It's time to get serious about lighting a fire under our weak Democratic leadership

meaning that all the people around him will be struggling against each other to be the one's with his ear. Chris Christie clearly lost the first round of wangling, but who will pull Trump's marionette strings going forward?

What a dummy.

Imagine you are an aide to Trump going into a G8 summit or some other gathering of world leaders.

Do you tell him he is the dumbest person in the room, and warn him not to get played by the other world leaders?

Or do you keep that information a secret from him?

His behavior seems to indicate that deep down he knows he is a stupid ass clown who is deeply insecure and has to act like alpha chimp to shore up his fragile ego. Would warning him that he is too dumb to function in a room full of other leaders activate this bravado in him, or does it cause him to sensibly hang back and keep his fool mouth shut?

Americans are getting screwed. They know it. They can feel it. The American middle class way of life is disappearing, and being replaced with an overclass and an underclass.

so, how does one campaign? You could, for example, point out that people are being screwed because of the actions of the bankers, the money men, the forces of international capitalism, the rapacious greed of the MBA class. This was Sanders' message, and it suggested an obvious fix: regulate the hell out of capital and capitalism, and protect people from excess greed and hard times. It also had the benefit of being true, and holding actual policy suggestions that would make life better.

Or, you could offer no scapegoat - just promise to shore up the safety net but not really blame anyone. This was Clinton's message: everything's ok, keep steady on this course. This approach wouldn't necessarily lead to improvement, but offered the same slow decline.

Or, you could offer a make-believe target to explain things. Filthy Mexicans. Terroristic Muslims. Minorities and "illegals" stealing jobs. This was Trump's approach, and because it was a facile and false boogie-man, it allowed people to blame others for their pain, all the while suggesting policies (the wall, "extreme" vetting) that felt like they meant something but wouldn't actually change the real problem. They will, in fact, make things worse, especially since the forces of rapacious capitalism are now unleashed.

When people are hurting, it is important for them to blame someone. Sanders had that, and it was true and useful. Trump had that, and it is false and harmful. And Clinton never had it, because being truthful about who is hurting the middle class suggests policies that the real owners of the country can't abide.

Just my 2 cents. This problem, of the Democratic party not blaming the actual perpetrators, has been endemic since the DLC. And it leads to loss and the horror of the Trump presidency. Because when people aren't being offered the true bad guys, they will latch on to false ones.

http://www.iwaited96years.com/

This is a very cool site.

And it was one of the best votes I have cast. Quick and easy, at my town hall. I encourage everyone to vote as early as you can if you have the chance....it will make you feel better.

The GOP to Captain Trumpolev:




Ah, Schadenfreude.

if he would promise to make Melania say "Moose and Squirrel" every once in a while.





JK. Of course I wouldn't. But she should do it, anyway.

It would be the ultimate delicious irony if this fraudulent human being, this cheat, this rapist, this self-dealer, this huckster, this racketeer, this chimpanzee with his daddy's money in his back pocket and his team of lawyers, who only got into the race to promote his brand and suddenly found himself riding the tiger, ultimately brought on the scrutiny of his financial crimes that led to his downfall.

Please, please, let there be enough justice in the universe for him to have revealed himself through this stupid stunt to law enforcement and pay just some of the penalty he should have been suffering for defrauding people all of this time.

He doesn't know anything - he is demonstrably and dangerously ignorant on nearly every subject.

He doesn't have any policies - his positions shift as he drifts from question to question by the seat of his pants.

He doesn't have any morals - he is a thief, a rapist, a liar, a cheat, a blowhard, and if elected would undoubtedly become a murderer

But what he does have is DOMINANCE - the alpha male chimpanzee in him. He has a little nickname for everyone around him, belittling them. He lets no challenge unanswered, and carries grudges and feuds forward for vicious years. He grimaces his monkey face at those around him, brags about how big and impressive he is in every aspect, constantly is on the lookout for the next mark and victim he can take advantage of.

Amazingly, this dominance is not only necessary for the Republican voters (they won't nominate anyone without it), it is _sufficient_. It is the _only_ thing they require from their leaders - to demonstrate braggadocio, and a willingness to other, belittle, and bully people of perceived "lesser" status.

It's astounding, frankly. They look at this guy, who is clearly not a fully formed human being, and because he displays his dominance, they are willing to drop any other criterion and follow him.

So, two questions - what can be done to counter it? (I suggest humor to deflate him)

and, why don't Democratic leaders display a bit of the same kind of dominance in their dealings with Republicans? Alan Grayson was the last one I can remember who knew how to treat the GOP with the disrespect they deserve, and it was such a rare thing from a Democrat that he stood out like a sore thumb.

It is a tool, and obviously has a remarkable effect on our deplorable brethren, so why don't we use it?