Thursday, December 15, 2016

DICTATOR PUTIN'S STRATEGY: MAKE CERTAIN THAT THE DEMOCRATS DO NOT NOMINATE BERNIE SANDERS

UP FRONT News   October 7, 2016
"The paper that won't be bought and can't be sold."
Published by Tom Weiss
Andrew Mazzone - Media Representative and Economics Advisor
Steven Gradman - Religious and Community Liaison
Allen Smith - Economics Reporter and Internet Advisor
www.tomsupfrontnews.blogspot.com   tomfreejournalist@gmail.com   tomsupfrontnews@yahoo.com
  The views expressed in UP FRONT News are those of the publisher or of the contributing writer and do not necessarily represent the views of staff.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
DICTATOR PUTIN'S STRATEGY: MAKE CERTAIN THAT THE DEMOCRATS DO NOT NOMINATE BERNIE SANDERS
   If Russian dictator Vladimir Putin wanted the authoritarian Donald Trump to win the 2016 election and ordered the hacking of Clinton campaign director John Podesta's  emails and those of (now ex-) Democratic National Committee boss Debbie Wasserman Schultz his strategy was to "help" the Democrats to nominate the weakest candidate, Hillary Clinton. I am not a conspiracy theorist but there are conspiracies. The DNC and the local Democratic Party machines and their unelected "super delegates" at the Convention plotted to deny the nomination to Bernie Sanders, a stronger candidate with none of "baggage" (e.g. $250,000 speeches for Goldman Sachs, the privatized email scandal, Benghazi, the mistrust and "likeability" factor, etc., etc., etc.). I am certainly not the only journalist who understands that many of the white folks who had voted for Obama, cast their ballots for Trump and that plenty of African-Americans did not vote at all.
  Donald Trump campaigned as an occasionally rhetorically "Wall Street"-bashing right wing populist who was constantly on the offensive, responding in the primaries and in the election with lies, evasions and attacks, often very personalized. The only time he politically retreated was when the then resurgent Sanders accepted Trump's impulsive challenge to a one-on-one debate.
  Had the Democrats run the nomination process more small "d" democratically, Trump would have had no choice other than to debate Sanders. A true populist against a faux populist and Trump would have had to do what he has never done, concede. 
  And so, thanks in part to the Electoral College we have an egomaniac who claims that he won by a landslide, and fills Cabinet with ex-Goldman Sachsers and other one percenters, who believes he is absolutely correct about everything.
   I've read some articles in what passes for the left wing press, urging resistance in the streets and communities and by politicians such as Senators Elizabeth Warren and Sanders and Keith Ellison. I've also chatted with a long time member of the Green Party (which, given the widespread unpopularity of the major party candidates, should have done better than finding itself in the perhaps somewhat embarrassing position of presenting itself as the voice of the 1% getting 1% of the vote) who offered some optimism inasmuch as the Trump victory brings the billionaire class out into the open.
   It is also true that China was at times a campaign issue but, as far as I am aware, the Greens spoke about Palestine but the Genocide in Tibet was not mentioned.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home