Are Democrats Finally Realizing That Their Non-stop Russia Bleat Is Failing?

If you turn on certain channels or head to their websites, there has been a constant plethora of stories about Russia and Trump. Literally, there could be big breaking news, such as the big terrorist attack in London, and those stations would mention it briefly then go back to Russia, Trump, collusion, stolen election, etc. A few Democrats are finally getting a clue

(Daily Caller) Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan criticized his fellow Democrats Wednesday night for being “obsessed” with President Trump and not focusing on the issues that actually matter to working people.

CNN’s Don Lemon asked Ryan to explain his statement earlier that day that the Democratic party brand is “toxic” to many Americans.

“Well, it happens to be true. We all have a lot of anger towards what Donald Trump is doing, but we’ve had four special elections, and Donald Trump, four, Democrats, zero,” Ryan said. “I hate to admit that. It hurts. It’s painful, but we’ve got to get our act together because there’s a lot of people relying on us.

“I worry sometimes that we get so obsessed and angered by Donald Trump, which is okay, but you can’t hold on to it because it takes your eye off the ball. We’re not focusing on the economic messages. People in Ohio, Don, aren’t really talking about Russia or Michael Flynn or Putin or anything else,” Ryan said.

“They’re worried about paying the bills, what’s happening with our pension, how much does it cost to send a kid to school, what’s our energy bill like. Real bread and butter stuff.”

I’d suggest that most of the average Democratic Party voter probably doesn’t care about the Russia thing, either. You know, the thing that they’ve found zero evidence of when it comes to President Trump himself. It’s mostly the media, party bigwigs, and the unhinged activists who care, because they have Trump Derangement Syndrome.

This follows on the heals of another Democrat getting wise after the loss of carpetbagger from another district John Ossoff’s loss

Of course, as Twitchy points out, Murphy himself has been part of that distraction, yammering on about Russia and Trump on Twitter and the networks, particularly MSDNC, for months now.

Really, what hurts Democrats is their message overall. When they deign to tell us in those few occasions, it’s about abortion on demand, gun confiscation, being pro-illegal alien, tax increases for Everyone Else, gender confused men in the girl’s locker rooms, and bigger and more controlling centralized government. It’s no wonder they don’t want to talk about what they stand for.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “Are Democrats Finally Realizing That Their Non-stop Russia Bleat Is Failing?”

  1. Dana says:

    The Democrats have no other message! On the social issues, they are about as far left as it is possible to go, and will see massive internal resistance if they even think about muting that. DNC Chairman Tom Perez has said that no Democratic candidate can be supported if he isn’t 10% pro-abortion, even though there are a lot of pro-life Democrats. There are a whole lot more Democrats who are parents of young children than there are mentally ill people who want to use the wrong locker room.

    Some of the (slightly) more sensible Democrats want to craft a message which “should be aggressively focused on job creation and economic growth,” but, trouble is, that’s Donald Trump’s message, and Democrat policies of higher taxes and more government programs don’t lead to more job creation and economic growth.

    The Democrats haven’t figured it out yet: they can’t be both the party of the working man and the party of the non-working man; workers and welfare leeches are natural enemies.

    This is where Barack Hussein Obama fooled them. In 2008, black voter turnout jumped from 60.0% in 2004, to 64.7%; in 2012, it jumped again, to 66.4%. The Democrats thought that would continue, but, in 2016, with no black candidate running for President, black voter turnout dropped to 59.6%. It’s not politically correct to say, but the turnout for Mr Obama was driven by the fact he was black, and Mrs Clinton couldn’t duplicate that.

    Following the Obama pattern, the Democrats focused their efforts on the very constituencies which have traditionally lower turnout! Good plan!

  2. GOODSTUFF says:

    The GA-6 race was the most expensive in history. At least $55 M spent, most of it by the Democrats.
    Revealing data point:
    Jon Ossoff got donations from 7,218 individuals in California, but only 808 from the district in Georgia.

    Another point:
    Jon Ossoff was not able to vote for himself yesterday because he does not live in the congressional district that he wanted to represent in Congress.
    In a normal election cycle the $55 M would pay for five or six campaigns.

    I am pretty sure the right word to describe the decision to spend money like a drunk lottery winner on a man who didn’t live in the district is “stupid.”

  3. Jl says:

    Answer-probably not, as they’re too stupid.

Pirate's Cove