CTV News / YouTube President Trump the 39 arsonist in 1561827381.jpg...
CTV News / YouTube

So there we have it. According to Charlie Sykes, if Democrats don’t run a moderate Republican, we are bound to lose the next election to the Marmalade shitgibbon. He is very concerned that we are going to nominate somebody who is way too liberal for his taste and he will be forced to vote for the Gropenfuhrer. And it seems like everybody left of Ronald Reagan is just too liberal. Even though he thinks Trump remaining President will be disastrous, we are failing to pander to those people who he considers very serious voters, unlike the dirty hippies who make up the Democratic base.

To be clear, I think a second Trump term would be a disaster. But while Democrats claim they are focused on beating him, the candidates so far seem intent on alienating socially moderate Trump skeptics, gun owners, fiscal hawks, suburban swing voters and folks who would like to keep their own health insurance. In other words, they don’t seem very focused on defeating Trump at all.

Know who that describes? Republicans. Since the GOP isn’t going to run a moderate Republican against Trump, he is demanding that the Democrats do so. Fresh off his snarky but oh so very serious advice for Democrats that graced Politico’s hallowed walls last week, he has watched the debates and come to the unassailable conclusion that all of the Democratic candidates are just too liberal and too fringy for his taste. That being the case, this new piece had to be written because those silly Dems just didn’t listen to his advice the first time.

Sykes seems to have been possessed by Charles Krauthammer’s spirit, or at the very least is attempting to fill his niche in the right wing punditry food chain. He is watching his party sink under the weight of too much accumulated stupid and is demanding that Democrats step in and save his party by abandoning our values.

There are millions of voters who have been horrified by Trump’s presidency and are open to voting for a reasonable Democratic alternative — but not for a party that ignores or scares them. Watching the debates, it was easy to forget that the election will not be decided on Twitter, but in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin and Michigan.

Aww. The poor Magaflakes aren’t going to vote for a party that doesn’t pander to them. News flash, Mr. Sykes: most of those people aren’t going to vote for a Democrat to begin with, no matter who it is. That is largely due to your efforts and those of your comrades in ink who insisted on ideological purity for so many years. A “reasonable Democratic alternative”? You want Democrats to give the finger to their millions of base voters in order to mollify a few thousand squishy Republicans who would at best sit out the election. You are advising us to abandon everything in which we believe in pursuit of the largely mythical “swing voter”.

Well sorry, Charlie. The reason that your party is in trouble is largely because you and your colleagues spent decades carefully working toward your stated goal of a “permanent Republican majority” without any regard for the consequences for the nation or the world. But now that your monster has broken free and is terrorizing the village, you’re demanding that we put your Genie back in its (Diet Coke) bottle. The same people who you sneered at or ignored when we tried to warn you of the likely outcome of such policies and tactics are now apparently responsible to clean up your mess. You want us to tell the Democratic base to take a long walk off a short pier because they don’t have any candidates that you can vote for. Too bad, buddy. WE didn’t nominate your sick, mumbling comb-over king. YOU did that. His nomination is a direct result of your manipulations and if you had better control of him, you would be cheering him on, Sean Hannity style.

It’s not up to us to throw you a life preserver. If you truly want to vote for a Democrat, then you’re going to have to vote for the Democrat that we nominate. We aren’t joining you. It turns out that people like our policies but even if you don’t, that’s fine too. You can vote for the rapist, white nationalist, serial liar, adulterer, cheater, racist, bigot, brain damaged, jaundiced maggot or you can vote for a Democrat. If you’re saying that the latter is “too liberal” so you’ll vote for the former, then that says much more about your lack of integrity than any Democrat’s.

What it comes down to is that we hippies were right all along and you have been wrong. Nevertheless here you are, despite your track record, still insisting that you are wise and sage and that the people who were right the whole time need to stfu and do what you say. We’re not obliged to take your advice. Don’t blame us for feeling ignored when it’s your party ignoring you.


Liked it? Take a second to support Associate Editor on Patreon!


  1. Agree with lone wolf. So it would be a win win for Cons to either have Trump or a moderate. We have gone too far right to think that the left staying in the middle will equalize this nation. Its simple physics. If he still feels that our candidates are not good enough for him, then he is ok with Trump. Just like all republicans, they can care less about humanity. As long as they get richer, can keep power and continue to oppress everyone that is not a rich white man, then all is well.

Leave a Reply to Sick of the Con Cancel reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here