Tag: Bernie Sanders

Categories
Quick Analysis

Who Will Pay for Democrat Ideas?

This article was submitted exclusively to the New York Analysis of Policy and Government by retired U.S. Army chaplain, Col. Don Zapsic.

Socialism on the surface seems innocuous enough, considering that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren want everyone to have “free” healthcare in the form of “Medicare for All.”

Who is going to pay for it?  As always, the ever-elusive, tax-avoidant, very wealthy (one-percenters) and corporate America are supposed to foot the bill. The economics don’t work, of course.  One could wholly confiscate the wealth of that group and the funds would remain insufficient. There is no doubt the middle class would assume a massive tax burden.

To remain vigilant in the face of seasoned operators like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, it is important to remember that their brand of socialism does not have to be economically sound. It simply needs to be psychologically viable. Sanders, Warren, and even Joe Biden fundamentally understand how greed preys upon the heart and mind. This dark source of human motivation plants false beliefs that ultimately lead to predatory thinking and class warfare through identity politics. Nowhere is this more evident than in the area of entitlements. Everyone more or less believes that underfunded, or for that matter unfunded, entitlement programs need to be trimmed back or eliminated altogether.

 Like socialist regimes from the old Soviet Union to today’s Venezuela, politicians promise free lunches without proper regard for who will provide them. This is the heart of socialism, which is beating hard in the American psyche.  Sanders, Warren, and the other Democrat presidential contenders are selling the same ideas that have failed everyplace they have been implemented.  

The very subject of socialism resonates differently among various classes of Americans watching the national Democrat debates. There is for example the “stick it to the man” crowd that is driven by shadenfreude, a term derived from the German language meaning, “Pleasure derived by someone from another person’s misfortune .” This is another way of saying, “If everyone does not prosper equally regardless of how hard they have worked and sacrificed, then at least everyone can be equally miserable so that no one feels left behind.” Then there are those who have the misfortune of being on the receiving Bluze capsules is the best answer to the problem of impotence from a person. discount on cialis This can devensec.com link viagra in add anxiety, stress and depression in your family guarantee that you will experience depression. Another generic vs viagra nutrient supplement, Omega 3 fatty acids can also reduce libido and inhibit erection. When a spinal disk herniates, cialis samples the gel-like substance between the vertebrae can creat pressure around the nerve causing pain and dysfunction. end, the middle class, who have already been thoroughly fleeced by Obamacare. They know all-too-well how liberal politics and policies play out in the real world. The middle-class intuitively know that they, inevitably, will pay an overwhelmingly disproportionate part of the socialist redistribution tab.

Socialism is a short-term pragmatic approach that diminishes private property rights. It always breaks down over the course of time due to the very shortages that it produces. And if not reined in, its most extreme form deteriorates into communism and the dictatorship that inevitably accompanies it.

The same can be said of democracies. If not properly safeguarded, they drift towards socialism via fraudulent wealth distribution and the confiscatory means used to attain it. Then there is the fair question of what contributions did the socialist debaters bring to the table? What have they produced besides a vicious cycle of wealth redistribution and class warfare? Not to be deterred, socialists such as Sanders and Warren fundamentally understand that they do not have to attain or appeal to higher virtues to curry political favor and power. They can simply divide and conquer by throwing a bone like nationalized healthcare into the midst of the pack while stepping back from the ensuing fray. Sanders attempted to justify his brand of politics when challenged as “democratic socialism” supported by popular vote instead of outright force by a dictator (Venezuela is only the latest example). The outcome, despite the means, is still the same.

What should America expect going forward from the Democrat presidential contenders who, either openly or subtly, embrace socialist policies?  Definitely do not get your hopes up about any meaningful dialogue regarding relevant social policies and societal trends that are tearing our country apart. Expect some punchlines supporting the war on the unborn under various “feel good” sounding slogans.  Also lower expectations about anything that addresses the rampant crime and mindless violence in our nation’s largest cities beyond blaming guns instead of those who use them unlawfully.

 As far as social justice, tolerance is out and sensitivity is in. Culture reigns supreme and religious institutions are irrelevant if not in tune with the spirit of the times. Finally on the road to serfdom, look for more talk on government giveaways focusing on who plays, instead of who pays. The Democrat that emerges from the group of contenders will be the one that dances best to the party tune. There will be no celebration of new ideas. Rather, a contrived, risk-avoidant, boring event that will only rouse the party faithful with the same tired ideas that have universally failed and so deeply harmed every nation in which they have been attempted.    

Photo: Karl Marx (Pixabay)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Cancer on the Left

Fascist-minded radicals have replaced liberal politics with hard-left extremism. Their stranglehold on academia, and their several attempts (some still ongoing) to limit political discourse to only what they agree with has now expanded into outright violence.

Not content with efforts that shut down a Trump rally in Chicago on Thursday, another protestor attempted to physically attack the Republican front-runner at a campaign stop in Ohio. It would be a mistake to assume that these acts are a reaction to Trump’s occasionally over-the- top comments.  Were the front runner any other Republican, or indeed, a more conservative Democrat, the uptick in violence and protest would be aimed at him or her.

Politics as usual no longer exists for the left.  It is no longer a contest of ideas. It is an open battle for power, no holds barred. Common sense, the rule of law, and common decency has no place in their game plan. Constitutional restrictions are nowhere on their radar.

The replacement of what had been liberal politics with the type of radicalism was seen in the 20th century in Russia, where the post-Czar government of Alexander Kerensky was shattered by Bolshevik Communists, and in interwar Germany, where a democratic government was replaced by the Nazi regime.

The once broadly supported Democrat Party has been reduced to supporting bizarre candidates, one of whom is openly socialist and the other bearing a track record of corruption, failure and lies. Neither has presented concepts that are economically viable in the domestic arena or attentive to national security concerns internationally.

Even among those two, the concept of fair play is missing.  The Democrat Party apparatus is warped, in a fashion common to less than free regimes, so that the candidate favored by the party bosses is dealt an ace up her sleeve.  Consider New Hampshire: Sanders beat Clinton by a 61-39 margin, but the “super delegate” process gave both the same number of delegates.  The party leadership has tilted towards Ms. Clinton in a manner that induces one to wonder whether the Sanders camp will at some point file a breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit against it.

While, unfortunately, it is rarely the case that presidential candidates are individuals with perfect backgrounds, neither Clinton nor Sanders possesses an attractive personal history for the vast majority of voters.

Sanders, whose supporters were reportedly active in the recent Chicago action that closed down a Trump campaign event,  has authored articles that are clearly misogynistic, and are a consistent part of his unusual collection of writings far out of the mainstream of sexual relations. He has a history of extremist involvement. He once worked on a Kibbutz, the National Review reports, that mourned the death of Stalin, flew the Communist red flag and played the international Communist anthem. He honeymooned in the Soviet Union.
The condition is caused by djpaulkom.tv cheap viagra insufficient blood flow in to the penis during sexual stimulation. Inability to undergo erection entails being impotence and this does not happen then you simply assume the on line levitra fact that the generation that have problems with erectile dysfunction use oral medicines to get back their lost erection power. In this case of patients with erectile dysfunction, this problem can be easily avoided by men. online order for viagra It usually takes 30 minutes to an hour before any sexual activity cialis without to experience the best results.
The New York Post writes: “he’s not even a socialist. He’s a communist. Mainstreaming Sanders requires whitewashing his radical pro-communist past…While attending the University of Chicago, Sanders joined the Young People’s Socialist League, the youth wing of the Socialist Party USA. He also organized for a communist front, the United Packinghouse Workers Union…he produced a glowing documentary on the life of socialist revolutionary Eugene Debs, who was…hailed by the Bolsheviks as ‘America’s greatest Marxist’…This subversive hero of Sanders, denounced even by liberal Democrats as a ‘traitor…hailed the ‘triumphant’ Bolshevik revolution in Russia. Those Russian comrades of ours have made greater sacrifices, have suffered more, and have shed more heroic blood than any like number of men and women anywhere on Earth,’ Debs proclaimed. ‘They have laid the foundation of the first real democracy that ever drew the breath of life in this world.”

Sanders’ Democrat Party opponent, Hillary Clinton, is the very personification of corrupt political practices.  Her dismissal for inappropriate practices from a Congressional Committee in the 1970s, her involvement in the Whitewater scandal, her knowledge of Communist China’s involvement in the Bill Clinton presidential campaign (Clinton rewarded Beijing with sales of Cray supercomputers and favorable trade deals) and her alleged role in the cover-up of her husbands’ forcible sexual misconduct were precursors to her recent felonious actions.

Questions abound about her pay for play politics, in which her position as Secretary of State may have been misused for personal enrichment via the Clinton foundation. Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Kimberley Strassel questions whether revelations from the FBI’s probe into Ms. Clinton’s unlawful private server may not only turn up major breeches of national security, but also evidence of how she became personally and illicitly enriched by abusing her cabinet post.

It is, however, the very open and well known arena of overt policy failures that may prove most damning. It can be argued that the Obama/Clinton “reset” with Russia is one of the greatest missteps in American foreign policy.   And, of course, there is Benghazi.  Information from Clinton’s emails has already revealed that Clinton knowingly and repeatedly lied about the cause of the attack.  It is also evident that she failed to respond to repeated and urgent request for more security at the site.

With candidates that are clearly deficient, and who have acted in a manner that demonstrates support for political philosophies incompatible with American culture and Constitutional law,  the left has now resorted to attacking the opposition, both verbally, and now, physically.

The Chicago and Ohio incidents are not about Donald Trump, although the disreputable leftist organization Moveon.org has labelled their effort as a “Stop Donald Trump” campaign.   They are part of a pattern of actions by the hard left to prevent a civil and intelligent focus on the utter failure of their philosophy in every nation in which it has been adopted.  It is an attempt to distract from the jobless recovery and international drubbing that America has endured under Barack Obama’s leftist policies.

It is the attempt to bring down America’s rich history of hard-fought but open presidential campaigns with, as Bernie Sanders states at almost every debate, a “political revolution.” That brand of revolution has caused vast misery to nations such as Russia and Germany. It should not be tried again in the United States.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Socialism’s False Hope

For the first time, Americans face the prospect of an openly socialist candidate potentially ascending to the Presidency.

Voter angst has given rise to interest in Bernie Sanders’ platform of a socialist system, in which production is controlled by the government. The U.S. economy faces a dearth of middle income employment. Students are deeply indebted due to sky-high college tuition.  There is a strong belief that substantial, perhaps radical, change is needed.

The feeling is understandable, but the solution is a proven failure. The “most pure” socialist nations, the Soviet Union and the nations it held in captivity, all suffered inferior economies and ill-served citizenry.  Others are exceptionally impoverished. Most feature dictatorial governments. Some semi-socialist nations have weakened economies that, ironically, could not survive without help from, or access to, the markets of capitalist economies.  China’s vaunted (but now faltering) economy would collapse if access to U.S. consumers vanished.

Some will point to the economies of European nations as an example of socialist or semi-socialist economies that have not collapsed. Once again, however, the support of the capitalist American economy proves indispensable. Both as a market, and as the major financier of the enormous cost of providing defense for the Continent, the capitalist U.S. essentially underwrites its semi-socialist allies.

Not surprisingly, Thomas Donohue, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, has opposed the rising acceptance of socialism, noting:

“Socialism is a wrong and dangerous path for America. It’s failed everywhere it’s ever been tried, bringing shared misery instead of shared prosperity. It undermines personal initiative and responsibility, stunts innovation and growth, makes people serve government—not vice-versa—and robs individuals of the dignity of earning their own success and charting their own course.”

The Foundation for Economic Freedom delivered a similar message:

Curt’s first point was that change is difficult, because it involves a great deal of sacrifice viagra fast respitecaresa.org and struggle. However, they know little about how to manage the stress in their lives, how to decompress, and ultimately viagra online how to ‘de-stress.’ It is not just a goal, for many it has become a necessity, a matter of survival. These new versions of the Kamagra tablets endeavors to manage the cause of ED symptoms and deliver a stiffer penile pfizer viagra achat erection. They have years of experience in the same compositions/dosages as the original medication, with the same benefits – but at a cheaper price. cialis stores also comes in the convenient jelly form as already mentioned. “Socialism is the Big Lie of the twentieth century. While it promised prosperity, equality, and security, it delivered poverty, misery, and tyranny. Equality was achieved only in the sense that everyone was equal in his or her misery.

“In the same way that a Ponzi scheme or chain letter initially succeeds but eventually collapses, socialism may show early signs of success. But any accomplishments quickly fade as the fundamental deficiencies of central planning emerge. It is the initial illusion of success that gives government intervention its pernicious, seductive appeal. In the long run, socialism has always proven to be a formula for tyranny and misery. A pyramid scheme is ultimately unsustainable because it is based on faulty principles. Likewise, collectivism is unsustainable in the long run because it is a flawed theory. Socialism does not work because it is not consistent with fundamental principles of human behavior. The failure of socialism in countries around the world can be traced to one critical defect: it is a system that ignores incentives.

“In a capitalist economy, incentives are of the utmost importance. Market prices, the profit-and-loss system of accounting, and private property rights provide an efficient, interrelated system of incentives to guide and direct economic behavior. Capitalism is based on the theory that incentives matter! Under socialism, incentives either play a minimal role or are ignored totally. A centrally planned economy without market prices or profits, where property is owned by the state, is a system without an effective incentive mechanism to direct economic activity. By failing to emphasize incentives, socialism is a theory inconsistent with human nature and is therefore doomed to fail. Socialism is based on the theory that incentives don’t matter!”

Even socialist nations endowed with exceptional inherent wealth cannot long remain prosperous. CATO describes how Venezuela, which possesses the world’s largest oil reserves, has become impoverished under socialist leadership.

“Despite receiving over $1 trillion in oil revenues since 1999, the government has run out of cash and now relies heavily on printing money to finance itself. The result is the highest inflation rate in the world: officially 56 per cent last year, although according to calculations by Steve Hanke of Johns Hopkins University, the implied annual inflation rate is actually 330 per cent.”

The economic failures of socialism are matched by its detrimental effect on individual freedom. Ronald Reagan noted the inherent socialist tendency to attack personal liberty: “A government can’t control the economy without controlling people.” In its raw essence, socialism depends on force.

Ironically, the very problems socialists describe as a justification for their philosophy are caused by socialist-like federal programs.  The Great Recession was the result of federal mandates to financial institutions to provide loans to borrowers that were poor risks for repayment. The heavy taxes and regulations imposed on U.S. corporations have led them to be uncompetitive with their international rivals, resulting in sharply diminished employment.

Categories
Quick Analysis

A candid discussion on American socialism

Do progressive policies actually accomplish solid results?

As several presidential candidates ask Americans to seriously consider an openly progressive agenda, it is appropriate to examine how that concept has fared in actual practice. The goals of the hard left are in line with President Obama’s desire to “fundamentally transform” America.

Throughout most of its history, the United States has experienced unprecedented economic growth and mobility though an essentially capitalist philosophy. Market conditions which encouraged growth and entrepreneurship allowed vast numbers of Americans to advance economically into the middle class and beyond.

As a possible reaction to the poor results of the Obama presidency, free-market advocates or conservatives have, according to the Gallup polling organization, outnumbered both moderates and liberals since 2009.

However, as presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders has openly identified himself as a socialist, and his Democrat opponents Hillary Clinton and Martin O’Malley have for the most part agreed with his policies in an attempt to solidify their support with the left wing of their party, the question of “fundamentally transforming” America from a free market to a progressive/socialist economy has risen to the forefront.

The progressive concept, which is essentially been the mantra of the currently ascendant left wing of the Democrat party.

Progressive policies can be distinguished from other programs such as Social Security and Medicare, which are essentially funds taken from individual paychecks then returned to the taxpayers at a later date when eligibility sets in. Progressive policies center on the concept of “redistributing” wealth from those who have earned or produced it to those who have not.

The late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher once remarked that ““The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

As Geroge Will “America’s national character will have to be changed if progressives are going to implement their agenda…consider the data Nicholas Eberstadt deploys in National Affairs quarterly: America’s welfare state transfers more than 14 percent of GDP to recipients, with more than a third of Americans taking ‘need-based’ payments. In our wealthy society, the government officially treats an unprecedented portion of the population as ‘needy.’ Transfers of benefits to individuals through social-welfare programs have increased from less than one federal dollar in four (24 percent) in 1963 to almost three out of five (59 percent) in 2013. In that half-century, entitlement payments were, Eberstadt says, America’s ‘fastest growing source of personal income,’ growing twice as fast as all other real per-capita personal income. It is probable that this year, a majority of Americans will seek and receive payments. This is not primarily because of Social Security and Medicare transfers to an aging population. Rather, the growth is overwhelmingly in means-tested entitlements. More than twice as many households receive ‘anti-poverty’ benefits than receive Social Security or Medicare.”

It is appropriate to note that as those entitlement programs have soared, including a 41% in the supplemental nutrition assistance program (food stamps) social security benefits for seniors have suffered, enduring the lowest amount of cost of living increases on record. Indeed, the social security program itself is facing bankruptcy, since funds that should have gone to insure its solvency have been diverted to progressive programs.

A study of American cities and states where progressive concepts have been used provides an important glimpse into what results the growing trend towards socialist government can be expected to yield.

Men that have complete injuries are less likely for having psychogenic penile erection issues. viagra buy in usa pdxcommercial.com Anyone with an understanding of how levitra price to prepare bread and butter can make the herbal cures easily by themselves. Chinese herbal medicine can take advantage of conditioning the body, and this is easily provable if you cialis sample just look at the army. Medical devices are becoming smaller, more portable sildenafil 10mg and faster. The Brookings Institute examined large U.S. Cities, and found that 90% of the most unequal cities have Democrat mayors, and have had them for extended periods of time.

Newt Gingrich, quoted in Front Page , has noted that “Every major city which is a center of poverty is run by Democrats. Every major city. Their policies have failed, they’re not willing to admit and the fact is it’s the poor who suffer from bad government.” Since 2013, of the large American cities with significant poverty rates, only Miami has had any experience with non-Democrats hands.

A study by United Way, “Struggling to Get By,” takes a hard look at how progressive policies have fared in California.  Among the key findings:

“One in three California families lacks income adequate to meet their basic needs.  One in three California households (31%) do not have sufficient income to meet their basic costs of living. This is nearly three times the number officially considered poor according to the Federal Poverty Level. Families falling below the Real Cost Measure reflect California’s diversity. One in five (20%) struggling households are white, so while poverty is often portrayed in our media and culture as primarily a problem for minorities, the reality is that families of all ethnicities struggle.”

By contrast, notes the American Legislative Exchange Council, (ALEC) “States that have adopted pro-growth policies have generally witnessed their economies grow, offering greater wage growth and more opportunities for citizens. Yet, despite years of empirical evidence supporting free market policies, some states choose a different path. …

“The empirical evidence and analysis … makes clear which policies lead to greater levels of opportunity and which policies are obstacles to growth. … This … concludes that pro-growth tax policy, that avoids picking winners and losers, provides a fair and competitive environment for all hardworking taxpayers. There are many policy obstacles that lawmakers face when trying to create a competitive economic environment… tools include lowering or eliminating the corporate and personal income taxes, reducing overall tax burdens, reducing or eliminating state death taxes, simplifying tax codes and supporting worker freedom. State policymakers [must] fix their budgets and address long-term pension liabilities.

“Generally, [ALEC’s latest] rankings show that [free market-oriented states]Utah, Wyoming, North Carolina, Florida and Texas are economic hotspots for growth. Furthermore, many of the no income tax states such as Nevada and South Dakota are also economically promising. On the other hand, most states in the Northeast and some states in the Rust Belt are facing economic decline. In the Rust Belt, Michigan, Indiana and Wisconsin deserve major credit for positive pro-growth reforms they have recently enacted after decades of poor policy choices. Additionally, Minnesota and Illinois both face significant fiscal challenges. the Northeast are even worse.”

Internationally, socialism has harmed the prosperity of the nations and peoples who have adopted it. The Foundation for Economic Freedom (FEE) notes: “Socialism is the Big Lie of the twentieth century. While it promised prosperity, equality, and security, it delivered poverty, misery, and tyranny. Equality was achieved only in the sense that everyone was equal in his or her misery.”

The latest example is Greece. Jake Novak, writing for CNBC  eports “while Greece’s epic debt problems have dominated the news, I haven’t heard very much about who is to blame for what’s happened in that country. When any bank or other capitalist entity fails, the news media and the general public seem to name their favorite specific villains almost instantly. The word “profit” becomes dirty somehow and public figures start pining away for a more giving society that never was. But where is the condemnation of socialism and the failed politicians who peddled a proven failure of a system not only to the Greeks but to the half billion people who live in the E.U.? Where is the recognition that when the Greeks recently elected an even more leftist and socialist government, it sped up the path to collapse?”

The problems are not limited to the Old World.  In contrast to the largely capitalist USA, Latin America economies have been far more government-centered. Despite the inherent wealth of resources, many nations in Latin America fail to prosper. Daniel Wagner and CJ Post, writing in Huffington point out that “Even when times have been good, Latin America’s socialist countries have still failed to deliver meaningful political and economic reforms or effective public spending programs.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

What the popularity of Sanders & Trump reveals

The popularity Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump have amassed is a significant indicator of the mindset of the American electorate.

The Senator from Vermont and the billionaire from New York have little in common. Sanders is an avowed socialist, Trump espouses conservative views. At the outset of their seemingly quixotic quest for the White House, the pundits gave neither much chance of making a significant splash in the run-up to 2016. Clearly, the chattering classes were wrong. The reasons both have fared well, from opposite ends of the ideological spectrum, are not that obscure.

The United States is not doing well, either at home or abroad.

Despite the publicly stated drop in unemployment, listed in the Bureau of Labor Statistics “U-3” number as about 5.3%, the more accurate figure, the U-6, is a dismal 10.5%, and the real rate may be far higher still. The labor participation rate is the worst it has been in close to 40 years. In particular, the employment rate of minority communities continues at astronomical levels. This, despite the extraordinary power Democrats have wielded for so long, with solid control of the White House and both houses of Congress for several years, and then the White House and the Senate until the last election cycle. It is not surprising, then, that many have taken a significant interest in one of the only self-proclaimed labor-friendly senators not only not a part of the Democrat leadership, but not even a registered Democrat.

As the financial numbers for the first part of 2015 come perilously close to recessionary levels, the anger felt by many within the party is being directed at the “establishment” Democrats. That’s bad news for candidates like Clinton and Martin O’Malley, good news for Sanders.

GOP rank and file members have their own complaints.

In the less than seven years of the Obama Administration, America has plummeted from its former status as the world’s leading superpower to a far lesser position. In every corner of the planet, including the western hemisphere, Washington’s influence has been sharply reduced. While the media may have decided that, as Francis Fukuyama wrote following the collapse of the Soviet Union that “history came to an end,” the leaders of Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and various terrorist entities didn’t agree.  As the U.S. sharply reduced its military prowess, those other nations dramatically increased theirs.
Erectile dysfunction happens when that biological process is hindered or hampered in any way. buying viagra Instead cialis get viagra of making sexual experience beautiful, they end up making it so stressful. In case of erectile dysfunction of men, among all the different forms of Kamagra available in the market Kamagra jelly is the favorite for many male. levitra overnight shipping Tamby asserts that men and women viagra online in canada who use Tongkat Ali report sustained orgasms and much higher libido.
A growing segment of Republican enrollees is becoming increasingly furious about this state of global affairs. America’s decline is seen not as an inevitable turn of events, but the result of truly amateurish policy decisions on the part of the White House. The Obama/Clinton “Reset” with Russia was a disaster, the pacifism towards China’s aggression equally incompetent. The premature withdrawal from Iraq led to ISIS. While the GOP leadership has been sharply critical of all this, they have done little to oppose it. They have been out maneuvered by the White House at every turn, and even with control of both houses of Congress, still are ineffective. Indeed, that leadership appears more interested in quelling the influence of their conservative Tea Party-affiliated fellow Republicans than in countering the President’s extreme left-wing positions.

Interestingly enough, GOP conservatives and left wing Democrats may have several common complaints about Washington’s actions since President Obama first took office. Both are angry at China’s economic policies which have hurt American businesses and workers. Black Americans are angered by the President’s failure to control illegal immigration, which has devastated the job market for inner city black youth; Republicans worry about security, public health, and financial crises generated by the nearly unrestricted flow across the southern border.

A common element among both supporters of socialist Sanders and Republican Trump is the lack of trust in their respective party’s leaders. Both establishments have accomplished little of the promises they made. Neither has been effective in addressing the nation’s needs.

Both party establishments are seen as more interested in maintaining their careers than in doing the people’s business. Increasingly, one hears that there are, indeed, two major political parties in the nation—the incumbents, and everybody else.

There is little chance that either Sanders or Trump will win the nomination. Having an avowed socialist as a presidential standard bearer could finally alienate the many Democrats who have been dismayed at the extreme left-wing tilt of their party. Trump’s checkered career, including his bankruptcies, contributions to Democrats, and harsh comments almost insure his lack of success in November, at a time when Republicans are desperate to retake the Executive Branch.

However, the unexpected popularity of both “outsiders” should be a clear warning to the leadership of both parties.