Going for Broke: The Last Gasps of the Democrat Party

From wokeness to brokenness over several decades of deceit.

A left-leaning veteran political reporter and columnist summed up the situation very well last month:

“But the Democrats still do not get it, which is why Trump should come to their aid by diverting leftover USAID funds to the Democrat Party, which is broke and on the verge of becoming as relevant in U.S. politics as Guatemala, Serbia, and Egypt.”

—Peter Lucas, Boston Herald, February 8th, 2025

It’s so sad when a political party has to manufacture support and pay people to attend its rallies. But that’s what occurred on March 22^nd in Phoenix when Democrat Senator Bernie Sanders and Democrat Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez assembled the “largest crowd ever” to protest authoritarianism, oligarchy, and Trumpism.

(Photo: Ronda Churchill for The Washington Post via Getty Images)

According to data analyst Tony Seruga, there were not 34,000 attendees, as reported by Sanders:

“There were “20,189 mobile devices … and 84% of the devices present had attended 9 or more Kamala Harris rallies, Antifa/BLM, pro-Hamas, pro-Palestinian protests, while 31% had attended over 20. And 90% of the attendees were associated with five protest groups, all funded by USAID via ActBlue: Disruption Project, Rise & Resist, Indivisible Project, Troublemakers, and the Democratic Socialists of America.”

Can we all agree there is MAJOR astroturfing going on here?

History Rhyming Once Again

They say history repeats itself. And those who do not learn from it are destined to repeat it again and again.

Looking back, I see similarities between today’s Democrats and another political party that bit the dust in the early 1800s.

The Federalists lost their mojo soon after the War of 1812. They were viewed as unpatriotic and fought hard against nationalism, making them very unpopular. They were the party of grievances, opposing much of what most Americans wanted and voted for at the time. On the other hand, the Democrat-Republican party appealed to a broader range of voters, including farmers and workers, with their appeal for limited government, states’ rights, and lower taxes.

Without leadership and vision, the Federalists failed to recover their footing and eventually disappeared on the political stage.

Is There a New Face of the Democrat Party Emerging After the Recent Losses?

Today, I see much the same thing happening to the Democrat party as to the Federalists.

Unable to appeal to a broad range of voters, they have been dipping into the extreme end of the political spectrum to rally the troops to become engaged.

Their last Democrat president could not assemble more than a dozen supporters to attend his events and had to avoid embarrassment by campaigning from his basement. The Democrat’s recent presidential candidate resorted to paying for busloads of people to have a decent showing at rallies. And things have only gotten worse.

Last Saturday’s event in Phoenix brought together two of the most radical Democrats to gin up a “show of unity” against all things “orange man” does. It doesn’t matter whether President Trump wants to deport extremely violent illegal aliens or reduce the massive $2 Trillion annual budget deficit – they oppose it. Why?

They feel they have better ideas, I guess.

Are we supposed to now listen to a self-described Socialist and a former cocktail waitress for our national policy actions? Think about what they are continuing to push on Americans:

· Ten million illegals entered the country under Biden; no pushback from Sanders or AOC.

· Federal debt of $35 Trillion, rising by another two each year.

· Support for using ActBlue to launder political contributions, many of which came from USAID fraud, the politically connected Samuel Bankman-Fried FTX and money laundering fraud, and wasteful Federal spending.

· The use of Federal law enforcement, justice, and prison institutions to persecute political opponents.

· Appointment of 250 “progressive” judges who are failing to follow the rule of law.

· Pushing to reverse the decision to let the states decide abortion questions.

· Firing employees and military personnel who refuse to accept required medical treatments.

The truth is the Democrat party is going through a crisis, and they believe that the teaming of Sanders and AOC is the way to go when it is precisely the WRONG way. Let’s take a look at some of Sander’s most controversial positions.

The Best Ideas of the New Democrat Party

Most people are done with silly questions such as, “What is a woman?” We’ve heard enough about pregnant people, pronouns, and chest feeders to last a lifetime. While some Democrats continue to push trans-women athletes into the ladies’ locker room, the rest of us seek political leadership from other sources.

Yet the emergence of Sanders and AOC does not present Democrats with new ideas; they both represent a turning back to Socialism and the incredible spending required to fund their pie-in-the-sky world. Creeping Socialism is what got us to where we are today; we don’t need or want more of it.

Here are some of the ideas offered by Bernie Sanders in the past, along with the projected cost:

1. Medicare for All
Cost: $32–$40 trillion over 10 years. Unclear how it would be funded.
Economic Impact: This proposal would replace private insurance with a government-run system, necessitating significant tax increases but potentially reducing healthcare spending. Americans already know how screwed up our present system has become after 50 years of government “improvements.”

2. Free Public College Tuition
Cost: $300 billion annually or $3 trillion over 10 years, funded by a financial transaction tax.
Economic Impact: This could increase access to education but also reduce financial market liquidity. We already have too many fine arts and women’s studies degree holders; we need more mechanics and tradespeople to rebuild our nation.

3. Green New Deal
Cost: Estimated at $16.3 trillion over a 10-year period.
Economic Impact: Promises to create millions of green jobs but requires massive infrastructure investments. Recent efforts have been filled with waste and fraud, as we see through DOGE’s efforts to unmask spending. Farms replaced with windmills and solar arrays are not the way to go.

4. Expanding Social Security
Cost: Estimated at $1.8 trillion over a 10-year period.
Economic Impact: Funded by payroll taxes on high earners, this measure may reduce GDP by approximately 0.9% in the long term. Again, DOGE is uncovering massive fraud in the existing system, which apparently funds 130-year-old retirees and “undocumented” individuals.

5. Progressive Corporate Tax Rates
Revenue: Estimated to raise $3–$4 trillion over a decade.
Economic Impact: It may discourage corporate investment and lead to even more offshoring and loss of jobs.

6. Universal Pre-K
Cost: Estimated at $1.5 trillion over a decade.
Economic Impact: It could boost workforce participation but require significant federal spending and likely lead to more government indoctrination of children with sex and gender “education” and other garbage from the left.

7. Wealth Tax
Revenue: $2.8–$4.35 trillion over a decade.
Economic Impact: Reduces GDP by about 1.1% by 2050 due to reduced private capital formation. It will drive even more tax sheltering for the rich and movement of capital out of the country. This proposal by Kamala Harris in 2024 was one of the many reasons corporate executives and billionaires left the Democrats.

8. National Rent Control
Cost: No direct cost to taxpayers; however, massive regulation and policing will be needed to implement and sustain the law.
Economic Impact: It may lower rents temporarily but could discourage housing investment and construction. Just look to the cheating and corruption in New York for the likely results of this policy.

9. Worker Ownership of Companies
Cost: No direct cost.
Economic Impact: This could increase worker engagement but deter traditional investors from starting or owning companies, as employees lacking business knowledge may struggle to balance personal versus corporate objectives and make bad business decisions. Look at how Germany’s worker-directed industries fail to keep up with competitors on cost, flexibility, and innovation issues.

10. Implementing a Carbon Tax
Revenue: Estimated at $2–$3 trillion over a decade.
Economic Impact: Encourages emissions reduction but increases costs for consumers and energy-intensive industries.

These figures provide an overview of the financial implications of a few of Sanders’ policies, though exact outcomes would depend on the implementation and economic conditions at enactment.

Question: Is this is the direction today’s Democrats want to go?

Not if they ever hope to win again.

***

Citations:

https://files.taxfoundation.org/legacy/docs/TaxFoundation-FF498.pdf

https://kffhealthnews.org/news/does-medicare-for-all-cost-more-than-the-entire-budget-biden-says-so-but-numbers-say-no/

http://www.thedp.com/article/2016/02/analysis-bernie-sanders-policy-proposals-penn-experts

https://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/commentary/new-study-shows-huge-cost-sanders-medicare-all-plan

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/analysis-sanders-single-payer-offsets

https://www.bbc.com/news/51662741

https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2020/1/23/sanders-wealth-tax

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/7/30/17631240/medicare-for-all-bernie-sanders-32-trillion-cost-voxcare