Everyone from left to right seemingly has put their two cents in on this story, with the right-wing blogs amplifying the Washington Post’s preconceived notions that there’s any sort of idealogical battle between Democratic politicians (in the “center”) and liberal bloggers (”on the far left”).
I’m kind of tired of this sort of thing, but what the hey. It’s fallacious, untrue, and a misrepresenation of reality. The vast majority of liberal bloggers are not advocating the party make a turn to the left. I can certainly speak for myself and say that isn’t what I’m advocating or have ever advocating. Frankly I’m quite fine with the party’s positioning on practically every major position (though I’m personally to the Democratic left on social issues and to the right on justice and fiscal issues).
I don’t care if you’re a liberal, moderate, or conservative Democrat - I just want you to open your yap. The Democrats seem to believe that sitting down like dumb ninnies even if they agree with Bush is a smart way to go about things. We’ve lost two national elections doing it that way, believing the predominant beltway/consultant consensus that the Republicans will hang themselves if we give them enough rope (but hey, the Democratic consultants get paid so what do they care - although you’d think they’d like to have a larger rather than shrinking pool of clients). That’s just ridiculous.
Eight years of Clinton showed us that even when President Clinton did nothing wrong, the Republicans found some reason to go to the press and make noise (at various times he was accused of being a drug dealer or a rapist, his wife was accused of being a lesbian, and they said his daughter looked like a dog). Sadly, the Bush Team has given us tons of material to work with and Democrats refuse to make hay with it — the simple act of issuing a press release seems to be beyond the capacity of the Democratic press secretaries.
If you don’t make any noise, the media has nothing to cover, and Bush’s policies are assumed to be without opposition and the press reports that “consensus” has been achieved.
By God, if issuing a press release is now tantamount to wide-eyed liberal madness the Democrats deserve to have even smaller constituencies than they already have.
Will the last Democratic senator please turn out the lights? Thanks.
(I do think its funny that advisers to the Gephardt and Kerry presidential campaigns are giving out advice on how to win. Right after that the Buffalo Bills and Minnesota Vikings are going to give us a chat on how to win Superbowls.)
BY THE WAY: As far as Tim Kaine doing the Democratic Response to the State of the Union? I don’t care. It is simply useless. It was lame when we had Pelosi/Reid do it, and it was lame when the Republicans wheeled out J.C. Watts to do it when Clinton was President. The response is useless and it would be better if we just didn’t have one and issue a press release saying that the steaming pile of nonsense he shoveled up in the State of the Union wasn’t worth a response.
But sending out press releases is Michael Moore business, sorry, I forgot.
(I do think its funny that advisers to the Gephardt and Kerry presidential campaigns are giving out advice on how to win. Right after that the Buffalo Bills and Minnesota Vikings are going to give us a chat on how to win Superbowls.)
Wonderfull! maybe you can talk to Markos Moulitsas about his prognostications re the 2004 elections at the same time.
If Dems aren’t even going to try to oppose the Repubs, what’s the point of having them? They may not win every, or even most, times right now, but they’ll never win if they don’t try. It’s easy to portray Dems as spineless wussy appeasers on terrorism and national security (the only area where voters think Repubs actually do better than Dems) when they’re spineless wussy appeasers on Repubs.
Lieberman? Oh, yeah…except for him. He sucks and should keep his mouth shut, right?
re: Lieberman: when his soul reason for being is slagging his fellow Democrats, yes. I don’t care if he’s to the right of Atilla the Hun, but he makes a living of going in front of the cameras and mugging for them by beating up Dems.
Maybe the dems agree with most of what the republicans are doing?
They just don’t want to piss off the radicals in the party that think being the “opposition party” means you oppose everything that the other side does……
I m kind of tired of this sort of thing, but what the hey. It s fallacious, untrue, and a misrepresenation of reality.
The first sign of somebody having a true problem is when they are in denial.
The vast majority of liberal bloggers are not advocating the party make a turn to the left. I can certainly speak for myself and say that isn t what I m advocating or have ever advocating.
Nobody’s talking about a “turn to the left.” The problem for Democrats is that you have a very loud and large segment of the party that is part of the angry left. If you think I’m wrong, then all one has to do is look at the various things they have embraced:
1. The filibuster of Samuel Alito
2. The embrace and the offering of the stage to a nutcase like Cindy Sheehan.
3. Talking about impeachment with regard to President Bush for a variety of things
4. Saying Bush purposely neglected Katrina victims because they were black
These are not ideals or views that are accepted amongst mainstream Democrats. It turns them off, yet Democrats like John Kerry, Harry Reid, Howard Dean, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi and others have embraced at least some if not all of these. It’s the agenda pushed by the likes of Kos and those like him.
Eight years of Clinton showed us that even when President Clinton did nothing wrong, the Republicans found some reason to go to the press and make noise (at various times he was accused of being a drug dealer or a rapist, his wife was accused of being a lesbian, and they said his daughter looked like a dog).
Oh please. If you’re going to whine about media bias, then at least choose examples that were put forward by the mainstream media. Using The American Spectator and Rush Limbaugh as some kind of evidence of media bias is foolish. And I don’t even know where you got the lesbian nonsense.
Sadly, the Bush Team has given us tons of material to work with and Democrats refuse to make hay with it the simple act of issuing a press release seems to be beyond the capacity of the Democratic press secretaries.
The problem is not that you’re not making hay with it. It’s that angry left wing of the Democratic Party shriek to high heaven over every issue as though it’s the scandal of the century. They never wait for all the facts to come out. They never take a step back and see everything for what it is. They just go batshit.
You can pretend all you want that it doesn’t exist, but it does.
A week after lefty bloggers criticize the Washignton Post ombudsman for playing stenographer for the Right on the Abramoff scandal VandeHei comes out with a hit piece on lefty bloggers arguing that they’re destroying the Democrats. So the only people willing to stand up for the Dems are destroying the Dems interests. Briliant. I have a theory.
Essentially, liberalism, after a long hard fight, became the status quo. It had the energy of the outsider, it was the champion of the people against the establishment. Then it became the establishment. At which point, the political energy began to shift back to the conservatives. It took them 30 years or longer to learn how to take advantage of it and since 1994 they’ve been on a role. They remade themselves as the outsiders fighting the establishment and they were able to draw political energy to their cause as a result. Democrats need to do that again now.
At the moment they are playing defensive which makes it all too easy for the Republicans to continue portraying them as the establishment, even in its last dying gasps. In this scenario, lefty bloggers aren’t the enemy, they’re pointing the way to reclaiming the status and energy of the outsider. To claim it, first the Dems need to accept that they’re on the outside now and that they’ve got nothing left to loose. Remember: “Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to loose.”Second, they need to go on the attack, hard, as rabble rousers and rebels, against a corrupt establishment. I don’t think anyone in the current Dem leadership is up to that task.
Jay: to varying degrees you’re making my point for me, though you can’t resist making some shit up. The Democrats have chosen the path of least resistance for over 6 years now. Something tells me it isn’t working. I’m not saying the more aggresive tone favored by the blogs is a magic bullet, but this is like playing prevent defense when the other team is up by 20.
1. The filibuster of Samuel Alito
Why not? There’s no penalty to pay for doing it. Sure, the wingnuts will stamp their feet, but so what? The only people who buy the line about “obstructionist” Democrats are not Democratic voters anyway.
2. The embrace and the offering of the stage to a nutcase like Cindy Sheehan.
Yeah, um, this never happened. You simply pulled it out of your ass. Or, I missed the big press conference where Howard Dean and Harry Reid locked arms with Sheehan. We don’t have a stage to offer anyone anyways.
3. Talking about impeachment with regard to President Bush for a variety of things
Yes, that sort of thing is unprecedented for political partisans. Just ask Ann Coulter, Bob Barr, Lindsey Graham…
4. Saying Bush purposely neglected Katrina victims because they were black
It’s clear the large black population of New Orleans and the Bush administration’s criminal response is just coincidence. It’s also a coinkydink that when he finally started appearing for Katrina photo ops Bush made a point of not going to New Orleans until the evacuees had been mostly cleared out - if I remember correctly the White House operatives didnt like the possible “optics” of the situation.
Using The American Spectator and Rush Limbaugh as some kind of evidence of media bias is foolish.
I never said this was some evidence of media bias, I said this was evidence of the right’s capacity to make noise that forced the media to cover whatever it was they were pushing. Devoting primetime coverage to allegations that the President raped a woman, for instance. I must have just imagined that.
And I don t even know where you got the lesbian nonsense.
Yeah, I just imagined that too.
Jay –
Look again the points you claim are hurting Dems with average americans:
1. The filibuster of Samuel Alito
USA Today’s polling shows that while the majority favor his approval, the trend is toward opposing his nomination. In Nov. it was 50 in favor, 25 opposed, 25 no opinion. By January 6-8 it was 49 in favor, 30 opposed and 21 no opinion. Combine that with a CNN poll that found 56 percent would oppose Alito if they became convinced that Alito will overturn Roe v Wade. Now don’t play naive with us here. Alito is no friend of Roe and he is on record as opposing it. And yet the Democrats simply rolled over to Republican spin and their rather uncivil demands for civility, allowing them to make a silk purse out of this sow’s ear. If the Dems had listened to their base they could have won this thing. No question.
2. The embrace and the offering of the stage to a nutcase like Cindy Sheehan.
I defer to Oliver. I would add, however, that when Sheehan was protesting outside Bush’s ranch, Newsweek found that 52 percent of Americans supported what she was doing.
3. Talking about impeachment with regard to President Bush for a variety of things.
Are you kidding me? Where the hell have you been the last 8 years? The Republicans put impeachment talk on the table. Now it’s radical? Nice try.
4. Saying Bush purposely neglected Katrina victims because they were black.
Perception is a bitch, isn’t it? After Katrina Bush’s job approval rating among African-Americans dropped to 2 percent. Two percent. Bush’s overall job approval rating dropped to 39 percent. Criticism from the Dems had nothing to do with these poll numbers. Bush got there all by himself.
Why not? There s no penalty to pay for doing it.
Sure there is. People are overwhelmingly opposed to a filibuster of Alito’s nomination. The Democrats are trying to convince people to vote Democrat. You don’t need to be convinced, but maybe the guy next door to you does and he’s not liking this kind of nonsense.
Yeah, um, this never happened. You simply pulled it out of your ass.
Sure I did. It’s pretty sad when I know more about the leaders of your party are doing than you do.
Yes, that sort of thing is unprecedented for political partisans. Just ask Ann Coulter, Bob Barr, Lindsey Graham&
We’re not talking about partisanship. We’re talking about winning remember? Impeachment did nothing for the GOP from a political standpoint.
It s clear the large black population of New Orleans and the Bush administration s criminal response is just coincidence.
Thanks for proving my point. You have no evidence of this. No proof whatsoever. Yet you tout it like it’s gospel. That’s a really good way to influence voters.
I said this was evidence of the right s capacity to make noise that forced the media
And I’m telling you that a conservative magazine and Rush Limbaugh do not constitute ‘the media.’
Devoting primetime coverage to allegations that the President raped a woman, for instance. I must have just imagined that.
No, but Juanita Broadrick’s claims had nothing to do with ‘the right’. Unless of course you believe she was just another tool of the Scaife machine. The press is going to buy into sensational claims just like they did with the Bush cocaine rumors.
Yeah, I just imagined that too.
Oh, so FreeRepublic is now part of ‘the media’ as well. Please.
Hey, but don’t take my word for it. The Democrats current strategy is similar to the Bill McBride playbook from a couple of years ago. He attacked Jeb Bush all the time and asked people to vote for him because he wasn’t Jeb Bush.
Worked wonders.
Actually frame, it is much simpler than that.
The Republicans are leaders with ideas. The democrats have set themselves up as a party that is against everything. They snipe at everything in hindsight, and can only state what they WOULD have done, if only given a chance. They are also the party of ” I told you so”….they come up with all sorts of horrible scenarios, some of which eventually DO happen. Unfortunately, they don’t actually have any better way to do, so they come across as whiny Cassandra’s….
I agree with Oliver on this point : The Dems have a problem…..
The Republicans are leaders with ideas.
Pray tell what are these ideas. This is a mantra with no facts to back it up. The great Republican idea of the last 20 years is that we should steadily privatize the government. We refer to this as “more Michael Browns”.
There’s a post awaiting moderation but I wanted to clarify this statement from it: “Democrats need to get back to being serious about formulating policy.”
This is part of the problem with becoming the establishment. Your energy shifts to maintenance not movement. Democrats are on the outside but they’re still in establishment/maintenance mode.
BY THE WAY: As far as Tim Kaine doing the Democratic Response to the State of the Union? I don t care.
I care - and it is painful to me that so few Dems seem to care. Sort of like a few years back someone saying that they “didn’t care” if Orville Faubus headlined a Dem party convention, being the new voice of the party and everything.
Pedro you’re right and you’re wrong. Democrats need to get back to being serious about formulating policy. Once again, the strongest debates and strongest ideas are being hashed out in the netroots. The Dems need to tap that resource. On the flipside, the Republicans have proven that ideas are important but not so important that you have to come up with good ones.
The Prescription Drug Benefit Program? Disaster.
No Child Left Behind? Disaster.
Social Security Reform? Non-starting disaster.
Tax cuts during a time of war? Record deficit creating disaster. Re-origanization of FEMA? Disaster.
NSA spying program? Consitutional disaster.
War in Iraq? Disaster.
Foreign Policy in the Middle East? Say hello to Hamas, Iran and disaster.
Foreign Policy in Asia? A nuclear North Korean disaster.
Environmental Policy? Warming disaster.
Shall I go on? None of these ideas has been good for the country but the Republicans have been able to sell them by wrapping them in terms of rebellion: shaking up the status quo at home and abroad. The Republicans are in power and all their ideas suck but they still sell themselves as outsiders breaking apart the establishment.
The Democrats need more than good ideas, they need to know how to sell them to a public that responds more to the percetion of vitality then the prowess of your wonkery. But they can get both by tapping the netroots.
People are overwhelmingly opposed to a filibuster of Alito s nomination.
“People”? Which “people”? Political partisans who already have their mind made up, but normal people couldn’t give a damn. They don’t even know who Alito is.
It s pretty sad when I know more about the leaders of your party are doing than you do.
Oh, I’m sorry, meeting Cindy Sheehan is exactly the same as making her a part of the platform. By that measure Jack Abramoff was Bush’s running mate.
Unless of course you believe she was just another tool of the Scaife machine.
Bingo. Thanks fer playin’.
Yeah, taking Jay Caruso’s advice on how to fix the Democratic party is much like taking Rush Limbaugh’s advice on drug policy.
Clue to OW: the reason the nutcase rightwing hates Cindy Sheehan is because she’s effective. If she wasn’t having an impact they’d ignore her.
You’ve got to get out of battered woman syndrome, OW.
Political partisans who already have their mind made up, but normal people couldn t give a damn. They don t even know who Alito is.
They may not know much about him, but the numbers show they’re opposed to the Democrats using the filibuster. This is fact dude. Deal with it. It doesn’t help get voters to your side. Remember, you’re supposedly talking about a strategy for winning remember? You’ve conceded this doesn’t work to help Demcocrats win because there’s no penalty to pay for it.
Oh, I m sorry, meeting Cindy Sheehan is exactly the same as making her a part of the platform.
I didn’t say she was part of the platform. A word I used was EMBRACE. Dean met with her and praised the shit out of her. If that’s not embracing, I don’t what is.
Like I said, continue to be in denial. When you lose again in 2006 and in 2008, you’ll continue to blame it on the media and for Democrats not “standing up” and being Democrats when in fact being John Kerry Democrats and Nancy Pelosi Democats and Ted Kennedy Democrats and Howard Dean Democrats is what’s going to keep you in the loss column for long time.
“This is fact dude.”
But it isn’t set in stone. Look at the numbers in CNNs recrent poll, Jay:
54 percent support Alito’s nomination with 30 percent opposing. But in the same poll a full 66 percent said they believe Roe should stand. Alito on the Supreme Court is a vote to overturn Roe. If the Democrats had any guts at all they would use a filibuster to press this point home in dramatic fashion. The numbers are in their favor:
“Only 34 percent of those surveyed said they believe Alito would vote to reverse Roe, while 44 percent said they think he would not. Another 21 percent said they were not sure.”
Convince half of that 21 percent and the Dems win. Think there would be a backlash against a filibuster? Think again:
“Of those surveyed, 48 percent said a Democratic filibuster of the nominee would not be justified, while 38 percent said it would be. Another 15 percent said they were not sure whether a filibuster — the use of extended debate to block a Senate vote on the nominee — would be justified.”
Again, convince just a portion of the 15 and the Dems win. All theyhave to do is have the guts to stand up and loudly, dramatically tell the truth: Alito is a vote to overturn Roe v Wade.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/23/alito/index.html
Oops, someone confronted Pedro with facts so here comes the bullsh*t: “opportunistic lefties who would oppose motherhood and apple pie if they thought it would win elections.”
The polls do not represent what Democrats are telling Americans, they represent what Americans are telling Bush and they are telling him in overwhelming majorities that the country is headed on the wrong track.
Like I said frame, you guys are the Cassandra party…..everything is a disaster as far as you are concerned. Unfortunately for you and your party, most americans don’t see it that way.
But thanks for making my point….
Again, hindsight. Telling America what went wrong is not leadership. The republicans got out in front on these issues, all of which are long term plays, not short term ones.
The more important polls are the ones that occurred when the decisions were made.
Unfortunately the polls also reflect the opportunistic lefties who would oppose motherhood and apple pie if they thought it would win elections….
“Unfortunately for you and your party, most americans don t see it that way.”
That’s why Bush is going into the SOTU with an approval rating hovering just above 41. His most recent favorability rating is even lower at 37. And what about Congress? 49 percent of Americans disaprove of the job done by Republicans in Congress. You live in fantasy land if you think the country supports the President and the Republican agenda.
http://pollingreport.com/index.html
In poll after poll over 60 percent of Americans think the country is headed in the wrong direction. Those are some real bang up ideas the Republicans have there.
http://pollingreport.com/right.htm
Exactly right, Oliver. Not only is Kaine a defensible choice for “response,” who the hell cares? Why are people supposedly favoring the Democrats, putting their grumbles into the press about THIS? It’s almost meaningless. It’s a minor decision.
I make some of the same comments here at Also Also.
Whatever frame. The opinion of a part-time film critic for a free newspaper doesn’t really concern me.
There is a reason that republicans control the white house and congress. It is because they represent the only true leadership in this country right now.
Constantly parroting the democratic talking points about a “culture of corruption” or a country heading in the “wrong direction” isn’t leadership, and it doesn’t offer any other option….and most importantly won’t get democrats elected.
I will say, however, that you stay true to form. When faced with facts: spin the bullsh*t, attack the messenger and pretend you never cared in the first place. I also love conservatives who think that leading the country in the wrong direction is praiseworthy because it’s still leadership, right?
Pedro, I pay my bills as a writer. If you think it’s so easy to write for a living go ahead and give it a try one of these days. You’ll also have to do a whole lot better than saying you “do” something everyday when you seem to be posting here at all hours. I work in front of a computer screen most of the time and I come here when I’m between ideas. When do you prepare for these surgeries you do, in between blog posts? To put it bluntly, I’m not taking your word for it that you do anything expect bitch.
“The opinion of a part-time film critic for a free newspaper doesn t really concern me.”
And what exactly qualifies you as an authority in anything?
If your job is to lead, then you should lead. Sometimes it will be in the wrong direction. Your “profession” is to criticise people who actually DO something, and you remain true to form here. That is why it is important.
I have to “do” something everyday. I cut people open to fix something….but it requires that I make decisions and actions that have consequences.
This is different from people who only react to situations and then criticise them.
Anybody can monday morning quarterback….it isn’t a skill. I suspect that the democrats will learn that someday.
Premiums paid up?
Whether you believe me or not doesn’t really matter does it?
The point still stands…..
You criticize people who produce something, don’t confuse that with people who have to create something and show results.
The democrats do the same thing…..
And BTW, how do you think surgeons “prepare”? You think we do stretching exercises or something? I trained for about 12 years to do what I do, at this point all I do to “prepare” is wash my hands….
LOL
“we surgeons”. You’ve kept the ruse up for almost two years, pedro - is anyone buying it?
“You criticize people who produce something ….”
Um, I create something every week. I write. Criticism is an art form in itself Pedro. Not that I’m saying I’m at that level but have you ever heard of James Agee, Manny Farber, Pauline Kael? Probably not.
And jesus christ, “…all I do to prepare is wash my hands& “? I think the AMA would love to hear that. Doctor my ass.
frameone???
I don’t think you read, or maybe you just misunderstood drpedro’s remarks. I think it’s called “sarcasm”
http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?sourceid=Mozilla-search&va=sarcasm
Quite a creative use too!
Oliver, you’re right.
There is little difference in policy positions between ueber-leftwing bloggers and the Democratic Party.
The main difference (as demonstrated by this post) is that the political amateurs in the blogosphere are unwilling to recognize the actual political realities on the ground. The Party’s willingness to heed this rabid and immature wing of the Left only makes them seem unserious. A good analogy might be to turn over the reigns of a business to someone who’s only been employed by the company for a year - simply because they scream the loudest.
How about this stage?
Honestly Oliver. You make it so easy.
“The problem is not that you re not making hay with it. It s that angry left wing of the Democratic Party shriek to high heaven over every issue as though it s the scandal of the century. They never wait for all the facts to come out. They never take a step back and see everything for what it is. They just go batshit. ”
It worked for you guys. Did you complain then? But then, y’all made hay with it.
I don’t see Howard Dean and Harry Reid locking arms with Cindy Sheehan, can you link those pictures? The only picture I see is her in Bill Frist’s office.
Cons calling the mother of a dead soldier a kook, crank, and everything else in the book- have you no shame?
And OldSeal why come to the defense of an ass?
St Wendeler –
Political realities on the ground? Simply because they scream the loudest? The political realities on the ground show Bush at 41 percent in approval, 37 in likability and with 61 percent thinking this country is headed in the wrong direction. And yet still the Democratic leadership behaves as if it’s up against a popular president whose policies are adored by the American people. Rather than respond to their base, the Dems have been cowed by a Right Wing base full of raving maniacs screaming that the world will come to an end if we don’t give up all our rights now to an imperial president. How did this happen? The mainstream media gives ample time to this raving base — Hannity, Coulter, Novak et al — to spew their invective while writing hit pieces on how the lefty blogosphere is detroying the Democratic party. That’s the problem.
“A good analogy might be to turn over the reigns of a business to someone who s only been employed by the company for a year - simply because they scream the loudest.”
StSwithins;
Please use PayPal to reimburse me for the irony meter which melted
down after that penultimately self-aware comment. (ergo 2000 election)
And as for the immature blogs and the screaming-mimi right wing;
well, that tactic has been SO unsuccessful for them. Hasn’t it?
factcheck, I assumed you knew how to read and would have read the text of the article. I apoligize, I’ll never overestimate you again.
“I missed the big press conference where Howard Dean and Harry Reid locked arms with Sheehan. We don t have a stage to offer anyone anyways.”
That is what you replied to with that irrelevant link. None of those people endorsed her, nor did Bill Frist, who the picture was actually referring to.
Again, where are the pictures? Where is the stage? Why aren’t you in school? Why haven’t you enlisted? Stop dodging the question.
Er, Farris? Did YOU read the article? I don’t read anything that shows Dem politicians doing anything other than giving Ms. Sheehan a polite hearing.
I know, I know, if they were REAL Americans, they’d refuse to meet with her…maybe even question her sanity…definitely declare that she’s not like those other GOOD moms who lost sons in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Farris, try not to get carried away, willya? One can disagree with Ms. Sheehan. That doesn’t mean that everyone who’s willing to hear what she has to say is doing something wrong.
I’m not imploying anything of the sort. After all, Bush met with her.
You’re not? Then maybe you’d like to take another crack at this:
The article you linked says that Reid, Pelosi, et al, took the time to hear what Ms. Sheehan had to say. That, to you, was the same as providing her a stage for her views.
As it happens, I think many of her views are correct. I, too, would like to know what the “noble cause” is that justifies our presence in Iraq and the loss of American lives. “Because he tried to kill my Dad,” isn’t good enough.
If you don’t come out and immediately (or even eventually) dissassociate yourself (as John McCain did).
Go ahead and line up behind St. Cindy. That and $5 million (which is all Dr. Dean has left in the account) are going to make REAL inroads this fall … for Republicans.
Having trouble making up your mind, Farris?
First you say inviting Ms. Sheehan in for a chat is “providing her a stage.” Then you say you’re “not implying anything of the sort.” Then you say the Dems are “lining up behind St. Cindy.”
I thought you people were good at “staying on message,” no?
The vast majority of liberal bloggers are not advocating the party make a turn to the left.
And that’s why I won’t donate to a lot of blogger’s fund drives.
I am advocating a turn left.