Please stop stepping on the rake Democratic Party.

[chesterslick]

32. Sure....

Last edited Thu Jul 5, 2018, 12:25 PM - Edit history (1)

Current party leadership rose to power during a period of stability; Reaganism represented the well planned and funded reaction to New Deal achievements.

This is the current leadership’s reality, fund raise in order to stay competitive, moderate conservative economic excesses and lead on social issues.

If however, society is undergoing a fundamental shift (think 1932 or 1982), the skills developed under this prior reality become less relevant (and yes, may appear as “unforced errors”).

For example, if money in politics is in fact a core problem of our time, are our House and Senate leaders, whose unquestioned ability to fund raise lead both to power, really in a position to move the party forward?

If the course of the river has truly changed, the current leadership is no more relevant than any other “back-bencher.”