NYT: Nancy Pelosi as the symbol of what went “wrong.” Nope, she is symbol of what is wrong with the Urban Elite Party.


In the New York Times today, writers Jonathan Martin and Emmarie Huetteman conjecture, somewhat obliviously and with meandering avoidance, what it is about soon-to-be-elected House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, that symbolizes the 2016 downfall of the Democratic Party.



Nancy Pelosi
Nancy Pelosi




What aspect of Pelosi is it that embodies the seeming American dissatisfaction with the Democratic Party this election season?


Well for one, I would volunteer that the party should be renamed more accurately to something like the “Urban Elite Party.” Nancy Pelosi, from Northern California by way of San Francisco, embodies the essence of liberal out-of-step California’s elitist retreat from the American norm.  The American norm is struggle and it is stretching the dollar to feed your family while praying that the factory doesn’t ship your job far away while the very elites who prosper at such off-shoring practices smugly wave the Democratic flag from their urban enclaves in California and the Northeast. This is the American norm.  Nancy Pelosi represents a way of life that very few Americans know but one which wields inordinate amounts of power and influence by virtue of its concentration in dense urban areas.


In the Times article, Tim Ryan, an Ohio Representative who is mounting a challenge to Pelosi in next week’s Democratic vote, asserts, in explaining why the Democratic Party no longer speaks to blue collar values of the working class, “We’ve lost that brand, and that’s the brand that gets you elected.”


Brand? Is this all it means to the Democrats? A cheap vehicle, a marketing ploy to garner devotion?


Ms. Pelosi has her share of detractors. She retains a tight grip on important decisions such as who controls the party’s campaign arm, and, more to the point, she and the two other highest-ranking House Democrats are septuagenarians who have stood in the way of younger, ambitious lawmakers for over a decade now.

But the criticism of her tenure is as much a vehicle for airing broader complaints about the condition of a party that just lost the presidency, failed to regain the Senate and picked up only six House seats as it is an attempt to oust her from her post.

“This is not just on Nancy Pelosi,” said Representative Debbie Dingell of Michigan, who is supporting her. “Our entire party has to figure out how we appeal to everybody, how we reconnect with the working class.”



I would suggest that step #1 would be for the Democratic Party to remove all traces of elitist coastal control from its upper echelons. As long as there are Bay Area holier-than-though environmentally-friendly wealthy self-destructive tax-and-spend bureaucrats conjuring the Party’s mandate, they will sink.


Not in this day and age of Donald Trump populism.

Some Democrats appear to share this opinion.



The question is whether Ms. Pelosi, whom Republicans have demonized in the past, would be an impediment to a revival.

“I think we need a new face,” said Representative Ed Perlmutter of Colorado. “There needs to be new energy injected.”

Other Democrats privately agree, but believe that Mr. Ryan is not the answer.



Nancy Pelosi represents the “old political economy” I wrote about last February. Pelosi, Hillary, McCain, Bush…these are old political economy hacks playing by archaic rules of engagement. They defer to elitist, out-of-touch motifs as political currency but no one in the real American heartland has the capital necessary to raise such luxuries; Pelosi is emblematic of the Democratic Party’s isolated disengagement from the pragmatic urgencies of the moment.  America is much more than small slivers of esteemed coastal real estate with all its ostentatious displays of consumerism and trendiness.


If the Democratic Party wants to prosper, it needs to leave the coastal urban zones behind because that shit doesn’t play in Michigan or Pennsylvania. Democrats abhor the thought that they need to share the stage with equally deserving Americans from less glamorous regions. This is why they despise the Electoral College.  The EC is buzz-kill egalitarianism.




Donald Trump serves Jillary Clintonstein a little “3D” notice.


After initially refraining from commenting on Hillary Clinton’s entrance into the election recount fray, Donald Trump used his favorite mouthpiece to unleash a flurry of commentary on Twitter today. My favorite Tweet, and the one that has received the most attention, was a reference to votes cast by illegal alien voters. That label has fallen out of PC favor in the past few years and Trump sidestepped it as well. He simply referred to “illegal voters” but we know what he means.




Everything Donald Trump says (and Tweets) is measured and houses several layers of “meta subtext,” or what Scott Adams might called “3D chess.”


The implication here is a message, not-so-loud, but very clear, to the vestigial Hillary Clinton presidential campaign and all other Clintonite slash Jill Steinian electoral busybodies who entertain the possibility that they might eek a victory out of the 3-week-old election by persistently deconstructing voting tallies.


Namely, Trump is firing a shot across the bow.  His message:   Jillary Clintonstein is playing with a Pandora’s box by retreating to such petty microanalysis of the election results in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania (while egregiously ignoring New Hampshire and Nevada, equally narrow-margined states, assuming the ostensible “mission of accuracy and integrity” aim of this exercise is to be believed).


Keep it up Jillary.


The rock you overturn might expose a hidden treasure you don’t want us to see…



Speaking of ping pong and D.C. politics…


The game.




The Obama administration is cautioning that the results of the Presidential election should stand and recount efforts are wayward.


“The Kremlin probably expected that publicity surrounding the disclosures that followed the Russian government-directed compromises of emails from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations, would raise questions about the integrity of the election process that could have undermined the legitimacy of the president-elect.  Nevertheless, we stand behind our election results, which accurately reflect the will of the American people.”





Jill Stein now hedges that the recounts probably won’t change the election outcome (despite millions of dollars that are going into her duplicitous effort).


Ms. Stein, of the Green Party, acknowledged on Thursday in an interview with the PBS “NewsHour” that it was unlikely that recounts could change the results. Still, she said that “this was an election in which we saw hacking all over the place,” and that “at the same time, we have a voting system which has been proven to basically be wide open to hackers.”





Hillary Clinton and her coven won’t say a word.

> …..




We are witnessing a battle between many fronts behind many closed doors, and I suspect that in the end, Donald Trump will emerge pretty rosy from all this.



Jill Stein has her Nigerian Princess moment.


So Green Party micro-scale drama artiste and nobody, Jill Stein, has capitalized on a report by New York magazine that a convenient convergence of computer scientists and election lawyers held a conference call with John (“Molesta”) Podesta on November 17 to plead their case that Russian hackers possibly distorted the election results in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, states that saw Hillary Clinton lose by thin margins. The Clinton campaign, considering the narrow losses, was mum in response, and has been mum since election night.


Atypically mum.


For all their hysterical ruckus and self-important posturing and despite Hillary’s reported meltdowns, the Clinton campaign has been mysteriously restrained in response to any possible “irregularities” in the voting results.


the activists held a conference call with Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and campaign general counsel Marc Elias to make their case, according to a source briefed on the call. The academics presented findings showing that in Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots. Based on this statistical analysis, Clinton may have been denied as many as 30,000 votes; she lost Wisconsin by 27,000. While it’s important to note the group has not found proof of hacking or manipulation, they are arguing to the campaign that the suspicious pattern merits an independent review — especially in light of the fact that the Obama White House has accused the Russian government of hacking the Democratic National Committee.


This, of course, did not stop Jill Stein from pursuing her own little ulterior and profitable path to riches.


Jill Stein has raised enough money for recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania after experts said it was possible that hackers had artificially lowered Hillary Clinton’s counts there.

Stein started the fund-raiser on her website on Wednesday, saying that she needed to raise $2million by Friday – but broke that within hours.

She has now raised the necessary funds for the filing fees in all three states, and announced on Thursday that the recount would be moving forward in Wisconsin.

Stein promised to use the money – which was initially set at $2million – to pay for recounts in the three states.

On Thursday morning, the target was increased again to $4.5millon.

The campaign anticipates eventually needing $6 million to $7 million to cover attorney fees and statewide recount observation costs.



The target keeps growing and the mysterious donations prompt the tally inflation to expand dubiously in response.



Ya want more money? We got more money.



Hillary Clinton is not pursing this path, and the Democratic Party has not signaled it intends to do so.


The only people raising a ruckus are the snowflakes congregated in teary safe zones across the country and Jill Stein who barely raised enough money during her campaign to buy a round of drinks at Chili’s for her staff. I would conjecture that a recount and detailed parsing of election results could easily implicate Democratic election malfeasance.  Forget the evil Russians. That knife cuts both ways.  Such a move could open up a grand old stinky jar of worms that snakes its tendrils across the rest of the country. Hillary’s dubious history surely is one factor that inhibits her and her backers from creating a spotlight-attracting ruckus. I suspect Hillary is happy to lay low and burrow herself deeply under those dank rocks until the internet snooping dies down complacently once Donald Trump recites his Presidential oath on January 20.


And Jill Stein?

Large sums of money, I tell ya!




Her scam is on and the dollars continue flooding in. From where, we don’t know, and we can only ponder.  But the money is coming in, massively. Four million dollars in less than a day…and on a Thanksgiving/Thanksgiving’s Eve at that. I guess Jill Stein’s politically expedient good deeds strike people as much more important than that turkey sitting in the oven.