Recent comments
ADHD: Hunter in a Farmer's World
Thom Hartmann has written a dozen books covering ADD / ADHD - Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder.
Join Thom for his new twice-weekly email newsletters on ADHD, whether it affects you or a member of your family.
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
By webmaster
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
Qualifications: does anyone think that she would be in the position she now enjoys if she had not been married to the other Clinton?
Democrat enough: Sanders is throwing a lifeline to the Democratic Party. Why are they resisting? Follow the money, as always.
US voters are begging for major four parties but the big wigs have it rigged for only two.
If Bernie does not get the nomination, he has the supporters and the money to do the tough work of forming a third viable national party.
Same can be said of Trump on the right.
ct
ccccctttttt, what part of "democracy" do you not understand? Voter fraud is a non problem that requires no solution and the purported "solutions" create exponentially greater problems than the ones they were supposed to fix.
After the last two days, I really do hope Bernie runs a third party "peoples" campaign. In a three way race between Hillary and any Republican, he would smoke them.
If a guy from a big bank pushed an envelope across Hillary's desk with a check inside for a quarter of a million dollars for her, we might suspect that a bribe had occurred. If Hillary gets a check for a quarter of a million dollars at the end of a one hour speech -- that is not considered a bribe. Surely we can see the money was for past services (the 1999 bank deregulation by Bill) and for potential future 'friendly' legislation. A wise investment, no doubt, however some might call it political corruption with a thin veneer to fool the rubes and to offer the media a fig leaf.
On Native Americans. A close friend is a Major Chief with the Choctaw and Cherokee, whatever a major chief is I don't know.
Ralph told me that his tribe has an oral tradition that says at one time they had technology and raped the land and overpopulated, but they found that year after year they had to dedicate more time to living, or live worse. Over time, everyone was working all the time and standing still. Raplh says that they realized a sustainable life style is a better way to live, even if it requires that everyone in the tribe has to fish or hunt or gather one hour a day to keep it going.
The GOP will lose. We FINALLY have a generation of youngsters who will join us. If you doubt the direction this country is moving, Simply answer this single question, and I'd like Thom to list these numbers ON AIR.
# of Thom Hartmann listeners today
# of Thom Hartmann listeners 5 years ago
# of Thom Hartmann listeners 10 years ago
At times it seems gloomy because the obvious isn't happening fast, and MANY Americans are balancing on their one remaining foot - trying to shoot off the other. However, the nation is indeed moving back towards Democracy. Another example is the fact that Bernie is so strong, and Hillary has become stronger the closer she moves to Bernie, and despite the rhetoric, T-Rump agrees with Bernie on MANY things. The ONLY absolute toxic candidate is the bugger eating Canadian Mullah, but didn't I hear that he's applied for a position with Iran.
Voter-suppression has for decades been a standard by-conservatives wickedness. F’rinstance, ’twas featured ‘way back in the ‘50s by the Texas Democrats, dominated by John Connally’s faction of conservatives. Several types of voter-suppression methods at both state and local levels.
This is what happens when Progressives save up their political energy for four years and spend it trying to elect a President that is completely, or nearly completely, in agreement with their agenda. Meanwhile Tea Party activists are constantly busy on the state and local level getting assemblymen, state senators, representatives, and governors elected. The result is thirty mostly conservative Republican governors and control of more state legislatures than ever.
According to the Washington Post:
"In 2009, Republicans controlled both chambers in just 14 state legislatures. Six years later, they had total control in more than double that number. And that's not even the full, bad story for Democrats. Look at their numbers. In 2009, Democrats had full control in 27 state legislatures; by 2015 that number was down to 11, the lowest ebb for total Democratic control since, at least, 1978."
This is how they have passed legilation to restrict voting rights, limit reproductive rights, legalize discrimination against members of the LGBT community, and I fear they're only just getting started.
In 1972 we thought it was a good idea to pull the Democratic Party to the left. We were successful in doing so, but the result was the biggest electoral debacle in the history of the party. This country, or the majority of it, is not liberal or conservative, but a kind of left leaning moderate. most people don't want government involved in their personal lives, want it to illegitimize discrimination, protect us from religious zealots, and want the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution, not enforce it.
Where it begins to fall apart is when it gets down to money. People above a certain income level gravitate to the Republicans because they want to keep what they've got & think the left wants to take their money & give it to all the people too "lazy" to make their own money. Like it or not, that is the perception. They believe we use their money to buy votes from all the stupid poor people. This is real. I'm not making this up.
Add those people to the bigots and evangelicals and people who want the clock turned back for nostalgic reasons, and you can build a majority. Eventually the majority will ease its way toward the left because of evolution, but if you're waiting for that to happen you'll be dead before you ever get to see it. It's going to take another generation at least.
Fortunately for us the dinosaur party is helping things along by listening to ideological whack-jobs like Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, and O'Reilly, and nominating more extreme candidates. Just look at the 17 dwarfs they put up. Jeb Bush was "the moderate one," and he's several steps to the right of his younger, dumber, brother.
The point of all this is that, I've been reading diatribes here about how Hillary has sold out to Wall Street and how she's a neoliberal, a term which tells me exactly nothing about her politics, (I hear it's attributed to Noam Chomsky but he's a whole 'nother essay.) If Cruz or Trump is the nominee Hillary will win handily, trust me. I don't care, I don't care, I don't care what the polls say in April, Bernie is Donnie's or Ted's best hope.
Whoever the Republican nominee is he will be the best financed in world history. Sanders is financially better off than Clinton now, but he takes great pride in not having a super-pac, and if he gets the nomination he'll be going against Koch money. Add to that the fact that he's a self described Socialist (you won't see the word "Democratic" in any add run by his opponent's super-pac) and I think he's unelectable against anyone currently running. And what happens if they talk Paul Ryan into running.
Don't get me wrong here, if Bernie manages to get the nomination I'm voting for him; hell, I'll even man the phone or knock on doors to help get him elected. But I'm talking to all the "Bernie or Bust" people here; I realize a for a lot of you this is your first contact with the system, but you're probably not going to get what you want. The best Bernie can accomplish here is to get his voice heard (speaking for you) at the convention. For now that should be enough.
Hillary Clinton is far from a great candidate to be sure, but consider the alternative. A Ted Cruz, or a Donald Trump, or even a John Kasich would be a disaster for all the progress that's been made in the past 50 years. Hillary may not be much, but she wouldn't do damage the way a Republican surely would, and she would certainly name progressive judges to the Supreme Court as well as the lower federal courts.
So let's not bite off our noses to spite our faces. No one is going to know if you help to put a Republican in the White House, except you.
In Mississippi where I live, I registered to vote when I moved from Tennessee 14 years ago. I was issued a voter registration card but have never been asked to show it at the polls, instead, I'm asked for my driver's license. So, why isn't this card good enough ID for voting? If it's because it doesn't have a picture on it then why didn't they take my picture and put it on my voter card when I registered? I've been to vote when all I was asked for was my name and when I said it, the poll worker confirmed my address, scratched through my name and handed me a ballot. It doesn't need to be any more difficult than that. I've never had to wait in a long line either or go very far to vote. I'm sure those 31 cases of voter fraud in 15 years didn't change the outcome any elections either. Election fraud is more likely to occur where politicians purposely do things that are underhanded to win elections like stopping a legal recount in a close election or kicking qualified voters off of the voter rolls to keep them from voting for the opposition. We need a constitutional amendment that gives everyone including prisoners over the age of 18 the right to vote, an amendment that obliterates all of the voter suppression laws, an amendment that goes into detail so much that it could never take a panel of 9 judges to interpret it, an amendment that requires the hosting government agencies to properly accommodate the voters so they will not have to wait in long lines or unnecessarily travel long distances, an amendment that requires voting districts to be determined by math and not by political parties, preferably by foreign agencies that have no dog in the hunt so to speak. The problem with passing such an amendment is that far too many of the people that we elect do not want voting to be fair, they just want to win any way they can.
Re: Bob M's. "Politicians will not listen to us unless we speak the language they understand.....money. Remember, money is speech. It is highly unlikely that the money can be taken out of politics, so we have to play by the current rules."
If We the People have to compete for our employees'/representatives loyalty with the cadre of ridiculously fabulously well-to-do billionaires, corporations, (etc. (?)), that are currently buying elections (and politicians) , - a: We're not going to be able to afford it, and, b) they're probably not the kind of politicians we want to elect in the first place.
___
"Citizens United" needs to go.
Public financing/free media coverage/many other improvements toward freer, fairer, elections possible.
In my opinion, the only time it should be necessary to show an I.D. at your polling place is when you don't have your your voter ballot pamphlet with you. Those are addressed to only one person: The person who is already a Registered Voter. I've never had to show my I.D. at the poll because everyone who comes to vote is recognized by almost everyone else present at the time. It's nice to live in a liberal, small town-like village, where people actually know each other and talk to each other. We like to include others, not waste out time and energy looking for reasons and ways to exclude them from the American process.
Rather than complain about voter ID laws, just help folks
to comply with them.
If the laws are onerous, then go through legal procedure to change them.
If one can not trust the ID of who is voting, then the process is a scam.
ct
Starting at the 52:00 minute mark, I asked Thom if he'll take the #BernieOrBust pledge. I'm not "an independent," and he trusts Hillary too much. Have you taken the pledge?
http://BernieorBust.org
Election results are much more skewed by voter suppression laws than by any supposed voter fraud, the intended result, of course, occasionally acknowledged by the perpretrators.
It would appear that traditional political parties are becoming progressively irrelevant. Traditionally, the Democratic Party was the party of average Americans who supported their families by their labor. Since labor unions have been under attack for decades, traditional unions have become weaker and poorer and, therefore, the Democrats have lost the major part of their traditional financial support. The Democratic Party is looking more like the GOP, because it is receiving more of its funding from the same sources as the Republicans: billionaires and corporations. So, the agenda of the Democratic Party looks very much like that of the GOP.
The middle class will have to form political action unions that are not trade based unions. Trade unions have been largely neutralized by corporate billionaires. Political action unions could lobby and contribute campaign funds to candidates of any party that has a platform that promotes the interests of average, middle class Americans. Politicians will not listen to us unless we speak the language they understand.....money. Remember, money is speech. It is highly unlikely that the money can be taken out of politics, so we have to play by the current rules. Political action unions could be modelled on the National Rifle Aassociation. Could an existing labor union provide the infrastructure for a political action union?
Hi Thom. You asked a very interesting question on twitter this morning. What will it take for the Democratic Party to “keep” me?
To answer that question, you need to know something about me.
I am 58 years old (I think about your age?) and grew up in a suburban middle-class family in South St Paul, MN. My Dad was a union forklift operator for a company called Farmers Union, which is now Cenex. When I read your book, “Screwed” I thought how your childhood very much paralleled mine. My mom worked part time as a clerk at the local drug store and we did pretty well. We never felt poor. Dad bought our home on the GI bill – he’d been in the Philippines during WWII - and we took a vacation in the station wagon every summer. And they were FDR Democrats, no question. In fact, my mom often tells the joke of how she never considered divorcing Dad, except for the time she heard he had voted for Ike. All in all they were married for 71 years and that was the closest they came to divorce.
So I come from good, Democratic stock. I have voted in every presidential and congressional election since 1976 when I voted for Jimmy Carter, who I still consider one of the most decent human beings alive.
So, with all that as background, the answer to your question is simple, they need to get back to the basics. They need to start paying more than idle lip service to the shrinking middle class. They need to get back to the party of FDR and away from the neo-liberal, center-right Clintonista’s. They need to fire people like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz yesterday. They need to denounce folks like the union-busting, name calling Rahm Emmanual. They need to stop embracing every bad trade agreement that comes down the pike. They need to embrace Health Care for all, rather than Health Insurance for all. They need, in short, Bernie Sanders. And, Thom, if they shove Hillary down our throats, I and millions of other long time and first time Democrats will say bye, bye to the party that left us.
Mark Murray @redtailhawk123
according to the numbers I saw in the Washington post this morning democrats got over 70,000 less votes than republicans.
Not all that long ago, I contemplated holding my nose and voting for Clinton, though going with the Greens seemed to make a lot more sense. (...voted for Nader in 2000 (not in FL)). Then Bernie Sanders, for whom I have the utmost admiration and respect, and who I was hoping would run, decided to do so, and as a Democrat. The stark and glaring contrast between the two Democratic candidates has come into focus, not just for me, but for a great many others... yes, the Democratic Party is in danger of losing the next generation of voters... in fact, the party bosses seem intent on doing just that.
Some say that this is not the time to say "Bernie of Bust"- type things, or to say anything negative about any "Democratic" candidate.
It seems to me that this is the exactly the crucial time...
...maybe it's best to simply list, among the many reasons I wholeheartedly support Bernie Sanders' candidacy, as the fact that he's not a lying, warmongering, bought-and-paid-for corporate shill, and neocon... like all too many in the Democratic Party.
I had decided to vote for Hillary if Bernie loses his fight. However my reason for voting for Bernie is that he is saying what I believe. To vote for Hillary is voting for a person who stands for all of what is wrong. My vote for Bernie is a vote for the change I think has to happen. I will not vote for Hillary if that helps elect a Republican so be it . Without real change we will continue to be ruled by a veiled plutocracy .
My state has been fracking and tearing up the land for coal and natural gas, (meaning liquid natural gas for export), export for years or decades now to sell overseas for profit.
OUR INDEPENDECE OF FORIEGN OIL IS A JOKE, A FARSE!!!
Our WY Federal State Senator Barrasso stood on the Senate floor along with John Hoeven (R-ND), and John McCain (R-AZ),.,.a year or so ago and made the plea to export LNG, (liquid natural gas), (in my opinion for profit for the country of Ukraine!)
ALL THREE SENATORS STATED, ON THE FLOOR, THAT NOT ONE DOLLAR FROM THE TAXPAYERS WOULD BE USED FOR THE PRODUCTION OF NATURAL GAS OR LIQUID NATURAL GAS, bla bla bla.
I called all three senator offices to express my disgust at the lies they told! Here in Wyoming we, the taxpayers are picking up the tab for bankrupt companies, 900 to 1400 and growing, for NG CO's that are going bust!
Now coal companies are dying (yea!!), in our state so they are going to leave the state with the taxpayers cleaning up their mess as usual!
I HATE THIS CORPORATE AMERICAN WAY OF DOING BUSINESS!! It sucks. Hey!, but go capitalism, right?
Not anymore.
We USED to have a fairly-decent “polity”
{Aristotle’s word for a functional governance}.
… … … …
ADIOS to America’s “POLITY”
{… a rhyme …}
Permit this analysis
of our nation’s paralysis: -
- Methinks academically
that our system is systemically
in severe malfunction, …
… in devastating conjunction
with degenerate subcultures
and plutocratic vultures
and pols of doubtful quality.
Adios to the American polity.
======================
I was originally neutral in the race between Clinton and Sanders, as I've long admired both. But when the Sanders campaign fell in league with Karl Rove, attacking Clinton personally, ragging on the Democratic Party and even bashing President Obama, it made me look harder at Sanders, his record and his political career. I'm so over Bernie now. I don't expect Thom or his readers to listen to anything I might say, but here goes: The Bernie Sanders campaign has turned into a repeat of Nader 2000 and look what that got us.
There's only one force in our country that can stand up to the fascism of today's Republican Party and that is the Democratic Party, and here we find yet another instance of bashing that Party, as Sanders has done for his entire career. Today's Democratic Party is not the DNC or its leader. It is in reality all millions of us who have been working all these years within the Democratic Party to mold it into a huge progressive movement, more inclusive, more science- and fact-based, less militaristic, more empathetic, more international in its vision. Please, go read the Democratic Party Platform in your state, read the National Platform. See if they speak to YOUR views and desires and, if they do, come join us in our effort. We can't entice you with quick, fancy promises, but we do have a reservoir of good will and a knowledge base to move the country back on track, one step at a time. Everything good that has come about for the People of this Country has been accomplished by progressives and today the effective progressive movement resides almost entirely within the Democratic Party. (That's why Bernie Sanders chose to run as a Democrat.)
Democrats are not "corporatist" or "elite" or "establishment" or "corrupt" or "war-mongering" or "in the tank for Wall Street or the fossil fuel industry" or any of the pejoratives commonly thrown at us by the naysayers as seen here. And, though she certainly has human flaws, objectively neither is Hillary Clinton. Naysayers like Sanders and Nader, Green Partiers, "independents" and the "loyal lefty outsiders" of today remind me of neighborhood kids, standing outside the fence, sneering while chunking rocks over the fence on those of us who are trying to weed the garden. It's not only insulting, it's not helpful. It doesn't help THEM, either!
And as they say, "Come on down!" We'd love to have your help, your ideas and your energy in the pursuit of real, concrete solutions. Don't follow any personal "leader," follow a vision, instead.
Remember, if you don't vote, or you vote for a write-in, or you vote for a 3rd party, this year, no matter who WE Democrats have selected as our Presidential nominee, you are voting for the real fascist movement in this country, the Republicans.
I've been listening to the opinions of some who support Sen. Sanders but then put in the disclaimer, " he won't get the nomination, so I'll support Clinton" Bernie is making Clinton flip on her previous statements...all for the sake of votes. This is what the Clintons do.
I can say this because I lived in Arkansas at the time of Bill's regime as Governor. There is Nothing either of them could say, that I would believe. I don't vote for parties, I vote for the person. In years past, I would say, " for the person who is lying to me the least". Now, like many others who are Independents, we are facing a big decision if Sanders doesn't get the nomination. There is no Republican I would vote for so that's a no brainer. The problem will be making myself vote for a person who is only out for her own personal gain.
There's a fundamental problem here - both parties have stopped being groups of people, united by a common interest - and have become "brands," controlled by elites.
It's not about the Democratic Party "losing" a generation of voters - that presupposes that the Party is product, trying to sell itself to customers.
The reality is that the "Party of the People" should be more like a tribe, or membership organization - if the Party is not representing new voters, it's because the voters aren't showing up to represent themselves. It's not about "attracting voters" it's about occupying the party and taking it back from a corrupt, self-selected, in-group.
A Tyranny of Political Parties: From Tribes to Insiders & Brands