The political strategy is blatantly obvious, but the end result is not certain. To anyone alive in this country at the present time, it is more than a bit obvious the Democrats are preparing to try to stop President Trump’s agenda at all costs.
It began with a women’s march the day after the inauguration and has never looked back. Much of the hoopla is funded by mysterious forces with many of the participants clueless about their activities when questioned by on-the-scene reporters. Sometimes even people who claim to organize such protests don’t know what they are there for.
Senate Democrats, led by Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, have blindly voted more and more in unison against Trump’s Cabinet nominees. It matters little which cabinet appointee it is, the thing to do is protest no matter what. There is even talk of an unprecedented filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee, a man that any Washington insider knows has a 100 percent chance of confirmation.
Nevertheless, Chuck and company are using their limited political capital and credibility to protest the sun rising in the east if it is something Donald Trump enjoys. Will such random acts of vanilla protest resonate with the majority of the American people? Most likely not and will bring with it further animosity for the far left and its surrogate media partners.
Even far left Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel has seen enough of the directionless liberals who cannot forget their lost election. He told a reporter this week, “You’ve got to pick which ones you’re going to fight about; not every pitch has to be swung at.”
If polarization is the main goal for politicians like Schumer and Warren, they may be sorry they wished for it. The political reality of their “What have you got to protest?” mentality is lean on principle and true conviction.
Their tiresome whining at everything Donald Trump favors Republicans more than Democrats. The far left furor may play well in regional locations like California (coastal area only) or New York City, but the stark reality of their ongoing nightly media event does not play well in the vast majority of American cities and the heartland. Their daily chants and protests appeal to the losing side that voted for them anyway.
When it comes to Congress, Republicans have something of an inherent advantage in both the House and Senate, and polarization helps reinforce those advantages these days. Oh sure, many of Trump’s cabinet nominees have been held up by Democratic diatribes and photo ops, but the reality is 100 percent of those nominees are being confirmed, and will continue to be no matter what Schumer and Warren do.
Meanwhile, where Democrats could make a difference with what political muscle they can pull together in their depleted state will have far less impact with a nation tired of the angry divide. The canned monologues and staged hysteria of the left is greeted by a majority of red state Americans.
Republicans took over the House and Senate in recent years largely due to the seats of the surviving moderate Democrats who have resisted the polar pull to the far left anarchy. It first happened in the South; then it spread to Appalachia and the Midwest. A straight-partisan vote for Congress pretty much ensures a Republican majority.
Trump lost the popular vote, but despite that loss, he actually won 230 out of 435 congressional districts, compared with 205 for Hillary Clinton. In the Senate, he won 30 out of 50 states. Fifty-three percent of House districts are Republican and 60 out of 100 senators hail from red states. Trump won 186 districts by double digits, compared with 171 for Clinton.
So here’s the real trend Chuck and Liz: The Republicans’ big wins in 2010 and 2014 largely nailing down districts and states that, in a strictly partisan world, would have been theirs in the first place. Being partisan in Congress seems to have helped them accomplish that task.
What is the Democrats’ game plan? It is obviously to stay completely partisan and playing to their base. There is no thought of expanding the party’s appeal. Their leaders act as if they have the majorities in the House and Senate. The midterm elections are two-years away and the climate of obstruction is now squarely on the party not in power. How is that playing in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that handed Trump the election?
Aren’t what the Schumers and Warrens of this world doing only promoting more of the same? Didn’t the Democrats lose the election because of the anger from the “deplorables?” Is anybody really thinking out this strategy in the Democratic Party, or are they headed towards an intended goal of seclusion and regionalism?
