Vote Blue, No Matter Who!

There have been some primary season surprises on the Democratic side of American politics during this primary season.  Yet another one happened last night in Florida as Angie Nixon, a left wing Democratic socialist, defeated Alex Vindman, who outraised and outspent her by almost 10 times more, won a surprisingly big 56-44% victory.  This one is difficult to figure, except considering it's a statewide race, and independent voters can't vote in a partisan primary in Florida.  Democratic party turnout was high, equalling the Republican turnout in a state that is more red than purple.  

Vindman, whom I like personally, billed himself as the candidate who had a chance to win the general election.  He does have name recognition, and a reputation as a never Trumper, as well as being somewhat of a centrist who leans a little bit more to the right.  And that turned out to be fatal to his primary nomination hopes.  

What's happening to cause these surprising election results is, as it almost always is with Democrats, in the messaging.  The realization that the sitting President is an incompetent boob is something that more than 60% of voters accept as fact.  Democrats are very likely to flip both houses, the senate side looking particularly promising over the past few months, and that will effectively stop Trump and make him a genuine lame duck with two years left to go, if he sticks it out.  The biggest issue is affordability as prices of everything have soared because of his stupid decisions.  

And while the Democratic party establishment is still feathering its nests, protecting its turf, and taking corporate campaign contributions, the message of Democratic socialists is resonating with voters, and they are responding to it.  And where there are candidates who are pushing that strong, working class narrative in clear, understandable terms, without all of the party gobbletygook, they are winning primary elections.  They have limited resources, because they won't take corporate money or accept AIPAC funds, so there are limits on their ability to get the narrative out there to the voters.  

But they are right on target with the message that is appealing to working class Americans, and as it spreads and grows, more and more of the candidates who wear the Democratic Socialist tag are winning primary elections.  And frankly, because that message resonates with so many independent voters, they are the better choices for winning in November.  

It's that narrative and messaging thing that Democrats seem to have so much trouble with that is pulling in this unusual coalition of liberal Democrats, the vast majority of independent voters turned off by partisan pushiness, the resistance to Trump showing up in No Kings rallies and literally now all over the place, and disaffected Republicans who realize that Trump must go or they lose.  That is going to produce a large enough coalition to win elections.  Establishment Democrats must get on board, not that they have to change their messaging or narrative, but that they must turn out and help every candidate with a D beside their name win their general election.  

You know, "Vote blue, no matter who."  That's been the Democratic mantra since Trump started running.  It has been the establishment's mantra during those times when there wasn't a lot of bold risk taking going on when we did have power to bring Trump to justice and stop this madness.  So now, the establishment needs to take its own advice and its own slogan, and put it to use.  

Vote blue, no matter who, even if the candidate is a Democratic Socialist.  

The Agenda is Very Simple

For those who have paid attention, and are waking up to why this message is appealing, it's pretty much what the average, working American who lives paycheck to paycheck would like to see.  

• Opening up the housing market by eliminating the ability of corporate entities to buy up housing and control the supply and demand to drive up prices. 
• Making the top 1% and the multi-billion dollar corporations pay their fair share of taxes.  No loopholes, exemptions or government favor granting.  Windfall profits tax on the worst abuses.
• Socialization and government intervention in areas where the profiteering has been the worst, most notably in health care.  Many Democratic Socialists are 100% in favor of a government owned, single payer health care system like most of our European allies, and Canada, now have.  
• Immigration reform that reflects American idealism. 
• No offensive, aggressive wars.  Turn the War Department back to the Department of Defense. 
• Increased government control in the energy industry, utilities, water supply.  
• Increasing the resources to provide for more infrastructure expansion and improvement to resolve supply issues and work to bring retail prices down, especially on supplies of food which are abundant in this country.  
• Major reform in agricultural development, so that farmers are not risking losing everything or being bought out by corporate interests.  

Let me point out that these issues are all in the common interest of Americans, there is nothing remotely communist about it, and in terms of being consistent with the Constitution, they are all designed to protect the American people from exploitation, which is the job of government.  

Vote Blue No Matter Who!

Let's be clear that there is no Democrat running for election during this cycle who would be worse than their Republican opponent.  Not one.  Focus on the issue, which is stopping the single worst President we have ever had in American history from doing any more damage to our country.  

That's the message, and the political interest and focus of Democrats now.  This needs to be as big a victory as possible, and I tend to think that the polling data, comprised by people who are mostly afraid of Trump, is significantly underestimating what is going to happen in November.   If this doesn't happen, and there's still a risk of that, given all of the bickering and infighting that is going on, a foot-shooting contest that could still turn into disaster, then we will lose the America that we know permanently.  

So, you know what to do.  Go out and do it. 

"I am pledging to vote for Democratic party candidates up and down the ballot in November.  If my state permits it, I will check the box for "Democratic Party Straight Ticket," if not, I will cast a vote for every Democrat who is on the ballot.  I will not, under any circumstances, vote for a Republican."  

This is Why Trump and Hegseth's Incompetence is So Dangerous

Joe Conason on Alternet: Trump Just Handed America's Enemies Everything They Wanted 

Thomas Kika on Alternet: Trump Handing His Fiercest Enemy a Huge Victory

Even if Donald Trump had actually written 'The Art of the Deal' (he didn't write a single word of that bestseller, his first big fraud) it would be foolish to expect that the President or his hapless envoys can deliver a viable agreement with the Iranians anytime soon.  Taken together, they lack all the qualities required to achieve the complex diplomatic resolution required in this crisis--like the nuclear agreement that Trump so cavalierly discarded in 2017...

The problem isn't only that Trump and his team of morons neglected to fashion any plan for their sudden urge to attack a faraway country with a million men under arms, a big weapons arsenal and a long history of ideological resiliance.  That was a historic and particularly stupid mistake, characteristic of Trump's shallow intellect--but now, after inflicting massive damage on Iran, the world and our own economy, he and his government are evidently stuck in the quagmire they created.  --Joe Conason, Alterned, April 2026

And so on it goes.  

The United States attack on Iran will go down in history as another lost war.  Trump launched the attack at the urging and behest of Benjamin Netanyahu, because Iran is Israel's most dangerous enemy and they do not have the military capability to deal with Iran while they are bogged down in the Gaza war.  When Trump scuttled the nuclear deal with Iran that was negotiated during the Obama Administration, he put Israel, and our other allies in the region, in much greater danger.  

Attacking Iran did not remove the ongoing threat to Israel.  It may have temporarily degraded Iran's ability to be a threat to their security, though the missile attacks on Israel have been worse than anything they've experienced from the Iranians before.  In spite of lies that pour forth from this President's administration on a daily basis about everything they do, especially this war and the effect it is having on the American people, it doesn't appear that anything has actually changed.  The Straits of Hormuz remain closed, choking off oil supplies and other kinds of shipping, driving prices up on all kinds of goods, but also depleting America's strategic oil reserve by dangerously high percentages, and depleting a military stockpile of weapons that will take years to replace.  

Iran remains a threat to Israel, and to the United States.  The attitude they are displaying, flaunting defiance and letting Trump open his mouth and make statements which they immediately contradict and defy, is a clear message to the world that they do not feel defeated.  Their ability to fire off clusters of missiles at Israel, and at our allies just across the narrow waterway between them, and to continue to vex traffic in the Straits would indicate that this is a long way from being over, and that Trump's threatening approach is not working at all.  They have gained the upper hand. 

And if that's not enough diplomatic stupidity, Trump uses social media to send a message to his "Secretary of War" to back down and substantially reduce joint military exercises with South Korea.  Let me repeat that, in case the significance of that statement hasn't yet sunk in.  He used social media to tell the Secretary of War to "substantially reduce" joint military exercises with one of our closest and most loyal Asian allies, South Korea.  

I do not understand why that announcement, and the way it was done, did not cause a media firestorm in this country.  That is the equivalent of handing China, who is one of the biggest threats to the United States in just about every way, a blank check.  The strategic importance of South Korea to the security of the United States should be one of our highest military and diplomatic priorities, but the sitting President uses his social media account to degrade its strategic importance and announce a backdown from activity that supports this priority.  

What's more frightening than the danger this puts us in is the fact that there are still too many Americans who have absolutely no idea about any of this, and are ignorant to the significance of these actions which demonstrate an intolerable level of incompetence from this President and his advisors.  Along with that is the fact that there won't be anyone in the Republican party who will stand up for the United States and defend us against our enemies.  

And there will still be plenty of ignorance and stupidity that will show up at the ballot boxes across this country on election day, even after all of this.  

 

 

Priority For Democrats Down the Road, In 2028 is Expanding the Supreme Court

The Washington Post reported today that Democrats have at least five different plans for a future overhaul of the Supreme Court, including expanding the number of justices from nine to thirteen, cutting lifetime terms to 18 years at the most, creating and enforcing an ethics code, and placing standards on how the court rules from its "shadow docket."  [WP, August 16, 2026]

[The story, by Julian Mark, appears in today's Post.  I an citing it for reference, rather than providing a link to a story which is behind a paywall.] 

According to the Post, Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse said, "There's constant and building dismay about the increasingly appalling record of the court.  And I think the continuing interest in reform springs from continued dismay and concern about the court's misbehavior." [WP, August 16, 2026] 

Such moves are considered to be turning the court "political," according to many Republicans.  What they fail to see is that the court they've created is very political and partisan, and Senator Mitch McConnell used some very disgusting and dishonest statements to justify unethical, if not illegal, acts in which he manipulated the judicial approval process to the benefit of the GOP.  And the justices who benefitted from it have amply rewarded both him and his party.  

And what has happened as a result is that the Republican Presidents who have had the ability to appoint justices, namely Trump, and his GOP predecessor, Dubya, have pointed political idealogues, rather than actual judges, to the vacancies they've been able to fill.  So they are the ones who are responsible for turning the court into a political body, rather than a judicial one.  And since they are willing to live with that, and benefit from it as well, then I think going to 13 seats when Democrats have the power to do it after 2028 is just fine.  I hope whichever Democrat wins that Presidential race will find the four most liberal jurists in the country, all under 40 years of age, and appoint them to the court.  Then start overturning prior decisions until the Republican-appointed justices damage is eliminated. 

We Had the Power to Do This During the First Two Years of Biden's Term

The Democratic party theme during the entire 2020 election campaign was the very real threat that Trump posed to American Democracy.  And as the expression goes, "we had him, dead to rights."  When the Supreme Court moved to protect him from prosecution by their very unconstitutional and unAmerican immunity ruling, that should have been the signal for Democrats to get started on amending the judiciary act to give President Biden four new seats to fill with left wing judges.  

There were several Democrats who were on board with that and said so, among them Senator Bernie Sanders, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, among others.  And while it certainly was a theme for the progressive side of the party, it was an idea which, matched with the federal indictments he received, would have brought the criminal to justice and knocked down the barricades of delays he used to get out of it.  

While the current conservative-biased court rules against the spirit of the law, a court more constitutionally centered, which means it would be made up of a majority of liberal justices, would have knocked down the immunity ruling, overturned Citizens United, and eliminated the Dobbs decision in one short session.  That would have opened the door to Trump's "speedy" prosecution on the criminal charges for which he was indicted, and landed him in prison where he belongs.  

The congressional investigation into Trump's seditious attempt to overturn the 2020 election, and subsequently, his theft of classified documents, discovered at Mar-a-Lago, would have then moved forward, especially if Biden had appointed a more aggressive and savvy attorney general.  It's even likely that the case in the hands of Aileen Cannon would have been removed and given to someone who could be more fair in judgment.  

But apparently, there are a lot of Democrats who don't really see Trump as the threat to American Democracy that he is.  Even after an almost year-long investigation into the January 6th sedition laid down a mountain of evidence of his tampering with and involvement in election results, there was fear that any further push might "look political."  There were an awful lot of frustrated Democratic voters, myself included, with the failure to prosecute that will be a black mark on the Biden Administration's legacy.  We would not now have to endure what we are enduring if the effort had been made to add those four seats in 2021 or 2022.

So This Topic, Which Isn't New, Is Now Finally Getting Some Traction

Two years into the second term of America's most inept, incompetent, and absolutely worst President, we are now finally seeing a movement among Democrats to, as the saying goes, "pack the court."  It's as if no one remembers that this came up in 2020, and no one wants to acknowledge that it was an idea that got floated around, and shelved.  But now, the process is made much more difficult by the fact that we no longer have a majority in Congress, nor the White House, and therefore have to wait, and hope and dream that we will be in charge following the election of 2028, so we can get this done.  

Not surprisingly, it is the more progressive wing of the party who is now picking up this theme and waiving the banner.  This can't be done in time to save us from Trump, though I hope the Congress we elect in 2026 puts an end to his ability to do much more than be ceremonial, if that.  But the immediate effect of a liberal court would be getting corporate money out of elections and returing that power to the people.  It would also restore the rule of law, to which the President would be subject equally, and make him an ordinary citizen when it comes to his desires to commit criminal acts.  

We need this.  

The other ideas put forth should all be added to the Judiciary Act.  Ethics rules should be in writing, reflecting the consensus of the will of the people when it comes to the behavior of members of the nation's highest court.  And that includes the kind of behavior that slipped by Congress when Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh were confirmed.  Justices who say one thing during their confirmation, but rule another way when on the bench should be subject to review, probation or removal from the bench for lying and misrepresenting their position.   

Term limits should also be imposed, and while 18 years was mentioned, I'm in favor of limiting justices to 10 year terms, all up and down and through the federal court system.  That's staggered enough to give Presidents an equal number of justices to replace during any four year term.  

Justices should have to divest their investments, and their business holdings before they can be nominated.  If they are not willing to do that, then it is time to move on to the next candidate.  

I'd also be in favor of establishing a citizens review board, empowered to recommend justices for impeachment, in the event that decisions start getting out of line.  Having to answer directly to American citizens and voters might cause some real reform to break out spontaneously.  

If Any Politician Wants to Earn My Vote...

Then support for judicial reform should be part of the Democratic party platform.  If the belief that Trump is an existential threat to Democracy is as much a democratic party ideal as anything, then this should become a campaign theme, and voters need to hold the politicians accountable for their level of support.  

No excuses.  If we gain the majority and have a Democratic House and Senate, and White House following 2028, the prospects of which look absolutely rosey right now, there will be no reason not to do this, except for those Democrats who still dip their hand in the corporate cookie jar and let them finance their campaigns.  The first two years should be a rush to get all kinds of anti-Trump legislation passed, and figure out how to make most of it stick.  

When It Becomes Real For Me, Personally

We paid for Medicare benefits all of our working lives.  The deductions started from my paycheck when I was sixteen years old, working at Bowlin's, a chain of tourist stores along the interstates in Arizona and New Mexico, and they came out of every single paycheck I ever received, a lifetime of spreading out payments for health insurance coverage during my senior years.  Over the years, it was a political football, with benefits waning and then increasing, depending on which party was in power.  The Republicans always had an angle on trying to figure out how to put mechanisms in  place so that a good chunk of the benefits, and some of the premiums, would go to pay profits.  To their credit, most of the time the Democrats are in power they spend looking for ways to strengthen and sustain what some claim is unsustainable, and to make sure that collections and distributions are fair. 

But when the Republicans are in power, watch out!  It may appear, on the surface, that not much is going on.  Don't kid yourself.  When they cut the budget, there are those who feel it, and I happen to be one of those.  

Actually, it's my wife who is feeling it.  

She fell in the bathroom, due to leg weakness caused by spinal stenosis.  That was the diagnosis, and the remedy, after five days in the hospital, was physical and occupational therapy in a skilled nursing facility, covered by Medicare.  Actually, Medicare provides full coverage for 20 days, and then 80% coverage for 80 more days, but we were prepared when the time came to go on Medicare, and we purchased the "gap" policy that covers the 20% Medicare doesn't cover.  We're caught up, deductible-wise, and so the transition from hospital to rehab facility went smoothly, at least at first. 

The physical and occupational therapy has turned out to be less than satisfactory.  The understaffed facility provides just one hour, combining both.  Looking into moving to a facility that might be better, I couldn't find one that either had better reviews or ratings.  When I asked the doctor who is in charge of her therapy routine, I got the standard, corporate-owned facility song and dance, that there was never a guarantee of more than she is getting (even though their representative told us she would get an hour a day each of OT and PT) and that her therapy is based on her own response to the treatment.  

Now it's been more than a month, there has been what I would call little improvement and the main goal, of her returning to being able to walk again, hasn't been met.  But they are telling us she is on the verge of discharge.  There is no way she could function at home without more assistance than is available, at least, not without looming danger of a fall.  

"It's the insurance," we're told.  They are the ones who are making all of the medical decisions, not the doctors and nurses who have this expertise. 

Just to make sure, I looked it up from two different sources.  She's entitled to 100 days, with an hour a day each for OT and PT, but it appears budget cuts have rolled back the number of hours of therapy patients on Medicare can get.  

So, after all of the caterwauling and whining that Republicans did when President Obama first proposed major health care reform, we still don't have it, but all of the problems and issues that the Republicans claimed would come from "socialized medicine" are materializing in our capitalist-driven health care system.  We are at this point in the first place because we were unable to get an appointment with a specialist in this specific field for more than three months.  Three months.  

When a major medical care corporation bought out the small, Catholic hospital system where we go to see the doctor, about a third of the doctors on their medical staff decided it was time to retire.  This created a shortage of doctors, especially those in general practice.  Those positions have not been replaced, and that has caused lines to back up go get in to see doctors.  So my wife had to endure her increasing pain, and run the risk of a fall, until she could see someone.  Unfortunately, the fall came first and she remains confined to a wheel chair, facing being relegated to home health care that won't provide anywhere near the level of help she needs. 

And did I mention, the home health agency has had to lay off staff, including some of the professionals like nurses and nurse practitioners, because of budget cuts in their Medicare allocation.  

I just don't understand why Americans are incapable of looking at what other countries, who have considered health care as a basic human right, have done for their people.  We've had this informal discussion on more than one occasion with neighbors in our building who are citizens of countries that have socialized medicine, and they can't fathom how, in this country, half of the revenue that is paid for health care by its citizens goes to pay stock dividents and profits, not medical care.  That explains, they say, why care is so difficult to come by in this country, and why we face situations like ours.  

So for any politicians who may be reading this, and I know there are several who do, health care reform now tops the list of my voting priorities, along with getting rid of Trump and bringing him to justice.  And I am not alone in this, there are millions who are having these same experiences.  

So are you listening?

 

A Feeling That I'm Having Trouble Shaking

The issue that is facing the American people at the ballot box in November is the existential threat posed to American Democracy by the criminal Trump.  That, and the fact that the man is an adjudicated felon, a mysogynistic rapist, alleged pedophile with plenty of evidence to prove it, and a mentally crippled egomaniac, and American voters put him in the White House, and now must correct their mistake, is the pressing issue of the mid-term elections. 

His own policies have created the issues that have plunged his poll numbers into depths never before achieved by a sitting President.  We voted him out in 2020, and that opened the door to several opportunities for Democrats to step up and protect the country from ever having to deal with the man  again.  There were indictments for crimes accompanied by a full Congressional investigation and mountains of evidence.  But prosecuting him was not a priority of the justice department, which was slow walking any potential action against him.  And no one wanted to talk about the bold risk that would have to be taken to neutralize the Supreme Court's ridiculous presidential immunity ruling by packing it with liberal justices, something that was within the realm of possibilities up to 2022. 

Yeah, I've heard all of the excuses about why that couldn't be done.  But if the man is the threat to democracy that he has proven himself to be, the risks would have been worth it to make sure that he couldn't ever get back in the White House.  We now see how seriously that threat was taken and how well the Democratic party establishment's plan worked.  It was, frankly, a huge disappointment and must be considered a political failure.

And now, as the economy tanks and prices soar and we are in a seemingly endless and unwinnable war, and the country is going to hell in a handbasket, the Democrats are apparently being given another chance.  The polling data, which skews heavily conservative, especially since Trump has a lot of influence over the corporate media that owns the polling services, is showing a blue tsunami forming up.  The primary elections have provided hints that the polls are probably underestimating the size of the blue tsunami, and from my perspective, I think we'll see Democrats take both houses of Congress this November.  And it won't really be all that close, though some of the races might be tight.  But when it's all counted, I fully expect to see Abdul El-Sayed, James Talarico and Troy Jackson in the Senate, along with Roy Cooper, Sherrod Brown, Josh Turek and Mary Peltola joining Jon Ossoff, who is going to win easily.  

That is, if the party can calm itself down, get focused on the real issue and stop fighting over who is and isn't a Democrat, and what are they going to do, and who is going to call the shots, and who is next in line for the handing out of privilege and prestige.  

Here we go again.  

This has some unpleasant resemblances to what started happening prior to the 2024 Presidential election, when Biden's debate performance sent the party into a frenzy that led to trying to replace him as the nominee just a hundred days before the election.  Yeah, that's the feeling that is creeping back in, as Democrats snipe and spat at each other over how much influence the left side of the party should have, as it wins primaries and displaces the centrists, moderates and slight to the right candidates that represent the Democratic party establishment.  

Yes, the same establishment that lost the 2024 election to the man who is arguably the worst President in American history.  The party fell victim, once again, to allowing the GOP to determine the narrative and create controversy.  The same party establishment that frittered away every single opportunity to stop Trump from being the greatest existential threat to American Democracy since the British sacked Washington in the War of 1812 lost the 2024 election because it panicked, spent too many weeks running around like headless chickens and then, tried to make up for it when it was way too late to make much of a difference. 

The Democrats are not going to win the midterms on the merits of their political perspectives or plans, they are going to win it because Trump has done such a poor job as President, and the Republicans in Congress have been his willing sycophants right down into the abyss.  The Democrats are also not going to win this on their own strength, within the moderate to centrist part of the party.  They are going to need the support of a wide variety of independent voters, and they are going to need every vote from the progressive wing of the party.  If they want the Presidency back in 2028, then after the midterms are over, they will need to come up with something to keep the younger voters, progressive voters and working class voters engaged and interested.  

And they must bring Trump to justice. 

I get it.  I understand when someone who thought that a particular senate or house nomination was their personal entitlement got swallowed up in the energy of that woke left side of the party, and lost a primary they thought they were entitled to win to a young, aggressive progressive pushing a Democratic Socialist agenda.  Well, Democrats have been warned for years now that they need to figure out how to get the votes of the working class back, and frankly, it's difficult for me to sympathize with candidates who lost in a primary when they thought they were entitled to the nomintation because of who they were or whose influence on which they depended.  This is about putting forth the best candidate who can win in the general election and the progressive Democrats focusing on affordability, jobs, a thriving economy and best use of resources are winning primaries and leading polls for the general election. 

And of course, that makes some establishment Democrats angry.  But if the establishment had acted with the kind of bold risk taking that would have kept Trump out of the White House, then they might not be having such a hard time convincing primary voters to support them.  

And if the party's leadership is not careful, they will once again fritter away the political opportunity of the century, that is within their grasp right now.  

A Lesson in Civics and Economics For Uninformed Republicans

Socialism isn't taking over the Democratic party.  And Socialism, especially the Democratic Socialism that exists in the United States, isn't communism.  It's the diametric opposite of communism.  

It is sometimes frustrating to use the term "Democratic Socialist," and have people turn up their noses, not knowing exactly what that means, but thinking it's the same thing as communism, and then turn around and say that they are 100% behind some political statement or plan that is pure Democratic Socialism.  Ah, the sad and painful result is this, of the dumbing down of the few social studies requirements for students in school left after most of them have been eliminated from public school curriculum.  When I taught high school civics, we distinguished between the economics and politics of Marxist Communism, Democratic Socialism, Capitalism and the American Constitutional Republic, which is a form of Democracy.  I doubt that's even a college requirement now. 

And here's some additional news.  Considering the political atmosphere in this country right now, it would not matter very much if it actually did.  We've seen Trump's true colors for a long time now, and while it is an embarassment to this country that it has taken so long for its people to realize this, there is now a solid core of Americans, about 60% of those who plan to go to the polls and vote in November, who realize electing Trump was a huge mistake.  

That has opened the door for more consideration of candidates for office who self-describe as Democratic socialists to campaign and win in primaries, since the pressure to try and generate more support from more conservative voters, which didn't ever really work anyway, is not as intense.  In fact, the wing of the Democratic party that seems to be most enthusiastic and is drawing people in and raising the percentages of potential voters is the side that leans toward Democratic Socialism.  

Democratic Socialism is Franklin Roosevelt

Franklin Roosevelt, arguably one of the best Presidents in American history, and singularly the most popular, won his first two terms on his economic plan, The New Deal, which was the most innovative economic, social and political reform programs in American history.  The New Deal is still one of the best examples of Democratic Socialism, because so much of what was instituted by government to help provide relief for the unemployed, recovery for the economy and which reformed the financial and banking system to safeguard against future economic downturns has survived to the present day.  And it was successful in achieving its ends, in that it laid a framework down for continued reforms, based on the learning experience where there were failures.  

So this is nothing new.  Take away the edge that has been placed on terms like "socialist," and it becomes pretty clear that the things on which current American Democratic Socialists are focusing are popular with voters.  Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have invested a lot of time articulating the agenda for Democratic Socialists.  They want to break up the corporate monopolies, something which we have a legal and constitutional basis for doing, but which has been unenforced by recent Republican administrations, put in a system of fair and equitable taxation, "making corporations pay their fair share" when it comes to taxes, which they don't do now, and get the government involved in a much bigger way in areas where there is a demonstrated need for reform, such as health insurance and health care.  

The aim of their agenda is to help the American working class by providing an economy that focuses on affordability.  They want to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans, many of who pay next to nothing now, and well below the percentages of income that middle class taxpayers now pay.  And they want to make major reforms to the Affordable Care Act, in ways that eliminate the profiteering on health insurance coverage, and gets the insurance companies out of the business of determining patient care.  

It's been the left side of the Democratic party that has provided the energy and momentum that has produced the massive turnouts in the No Kings marches and rallies, and has pushed voter enthusiasm to near-record polling levels three and a half months before the midterms.  And I'll also say that it is not going to be necessary to try and walk some kind of middle-of-the-road position to attempt to attract more conservative voters.  Those whose ignorance and stupidity include racist prejudice against candidates like Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic nominee for the Senate seat in Michigan, and Francesca Hong, the Demoncratic nominee for Governor of Wisconsin, wouldn't be convinced to vote for them anyway.  There will be plenty of more progressive minded voters to make up the difference.  

The Main Objective of This Civics and Economic Lesson

We've had laws regulating economic practices in this country since the very beginning.  They are based on the founding American principle that a government of, by and for the people is responsible for the collective protection of its citizens from all enemies, foreign and domestic.  As a result, when it has become the practice of business to organize itself in such a way as to take advantage of Americans by profiteering tactics, such as forming trusts, or monopolies to control every aspect of supply and demand of goods and services, government has stepped in.  That, for most of those who call themselves Democratic Socialists, is the essence of government protecting its citizens.

I've had a front seat to the monopolies and trusts being formed in health care over the last 20 years as I have prepared for retirement.  My current health care provider, a non-profit, religious based corporation, was bought out by a major medical conglomorate about four years ago.  The effects of this have been immediate.  There was a rush, among some of the older doctors and medical staff, to the retirement exit.  Appointments that used to be easy to get within a couple of weeks, now require more than a month's wait, and in the case of my general practice physician, three months is not unusual.  During the three hospitalizations I've had over the past eight years, there has been a noticeable decline in the quality of nursing care, as the number of patients assigned to each nurse in the hospital has doubled and nursing staffs have been cut.  

Of course, the most noticeable change was the increase in costs, as my insurance provider raised premiums because the costs went up.  I went on Medicare three years ago, just before my employer-provided insurance premium topped $1,000 a month.  But the gap insurance that I have now is double the monthly cost from the original contract.  

Communication, even through their online app, has become far more difficult and time consuming following a major change to a different provider for online medical records.  Shortly after having a major problem retrieving my own online account through the app I found out that the corporation that now owns the provider also owns the company that operates the online records system.  The average wait to see a specialist now is 6 weeks.  

My Support For Democratic Socialists Starts With Their Support of Medicare For All

I've seen "socialized medicine" up close.  When my Dad remarried at 80, it brought a stepbrother and his wife into the family who are Canadian citizens.  They are in their 70's so I've seen how their medical care works, compared to ours.  They live less than an hour's drive from Toronto, so of course, they have access to the best that Canadian Medicare has to offer.  There is a cost to the program, like Americans and medicare, Canadians pay the medical tax as a payroll deduction.  That, of course, spreads the cost of medical care out over a lifetime.  

But the bottom line is that most of the money paid in, about 90% of it, actually pays for the care, while in the United States, half of what we pay for medical "costs" go to pay the dividends for stockholders who own the hospital corporations and insurance companies.  They seem to be very satisfied with the quality of care they receive, and while there are some procedures and regulations that seem designed to test patience, overall, from my perspective, they are much better off than I am, even though I've finally reached medicare eligibility.  Their actual cost, out of pocket, for the premiums is less than half of what private insurance costs in the US.  

The trade off is that the difference between what most Americans, or their employers, now pay for health insurance is twice as much as the payroll deduction would be for a Medicare-for-all kind of program.  For me, the last two or three years that I worked, that would have meant a savings of over $500 a month.  That's a huge benefit for middle class Americans, the 99% of us who work for a living.  

And that's what Democratic Socialism is all about.  It's about helping the middle class get more out of the dollars they work hard to earn.  

Carville Predicts That When the GOP Loses the Midterms, Trump Will Resign, And Get Vance to Give Him a Blanket Pardon

Carville's New Twist on Trump's End Game 

I know a lot of people don't put a lot of stock in James Carville's predictions, though he does seem to have an uncanny knack at getting these things right most of the time.  And this most recent prediction is plausible, especially with the understanding that the GOP is just about as corrupt as any political party ever has been in American History.  I can see it happening. 

Carville predicted, several months back, that if Trump lost control of Congress, even just the House of Representatives, in November 2026, he would step down.  My first thoughts were that he's such an egomaniac, and so controlled by his own grandiose delusions that he would choose to remain, even knowing that Congress would squelch anything he wanted to do.  

But, his ego is not able to deal with losses, disappointments and failures, and he will be faced with that at every turn when the Democrats get back in control of Congress.  Carville has been pretty accurate in reading the signs of mental breakdowns occurring with Trump, and he has been fairly accurate in his predictions what Trump will do next.  Unless he is completely out of it mentally, something that is entirely possible, Trump has to know that he will be pursued for his crimes the moment he steps away from the immunity bubble the Supreme Court gave him.  More than anyone else in the country, he knows exactly what he did with Jeffrey Epstein, already public knowledge and what will focus on the evidence to clear all of that up will take him down.  

So negotiating some kind of deal with Vance, someone who is perhaps his equal when it comes to lack of character and integrity, perhaps worse if that's possible, is very likely.  

Such a Move Woulld Have Disastrous Consequences For Vance and For the GOP

The backlash that ended any possible success of Gerald Ford's Presidency came from his pardon of Richard Nixon.  Wrongly discerning that the country didn't want to keep kicking Nixon around for his crimes, Ford issued the pardon that ended his political career.  It was an egregious violation of the rule of law, giving a "get out of jail free" card to someone just because they had managed to get the American people to elect them to public office.   It ushered in a Democratic sweep in 1976, and whatever hopes Ford might have had for remaining in office died the day the pardon was issued.

And I hope that if Carville's prediction comes true, the same thing happens to Vance and the GOP.  

Vance would be a worse President than Trump.  Of that, I have virtually no doubt. Opportunists tend to be incompetent, and what we have seen from Vance so far, if it is representative of the man's character and ability, doesn't inspire hope for the fact that he is one heartbeat away from the Presidency.  He is one of the most dishonest and duplicitous individuals in politics, and he is dangerously lacking in the ability to comprehend facts.  He lacks any kind of personal charisma, which I've heard described as a "loser personality."  He's taken so many different and opposite positions on various issues that it is impossible to know what he really believes.  

The fact that he doesn't get caustic criticism from the conservative Evangelical right is very telling, converting from conservative Evangelicalism to Catholicism.  Anyone else who did that would be considered a godless heretic by many Evangelicals.  Religious beliefs are the result of deep, personal convictions, in the same way politics are part of personal identity.  Vance has flip flopped in both areas, which opens him up to legitimate questioning of his ability to be trusted on anything.  

I'd be overjoyed with the prospect of Trump being ousted from the Presidency for any reason, but not thrilled at the prospect of having someone even more corrupt and lacking conviction waiting to sieze power.  We need to make sure there's a Democratic Congress in place that isn't going to bow to corporate interests or billionaire wishes and willing to oppose anything Vance does.