Her attorney has denied all charges and said she will fight them in court.
Schillinger made an unsuccessful run for lieutenant governor as a Republican last year and has played an instrumental role in a political action committee that has poured more than $800,000 into Pennsylvania school district races since 2021. The PAC has focused on supporting school board candidates who opposed COVID-19 lockdowns and argue left-wing ideologies are invading the education system.
In the recent criminal case, Schillinger is accused of punching a partygoer several times in the face during a series of alleged outbursts by drunken adults at her home on Liz Circle in Doylestown, according to an affidavit of probable cause.
The documents state that during the event — which started Sept. 29 and went past midnight — Schillinger’s then-boyfriend allegedly grabbed a 16-year-old by the neck for intervening in a fight between the couple and hit a 15-year-old in the face during an argument over football. According to the allegations in court papers, her intoxicated mother also punched the older teen in the eye and chased him around the kitchen island. Police said they had cellphone recordings of some of these reported events.
To escape the unruly adults, several minors started making their way out of the home, even as Schillinger ordered them to stay, court documents allege.
Cellphone footage showed that as the teens gathered in the foyer Schillinger lunged toward one partygoer before others began restraining her. That individual told police Schillinger struck him three times with a closed fist but that he wasn’t injured, according to the affidavit.
Schillinger had been throwing a 17th birthday party for her daughter that night, hosting about 20 teens in her basement, where there was a bar stocked with New Amsterdam vodka and Malibu Bay Breeze rum, police wrote in the affidavit. In addition to supplying the underage group with alcohol, she allegedly poured liquor for the teens, asked them to take a shot with her and played beer pong with them, witnesses later told authorities.
State law makes it illegal to serve or allow minors to drink alcohol.
One of the teen’s parents called police early the morning of Sept. 30 to report the assaults and the underage drinking at Schillinger’s home. Investigators interviewed multiple teens who had attended the party, the affidavit states.
This wasn’t the first time police visited Schillinger’s home — which she’s been renting since the spring — for reports of an underage party, according to court documents.
Emergency dispatch data provided by the Bucks County Emergency Service Division logged at least four different calls at the address.
Buckingham Township police responded to a noise complaint call and possible underage party at Schillinger’s home on Sept. 24, the weekend before the birthday party, according to 911 data and court records.
Police reported in one affidavit spotting a number of beer cans strewn around the property and street that night. They also saw about 20 teens dart into the home and, when they tried speaking with Schillinger, found her to be “intoxicated and uncooperative,” the affidavit states.
They seem nice. And so morally upright. We really should listen to them when they say they know better about what your children should be taught.
Meanwhile, Republicans are having a little family fight over yet another example of right wing hypocrisy. Get a load of this hot wingnut on wingnut action from the conservative site the Washington Examiner:
In the dumbest possible online nontroversy that has been branded #Calendargate, a handful of conservatives — and disproportionately, conservative women — are apoplectic over a calendar featuring photo shoots of various right-wing bloggers and “influencers.” Meant to lampoon the leftist notions that men can be women and that anorexia and obesity are considered beautiful by Hollywood and the corporate media, the “Real Women of America” 2024 calendar operates as part pin-up and part not-so-subtle advertisement for the creator, “Conservative Dad,” and his Ultra Right Beer.
It is kitschy. The photo shoots boast a relatively low production value, and the aesthetic is certainly catering to a working-class sensibility, not the world of high fashion or museum curation. But the calendar itself is anodyne and innocuous at worst and a fine celebration of real, conservative women of all races and healthy, attractive body types. It’s PG-13 and tolerably cringe, but pin-ups are neither meant to be high art nor pornography. The most scantily dressed model is the bikini-clad cover star, Riley Gaines, who became a conservative celebrity as a collegiate swimmer who competed against biological male Lia Thomas, and the rest of the models are fully clothed.
That hasn’t stopped yet another right-wing outrage cycle.
Q: What's the conservative antidote to feminism? A: Take your shirt off, get in the tub, and arch your back for the camera, kiddo https://t.co/IcAUhsWGhB
Yep. Those right wing outrage cycles really are tiresome aren’t they? I feel you buddy.
I know, I know. They are shameless and hypocrisy is no longer operative. But we all know that this stuff is deeply uncomfortable for some of them even if they don’t admit it. They know that we know that they are completely full of shit. Most don’t care. But the ones who do must be forced to own their nonsense.
I feel like not enough attention is being paid to Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) saying that Republicans in Congress are being blackmailed by Russian operatives using hookers and drugs to get them to change their votes on legislation.
That guy’s a bit of a nut. On the other hand, this isn’t the first time we’ve heard this sort of thing. Remember this?
A month before Donald Trump clinched the Republican nomination, one of his closest allies in Congress — House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy — made a politically explosive assertion in a private conversation on Capitol Hill with his fellow GOP leaders: that Trump could be the beneficiary of payments from Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“There’s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump,” McCarthy (R-Calif.) said, according to a recording of the June 15, 2016, exchange, which was listened to and verified by The Washington Post. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher is a Californian Republican known in Congress as a fervent defender of Putin and Russia.
House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) immediately interjected, stopping the conversation from further exploring McCarthy’s assertion, and swore the Republicans present to secrecy.
Before the conversation, McCarthy and Ryan had emerged from separate talks at the Capitol with Ukrainian Prime Minister Vladimir Groysman, who had described a Kremlin tactic of financing populist politicians to undercut Eastern European democratic institutions.
News had just broken the day before in The Washington Post that Russian government hackers had penetrated the computer network of the Democratic National Committee, prompting McCarthy to shift the conversation from Russian meddling in Europe to events closer to home.
Some of the lawmakers laughed at McCarthy’s comment. Then McCarthy quickly added: “Swear to God.”
Ryan instructed his Republican lieutenants to keep the conversation private, saying: “No leaks. . . . This is how we know we’re a real family here.”
And they wonder how anyone could have fallen for the pee tape rumor….
Is there any truth to this? Who knows? Would I be surprised if it were true. Not a bit. The GOP is that corrupt. Look who they worship like a god.
Nina Burleigh has written a great piece for TNR about Joe Biden’s other opponent in the 2024 election: Fox News. I urge you to read the whole thing if you can. It will be worth your while.
It opens with this:
On October 6, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics released its monthly jobs report for September. The numbers were extremely positive, with 336,000 jobs added, almost double the forecast. Most media outlets were reporting the numbers as a sign of improvement in the economy—which they are. But Fox reported otherwise. On his prime-time show that night, host Jesse Watters called the report “a straight-up scandal.” He accused the Biden administration of “cherry-picking and double counting the numbers.” As he babbled, chyrons drove home the point in capital letters, for anyone watching with the sound down, in, say, a bar or a gym: “Biden’s Jobs Numbers Scandal” and “Biden’s Economy Is Smoke & Mirrors.”
That day, the network flooded all its zones with the same shade. A Fox Business segment hosted Strategic Wealth Partners “investment strategist” Luke Lloyd, who opined that the good numbers merely proved Joe Biden’s socialism. “My reaction? We are becoming a more socialistic country, and these job numbers prove it,” he said. “We’re taking jobs from the private sector and creating them in the public sector. And who’s financing those jobs? Me, you, and the viewers, through inflation…. Government spending is going to keep inflation in the game.”
All that was just Day One. For the next week, the network served up a chorus of boos for the unemployment numbers. The next morning, hosts of Fox & Friends Weekenddiscussed the U.S. employment data over a chyron announcing, “Biden Criticized Over Handling of Economy.” Host Will Cain reported that the good jobs numbers were actually very bad news in a period of “runaway inflation,” and that more people working was simply going to drive up prices even further. “I got to tell you, when I’m out there talking to friends who are either in real estate or financing, there’s a great amount of fear about this economy and what could happen over the next 12 months … inflation goes high and interest rates goes high.”
As we head into the 2024 election, this is the messaging tone we can expect the nation’s most-watched cable network to spew hourly. No matter who the Republicans run, Fox will exist as an open adversary to Joe Biden—his other opponent. The network has always gone after Democrats—it did this to Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Kerry, and Al Gore. But this election year is different. It is a crisis for American democracy, a crisis that is in no small part Fox’s making. And it’s not clear that Democrats have any plan for how to handle their other—perhaps even the stronger—2024 adversary.
[…]
Is the Biden campaign, are the Democrats generally, ready for this? A debate rages right now in Democratic circles about how the party and its officials should deal with Fox—to refuse to appear on the network and instead expose the corruption at its heart, or to play ball with it and try to outsmart it. There are good arguments on both sides. Wherever Biden and his people come down, they need to do so understanding that Fox isn’t merely an unfriendly media property. It’s an opponent, and one with a press pass and the First Amendment to shield its lies.
It’s straight-up lies and propaganda. And you wonder why people are so uninformed in this country. But it’s that last bit that’s immediately concerning.
Most media observers and critics say that unless you are as skilled as Pete Buttigieg or Gavin Newsom it’s probably best not to go on at all. It’s very important to know how to parry their narrative and not everyone can do it. Others disagree pointing out that 40% of independents watch Fox and that the messaging around social security and medicare needs to be shared with the seniors who are watching Fox non-stop.
I honestly don’t know who’s right on this. “Better media training” has been the mantra for as long as I can remember but I’m not sure it’s ever made a difference. And do those seniors who watch Fox will ever believe that Trump and the Republicans will do anything to harm them. Fox blames everything on the Democrats and the hippies no matter what the truth might be!
It is possible to persuade them but the question is how to get it done
A 2022 experiment bears that out to some extent. Researchers paid Fox viewers to watch CNN for just a month—and they changed their minds about things like the government response to Covid and Democrats’ attitudes toward police. But in the real world, with such experiments impossible on a large scale, Democrats in 2024 face the profound challenge of meeting a moment of fascist authoritarian descent at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to messaging.
Burleigh correctly observes that Fox and the Republicans have discovered how to make politics “entertaining” whether it’s as theatre or sporting competition (or maybe lynching?) for the GOP voters who prefer this way of experiencing politics. According to various studies, Democrats apparently prefer to have their political entertainment more policy oriented. The result is that Fox viewers are extremely uniformed. Surprise! And the MSM is more boring…
We’ve all talked about this for years and I’m not sure there are any good answers for it, even now. When I think about it, it’s kind of a miracle that Democrats have managed to win all these elections in the last few years. Maybe that’s a hopeful sign?
Burleigh takes a long look at some of the long term work the Democrats are doing from building local news infrastructure (which sounds very interesting) to legal strategies, boycotts and carriage fees, all of which point to some clear signs that Fox, for all its power, is actually a very “wounded beast.” and may have actually reached the apex of its power some time back. That’s the most optimistic take I’ve seen and it does have a ring of truth. The problem is that they are still massively influential, dedicated to Donald Trump and they aren’t going anywhere before this next election.
So, add Fox to the list of Biden opponents, along with Trump, RFK Jr., Jill Stein and Cornell West. It may be the hardest one to beat out of all of them.
Republicans have a real problem when it comes to simple questions about the civil war and slavery. Nikki Haley got caught in a major gaffe yesterday in New Hampshire but Ron DeSantis has a lot of nerve dinging her for it though. He’s the guy who said defended a high school AP curriculum that said slavery helped enslaved Black people develop skills that could be applied for their personal benefit. Please.
Here’s the whole Haley exchange:
This isn’t hard. As Ron Brownstein pointed out, “South Carolina’s 1860 proclamation outlining its reasons for seceding from the Union mentions slavery in its opening sentence & points to the ‘increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery’ as a reason for the state” seceding.”
She tried to clean it up today. First, she said it was a Democratic plant in the audience, as if that would make a difference. And she also said this:
“Of course the Civil War was about slavery … But it was also more than that. It was about the freedoms of every individual. It was about the role of government.”
Hmm. “The freedoms of every individual” in this context would include the freedom of white people to own slaves. “The role of government” would be the role of government to allow the ownership of other human beings. She’s still not willing to speak the simple truth and is instead channeling the old Lost Cause narrative that the civil war was about the “principle” of states’ rights.
Haley should know better. She has a history with this stuff as the Gov. of S. Carolina.
“As she ran for governor in 2010, Haley, in an interview…described the war as between two disparate sides fighting for “tradition” and “change” and said the Confederate flag was “not something that is racist.”
Apparently, the story hit all the airwaves in New Hampshire last night. It wasn’t exactly a confederate state. It illustrates a central problem for the GOP — there are a lot of racists in the party and they demand to be catered to. But if you aren’t Trump (who’s allowed to vomit up anything and people in the party will excuse it) you’d better be able to smoothly dog whistle your way through it in places where Republicans prefer their racism to be more subtle. Haley just failed that test.
“Why Trump’s ‘Kubrick Stare’ mugshot is straight out of the horror film playbook” – via The Telegraph
The man spends (how much?) time, bronzer and hairspray on himself each morning before going to work late. He had to have daily presidential security briefings dumbed down to maps and bullet points because he has a short attention span for anything not Donald Trump. He has other priorities (which don’t include personal hygiene).
But question his star power (or his liquidity) and you have his full attention.
Donald Trump kept the Christmas spirit going strong on Wednesday when he used his Truth Social account to go after the director of Home Alone and Home Alone 2 for suggesting in an interview that he “bullied” his way into a now-iconic cameo in the 1992 sequel.
Just as Trump has frequently accused special prosecutor Jack Smith of having a fake name, the former president suggested the same of Chris Columbus as he disputed the director’s claims about how his appearance during a scene at the Plaza hotel, which he owned at the time, came to be.
“30 years ago (how time flies!), Chris Columbus, and others, were begging me to make a cameo appearance in Home Alone 2,” Trump wrote, claiming he was “very busy” and “didn’t want to do it” but because they were so “persistent” he agreed “and the rest is history!”
Trump focusing on the big issies like the director of Home Alone 2 saying mean things about him. pic.twitter.com/thu2Nh2DYp
Over the holiday weekend, Columbus told Business Insider that the production paid to film in the Plaza lobby, but there was one condition.
“‘The only way you can use the Plaza is if I’m in the movie,’” he recalled Trump saying. “So we agreed to put him in the movie, and when we screened it for the first time the oddest thing happened: People cheered when Trump showed up on-screen. So I said to my editor, ‘Leave him in the movie. It’s a moment for the audience.’ But he did bully his way into the movie.”
“Nothing could be further from the truth,” Trump shot back on Wednesday. “That cameo helped make the movie a success, but if they felt bullied, or didn’t want me, why did they put me in, and keep me there, for over 30 years?”
The idea of removing Trump from the film has come up before, such as just after the Jan. 6 insurrection in 2021 when someone on Twitter proposed a “petition to digitally replace” Trump in Home Alone 2 with 40-year-old Macaulay Culkin, to which the actor replied, “Sold.”
“I am your warrior. I am your justice. And for those who have been wronged and betrayed: I am your retribution,” Trump told CPAC in March.
I’m giving space this morning to the youngest Democratic state chair in the country. One year ago, Anderson Clayton, a 2020 Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, and Amy McGrath field organizer took on “the powers that be” in the N.C. Democratic Party. She ran for state chair at 25. And won. Last night, she looked back on that decision (on the hellsite).
(Full disclosure: I’m a friend and a fan. Clayton consulted with me for 3-1/2 hrs weeks before announcing her run. She did everything I recommended and more, including getting an early start. I funded a chunk of her campaign and watched it unfold as the only supporter over 35 on her campaign Slack.)
I was terrified when we launched. Folks didn’t understand why we wanted to get into the race so early, and everyone I talked to about running told me, “The race is in February. Why are you thinking about it now?” It was December. Because we knew by being the youngest, people…
We sent out mailers(!) that were made possible by donations (!) we got because during call time we didn’t just call folks within the party, we made sure to test my ability to raise money. Because the number one critique we got was that “young folks can’t raise money.” pic.twitter.com/4qVggRGzuj
(Since winning the chair, Clayton has appeared on television, in national newspaper profiles, and raised funds across the country.)
That was when a certain state senator named @MikeWoodard endorsed me in the race. It was a moment of all moments, and it gave the idea and the thought that we could really win this thing to so many folks on the ground. And to me, it was such a brave thing.
I’m hoping that after this year we’ve done just a little bit to prove to folks that it was the right thing to trust a young person with this responsibility.
And that young folks can be some of the most creative, talented, and resourceful places of energy for our party…
I see our party’s future every time I speak to a group of teen Dems, young Dems, or unaffiliated young folks who feel disaffected from our party right now, but know that they’re pro-choice voters, or climate voters, or gun-violence prevention voters. I see it all around.
I know I still have so much to prove next year. I’m celebrating today though, because we took a risk. And it paid off. I hope every young person out there who feels scared or like they shouldn’t run for office, or challenge the status quo – will take this as a sign to do it.
Also PLUG: help a girl with an end of year deadline bc I want my fundraising numbers so strong in January for 2023 that folks can never say again young people can’t raise money! If we work hard, we can! 💪✨🫶 #ncpolhttps://t.co/xAbzz8hrgL
If anyone is going to redeem the global climate and our reeling democracy, it’s not going to be the generations that oversaw bringing the world to this crisis. Fixing what needs fixing is not going to come from a dial-tested three-word slogan or a dead-on-arrival five-point progressive policy. Most political work is not an intellectual exercise or showing out in yet another street protest featuring decades-old chants. It’s grunt work. Endless grunt work. If you’re not prepared for that kind of organizing, stand aside and let those with the passion for it do it. They’re likely 40 years younger.
I have nothing but respect for Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi and her career of accomplishments. I still want her to go home and make room for fresh talent to move up. She can take Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Steny Hoyer and Jim Clyburn with her. Their party will be stronger for it.
“It’s not [your, his, her, their] turn” is a party culture (another local tale about beating that here) that has little to do with talent. It wasn’t Barack Obama’s turn in 2008 either, or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s a decade later. The veteran organizers defied that culture and made history. “For everything there is a season, and a time for every purpose under heaven,” says Ecclesiastes. Too many of our leaders don’t know when their season is up. It’s why we have a septuagenarian and an octogenarian running for president in 2024. But here we are. I’m talking about where we go from here.
Want to be a “playah”? Show up willing to do the grunt work. Then keep showing up.
Anderson Clayton is Gen Z. First order of business is a selfie (moments after we first met in person., June 18, 2022).
Where’s change coming from in your state? My friends in their 20s have different sensibilities and cultural touchstones. And a fresher set of skills. So did we at that age. It is the way of things. Get behind the new.
You gotta get yourself together babe Try to keep it cool You wanna make it last forever maybe Get behind the new
Unfortunately, sometimes people have to see the consequences of their actions before it can.
If there’s one issue I’ve sadly become so pessimistic about that I can hardly write about it anymore, it’s guns. The ongoing tragedy of our fetish for the grotesque weapons of war with which so many Americans believe they have a right to play makes me feel like pulling the covers over my head and never coming up for air. I’ve noted the failure of NRA in the last couple of years and they did manage to pass a very tepid gun safety bill in the last congress. But even with that it just seems so hopeless that I’ve lost heart.
But I read a story this morning in the Washington Post that makes me wonder if maybe something might be changing and I’m sharing it with you with a gift link so you can read it too. It’s about four current and three former Senators who have changed their minds. That’s not something I expected to see.
They interviewed these senators who all voted against the bills that were proposed in the wake of the horrific Sandy Hook massacre in 2013. It’s emotionally wrenching to be reminded of that horror and witnessing these Senators confront what they did is quite moving. An excerpt:
It is rare for politicians to shift their viewson policy issues as culturally divisive as gun rights. But the expressions of remorse underscore how the failure to change laws in response to Sandy Hook continues to haunt many who held power at the time — prompting some of them to openly wonder if they allowed short-term political considerations to cloud their judgment on votes that might have saved lives. Obama, addressing Sandy Hook families last year at an event commemorating the 10th anniversary of the shooting, called Congress’s inaction that spring despite his personal lobbying “perhaps the most bitter disappointment of my time in office, the closest I came to being cynical.”
The Democrats have changed, not the Republicans which means that any real change will require the Democrats either winning the White House and the congress with either a filibuster-proof majority or the will to eliminate the filibuster. We’re a long way from that. But this article made me think for the first time in a long time that it might be possible.
Read the whole thing if you have the time. Maybe there is a tiny bit of light at the end of the tunnel?
