Thom's blog
Can A Disruptor Win Against Trump?
Americans love disruptors, and always have. It's part of our political DNA, stretching all the way back to the American Revolution. Thomas Jefferson ran for president as a disruptor, dedicated to bringing down the conservative regime of John Adams who had already put more than 20 newspaper owners in prison for saying bad things about him. Andrew Jackson ran as a disruptor, promising to close the Second Bank of America and return economic power to average Americans. Abraham Lincoln's disruption, although painful, altered our country forever for the better. Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt massively disrupted the fabric of America, and Americans loved them for it. Jack Kennedy ran for president as a disruptor, and after he was assassinated his vice president, Lyndon Johnson, lead one of the largest revolutions in American history with the Great Society and the Civil and Voting Rights Acts. Bill Clinton campaigned as a disruptor, although he failed in that; Barack Obama promised disruption - "Change!" - and brought us a historic presidency and the Affordable Care Act. Donald Trump ran as a disruptor and now sits in the White House. If Democrats want to take the White House back from Trump, they can't do it by being "nice," or promising to "work with Republicans across the aisle." The American people know that things are not right, and they want someone to blow the system up, metaphorically speaking, the way all those presidents just listed have in the past. This election is not about left or right, socialism or capitalism, or any other of the conventional wisdom. It's about status quo versus disruptors. And a disruptor will win against Trump. -Thom
|
Monday's Daily Stack
Hour One: Can a Disruptor Win Against Trump?
Tweet: " 1 Americans love disruptors, and always have. It's part of our political DNA, stretching all the way back to the American Revolution. Thomas Jefferson ran for president as a disruptor, dedicated to bringing down the conservative regime of John Adams..." by Thom Hartmann.
Case: " Bush v. Gore", 2000. " The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States"
Event: Sun, Feb 23, noon or 1pm: Minneapolis, MN: " Blue State Ball" with Thom Hartmann.
Hour Two: Issues of the Day- Congressman Ro Khanna (D-CA, 17th District)
Article: " Constitution of the United States" Article 2 section 1. " The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them." (domestic emoluments clause).
Article: " Constitution of the United States" Article 1 section 9. " No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state." (foreign emoluments clause).
|
Tuesday on The Thom Hartmann Program, 12-3pm ET
And, the best of the rest of the news along with your calls right here on...
The Thom Hartmann Program, Occupying The Media 3 hours a day 5 days a week for "we the people"
And don't forget...Democracy is NOT a spectator sport...it begins with you...
|
|
|
Watch & Listen to Thom
2020 Win For Progressives, Means Disrupting Trump
The Legislative Races Democrats Need To Win in 2020 (guest host Jefferson Smith)
Was Iowa a Victory for LGBT Americans? (guest host Jefferson Smith)
Did The For Profit Press Create Election Security (guest host Jefferson Smith w/ Karen Kornbluh)
Truth About Fed Budget : Revealed! (guest host Jefferson Smith)
Do We Want a Free Press Or a Free Market (guest host Jefferson Smith)
|
On the Road Again
"The War on Voting: Who Stole Your Vote--and How To Get it Back" - Book Tour Is Coming...
Fri, Feb 28, 7:30pm PT: Powell's, 1005 W Burnside St., Portland.
|
|
|