Slams Obama’s staffers’ ‘contempt’ for liberals
The tea party movement represents “the last gasp of a generation that has trouble with diversity,” Howard Dean told an audience Wednesday.
The former governor of Vermont and head of the Democratic National Committee told a breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor that he expects the tea party to be a powerful influence in the 2012 election as it was in the 2010 election, but he doesn’t see it as the future of American politics.
“I think it’s the last gasp of the 55-year-old generation, not the first gasp of a new generation,” he said. “It’s a group of older folks who’ve seen their lives change dramatically. The country’s not the same … All of a sudden it’s here for them and they don’t know what to do … Every morning when they see the president they’re reminded that things are totally different than when they were born.”
Dean, who became a folk hero to progressives after his iconoclastic 2004 presidential run, suggested that the Republicans may find it more difficult to attract voters in the future, as the influence of the over-55 crowd wanes. But he said the GOP could still attract new voters, provided they change their message.
“They can get this younger generation,” he said. “But they can’t get it on the backs of gays and immigrants, because many of their friends are gays and immigrants.”
Dean also welcomed the staffing changes at the White House and criticized current White House staffers who he said had “contempt” for the president’s progressive base.
Dean didn’t name names, but the comment seemed targeted at Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, who announced this week he will be leaving the White House. In an interview with The Hill last summer, Gibbs criticized the “professional left” for their frustration with President Obama’s policies, provoking anger among liberals.
“As they say, don’t let the door hit you in the you-know-what on the way out,” Dean said.
The following video was uploaded to the Web by the Christian Science Monitor.
Things are so bad for Republicans the GOP had to send money to Texas
In 2016, then-anti-Trump Republican Sen. Linsey Graham proclaimed, "If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed.......and we will deserve it." It seems his prediction is coming closer to fruition.
Financial reporting reveals that the Republican Party was forced to send $1.3 million to ruby-red Texas as the election nears.
It was something spotted by ProPublica developer and ex-reporter Derek Willis Sunday.
"That's never happened before," he tweeted.
He noted that the Texas GOP raised $3.3 million in August, but nearly half of that came from their national parents.
What the London ‘Blitz’ reveals about how much pain and tragedy people can handle in 2020
It's hard to imagine how 2020 could possibly get worse. "If we lose Betty White," a friend said on a drive to the Supreme Court to lay flowers.
So many Americans have lost friends or family members to COVID-19. Thousands of Americans survived the virus only to desperately needed organ transplants and forever will struggle to breathe the way they once did. Others are still suffering without smell or taste even three months after having the virus. Millions of Americans are out of work. Debt is stacking up for those trying to survive in the COVID economy. A lack of health insurance can mean hospitalizations from the virus are putting people into bankruptcy.
Stop trying to convince people you’re right — it will never persuade anyone: expert
MSNBC host Joshua Johnson noted that this year has been full of strife, with Americans having a lot to stand up about. Whether the slaying of unarmed Black men and police brutality, or healthcare, and the coronavirus, Americans are lining up to protest.
Johnson asked if people try to start tough conversations, how do they keep it productive, and when it's time to give up. In her book, We Need to Talk, Celest Headlee explains tools that people can use to have productive conversations about tough issues that help move the needle.
"Keep in mind that a protest isn't a conversation, right?" she first began. "That's a different kind of communication. The first thing is that our goal in conversations is not always a productive one. In other words, oftentimes, we go into these conversations hoping to change somebody's mind or convince them that they are wrong. You're just never going to accomplish that. There's no evidence. We haven't been able to -- through years and years of research we haven't been able to find evidence that over a conversation somebody said, 'You're right, I was completely wrong.' You've convinced me. So, we have to stop trying to do that. We have to find a new purpose for those conversations."