Learn from the '16 election and MOVE ON. We know what happened. So let's focus on 2017 and 2018.

So many people are tired of re-litigating the '16 primaries and general election. Wasserman and Brazile are GONE. Goodbye to them. In the long run what we need is national campaign finance reform to give the system back to the people and take it away from the rich donors.

As to 2016, tt was never any surprise that party and DNC insiders and the party establishment would be partial to Clinton because she was a longtime member of the party high in the chain, and Sanders was an independent and not a member of the party. Still, Sanders was allowed to run in the party and did receive DNC resources. There was no widespread "rigging". Primaries and caucuses are run by the state parties, not the DNC. Never forget that. In my view, in the general election, Sanders would have been the stronger candidate because it was an outsider year when people wanted change. And while we should all thank Hillary Clinton for her service and we all know she would have been a THOUSAND times better than Trump and I certainly voted for her, she just didn't have great enthusiasm, was plagued with the email scandal, just did not run a strong enough campaign (not a bad campaign, but some real mistakes too), and was an establishment candidate who simply did not embody "CHANGE." She was seen as the status quo, and people wanted change. And yes, the third partiers, Russian interference and the Comey letter were SERIOUS factors too, but we can't discount the other fundamentals and problems that led to her electoral defeat. Still, in the primary Clinton was better known in the party and simply had large advantages in the South and most delegate-rich primary states. Sanders just didn't have the national standing in the party to win that nomination. He did not lose the primary due to vast "rigging." He lost because he received fewer votes than Hillary Clinton.

So, we know just what happened in the primary and the general election last year. We also know the party needs to unite and have a strong affirmative MESSAGE for voters going into 2018 and that message is that we will keep Crazy Donnie in check, we will create good jobs for everyone everywhere the CORRECT way with middle class economics instead of failed trickle down, and we will solve the nation's problems the right way because the R's and Trump are unable to lead.

So let's put 2016 away once and for all and move on to 2017 and 2018.

Donnie, here are two sides. Both are indeed being violent. But they are NOT the same.

SEE LINK:

"I will not take vacations." (See Link)

Thank Susan Collins and URGE her to STAY in the US Senate. Here is why:

This is in no way an endorsement of Republican policies or the Republican party, and I DISAGREE with Collins on most of her votes in the US Senate. However, she does have a moderate bent, and her very recent votes on the horrid GOP healthcare bills were the right votes. She should be thanked for these votes to stop the rotten GOP DEATHcare bills. They were votes where she resisted huge pressure from her GOP colleagues.

We need Collins to stay in the Senate. Here is why. WE DO NOT WANT HER TO LEAVE TO RUN FOR GOVERNOR!!! That is because the horrid rotten LePage would then appoint either himself or another far right winger to that US Senate seat and he or the other person would help Trump and the radical GOP kill our healthcare and do so many other rotten things. Collins is very popular in Maine and is at least a voice of relative moderation and reason who places a needed check and balance on Trump in the Senate.

Also, if she ran for governor because of her popularity she would likely win the governorship in a year when with the right Democratic candidate should be able to win the governorship back absent a Collins candidacy.

So, for these very important reasons, I urge you to please contact Sen. Collins via email and thank her for her courageous healthcare votes and ask her to please stay in the US Senate because that is right where we need her.

Link to email Sen. Collins: https://www.collins.senate.gov/contact

AND PLEASE SHARE THIS MESSAGE.

Fix the party, run good campaigns, vote, and win more elections. Protests are a waste of time.

Want healthcare? Fix the party, run good campaigns, vote, and win more elections. R's don't give a shit less about protests and they are a waste of time. Win more elections. Simple as that.

The moral of this story: Want healthcare? Then WIN MORE ELECTIONS.

We have got to learn the great historical lesson: ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. The Dem Party has been seriously broken and gutted all over the country. And too many Dems/Progressives don't vote. It's that simple. If you don't win elections, the Republicans own the power and will do rotten horrid things. If you don't like those rotten horrid things then WIN MORE ELECTIONS. Simple as that.

Democrats being just a big city party for some groups but not others has already failed.

The 3100 county strategy pushed by Keith Ellison is what the Dem party must do. And that means compete EVERYWHERE and have a strong jobs message for everyone everywhere. The Dem party has been GUTTED all over the country since 08 because it decided to be mainly an urban party, went corporate at the national level, and decided to just compete in presidential years.

MEGA FAILURE! MANY registered Dems in small towns and rural areas voted for Trump, not so much because they liked him a lot, but because when your town is dying, when mills and shopping centers have closed, when you feel your beloved town has no future, you want JOBS again and the middle class American dream again. And Trump and Republicans successfully addressed that anxiety with a strong, clear, simple jobs message.

Dems may not win all those areas back, BUT, as BARACK OBAMA said, you have to compete everywhere and get MORE of those votes to be a viable national party that can win.

When Obama came to office in 09 he and he and Dems did plenty of PROGRESSIVE things. In 2010 the "base", which should have been extremely happy and energized, went to sleep, at least in too many cases. And in 2016 if the thought of a Trump disaster and the first woman president couldn't energize the "base," then what would have? Sure, Clinton could have done a better campaign, but it's not as though it was a terrible campaign. Too many in the "base" stayed home. No excuses.

The party needs to compete EVERYWHERE, and it is needs a strong, clear, compelling JOBS JOBS JOBS message which works for EVERYONE EVERYWHERE. The party needs to build NATIONALLY from the school board to the Senate, and it needs to fight for votes EVERYWHERE including RED areas which we may not win but can at least get MORE of because in the big picture that matters bigtime.

GOOD JOBS FOR EVERYONE EVERYWHERE is the number one concern, always, and it plays well in both cities and out in the country. And we haven't had a strong jobs message at all. It has STUNK. People are far less concerned about divisive "civil rights" and "identity politics" issues than they are about having a good job, buying a home, have two vehicles, and taking a vacation every year. That is the middle class American dream that EVERYONE wants regardless of race, color, or creed. The other stuff is secondary to most people.

I'm not saying those issues are not important at all, I am just saying they are not the main priority for most people. What good are more "rights" if you don't have a good job and are struggling economically? Not much.

Ranked Choice Voting repeal effort is killed in the Maine Legislature.

Yesterday the effort to repeal the Ranked Choice Voting referendum was killed in the legislature. The House had voted to stop the repeal. The Senate voted for the repeal. These were party line votes. R's of course voted to repeal the will of the voters. So what happens is the repeal effort dies in non-concurrance. The R's refused to come to a conference committee to strike a compromise on this which is what the Dems wanted and begged them to do.

Hundreds of us lobbied to stop the repeal and for the constitutional fix which would have fixed the referendum law to allow for state elections to be included in the law. The problem there was the state supreme court issued an opinion saying that state elections could be won with a mere plurality on the first count and therefore the ranked choice process conflicted with the constitution but ONLY for those three state races of state house, state senate, and governor. All other races covered under the ranked choice voting law are entirely constitutional. These include primary elections for state and federal offices and the federal offices for congress in general elections. Traditional first-past-the-post elections will remain for local and county level elections. So we had the vote on making the small fix to the constitution, and the R's of course refused that so we couldn't get the 2/3 majority needed to make that happen.

The compromise would have been to suspend ranked choice voting for the three races with constitutional problems and allow it to go forward for the other races thereby following the will of the voters while respecting the court's advisory opinion. Again, the Dems begged the Republicans to compromise and they totally refused.

What this means is that the referendum law will go into effect for the 2018 elections, and, if there is still no constitutional fix by that time, there will likely be a lawsuit challenging the results of some of the three state races found to be constitutionally problematic. Then the court will strike those results and officially strike the state races from the law, and we will need to have re-votes for those races.

All that had to happen here is for the Republicans to stop being totally RADICAL and either agree to the constitutional fix or agree to a compromise to suspend the state races from the law while allowing Ranked Choice Voting for the remaining races under the law. Easy. But do you think they would do this? Of course not. Why? Because they are indeed RADICAL IDEOLOGUES who on this referendum and others are trying to overturn the will of the voters just because they don't like it. They are doing the same thing on the education funding law passed by voters in November. Disgusting.

Imagine if Democrats were trying to repeal referendums that were particularly conservative in nature. The Republicans would be screaming bloody murder. They need to stop their typical hypocrisy. Completely overturning referendums is virtually unprecedented. It has only happened once, and that was on something found ENTIRELY unconstitutional, not just partially.

Let me also say for the record that the leaders of the Ranked Choice Voting campaign vetted the referendum question on this, and constitutional scholars did advise that they thought it would not conflict with the state constitution mainly because any reading of the term "plurality" must also include a majority which is the goal of Ranked Choice Voting. However, the state supreme court opined that under the language of our constitution a MERE plurality on a first vote was sufficient for the three state level elections. Leaders of the ranked choice voting campaign were honestly surprised by the ruling. However, they respect it and were entirely willing to accept a modification of the law because of it.

But thank you Democrats and Independents in the Maine legislature for standing strong on Ranked Choice Voting. It is the will of the voters. !!!

A Dem further to the left would NOT have won GA-6. Ossoff got about as close as possible for a Dem.

Ossoff was damn smart not to make the race about Trump and instead to make it about the lives of the people in the district, and a Dem further to the left sure as hell would never have come as close to winning that seat as Ossoff because that Dem would not have fit the district and would not have been able to put the coalition together that damn near won the seat.

Ossoff knew the district and played it just about right as a fiscal moderate to conservative and a social moderate to progressive. That is an affluent fiscally conservative district. He focused on the message of being a fresh outsider and economic development tailored to the district.

No Dem was ever EXPECTED to win that DEEP RED district. It was possible, but not probable. A strong Dem campaign was expected to get close, and the expectation was met. And it was damn right to try hard because THAT is the 50 state strategy and we need to compete everywhere.

This is a big country, and one-size-fits-all-ism does not work. If you want to be competitive in some of these purple and redder districts, you need candidates suited to the district. That doesn't mean Republican Lite, but it does mean Democratic Different. Core populist principles of an economy and government that work for ALL the people should be a commonality, but beyond that there has to be some flexibility. For example, John Bel Edwards in Louisiana is a social conservative and an economic moderate to progressive. And THAT is the kind of candidate that can win the governorship of Louisiana. A social liberal would never stand a chance in Louisiana. But Edwards is not Republican lite. He is far more progressive on the economic issues than the Republicans. He is a Democrat who fits that state.