Postmortems of the Democratic Party’s loss, running well beyond the defeat of Vice President Kamala Harris and Gov. Tim Walz, D-Minn., are starting to come in from some of the party’s most perceptive thinkers. And it was a loss across the board, not just this year. As RealClearPolitics’ Sean Trende has argued, 2024’s voting patterns were a “rehash” of 2022. Republican gains that year were less than expected, with then-President Donald Trump’s imposition of weak Senate candidates leaving that body 50-50 Democratic and the antics of Trump-favorite former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz sparking turmoil in a narrowly Republican House. However, the 2022 numbers, plus stronger candidates, produced better results for Republicans this year. Trump’s 50% to 48% popular vote margin over Harris was accompanied by an increase in his percentage from 2020 in every one of the 50 states and from the vast majority of the United States’ 3,141 counties. The most visible exceptions on The New York Times’ ingenious arrow maps were metro Atlanta counties filling up with middle-income black migrants from troubled Northern cities. Republican capture of a Senate majority was decisive even as the party’s 3% lead in the House popular vote left it with only a bare majority of seats, thanks to Democrats’ gerrymandering. However, Republican gains among Hispanics and Asians and in big metro areas point to possible future gains. The 2022-24 rejection of Biden-Harris policies may or may not lead to an enduring Republican majority. However, it is, as the headline on an Ezra Klein postelection New York Times’ interview proclaims, “the end of the Obama coalition.” The most major components of his supposedly ascendant Democratic majority, including record turnout and percentages among black voters, continuing supermajorities from Hispanics and Asians, and enthusiastic support from young people, have receded, and support from white college graduates has even cracked a bit. The 44th president, in his Kalorama mansion, 2.5 miles from the White House, has seen the arc of history bend toward Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago. Smart Democrats are focusing on one cause of their party’s limited but, at least for the moment, decisive decline. Ruy Teixeira, coauthor of “The Emerging Democratic Majority,”which foresaw the Democratic Party’s triumph in 2008 but not its subsequent demise, writes that Democrats have moved sharply left on cultural matters, on racial quotas and preferences, on increasing rather than reducing immigration, toward stands that have repelled “the white working class” in the 2010s and now repel the nonwhite working class in the 2020s. Nor have they delivered economic results acceptable to modest-income workers. As Clinton administration aide William Galston writes in The Wall Street Journal, Bidenomics, huge spending tranches that sparked inflation, was sparked by Hewlett Foundation-supported theorists bent on repudiating “neoliberalism” and imposing “industrial policy, worker power, antitrust policy.” It turned out that voters preferred the results of Trump’s pre-COVID-19 policies. Once upon a time, Democrats relied on policy advice from state and city party bosses who were in touch with ordinary people. These days, argues economist Noah Smith, they are overly reliant on “a variety of activists and special interests—collectively known as ‘The Groups,’”—who, in the contemporary equivalent of smoke-filled rooms, “persuade Democratic staffers and politicians of their ideas … well out of the public eye.” Klein fleshes out this point, decrying “the power of this nonprofit complex in the Democratic Party.” The Groups, Washington and New York-based, don’t really represent the people they presume to speak for. Hispanic Groups wanted to “decriminalize border crossing.” Hispanic voters don’t. Black Groups wanted to “defund the police.” Black voters don’t. These aren’t mass-membership groups such as those that led the civil rights revolution.“There’s been this dynamic where you have these groups that are claiming to speak for very, very wide swaths of the electorate and persuading Democrats of things that those parts of the electorate don’t really believe,” Klein says. All of which suggests Democratic politicians would do well to block these folks on their computers and start listening to real people out there. However, the fact that the groups don’t represent all the voters they claim does not mean there is no electoral constituency for their policies at all. There is a left constituency that represents some sizable minority of Democratic voters, which you can spot on the electoral maps. It’s most visible in university towns. In Wisconsin, Madison’s Dane County (with the state’s flagship university plus the state capital) casts a higher Democratic percentage and larger popular vote margin than Milwaukee County. In Michigan, Ann Arbor’s Washtenaw County and East Lansing’s Ingham County cast higher Democratic percentages than Detroit’s Wayne County and a combined popular vote margin 15 times larger than Flint’s Genesee County. University counties are loaded with academics and public employees, plus affluent professionals and indigent grad school dropouts, many attracted by college town ambiance and the large majority disposed toward unpopular leftist policies. You can see large concentrations of such people—I call them the barista proletariat—extending over relatively low-rent, mostly but not all-white neighborhoods, usually subway-accessible and marijuana dispensary-dotted quarters in our largest cities. They’re apparent on the New York Times’ graphics department’s superb maps of municipal elections of New York City in 2021 and the Chicago primary and runoff in 2023. Once upon a time, traditional working-class folks, white ethnics, and blacks and Hispanics with families and more regular jobs, lived there. Today, the barista proletariat dominates Astoria, Long Island City and Jackson Heights in Queens, and non-Orthodox Williamsburg, Fort Greene and Bushwick in Brooklyn. In Chicago, they live on the Lakefront, a couple of miles inland north of Irving Park Avenue, where expensive high-rise condos thin out in favor of cheap rentals in three-story brick buildings. In elections for mayor, barista proletariat neighborhoods voted heavily for leftist Maya Wiley in New York in 2021 and Brandon Johnson for radical teacher union head in Chicago in 2023. Wiley, who lost most black precincts to current New York City Mayor Eric Adams, a former police officer, finished third citywide, but Johnson edged out incumbent Lori Lightfoot in the primary and edged out former school head Paul Vallas 52% to 48% in the runoff a month later. Key votes in both contests were cast by barista proletariat wards. By almost every standard, Johnson has been a disaster. He has allowed a contract with a firm that tracks gunfire in murder-prone areas to expire, proposed borrowing $300 million to pay off his former teacher-union colleagues, and had the Chicago City Council vote down his demand for higher taxes 50-0 (former Mayor Richard Daley used to see his positions win by that margin). The result is high crime, departure of corporate headquarters, black as well as white flight from the city and state, and vandalism of once-vibrant shopping districts. Chicago is one of the great artifacts of Western civilization, and the barista proletariat is on the way to destroying it. This is what we might expect from a segment of the electorate whose orientation is essentially adolescent—with no steady community tie through homeownership or job tenure, devoted to freedoms defined by lack of adult restraint or supervision, with an adversary posture to middle-class mores and American traditions. These are people aching with personal dissatisfaction, taught in schools and colleges that their complaints can be easily assuaged by government bureaucracies. Teixeira, Galston, Smith, and Klein seem to argue that the Groups represent no existing electoral constituency. However, the barista proletariat does populate the staffs of nonprofit groups and electoral politicians, the ranks of publishers’\’ assistants, and newspaper and magazine junior editors and writers. Their readiness to protest and shut down Democratic and media operations is a source of power, deployed often with the gleeful abandon of adolescents granting themselves a day off. The cultural stands that hurt Harris may come and go, but the barista proletariat, which wholeheartedly supported them, remains a continuing liability for a Democratic Party that has been freshly rebuked by the voters and whose dreams of almost automatic victories have been dashed. It’s a group, Smith concedes, that accounts for a large part of why progressive cities are governed so badly, and that, in turn, is one reason so many voters resisted the appeal of a San Francisco Democrat. The barista proletariat could be a problem for Democrats if they decided to use the presidential nominating process they reformed in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s but have allowed voters to influence, beyond the initial two or three contests, only twice in this century, eight and 16 years ago. On both occasions, Sen. Bernie Sanders,I-Vt., with visible barista proletariat support, came close to winning the nomination. Sanders, who turns 87 years old in 2028, presumably won’t run again. However, its far from clear that the smart Democrats who understand the harm done to their party by the Groups will be able to outsmart them or outmaneuver their one electoral constituency, the barista proletariat, which threatened to run away with their presidential nomination the last time it was openly contested, eight years ago. COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post The Groups and Barista Proletariat of the Democratic Party appeared first on The Daily Signal.

A woman took in a kitten who had stayed at the shelter for days and watched him regain his spark. ChipNadijaWhen Nadija, an animal rescuer and fosterer, met Chip, the kitten, at the county shelter, he was desperately waiting for a foster home.Alone in his kennel, he was dirty, malnourished, and had a severe eye infection. Though Nadija already had her hands full with fosters, she couldn't stop thinking about him, hoping he would be scooped up soon.After more than a week without anyone taking him in, she decided to step in to give him a chance at a better life. NadijaAfter Chip had his eye surgery, Nadija brought him home and made him comfortable with cozy, warm blankets. Though tiny and covered in flea dirt, he soon felt safe, falling soundly asleep in his new bed.For the first few days, he spent most of his time resting, allowing his body to heal and regain strength. Nadija"I spent a lot of time just laying with him, which he loved, snuggling him and making him feel safe and loved."With plenty of TLC, Chip's spirit lifted, and he began playing and showing interest in toys. But his energy remained low, and he needed assistance with bathroom trips and massages to soothe his tummy. NadijaHe perked up whenever his foster mom was near. It was as if he understood her care and sought comfort by her side. Despite his stomach issues, Chip was always cheerful, enjoyed his meals, and soaked up all the extra snuggles.He "thanked" his human by washing her face and purring softly into her ears. NadijaAfter nearly two months of painstaking care from his foster mom, Chip finally felt better and started using the litter box more consistently. "It has been such a rollercoaster with this sweet boy—a plethora of meds and different foods, but this makes it all worth it."He was ready to have fun, and Nadija knew the perfect companions to introduce him to. NadijaChip met Milo (gray) and Alfie (tux), who immediately brought out the mischief in him. He tumbled and raced alongside them, keeping pace with the boys despite his stubby legs."He's an energetic little potato that wobbles, but it adds to his charm." NadijaHis limbs appear shorter than usual, causing him to waddle when he walks, but the determined little guy always holds his own during his playful romps with his much bigger feline friends."Chip loves to play, hang out in a cozy bed with a heating pad, and loves his cardboard scratcher. Even though he's not a 'normal' kitten, he's doing well." NadijaChip needs extra help to reach his milestones and improve his mobility, but he is unstoppable in his zest for life. "He's such a happy, playful (in his own way), snuggly boy who deserves the absolute best."Alfie, who is blind, is completely enamored with Chip, following him around and getting him into all sorts of trouble. NadijaChip has a loving human who caters to his every whim and soft blankets to keep him snug at night. He sleeps in each morning, rolling around in bed until breakfast is served. NadijaA few months ago, Chip was a tiny kitten alone in a shelter kennel, his future uncertain.Now, he's flourishing with a foster family rooting for him every day, and he continues to amaze them with his resilience and playful spirit. NadijaShare this story with your friends. More on Chip and Nadija's fosters on Instagram.Related story: Cat Just Skin and Bones Walks Up to People Asking for Help, in a Month She Makes Incredible Transformation

The Family-Run Businesses That Make Thanksgiving Possible

Recall, it’s the Left that had worked itself into a frenzy over Donald Trump, repeatedly assuring one and all that Trump was a threat to democracy. Obviously the American people did not agree, electing Trump by a considerable margin. A presidential election would be exactly democracy at work. Now comes the news that the owner of the Los Angeles Times, one Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, has decided to do his part for democracy by hiring CNN’s conservative contributor Scott Jennings as a member of the Times editorial board. The result? Liberals freak out at the reality of intellectual diversity arriving at the Times editorial board. The paper, at the instruction of its owner, previously declined to endorse a candidate for president during the 2024 election. Since the assumption was that the left-leaning paper would endorse California’s own, Vice President Kamala Harris, the news that no endorsement would be made sent shock waves through the paper. The editorials editor for the Los Angeles Times, one Mariel Garza, resigned, telling the Columbia Journalism Review:  “I am resigning because I want to make it clear that I am not okay with us being silent. In dangerous times, honest people need to stand up. This is how I’m standing up.” Now comes the news that the owner has extended an invitation to CNN’s conservative, Trump-supporting contributor - Jennings - and more left wing freaking out occurs. The Times of India headlines: Why liberals are angry about pro-Trump Scott Jennings joining LA Times editorial board That story reports:  “The Los Angeles Times’ decision to appoint Scott Jennings—a vocal conservative commentator and former adviser to President George W. Bush—to its editorial board has ignited a firestorm of controversy. The backlash, especially from liberal voices within the media and the Times newsroom, has been swift and intense, highlighting the deeply polarized reaction to including a prominent pro-Trump voice in the ranks of a traditionally left-leaning institution.” All of which decidedly underlines the hard fact that for all their goings on about Trump being opposed to democracy, it is in fact the Left that hates genuine democracy. Intellectual diversity is, of course, a bedrock principle of democracy. One of the central tenets of democracy is the freedom to speak one’s mind on the issues of the day. The point of the First Amendment is to ensure that freedom of speech is guaranteed to American citizens.  Thus the uproar over the appointment of a conservative to the Times editorial board is a showcasing for the Left’s intolerance of intellectual diversity and their hatred for genuine democracy at work.  Amusingly, the Times of India story on this says:  “However, for many in the newsroom and beyond, this move is seen as a betrayal of journalistic integrity. Critics argue that Jennings’ unapologetic pro-Trump stance and his critiques of the Democratic establishment amount to platforming partisanship under the guise of editorial balance.  The backlash within the Times itself has reportedly been severe, with staff members expressing outrage at what they view as a sharp pivot away from the paper’s traditional values. Internal sources suggest that many journalists are “pissed off” by the appointment, feeling it undermines the institution’s credibility and its commitment to holding powerful figures accountable.” Got that? A "pro-Trump stance" is "platforming partisanship," unlike oh, longtime reporter Doyle McManus making the case for Kamala? In other words “journalistic integrity” to these left-wing activists badly disguised as “journalists” is adopting and pushing the left-wing viewpoint on whatever issue of the day is front and center. Which is to say the obvious: that is hardly “journalistic integrity.” That is left-wing activism pushing left-wing propaganda. It is precisely to bring genuine journalistic integrity to the Times that Dr. Soon-Shiong has asked Scott Jennings to join the paper’s editorial board, bringing with him a decided reputation for conservatism and, unlike his new colleagues, a record of supporting not just conservative principle but supporting President-elect Trump. One personal note. For a time Scott Jennings was a CNN contributor at the same time as I was there. He was quite obviously a smart, thoughtful guy with a conservative world view. One can be excused for thinking that it is precisely because Jennings has a well-considered conservative world view that the Left is foaming in anger at his addition to the Times editorial board. In an interview with Fox News’s Trace Gallagher, Dr. Soon-Shiong said:  ….we’ve conflated news and opinion. So, the first thing I want to do is ensure that we explicitly say this is news. And if it’s news, it should just be the facts period. And if it’s an opinion, that’s maybe an opinion of the news and that’s what I call now a voice,” Soon-Shiong replied, adding, “And so, we want voices from all sides to be heard.” Exactly. A better reason than that for the Los Angeles Times to add Scott Jennings to their editorial board could not be had.

Rep. Jasmine Crockett Tells MSNBC Doesn't Think Mass Deportations Will Happen

Joe Rogan and Mike Rowe Deliver Body Blow to MSM Over Being Replaced by X

Op-Ed: Lawfare Will End When the Left Is Too Terrified to Contemplate Continuing It

Trudeau Troll: Young Boy Is the Hit of the Night As He Photobombs Mar-a-Lago Summit

Harvard law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz has been working on forming an elite team of attorneys and legal experts from across the United States to defend Israeli leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.