The Democratic Party

The Democrats Brand Problem, Made Simple

/ Rich Wilkins / Leave a comment

With the brief exception of right before the election, Donald Trump has been historically unpopular for ten years now. Most Presidents have a period of time in which they are very popular with the public, at a minimum after their inauguration. Trump never got there. He’s the first and only President to win twice and lose the popular vote twice, and not hit 50% in any of three runs. Many Democratic policy positions are reasonably popular, and even now they are winning on most issue polling. Most ballot initiatives, from expanding health insurance to protecting abortion rights, to funding schools, to protecting the environment, to legalizing weed, and so on, pass even in red states. Democrats may even win in both New Jersey and Virginia, not to mention the NYC Mayoral race and Pennsylvania Supreme Court retentions this Fall. There are a lot of reasons to think that Democrats could have a very good midterm, and Republicans could have a very bad one. And yet, there’s a lot of reasons to not think that too.

Anecdotal evidence on the ground here in Pennsylvania shows GOP gains in the turnout battle for 2025. There have been weak polls and anecdotal evidence in New Jersey of similar sluggishness in the Democratic Party. Talk to most professionals and they’ll tell you online fundraising has not picked back up since the 2024 Election. The enthusiasm isn’t great. It’s not a sure sign of defeat. It’s problematic though.

Polling on the Democratic Party, rather than their positions, suggests that just about everyone reviles this party right now. Conservatives and Republicans hate the Democratic Party, obviously. Leftists and Democratic Socialists hate the party too, for not radicalizing. Centrist and moderate Democrats generally think the party has lost it’s mind and doesn’t know how to win. Most of the major national figures in the Democratic Party are at least partially controversial to the Democratic base, if not the whole country. Many of the key national policy fights right now, such as “law and order,” immigration, trans-rights, and Gaza are fights that divide Democrats and tend to poll favorably for the GOP. This is astounding given the deep cuts to health care, the environment, student loans, and education that were just carried out in Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill,” but Trump is managing to push these issues to the forefront through over-the-top actions.

A lot of people in the Democratic tent want to take this time to argue about ideology and “the Overton Window,” and all kinds of largely academic fights that don’t mean anything and won’t change our fortunes right now. Tweaking our position on student loans or health care really isn’t going to change matters very much. Democrats have two main macro-sized problems that are going to drown out any nuance anyway.

  1. Voters don’t like who they think we are. This is sort of self-explanatory. Conservatives think Democrats are a bunch of wimpy nerds who want to make them eat kale, listen to some scientist tell them every decision to make in their lives, and want them to believe that terrorists, criminals, and illegal immigrants are the good guys, but the cops in their town are the bad guys. Leftists and Democratic Socialists think Democrats are a bunch of wimps who will either roll over and play dead in any policy fight, or are bought already and will sell out, or worse yet, are just a bunch of rich privileged kids that want to stay important. Then there’s the rank and file Democratic voter, who generally thinks we’re concerned with matters that don’t matter enough to people’s lives, and are losing elections because we attach ourselves to niche cause we can.
  2. Voters are unenthusiastic at best about the product we’re selling them. We have spent a lot of time fighting about whether we should have more or less identity in our politics, more or less economic ideology in our politics, or that we’re just packaging both wrong. Here’s the reality- a guy who is not popular with the overall public continues to grow his vote share in each election. We can argue about whether it was dislike directly toward Hillary and Kamala, or dislike with our policies, or something else, but voters do not like what we are offering them. I hear a lot of activists saying we can’t morally re-consider even what positions we talk about, much less moderate on them, but the reality is that what we’re doing now doesn’t work. The guy who was perceived as the most moderate candidate beat the crap out of 20 or so Democratic primary candidates and then won a majority to defeat Trump. Once he was seen as feeble and compromised to the party, we have had nothing. Clearly re-running the last decade isn’t going to work.

It is entirely possible that the Democrats can win in 2025 and 2026 without really changing anything. They almost certainly won’t win the Senate, as Democrats hold exactly zero seats right now in states Trump won all three times, and they would need to claw back seats in places like Iowa, Ohio, and Florida, which maybe they do once, but not across the board. In the House though it’s close, and most of the GOP members did take a vote to gut Medicaid. The Republicans were deeply unpopular in 2010 and won over 60 seats. Of course, they lost two years later. It wasn’t until they found a standard bearer that motivated voters and was “different” than the Bush Era GOP that they took back the whole government.

This is really unpopular with some of the most motivated Democrats, but here’s the reality- Democrats should run fairly normal (to regular people, not us), frankly successful people for office, and they should run on things that voters care about and agree with us on. No, I’m not saying you have to change your position on protecting trans kids from bullying, nor do I think you should. I am saying campaigning on broad amnesty for illegal immigrants or defunding the police is stupid and will lose us elections. Saying the War in Gaza should end is fairly easy and mostly agreeable, but don’t defend Hamas or say “Globalize the Intifada.” It’s a loser position. Raising the minimum wage, fixing the student loan system, making more people eligible for overtime, funding schools, building more affordable housing, legalizing marijuana- these are things that most people can support. If it sounds like I’m avoiding some of the bigger social fights, I’m not necessarily. I think we can win running on abortion rights and really most fights that involve protecting the rights of an individual to live how they chose. I think lecturing America about every social ailment it has though has gone piss poor for us, and has backed us into a political corner. So yes, I would try to run a product that people might relate to or even want. If that means talking a little differently to voters, I think the evidence is pretty clear we need to do that.

Why I’m Not Going to Give Crooksy or Crosswell an Audience to Answer my Attacks

/ Rich Wilkins / 3 Comments
From the horse’s mouth.

I was invited to tonight’s Lehigh Valley 4 All meeting to ask Bob “Crooksy” Brooks questions about the things I’ve written about him. I’m going to decline at this time. I’m sure his team would say that vindicates him, that it shows I’m throwing baseless accusations at him from behind a computer screen and won’t defend them. If I were him, that’s what I’d say too. I’m going to proceed to tell you why that’s a pile of shit.

I’ve been at an event with Crooksy and Crosswell since I started writing about them. If they were truly mad and felt they had a legitimate beef with what I wrote, they could have addressed it then. Neither of them did. I have no reason to give either one a chance to prepare answers for an audience. One’s a bartender and one’s a lawyer, two professions that know how to talk their way around anything. In both cases, I have laid out unassailable facts, not opinions or presentations, about them. I posted the Superior Court’s opinion on the matter of Crooksy stiffing his ex-mother-in-law, which clearly shows he didn’t pay her back for 14 years, meaning no, it wasn’t just part of a messy divorce like he claims. Why would I give him equal footing with me to lie about that for an audience? I posted the actual screenshots of his social media where he says he thinks we need more guns and prayer in schools, and where he talks about hating Kaepernick for kneeling during the national anthem. Did I add on my opinions? Sure. But what I gave you out front was the documentation of this man’s views and actions. I am not going to literally debate if they happened with him. If he wants to accuse the Superior Court of Pennsylvania of lying, he can do that himself. Bob Brooks did everything I said. If you want to decide those things don’t matter to you, you can do that on your own.

I’m going to say the same for Ryan Crosswell, who no one is asking me to give a forum to at this point. Again, I’ve laid out the facts here. Crosswell is not from here and is a lifelong Republican until a few months ago. Voter registration is a public record, and it shows him repeatedly registering as, and voting as, a Republican in such far off places as Louisiana and Washington, D.C. There’s not much to argue there. I showed you Crosswell’s LinkedIn, which talks about his work at an infamous union busting law firm, and in which he talks about his work to screw workers. Crosswell filed a finance report in July that showed almost all of the money he is raising is from out of town, with just one donor in the district. Again, these things aren’t really up for debate.

There are five candidates in this race. I’m not going to debate all five of them about their life stories. I’m not attacking three of them, all of whom are long time Democrats who have lived in the Lehigh Valley for years. I’m attacking two guys who really shouldn’t be running in a Democratic Primary in the Lehigh Valley. The response both have given so far is to tell people that I’m attacking them on the behalf of Lamont McClure. That’s a load of shit. Go check McClure’s campaign finance reports, I do not work for him. I will not be working for him in this primary either, including in the future. I like Lamont enough, but he’s not paying me a check to do anything for him. I have not worked for a political candidate since May of 2024, most of my work is now for independent expenditures, and will be remaining as such. I’m not going to debate these kinds of lies for an audience, where how one presents themselves can sway the crowd on who they are going to believe, these guys are both trained talkers. I am laying out the facts on these individuals in black and white letters. This shouldn’t be a matter of interpretation, it should be a matter of facts. If Crooksy wants to debate if he’s a deadbeat or not, he can send mailers to the voters telling them he’s not. I sure as hell am not going to give him a platform to do so.

The primary voters in 2026 can decide what they think of the facts, but I’m not going to debate what the facts are with people that would screw family members or working people. If primary voters choose one of these guys, we’ll see how the full electorate reacts. My guess is not very well.

Crooksy’s Excuses for Stiffing His Mother-In-Law Lack Any Credibility

/ Rich Wilkins / 8 Comments

So I was in a room with Bob “Crooksy” Brooks this morning. No, there wasn’t a fist fight. I was too busy guzzling coffee to cause a scene. I did meet his manager though. Nice young lady, we have some common friends. I hope she enjoys her stay here in the Lehigh Valley. Well, most of it.

Friday a local activist leader let me know she really liked Crooksy when she met him. I’m not shocked, the guy tends bar at the Holy Family Club in Nazareth, that takes people skills. I mean, gotta talk for them tips, you know? Anyway, she said she asked him about my allegation that he took $55k from his mother-in-law, and he answered it satisfactorily for her. His answer? It was all part of a messy divorce.

You know what, I get why that makes sense. Divorces are inherently messy, right? If this was a question of when the suit itself was filed, or why, that might be satisfactory. The problem is, the actual issue happened years, and years before the legal proceeding. The case was decided in the Superior Court in 2021. The initial trial was in 2020. The actual case took place between 2004 and 2008. From the Superior Court opinion:

In June 2004, Michael Wiley transferred title to a residential building lot to his future daughter and son-in-law, Jennifer and Robert Brooks (Defendants).2Prior to the transfer, Michael Wiley funded the subdivision of the land, and Defendants agreed to pay him $55,500 for the cost of subdividing and the value of the lot. However, Defendants never paid Michael Wiley.

In 2008, at the request of Michael Wiley, Carol Wiley had a promissory note drafted which memorialized Defendants’ debt, and provided that Defendants were jointly and severally liable to pay CarolWiley $55,500 at 6.5% interest, in 120monthly payments of $630.19, beginning July 1, 2008. On July 12, 2008, Wiley and Defendants executed the promissory note in the presence of a notary. Defendants never made any of the payments prescribed in the promissory note.

On August 27, 2018, Wiley filed the underlying breach of contract action against Defendants. Brooks filed a reply and new matter on October 25, 2018 raising several affirmative defenses, including the statute of limitations, statute of frauds, and lack of consideration. On October 31, 2018, the trial court entered default judgment against Jennifer Brooks after she failed to respond to the complaint. Wiley filed a response to Brooks’ new matter on November 13, 2018.

The court held abench trial on August 11, 2020. At the close of Wiley’s case, Brooks moved for compulsory nonsuit, asserting that the action was barred by the four year statute of limitations governing contracts, and that no consideration was given for the debt because Wiley did not own the real estate and did not advance funds. The court denied Brooks’ motion, but ordered the parties to file post-trial briefs addressing the statute of limitations and statute of frauds. After reviewing the briefs, the court on September 11, 2020 entered a verdict in favor of Wiley and awarded damages of $130,386.36.

Let me break that down as simply as possible. In 2004, Mr. Wiley funded a subdivision of a property to Brooksy and his soon-to-be wife, to the tune of $55k, and they agreed to pay him back. They didn’t pay a red cent back. In 2008, FOUR YEARS LATER, Mr. Wiley was concerned enough that they would never pay him back that he and his wife made Brooksy and their daughter sign in front of a notary that they would pay them back, on a schedule, with interest. They never made one payment. Not a dollar. TEN YEARS LATER, Mrs. Wiley sued him and their daughter. The daughter didn’t even bother to contest the case. He did. TWO YEARS later, it went to trial. Brooks did not contest that he signed the note, or that he didn’t pay them back. He basically said they waited too long to sue him and Mrs. Wiley wasn’t the actual person who gave him the money, so she couldn’t sue. The court rejected that argument.

I’m not a lawyer. I also know that divorces are messy. I’m not here to comment on the legal questions raised. Here’s what I know- this dude got a loan from his father and mother-in-law in 2004 and paid back not one cent for 14 years before it went to court. He doesn’t even contest that he stiffed them for 14 years. He basically tried to say they’re shit out of luck for waiting to hold him accountable.

This is not an issue of an ugly divorce. This is just basic dishonesty.

Rumor Mill- Crooksy Rakes in the Cash, Union Buster Crosswell Fades

/ Rich Wilkins / 2 Comments

The DCCC rumor mill is loud these days. As they try to prop up candidates they like and penalize candidates they don’t, they tell folks things in hope that they put it out there. I’m more than happy to oblige. In PA-7, they want you to back Bob “Crooksy” Brooks, a deadbeat who stiffed his mother-in-law, and will be torn to shreds over it by Ryan Mackenzie and the GOP. The guy is DOA in the general election, and probably wouldn’t be good if he did win, but he makes money for their chosen consultants, who happen to also be Senator Fetterman’s team, and he’s the head of a union. Sure, he’s a bad candidate, but he furthers some folks careers. So they want you to know that “Crooksy” is going to blow away the other four Democrats in fundraising, as this guy did last reporting period. They are telling people that Bob “Crooksy” Brooks will raise $400k in the third quarter.

Crooksy’s number, if he actually reaches it (a month ago they were saying $200k, so read into it what you will), is pretty decent. It’s not shocking though, nor is it a number that makes him a prohibitive favorite. “Crooksy” Brooks hired folks who helped build Bernie Sanders and John Fetterman’s mythological campaigns, and also raised a bunch of money when people believed they were working class heroes. In Fetterman’s case he raised a bunch of money online and basically drowned his primary opponents, before going on to basically vote with the Republican Party in the United States Senate. Crooksy is just their new grift to get paid. With three full quarters of fundraising, and reasonable depreciation built into it after his launch, Crooksy would be on pace to reasonably raise about $1 million for this race. The problem for Crooksy is he starts way behind, and people don’t really like him more once they’re told about him. He’ll need to spend most of his million introducing himself and making people like him, and that’s assuming no one comes in and tells the voters he’s a gun nut racist, who stiffs his mother-in-law, to the cost of a few hundred thousand dollars. He’ll need a lot more.

Then there’s Union-Busting Ryan Crosswell, who was at one point the darling of the Washington types, but then the DCCC got some flack for running a Republican and backed away. The truth is that they’d still be fine with Crosswell as their nominee, but they know they can’t say that out loud, and now they got some static from the district, so they have to pretend they don’t like him. The truth? He’s probably actually better than Crooksy, provided that you don’t care at all what your Congressman actually believes, or if they actually have any grassroots support in the district they aren’t even from, or really if you just don’t care about anything. Since they know Crosswell is a bad look, they have to at least go through the motions of shitting on him. They are putting out there that he will not hit his $300k goal for the third quarter, as donors back away from him as they learn more. If Crooksy wasn’t better for business for the Beltway types, I’d predict him getting this same treatment next quarter.

Then there’s poor Carol Obando-Derstine, an actual Democrat from the Lehigh Valley who doesn’t hate Colin Kaepernick. Sure, Carol’s pretty corporate in her career choices, but she at least has business running in this race. So of course, the Beltway crowd wanted her to drop out, thereby pushing any women candidates out of the race. Then, when she got endorsements from some Latino Groups and Emily’s List, Bernie’s DSA goons made sure to deny her the SEIU endorsement that the local members wanted to give her. Crooksy needed that endorsement, stealing from his mother-in-law wasn’t going to finance this campaign on it’s own! Honestly, this kind of treatment of a former Democratic staffer is a really bad look, but she’s in the way of the fat cats getting paid. The Beltway elites want you to know that her entire campaign staff is fleeing her in droves, and she’s refusing to raise money. They’re predicting she’ll raise “under $100k.” She might. They want you to know that though so you back their chosen candidate though.

Then there’s Lamont McClure, Northampton County’s two-term Executive, who isn’t raising cash fast enough for their liking. To hear these Beltway warlords tell it, McClure might not report any money at all this quarter. Dude can’t even rub together two nickels for heat. What’s the guy even doing in the race? We know he gave himself $200k this quarter, so I assume he’ll raise that much at least. They assume though that the one candidate to win a major local office in this race is dead at this point. In fact, that’s their excuse for why the Governor didn’t tell him to drop out. To date, my math says he’s raised at least $430k for this race, which is less than Crosswell for sure, and maybe Crooksy, but probably enough for him to stay in. Basically though, the Beltway Chieftains want you to know that while local voters, elected officials, and unions always like him, he’s dead.

Then there’s Mark Pinsley. The rumor here is he’s still on Planet Earth. Poor Dude won a couple of elections and these folks act like he doesn’t even exist. They didn’t even take time to shit on him in their rumors. Hell, they didn’t even let lunatic Bernie endorse him, and he’s trying to run like him. I guess they hope he just goes off and runs for State Senate, again.

Part of the reason the Democratic Party loses is voters see right through our astroturf narratives. Republicans put up authentic lunatics, we put up Crooksy. It seems that in the case of PA-7, the Beltway Elites are desperate to find literally anyone to be their candidate besides a Democrat from the Lehigh Valley. I’m sure voters will love that.

It’s Time for Governor Shapiro to Figuratively Punch the Pennsylvania Senate in the Face

/ Rich Wilkins / Leave a comment

In theory, the law is that the General Assembly shall pass a budget, and the Governor shall sign it by June 30th. That almost never happens cleanly. Usually though, the legislature stays in session and at least pretends they’re working/negotiating. Like you at least have some level of shame when you don’t do your job, right? That’s natural. In 2025, that’s no longer a thing. The State Senate left town in June and just decided to not come back to work ever again, basically.

Now, I’m going to be fair for a second. I actually agreed with them back in May and June- how the hell do you pass a budget when you have no idea how much the Federal Government is going to give you? Between DOGE and the “Big Beautiful Bill” it was fair to say there was too much uncertainty. Based on the lack of actual partisan noise at the time, I think even the House Democratic Majority realized this. It was close to impossible to plan a year’s worth of spending when there was so much chaos. Granted, most of the State Senate Republican Majority were vocal supporters of Trump, so their complaints here are ironic. Just because they were hypocrites didn’t make them wrong though.

That time has passed. Governor Shapiro gave everyone time to figure out what was going on. Republicans passed their “Big Beautiful” pile of shit in Washington. Sure, some things can change at the margins going forward, but not so badly that you don’t move forward. Given that we’re now a quarter of the way into the budget year, the legislature could fund the last nine months with basic certainty. They just won’t.

So here’s the thing, the Governor and local officials of both parties did a nice job across Pennsylvania preventing the pain from hitting the general public. Schools opened, road projects continued, the hospitals received their Medicaid money, and so on. Counties continued providing services. You can only bleed so much blood from a stone. If you only have $100, all the magic tricks in the world don’t turn that into $110. The Feds are sending less money to counties, schools, and municipalities. The state is running out of legal authority to send any money to them either, because there’s no budget. Why should you give a shit? Safe Harbor in Easton, who cares for a large chunk of our local homeless population, announced the county is out of money to provide them to provide the services. Northampton County announced they would furlough human services employees at the end of the month. They’re out of money. If that doesn’t hit home enough for you, I think Bernie O’Hare explained it fairly plainly:

NorCo’s Human Services Department investigates allegations of abuse and neglect aimed at our children and elderly, the most vulnerable members of society. It provides a wide variety of services to individuals who have mental health issues. It provides services, usually through vendors, aimed at the prevention and treatment of alcohol and drug abuse. It also helps veterans and their dependents. 

The state funds between 80-90% of the salaries of these workers. But since the state budget impasse on June 30, the county has been paying these salaries on its own. McClure estimates that the county has spent $8-12 million so far and estimates that figure might be as high as $20 million by the end of October.

So basically, everybody who desperately needs help will stop getting it. Kids, old people, and mentally unhealthy people will be left to fend for themselves. The State Senate’s response? Take a long Summer vacation. This is serious stuff, but they’re treating it like nothing. Meanwhile, their ally running for Lehigh County Executive just thinks he’ll “get his money,” but honestly he’s just too stupid to handle this stuff. We’re heading towards a societal disaster in Pennsylvania. I realize some people like to say they’d rather live in Mississippi or Iowa than California, but are you really ready to put that to practice?

It’s time to punch back. This irresponsibility is going to cost lives. As someone who now lives about a half step from ruin, this hits home to me. People often ask what Democrats do for them- this is a good time to show them. I actually think he went a bit mild here, but McClure did get this right:

“Republicans in the State Senate have failed the people of Pennsylvania by refusing to pass a budget,” said McClure. “For three months, their dysfunction has left counties like Northampton footing the bill, costing us millions of dollars just to keep essential services going. … This is unacceptable. They must do their job, pass a budget, and stop punishing taxpayers and seniors alike.”

While I appreciate McClure and any other Democrat making this case, let’s be honest, County Executives and Congressional candidates are not the loudest voices in the room. All they can do is make their case the best they can. Those voices would be Governor Shapiro and Senator Fetterman, and we already know Senator Fetterman will let us down. Governor Shapiro is doing a great job running the government of Pennsylvania and deserves to be re-elected for that. We now need him to raise his voice though and maybe take an unsafe political stand. Him barnstorming the state and even national media and making the case that the State Senate Republicans are literally going to get people killed to have their extra long vacation would put the pressure needed in the very small number of swing districts left in the Senate. People who want to be national politicians need to know how to fight when it’s time. For Governor Shapiro, it is time. He has certainly made the case against the Senate GOP so far, but he needs to scorch the earth. The time has come.

I Guess His Mother-In-Law’s Money Wasn’t Enough, Bob “Crooksy” Brooks Needs Your Money

/ Rich Wilkins / 1 Comment

Make sure you hold your wallets, Crooksy needs your cash! I guess the $55k he stiffed his ex-mother-in-law for wasn’t enough to finance Crooksy’s campaign. I get it though, campaigns are hard. It’s hard to get elected when the only people who like you don’t live in your district. Everybody who knows Crooksy best won’t support him. He blows them off, and they know he’s inauthentic with all of his talk about supporting “working people.” At least Vermont Senator and Democrat hating lunatic Bernie Sanders has his back though.

Look, I do have some empathy for Crooksy’s team though, lying is really hard. The truth is, we all know he isn’t a Democrat (more on that later). Crooksy posts pro-gun, religious fanatic, lunatic shit on his Facebook when he’s advocating for political violence. Crooksy even puts up pro-segregationist/slavery shit ripping on Colin Kaepernick. This guy really thinks we’re going to believe he’s a Democrat. I honestly think Crooksy knows in his heart that he’s in over his head here, but I guess his handlers who created John Fetterman think they can pull off the con-job again. They pulled SEIU in on the con. They even did so over local objections. They are going to need an astronomical amount of money to convince people to elect a deadbeat that sides with Republicans on social issues, in a Democratic Primary. Even if they survive that, do you really think Ryan Mackenzie and national Republicans aren’t going to use the same information I gathered on Bobby “Crooksy” Brooks to destroy him in the Fall? Stealing from his Mother-in-Law alone is enough to sink him in the Lehigh Valley.

So yeah, watch your wallet. Crooksy needs your money in a bad way. If 877-338-2472 shows up on your phone, mark it spam and junk. It’s a waste of your time.

What in the Delusional Hell?

/ Rich Wilkins / Leave a comment

Look, I’ve found some of what Kamala Harris has had to say so far in her book to be hilariously funny. When I read the excerpt about why she didn’t pick Pete Buttigieg as her running mate, I definitely found her logic to be sad and maybe even cynical, but also probably correct from a purely strategical manner. Her “criticisms” of Biden for staying in as long as he did basically miss reality for me, but I think from her perspective are almost a necessary rationalization of why things went how they did.

Then there’s the screenshots above about her book, which are basically a good enough reason for me to not read it. Look, I voted for Kamala Harris, and I would again. She’s got tons of good qualities. The fact is though, if they weren’t prepared for her to lose by election night, she and her team are the most delusional people I’ve ever seen. Yes, I knew we were going to win for Biden/Harris in 2020, because Joe Biden was not only consistently ahead in state and national polls, but was usually over 50% in most polls, regardless of his margin. At no point was Kamala Harris ever really there. She was behind in the polling averages in almost all of the swing states, well within the margin of error, but behind. Her numbers in the polls looked eerily similar to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Election Results, and they basically finished exactly there. Many Democratic donors, activists, and even operatives have spent years getting excited at every “gotcha” moment for Donald Trump, every bad debate performance or speech, and every new scandal that arises around the guy, and every time they get excited and proclaim “this is the time” people finally turn on him. They never do. The only campaign that ever put forward a viable alternative that a broad enough cross section of the country might vote for instead of Trump, was Biden’s 2020 campaign. Hillary and Kamala both sort of relied on the country finally decided Trump was too stupid, evil, corrupt, or wrong to vote for. That was never, ever going to happen.

There’s a really ugly truth that maybe Vice-President Harris didn’t want to write about, or maybe it was cut from the book, or whatever- Kamala Harris was never going to win the 2024 Election. The country had soured on the Democratic Party as a whole. Inflation had put them in a bad mood. They had soured on Biden, in part because of inflation, in part because he was old, and very largely because they felt he had governed less moderately than they hoped he would when they elected him. Harris was his Vice-President, in a party where really no one had made a move to stand against Biden’s Presidency, making her the most vulnerable to his negatives of a party full of people who were vulnerable to his negatives. Then there is the simple fact that Harris herself was viewed even more negatively than Biden through virtually his entire Presidency until Democrats ran away from him (like cowards) after his debate performance. And yes, since I named every other reason, let’s just state the obvious demographic reasons. Hillary Clinton was possibly the most qualified, most universally known nominee the party ever put forward in 2016, and Barack Obama was still very popular, not to mention she was the first female nominee in the history of the country. Just read everything after that last comma and get the point, because none of the stuff before it mattered. Hillary Clinton lost, as about the best woman nominee anyone could have come up with at that time. The country is very, very resistant to electing a woman. That’s a bad thing, but it’s a thing that isn’t changing on it’s own. Kamala Harris was not only the next woman to run for President, she was also a Black woman. This country’s history of racism is well chronicled. It’s a large reason why one of our first forty-seven Presidents wasn’t white. Harris, with an avalanche of things already against her, was asking the country to elect a Black woman. I don’t know if it was impossible for her to win in a neutral environment, but the odds were pretty high against her. Stack all of the other negative things I mentioned here on top of that, and Kamala Harris was basically trying to swim up Niagra Falls in this race. She never had a chance.

The 2024 Election was decided when party elders like Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama decided to be influenced by the politically blind, such as George Clooney and other wealthy donors, and basically pushed Joe Biden out of the race. No one but Biden had a prayer in hell of beating Donald Trump. Biden knew that, that was why he had continued running for President well after his 80th birthday. Biden also knew that if he didn’t run, the only way to avoid a complete Civil War level meltdown within the Democratic Party was to coronate Kamala Harris and hope for the best. He had much better instincts than any of the other “elders” in the Democratic Party. All of this is what bothers me about what Harris is saying here. She’s criticizing Biden for being the adult in the room. She also wants us to believe she really had no idea she was going to lose. The day Biden dropped out, I knew she was going to lose. I know she was smart enough to know that too. I am willing to bet a donut to anyone that if you could get a candid answer out of anyone senior on the analytics team, they would tell you their numbers showed they were losing. As cynical as I am about analytics, even I would be stunned if they were so bad that they actually believed anything else.

“Crooksy” Adds More Endorsements From People Who Can’t Find Allentown on a Map

/ Rich Wilkins / 2 Comments

The less you know about Bob “Crooksy” Brooks, the more you like him. If you don’t know that he stiffed his ex-mother-in-law for $55k, you might think he’s working class. If you don’t know that he shares propaganda from groups that advocate political violence, you think maybe he’s a Democrat. If you don’t read what “Crooksy” says about Kaepernick, you think maybe he’s not a bigot. The more you know though, the less you like him.

“Crooksy” is running the Fetterman handbook for how to campaign though. He’s collecting endorsements, just none of them are from here. Democrat hating lunatic Bernie Sanders enthusiastically supports “Crooksy.” I doubt any local unions will support him after he had better things to do than come see them though. The truth is, the guy is awful and shouldn’t have run, and everyone around here knows it. If you don’t live in the Lehigh Valley though, there’s not too much harm in endorsing a guy that Ryan Mackenzie would crush. This is why state legislators from other parts of Pennsylvania love Crooksy. He’s probably not taking money from their constituents.

“Crooksy” is racking up the endorsements from leftists from other parts of the country though. In addition to the geriatric socialist from Vermont, he got the guy who got to be Bernie’s warm up act when he came to the Valley back in the Spring. I guess he figures no one in Pittsburgh will ever know. In case that’s not enough, he got the endorsement of California “Bernie Bro” Ro Khanna, who he wants you to know is a Pennsylvania native. He lives in Silicon Valley now, because you know, Bobby is a real working class icon here. Crooksy has lots of support from California and Vermont politicians. He has none from any working folks here.

Bob “Crooksy” Brooks looks great if you get to stay ten thousand feet away from him. If the Democratic Party is stupid enough to nominate this clown, Ryan Mackenzie won’t let any voters in the Lehigh Valley stay ten thousand feet away though. The racism, the violent political rhetoric, the stealing from his mother-in-law- Mackenzie will put it on our televisions, on our computer screens, and in our mailboxes. To be honest, we kind of deserve it if we’re dumb enough to allow it. None of the people who know Crooksy all that well want anything to do with him.

Would Bob “Crooksy” Brooks Kill the ACA?

/ Rich Wilkins / Leave a comment

The Democratic Party should absolutely shut down the federal government, it’s not doing anything of value right now. If you need a specific reason to shut it down, the GOP is trying to strip away subsidies for people to buy the Affordable Care Act. This should simply be a red line. There is no good reason to strip health care away from more people. Of course our useless DEMOCRATIC U.S. Senator John Fetterman says he will fund the government anyway. In 2028, we need to be done with this bum. We can get a better trust fund baby Democrat, if not an actual good Democrat. Kick him to the curb.

Given that Bob “Crooksy” Brooks is running for Congress and would take the same votes, and has the same handlers telling him what to say and do, verbatim, we have to ask- would Bob “Crooksy” Brooks tell his constituents to go to hell too? Would he treat his constituents like his ex-mother-in-law? Will Brooks vote with the people he agrees with on social issues? Given this man’s record, we have to ask.

Every candidate in the PA-7 Democratic Primary should be answering though. I’ve seen posts from McClure and Obando-Derstine so far. I hope the rest let us know if they’re with us or against us.

What Does Bob “Crooksy” Brooks Think About Political Violence? Well, Let’s Look at His Past…

/ Rich Wilkins / 12 Comments

By now if you read this site, you are probably of Bob “Crooksy” Brooks running for Congress. I am too. The idea this guy thinks he can win, or that he’s a Democrat, is completely insane. This is basically Steve Lynch with John Fetterman’s handlers. The guy stiffed his ex-mother-in-law out of $55k. He appealed it, and lost. Then, instead of paying up, he walked away. Maybe that was just being lazy, not crooked though. Of course he was endorsed by Democrat-hating lunatic Bernie Sanders. Of course he was, just like his hero, John Fetterman. Much like Crooksy’s hero Fetterman, he also has some way out of line views on race too. I really hoped this guy wouldn’t drag his friends through a campaign that will end in defeat, a matter of when, not if. He’s insisted though.

As I wrote about this guy, multiple sources sent me things to know about Crooksy and his past. Above, you see a social media post that I chronicled at length. In reposting that meme, Crooksy makes clear that he believes in prayer in schools, and guns in any lunatic’s hand that can grip them. It’s bad enough that Crooksy is a right-wing militant, he doesn’t belong in a Democratic Primary, but the meme was put out by the 3% militia men. He’s basically sending out January 6th’ers stuff on his social media.

On August 19th, a woman that I will identify as Karen sent me over a full memo of additional materials and context on Brooks. Karen does not appear on any other campaign’s payroll, which doesn’t mean she isn’t, but I certainly don’t know her. As she shed more light on who Crooksy is, it’s become clear he’s totally unacceptable.

When Crooksy posted the meme above is significant. Just days after an armed nutbag went into an El Paso, TX Walmart and killed people, there was Crooksy posting pro-gun material. One could say that it isn’t proof of support for the killer, but the fact that it’s material from radicalized right-wing fanatics who do. support killing Latinos and lots of other people, and that didn’t dawn on him at the time as a bad thing is significant. Crooksy posted this in 2019, years before a Congressional run, and frankly before he was even a major labor figure, so while now John Fetterman’s handlers have their hands on him to tell him not to say anything this crazy, this 2019 post by Crooksy is a better representation of who he is. When he didn’t think everyone was looking, he was in favor of right-wing radical propaganda and beliefs. Now that he wants to be your Congressman, you are getting a cleaned up version. Reality is though, he’s a right-wing gun nut.

A bunch of people in Washington and Harrisburg want to sell you a vision of some working class hero that will go “fight for you” in DC. It’s astroturf. God knows who he’ll take from and what he’ll actually believe if you give him a chance to go there. Crooksy is just Fetterman 2.0.