Skip to main content

The Democratic Party is Responsible for the Election of Trump

1) In the 90s they started Globalization. Like Ross Perot warned, millions of jobs were lost, leaving millions of angry ex-workers.

2) No help was given them. The Bill Clinton administration could have enacted something like the GI Bill after WWII. Instead, those out of work were left to smolder for nearly 20 years, while the Dem Billionaires got richer.

3) Then came the 2008 crash with all its too easy to get mortgages. The Obama Dems didn't do one thing to help folks avoid foreclosure, or help after they lost their home. Instead, the Bank Bailout, passed under Bush, was implemented under Obama. Out of this came a whole lot more angry people.

4) Then the Dems cheated us out of Bernie’s candidacy in 2016. Polls showed he could have beaten Trump. This is because he spoke to those Victims of Globalization and Bankster Fraud who had become a voting block.

5) Hillary Clinton didn’t acknowledge those folks. But Trump promised them revenge, and got their votes in 2016. He made the same promise in 2024. The Victims of Globalization and Bankster Fraud, as angry and worse off as ever, gave him a Mandate to Break Stuff. This time he had the Project 2025 authors to tell him how to do that. Their program included terrorizing immigrants who had long been blamed for the losses of jobs, deflecting attention from the Dem, and Repub, Billionaires.

Today's Democratic Party is OWNED by Billionaires. They will only allow so much "resistance" to Trump and “reform” as squares with their financial interests. I.e., the Democratic Party can't and won't buck up against their Super Rich owners - individual officials couldn't get re-elected if they tried that.

Only a Party committed to the principles of Marxist Humanism can be relied upon to lead the way to real reform. The Party of Sanders, AOC, Mamdani, and others. The Party started by the Marxist Humanist, Michael Harrington, the Democratic Socialists of America can be trusted to stay on the right path.

So, start a branch in your neighborhood today!

William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
The Political Science Interpretivist
Marxist Humanist

 

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

If Political Science is Widely Regarded as Irrelevant to Real Politics, What Can be Done to Reverse that View?

Let Google AI Answer that Question with its Own Book Review: The main argument of William J. Kelleher's book,  Normative Political Science: An Exciting New Way to Do Poli Sci Research,  is that it is possible to scientifically measure the "operational goodness" of a political system. Rather than relying on subjective moral philosophy, Kelleher proposes a method that combines two established theories to provide an objective, data-driven evaluation.  Key components of the argument 1. Integration of established theories Kelleher's methodology is based on two frameworks: David Easton's Systems Theory: This theory conceptualizes a political system in terms of inputs, processes, and outputs. The system converts demands and support from the public into policies and decisions. Kelleher uses this as a "blueprint" for a political system. Robert S. Hartman's Value Science: This formal axiology provides a framework for meas...
Post a Comment
Read more

Does Political Science Force Graduate Students into a Career of Irrelevancy?

Introduction       In a 2014 New York Times op ed, columnist Nicholas Kristof drew numerous defensive responses when he criticized political science for having very little “practical impact” in “the real world of politics.” [1] Rather than exercising civic leadership, political science has been most noticeably AWOL from public policy debates since WWII, he claims. And, in his view, there are “fewer public intellectuals on American university campuses today than a generation ago.” How does he account for this absence? Primarily, it is due to the academic interest in pursuing the quantitative approach in political science research. This kind of research is too often unintelligible to both the politically interested general public and the policy making community. Also, the “value neutrality” required for such studies prohibits advocacy. The pattern persists, in part, because graduate students must conform to the expectations of their professors, as a requirement ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Karl Marx was the FIRST Democratic Socialist

Karl Marx was the first Democratic Socialist.  As the election of Zohran Mamdani shows, Democratic Socialism includes the belief that socialism can be realized through democratic processes , and that where this can be done No Violence is needed. Karl Marx declared over 150 years ago that “there are countries, such as America and England … where the workers may attain their goal by peaceful means.” [1] And, ironically, in a New York City newspaper, the New York World, published on July 18, 1871, Marx said “the way to show political power [in Britain] lies open to the working class. Insurrection would be madness where peaceful agitation would more swiftly and surely do the work.” [2] Then, as if prophetically describing our own times, Marx observed, “Let us sum it all up in a word. The working classes remain poor amid the increase of wealth, wretched amid the increase of luxury. Their material privation dwarfs their moral as well as their physical stature. They cannot rely on othe...
Post a Comment
Read more