They are entrenched because of the corporate money and big dollar fundraising that goes with it. If you went to go primary Chuck Schumer or Nancy Pelosi good luck on the fundraising side of things. While that has always been true it is much worse after CU right?
Otherwise explain why the average Dem congresscritter is 70+ and refuses to actually accomplish anything. There have been attempts to overthrow these people and they have mostly failed because the money machine and power is behind the establishment candidates. It takes an AOC level candidate to have any chance.
The corporate donors care about the Barr stuff for the same reason they care about everything. The status quo enriches them. Iâm not saying they call up Nadler and tell him to suck. Iâm saying the sysyem is designed to pick and reward a Nadler type. And there is an unspoken quid pro quo going on between the DemE politicians and the donor class to not upset the apple cart too much.
Fine as far as that logic goes with respect to policy that matters to corporations and wealthy donors, but there is zero connection between competently questioning Bill Barr and pissing off donors. Itâs depressing and infuriating but they arenât tanking. Theyâre incompetent.
I mean I guess I agree? But Nadler is incompetent because the powers that be want him to be. Whether that is by his own choice or by the choice of the powers that be (by supporting an incompetent candidate) isnât really that relevant is it?
In other words the powers that be definitely donât want M4A, higher taxes for the rich or really any other remotely progressive policy. How do you make sure this happens? You fill the party that is supposed to be fighting for the common man with Chuck, Nancy and Nadler types who are utterly useless. And again whether that is their makeup or whether they are playing their part doesnât matter.
If you watch the AOC documentary this seems false. There are tons of smart and competent people who essentially get shut out of the process by the DemE system.
I did, but it seems odd that we can say that money matters too much for modern day politicians, but get mad at the DemE for having fundraising hurdles. (I hate defending the establishment here)
I think that is slightly different than what I am saying. I am saying the Dem establishment is designed to prioritize candidates who are complicit (or âmoderatesâ if you will) to those actually willing and able to fight to accomplish anything. The whole are they incompetent or complicit thing comes up literally every hearing. The answer is it could be either one or both but the result is the same.
The way I see it is that the major Dem fundraising stuff is geared around getting money from the rich. The rich like and enjoy the status quo. So of course when you have politicians who are elected through this Dem fundraising pipeline they arenât going to show up to congress and fuck over the donors they need to get elected every 2 or 6 years. Instead they fuck over all of us.
By the way, alleged super genius Barr has telegraphed his scripted plays. Heâs going to announce the âfindingsâ of this âinvestigationâ some time in October:
Heâs going to say the entire Obama administration was corrupt and Joe Biden was directly involved in the phantom criminality. Simultaneously, he will indict Hunter Biden and god knows who else. He may throw in a Benghazi investigation for good measure. The media will fall for this obvious bullshit and treat it as a serious charge/investigation.
Itâs also why AM Radio/Fox News has been going all in as it being the crime of the century. To normalize it to enough Trump voters before you pull the trigger to lose none of them and hope to pick off some Biden voters or just have them stay home. Besides, it worked last time.
I strongly disagree. They simply are too lazy not to do the easy, default thing and treat it like real news complete with âboth sidesâ panels. They canât fucking help themselves. âBarr says Biden is a crook, Dems say this is a politically motivated ploy, here are a few people to yell at each other!â Do you really think the NYT has learned anything? That they wonât front page headline Barrâs obvious bullshit? Paging the fucking narrator.
lol @ âhijacking.â as if the DHS wasnât an Orwellian nightmare from day one.
This is how shifting the Overton window works: W exploits 9/11 to create a massive new federal police apparatus that anyone paying attention could see was plainly fascist as fuck. 19 years later the NYT is spinning the narrative that this once-noble institution has been hijacked from its ideals to become some kind of politicized agency.
Thatâs how this shit gets normalized; the NYT wants to go back to the good old days when the post-9/11 security state just went through your library records and gave you a color-coded alert to tell you how scared your should be of Muslims at this moment. Thatâs the âmoderateâ take in polite circles.The idea that the whole department should be dismantled is beyond the pale, itâs not even discussed in serious-business print media.
And Iâm sure Chuck and Nancy have some plan to âreformâ the DHS. Fuck all of this.
They have to report on it because itâs news. Theyâll state the facts: DOJ did X, Barr says Y, Dems say A, GOP says B. Then theyâll have two talking heads on to rip each otherâs heads off.
The average person will think the truth is somewhere in between.