Category: partisanship

Categories
ideological culture partisanship

Socialist Idiocracy

Democratic Party,Zohran Mamdani, socialism, DSA, Congress, capitalism

Old School Democrats are losing it.

Losing the young and, therefore, control of the direction of their party . . . to the Democratic Socialist of America.

Do they understand the dangers?

While it is expected that Republicans — such as Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) — would object to the rise of socialist agitation in the Democratic Party, getting Democratic leaders to object to the new radicalism has not proved quite so easy.

But James Carville, the strategist behind Bill Clinton’s victorious presidential runs three decades ago, is speaking out.

“What I would tell a Democratic socialist — ‘If you hate the Democratic brand so much, why use our words? Go call yourself something else. Call yourself the Socialists of America,” he said. “Don’t use our name. Make up your own name.”

The Fox News report elaborated, “Carville argued that the DSA’s values and policy positions, including defunding the police, do not align with those of the Democratic Party.”

Now, Carville’s not really in any position to demand that the ersatz “Democratic Socialists” strike the “Democratic” from their name. The Democratic Party — the party of Jackson and Van Buren as well as of Wilson and FDR — does not have a monopoly on the term. It is not Democratic® or Democratic™. And what with how Democrats in the Democratic Party are now scarcely committed to democratic processes at all — remember the stealing of Bernie Sanders’ nominations, or selecting a new presidential candidate without one vote of party regulars? — maybe the term should be up for grabs.

But not by socialists. 

Why? Carville called the hyper-successful and self-designated socialist “streamer” Hasan Piker an “idiot,” and his listeners “left-wing idiots.”

Yet they cannot call themselves “Idiot Socialists of America,” can they?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
ballot access initiative, referendum, and recall litigation partisanship

Maddened in Michigan

Michigan, petition, initiative, deadlock, democracy, voting

“It’s not every day that Michigan’s bureaucracy violates state and federal law while disenfranchising more than 700,000 Michigan voters,” opens the legal brief filed in the Michigan Supreme Court last Thursday by Americans for Citizen Voting – Michigan. “But that’s exactly what happened [last] week.”

The group (which I chair) has worked for the last year to place the Citizen Only Voting Amendment on Michigan’s November ballot. It makes two basic reforms: requires the Secretary of State to check the voter rolls, identifying and removing noncitizens in a fair process, and requires photo identification to cast a ballot.

Last week, the Board of State Canvassers, two appointed Democrats and two appointed Republicans, deadlocked repeatedly, 2-2, on counting petition signatures even when they agreed that the signer was a registered Michigan voter, and then, on whether to certify the issue for the ballot. 

“The initiative’s sample was left just three signatures short of certification for the ballot,” Sen. Ruth Johnson explained in The Detroit News, “after Democrats on the board refused to count the signatures of nine Michigan voters whose identities had been verified by a notary public, and who signed affidavits under penalty of perjury that the signatures on the petitions in question were theirs.”

“These are real affidavits from real people who are real voters who signed these petitions,” Republican Board Chair Richard Housekamp implored his two Democratic colleagues. 

“The signature matches,” acknowledged Democratic Vice-Chair Mary Ellen Gurewitz, “but whether it should be counted . . . um . . . I think we should decide later.”

“So, you’re going to hold the voter hostage is what I hear you saying,” Housekamp replied.

“You should not have to stop to check the count,” wrote Johnson, a former Secretary of State, “before giving credit for a signature you have already acknowledged is valid. . . .

“Two unelected members of an obscure state board,” she concluded, “cannot be allowed to strip away the constitutional rights of nearly one in 10 adults in our state who signed a petition to place this issue before voters.”

That’s why we and the 700,000 Michiganders who signed our petition want our day in court. Left without any response at all from Michigan’s Democrat-dominated Supreme Court, on Monday we filed an emergency petition with the U.S. Supreme Court. 

Yesterday, Justice Brett Kavanaugh ordered the Michigan Secretary of State, Bureau of Elections and Board of State Canvassers to respond to our appeal by noon today. Our day is coming.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
crime and punishment ideological culture partisanship

The Violence Is Inclusive

worried democrat, radicals, leftists, progressivism, socialism, communism

“I don’t feel safe going,” Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel recently shared about her decision to skip the Michigan Democratic Party state convention later this month. 

“I don’t want to get chased around. I don’t want to get harassed. I don’t want to get yelled and screamed at.”

It’s a gathering of her own political party! 

“This cannot continue, and the fact of the matter is, we have to be able to be a society where we can have intelligent discourse and debate about ideas without people being threatened,” the attorney general implored, “and certainly without people carrying out those threats.”

When people don’t feel safe, that indicates a failure of our criminal justice system. The attorney general is each state’s highest law enforcement official. So, what does it say when a state AG feels threatened? Afraid to venture out in public?

“Nessel’s declaration,” explains The Times of Israel, “comes in the final days of the primary between Rep. Haley Stevens, a pro-Israel stalwart, and Abdul El-Sayed, a democratic socialist who is deeply critical of Israel.”

Still, even bitter policy disagreements do not have to metastasize into hate-filled harassment . . . threats of violence . . . or worse.

“Former Senate candidate Mallory McMorrow has also acknowledged antisemitism within the Democratic Party,” the Daily Wire reports, “recounting an incident at the Democratic National Convention in which, she said, an attendee shouted an antisemitic slur at her Jewish husband while he was walking with their five-year-old daughter.”

Michigan’s hotly contested U.S. Senate Primary will end tomorrow. The fear of political violence will not.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
ideological culture national politics & policies partisanship too much government

Socialists to Seize Power?

socialism, Democratic Party, prison, authoritarianism, totalitarianism

Evan Barker isn’t surprised. 

“The democratic socialist surge of the past several weeks has stunned the nation,” this former Democratic operative wrote last week. “From left to right and everywhere in between, people are asking: How did we get here? What does it mean? And will the Democratic Party survive it? The prevailing reaction has been shock.”

She’s not shocked, though, because for half a decade she had worked for “a slew of progressive candidates” teaching “DSA-aligned staffers how to build a money machine for the left; coached progressive politicians on how to speak to donors; and collaborated with billionaires to create a robust fundraising network.” 

But after the big loss for Kamala “Salad Slinger” Harris and Tim “Cringe” Walz, Barker left the party. And wrote a book, Nothing Left, regaling us with how she became disillusioned with “a leadership class” that had drifted “further and further from the working-class Americans they purportedly represented.”

Barker’s not alone. Others in the rah-rah crowd for an older Democratic Party have also expressed their chagrin. On the First of July, well-known “liberal” journalist Jonathan Chait published in The Atlantic “There’s Nothing Democratic About These Socialists.”

Noting that the Democratic Socialists of America despise the Democratic Party, with many of DSA’s stalwarts veering off into communist advocacy without much nudging, the question becomes why Democrats with some sense don’t come to their alleged senses.

Chait observes that Michael Harrington, the socialist founder of DSA, placed into its bylaws “the expulsion of members who were ‘under the discipline of any self-defined democratic-centralist organization,’ a slightly jargonish way of describing communists.”

Yet, the Democratic Party isn’t as moderate as Harrington!

Truth is, “DSA supporters see internal division not as a risk but as a historic opportunity to seize power.”

And the “means of production.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
ideological culture national politics & policies partisanship

The States Fair

Great American State Fair, Donald Trump, Pennsylvania, July 4

I’m usually suspicious of business-government partnerships. But some occasional and low-level efforts are inevitable and at worst anodyne.

Take the Great American State Fair in the District of Columbia. This was an effort conceived by Donald Trump in 2023, and “enacted” (?!?!) by the president’s executive order once he resumed office in 2025. The idea was to celebrate the semiquincentennial in the capital with booths from each state. It was all very huzzah-hooray-USA-oriented, and sounds like good clean fun.

I did not attend, and it reached its natural conclusion without me last Saturday, on the Fourth of July.

Interestingly, a number of states pointedly did not participate. One gets the feeling that this was all about hating on Trump, but maybe not. Be that as it may, Pennsylvania’s Democratic governor wouldn’t fund or organize the Pennsylvania booth, saying that he couldn’t whip up any business sponsors.

That is unlikely, for when Pennsylvania’s Republican senator, Dave McCormick, heard about it, he called his state’s senator from across the aisle, John Fetterman, and the two decided to do it all themselves. “I started to call businesses, and they came out of the woodwork,” said the Republican.

From the accounts I’ve read, the event was either a self-serving (Trump-o-centric) failure or a moderate success — not a blowout — with the Pennsylvania booth standing out, featuring antique flags and a replica of the Liberty Bell.

This is old-time patriotic fun, a way of celebrating the good stuff of our states and the union.

A cynic might say it’s all bread-and-circuses, a distraction, but the answer to that is: enjoy but don’t be distracted.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
ideological culture partisanship

Partisan Pride Divide

national pride, patriotism, democrat, republican, military, higher education, America, freedom, democracy

“How proud are you to be an American?” a new NBC News poll asked.

“At the turn of the century, three quarters of Americans were ‘extremely’ or ‘very proud,’” Steve Kornacki explained to Meet the Press host Kristen Welker yesterday. “That number’s fallen to 56 percent.”

It is a sizable drop, leading Kornacki to inquire, “What’s behind this?” before supplying an answer: “it’s partisan.”

Boy, is it. Fully 90 percent of Republicans are “extremely” or “very proud” to be Americans, with just a mere 3 percent “only a little” or “not at all” proud. Compare that to Democrats, less than a third (29%) of whom are “extremely” or “very proud” to be Americans with a whopping 36 percent “only a little” or “not at all” proud.

There is a significant divide between those 65 years old and older, 75 percent feeling pride, and the 18 to 34 age group, with only 36 percent feeling it. But those differences pale in comparison to party identification.

In analyzing the poll at NBCNews.com, Jonathan Allen points out that Americans “have little faith in their institutions.” 

The military is the only institution mentioned in the survey that received overall majority support — 60 percent had a “great deal” or “quite a bit of trust,” including 86 percent of Republicans but only 40 percent of Democrats.

A bare majority of Democrats, 52 percent, had significant trust in colleges & universities, while only 17 percent of Republicans shared that trust. “The significance: this is the only major institution,” noted Kornacki, “that a majority of Democrats feel that way about.”

Institutions often disappoint and our government has done things for which the proper emotion is shame, not pride. But the principles of individual liberty, equality and justice, proclaimed here 250 years ago, have been, as Tom Paine predicted, “an asylum for mankind.”

A source of pride.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created wth Nano Banana and Grok Imagine

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
ideological culture national politics & policies partisanship

Promising & Not

Endorsements, Democratic Party, socialism, Mamdani

“We are capitalist, not socialist.”

Those words are from the “Promise to America” pledge promoted by a new group of the same name and unveiled last week by Reps. Tom Suozzi (D-New York) and Rep. Adam Gray (D-California). 

“Two Democrats in Congress who flipped Republican-held seats in 2024 are launching a pledge for their party’s candidates they hope will act as a rallying cry for centrists,” explains a Washington Post article, dubbing it “a direct rebuke to the party’s leftward tilt as democratic socialists such as New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) capture the party’s energy and activism.”

"We Are Capitalist, Not Socialist." Adam Gray, Tom Suozzi, Democratic Party

“We want safety,” their “Promise” continues, “not lawlessness.”

“No, duh,” would have been the response to such a statement years ago. But today? “Refreshing!”

These Democrats call for “secure borders, safe communities, honest government, and an orderly immigration system that protects the country, strengthens the economy, and treats people with dignity.” It’s a far cry from: Free healthcare for those here illegally!

“We believe America remains indispensable to global stability, democratic values, international security, and strong alliances,” the document expounds. “In a dangerous and uncertain world, America must lead with strength, purpose, and partnership.”

In closing, they declare: “We are proud, not ashamed of America.”

The Post suggests, however, that this slogan “could be polarizing on the left.” 

Sure, it is a much different message than Maine Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner has expressed. On an online forum back in 2021, in a discussion on securing disability benefits from the VA, a fellow veteran vented, “Fuck Uncle Sam,” to which Platner added a clarification: “Fuck him and take his money.”

Which message for Democrats?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Note: Sorry for the foul language but, frankly, I did not want to cushion the blow.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
ideological culture partisanship political challengers

A Perfect Fit?

Graham Platner, Democrat, Maine, The View, democracy

“These are character flaws that I’m tired of hearing about,” offered Whoopi Goldberg, Monday, on The View. 

She was speaking about Graham Platner, the leading Democratic Party candidate for the U.S. Senate seat in Maine currently held by Republican Sen. Susan Collins . . . and of his litany of scandals — the latest to garner attention being his sending of sexually explicit texts to as many as a dozen women during his marriage . . . while having been married for only two and a half years.

“Platner has faced criticism for a series of inflammatory Reddit posts and, more recently, for a Nazi symbol tattooed to his chest,” The Free Beacon reported last year. Mr. Platner says he was unaware that his tattoo was a Nazi symbol but, according to the Beacon, “Two Platner associates have contradicted his claim of ignorance.”

The Reddit posts included calling himself an “antifa supersoldier” and a “communist,” while also using anti-gay slurs and belittling veterans, police, rural white people, and African Americans.

After counting all his various scandals, The View regular Sunny Hostin concluded, “So he’s a liar, a racist, an antisemite,” then added, “He’s a homophobe.”

Nonetheless, Hostin said she is “conflicted.” Meaning she might still want him to be Maine’s next senator?

Now making a play for the Senate, Platner has kindly covered up the tattoo and deleted those deeply offensive Reddit posts. 

The 41-year-old presents himself as a working-class guy, though he comes from a wealthy family that placed him in a $75,000 a year prep school. He is an oyster farmer, but most of his income derives from disability payments. He told reporters that he bought his home with a VA loan, but his father loaned him the money.

“You’ve shown me who you are,” The View’s Sara Haines said of Platner, “and I heard you.” She declared, “This man should be nowhere near Congress.”

Senator Bernie Sanders, the Vermont socialist, begs to differ: “We desperately need somebody like him here in the U.S. Senate.”

Graham Platner should fit right in.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Grok Imagine

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
national politics & policies partisanship

King & Kingslayer

Donald Trump, Thomas Massie, revenge, Republican, endorsement, elections

Two weeks ago, five incumbent Indiana state senators “weren’t just defeated,” as NBC’s Steve Kornacki explained, “they were defeated in landslides.” 

The five had bucked President Trump’s call to redraw the state’s congressional map, blocking the creation of two additional Republican-leaning districts and drawing the ire of the president and his supporters, who got behind their opponents. 

On Saturday in Louisiana, Sen. Bill Cassidy, a 12-year Republican incumbent, became the first elected U.S. Senator to lose in a primary since 2012. Again, Dr. Cassidy wasn’t simply eclipsed by a challenger; he came in a distant third place with less than 25 percent of the vote. Cassidy was one of seven GOP Senators who found Mr. Trump guilty in his second impeachment trial, following the U.S. Capitol riot on January 6, 2021.*

I cannot recall a president of either party ever wielding so much electoral clout within his own party — perhaps partly because other presidents did not attempt to reshape their party as aggressively as Trump has, and partly because no president has enjoyed the outsider status required to mobilize the disgruntled grassroots.

Today, Kentucky’s Republican Primary offers another stop on what the media has dubbed “Trump’s revenge tour.” The Bluegrass State’s 4th congressional district sports 14-year incumbent Rep. Thomas Massie facing Trump-endorsed challenger Ed Gallrein, a businessman and former Navy SEAL, in “the most expensive House primary on record.” 

President Trump called Massie “a third rate Grandstander” in 2020 but then endorsed Massie in 2022. After Massie’s opposition to the “Big Beautiful Bill,” the Iran War, tariffs, and support for releasing the Epstein files, Trump has gone after him.

Latest polling shows “the race to be evenly deadlocked,” but if anyone can withstand the Trump onslaught, it may be Massie . . . who is so thoroughly not a Washington insider.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 

* Of the other six U.S. Senate Republicans, four chose not to seek reelection (Sasse, Neb.; Burr, N.C.; Toomey, Penn.; Romney, Utah), while Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski won re-election in 2022, and Senator Susan Collins of Maine is on this November’s ballot.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
election law litigation partisanship

Un-Redistricting Virginia

Gerrymander, Virginia, Circuit Court, voting, elections, democracy

A circuit court has ruled that Virginia’s new voter-passed congressional map, gerrymandered to give Democrats in the state a prohibitive advantage in the next congressional election, is unconstitutional.

Judge Jack Hurley, of the Circuit Court of the Commonwealth of Virginia for the 29th Judicial Circuit, Tazewell County, denied a motion to stay his injunction blocking certification of the election using the new districts. Former Virginia attorney general Ken Cuccinelli reports that once a final order is drafted and entered, “it will be immediately appealed.”

If the rejiggering survives the challenge, it could be the factor that tips the balance in the House of Representatives toward the Democrats next November.

Cuccinelli, who is now national chairman of the Election Transparency Initiative, had been saying that passage of the gerrymander would not be the last word. In their rush to get the measure to voters and enacted before November 2026, lawmakers ignored sundry constitutional requirements.

The 2024 special session that took up the redistricting measure had been convened to legislate about the budget. “Its governing resolution limited the session’s scope. Expanding it to include a constitutional amendment on redistricting required a two-thirds vote that never occurred.”

Also, says Cuccinelli, the state constitution requires that “an election must intervene between first and second passage” of a proposed constitutional amendment. “Here, first passage occurred during an election cycle — not before an intervening one.”

Among other problems is the constitutional stipulation that “every electoral district shall be composed of contiguous and compact territory.” The proposed map violates this requirement “badly.”

When you’ve got to go, you’ve got to go, and this partisan map must go.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Grok Imagine

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts