I saw a brief clip of MN Rep. Keith Ellison last night on one of the MSNBC programs to discuss the Iowa caucus results. Ellison supports Bernie Sanders, but he doesn’t fit the “Bernie bro” stereotype so derided in comments here. He’s calm and gracious, qualities he no doubt had ample opportunity to hone when he co-represented the Gopher State with hysterical rightwing nitwit Michele Bachmann.
Maybe trial by pinwheel-eyed lunatic gives people clarity of thought if they can refrain from responding in kind. After discussing Clinton’s tagline, “a progressive who gets things done,” Ellison noted that we can thank Bernie Sanders for the fact that both Democratic candidates embrace the progressive label. He’s right.
Clinton will almost certainly lose in New Hampshire, probably by a wide margin, and though that’s expected, the Beltway pundit frenzy that began in muted tones when her lead in Iowa slipped and ratcheted up when she squeaked out the narrowest possible victory will roar to life full force if she loses. The din will grow deafening in the week and a half before the voting starts again in Nevada and South Carolina.
Team Clinton will have a choice to make. Team Sanders will too, but more of the pressure will be on Clinton if she loses big in New Hampshire. The Clinton campaign can wink and nod while “outside” groups like the loathsome David Brock’s “Correct the Record” organization ramps up attacks on Sanders, or she can publicly call off the dogs. I hope she does the latter.
Here’s a sample of the garbage Brock and his minions, who now include Peter Daou (the same Daou who once begged Democrats to remember that Sarah Palin used to be “a little girl”), plan to dump:
“When the conservative machine cranks up and kicks into high gear, Bernie will be eviscerated, turned into an aging cartoon Commie, a flip-flopping America-hater, a 60s holdover writing bizarre essays about free sex and child rape fantasies, a non-Democrat Democrat whose embrace of the NRA undermines his claims to purity, a politician who voted against the Amber Alert system, a draft dodger, and a man who thinks women’s rights are a distraction,” Daou wrote in a post for Blue Star Media.
Yeah. And if Clinton wins, the Wingnut Wurlitzer will paint Hillary as a castrating bitch who allowed her unsatisfied man to go wilding on random interns, a man-hating lesbian goon who murdered Vince Foster, a power-mad hag who sold out Israel to appease the mullahs in Iran, a tool of the gay agenda who will confiscate every red-blooded American sportsman’s firearms and use them to perform involuntary shotgun same-sex marriages, after which the guns will be melted down to create a giant metal vagina shrine for the White House lawn.
The Democratic candidates can’t control the conservative media, but they can control how they react to it. They can and should respond to its attacks, but they ought to refuse to do its dirty work on each other.
There’s a lot of talk about the disaffected youngs who are disgusted with the political process and how that bodes ill for the Democrats, especially if HRC is the nominee. Maybe we could flip the script if our candidates continue to have substantive discussions that focus on their different visions of achieving similar goals while the Republican candidates use every forum to rip each other to pieces, lie about Democrats and paint present-day America as a post-apocalyptic hellscape. Worth a shot?
Yutsano
It depends on how much control she has over Brock. My guess is she tells him to chill out here soon since this sniping is going to backfire hard once the general comes around.
New Hampshire also ends Bernie’s free run. After he starts losing big it will be interesting to see how he reacts and how much control he has over his proxies.
henqiguai
Hmm. That actually sounds like an entertaining idea. Make it so, Number One…
Paul in KY
I actually think humor is a great antidote. FDR got plenty of mileage by laughing at his critics & their opinions of him. Truman also derides them as well.
schrodinger's cat
Its not the Bernie bros that keep me from supporting Bernie, its the man himself. His plans are Utopian and utterly impractical, from healthcare to immigration and everything in between. Saying that a revolution will make it happen is not a plan.
Jennifer
Pretty obvious who David Brock used to work for. I guess that because the smears & slanders work well with the conservative base he used to be paid to rile up, he just assumes the same hold true for the Democratic base.
He & his can paint Hillary’s squeaker in Iowa as a huge victory all they like, but the best that can be said for a candidate with 25 years of national name recognition, with ties to Iowa going back at least that far, who had 8 years to build a ground organization, support of the party establishment, and big money & superpacs backing her, is that she barely escaped a near-disaster with her less than 1% margin of victory against a guy who was unknown to most in the country just 6 months ago.
I’m not a Hillary hater; I’ll get in line to vote for her if she’s the nominee, but her Iowa performance indicates that she’s a weak candidate.
Paul in KY
@henqiguai: That would get me back up to DC for a visit.
JMG
Attacking Sanders is dumb politics. Clinton should be killing him with kindness, as in “that’s a wonderful goal Bernie. You’ve been in the Senate 20 years. How many of your fellow Senators do you think support it?” Make Sanders acknowledge how hard it will be to accomplish the changes he’s proposing.
MomSense
@schrodinger’s cat:
Same here.
Miss Bianca
I have to say I love the fact that Bernie is in this race, that he’s pushing the policy issues that he’s pushing, and if HRC can continue the trend she seems to be on – ie “lessons learned from ’08: don’t be a dick” – it could be truly a wonder to behold: actual real dialogue on the Dem side about actual real problems facing the country, while the Republicans continue fapping into their own foul nests.
You may say I’m a dreamer…but it’s a lovely dream, with some apparent basis in reality. At this point, anyway…
cmorenc
I want a bumper sticker:
HILLARY / BERNIE
I’ll vote for either one
Betty Cracker
@Miss Bianca: You’re not the only one…
Eric U.
it’s good to have Bernie in the race instead of republicans in disguise like Lincoln Chafee or Harald Ford. But the problem with him is the same thing that hurt Obama when he took office: people blame the president even if he’s trying to fulfill his promises. Politics in the U.S. is nearly impossible nowadays.
JPL
I’ll support the Democratic Nominee……………..
The Republic, Blah Blah Blah...
I agree w/ this statement completely…
I recall saying months ago that I didn’t think Sanders stood a chance in this process and I am surprised he’s done as well as he has… not disappointed or upset… just surprised… AND… I’m glad he did jump in, if for no other reason than he’s forcing other candidates, like Hillary, to address issues they might have otherwise veered away from…
He’s actually moving the infamous ‘Overton Window’ back in the other direction… finally… IMHO…
Sawgrass Stan
@MomSense: Count me in.
schrodinger's cat
@Miss Bianca: You are not the only one.
OT: A 5 judge bench of India’s Supreme Court is going to review the constitutionality of Article 377, a statute from the Raj era which criminalizes homosexuality.
There is also a new movie out called Aligarh about the case of Prof. Siras of the Aligharh Muslim University who was fired for the offense of being gay. He sued his employers successfully but committed suicide soon after.
benw
@cmorenc: BERNILLARY 2016
henqiguai
@Jennifer (#5):
Well, based upon the contents of your second paragraph, I’d suggest an alternative interpretation – your analysis is incomplete.
Citizen_X
Yeah, I don’t like when Dems polish up old right wing attacks, so I don’t appreciate Bernistas running the same old Scaife-funded smears against the Clintons, and hippie-bashing against Bernie? You think Republicans won’t gleefully use that shit against Clinton in the general?
Linda Featheringill
@Miss Bianca:
Sweet Jesus, yes.
So far, Hillary has acted like a gracious queen on the way to her coronation. I had originally hoped that Bernie could push her into taking a stand on some meaningful issues, but it hasn’t happened yet.
However, I do respect the right of her followers to support her.
Now if we can get them to respect our right to our own political opinion.
BR
As someone still dissatisfied with both Clinton and Sanders, I will say this — when people hear some of the weirder stuff from Sanders’s past (the fiction writing, especially) I think they will be surprised. Whereas with Clinton they won’t be no matter what the GOP attacks her with because they’ve been attacking her for 20 years.
I still don’t get the sense that either of them are quick enough on their feet and sure enough in themselves as politicians to punch back if they need to in real time (like in an interview or a debate).
Bex
@schrodinger’s cat: AMEN!
Rommie
I agree that primary sword-fighting isn’t going to help either of them. BUT – many wanted to see HRC challenged in a primary so she’d be ready for the GOP opponent. She certainly got it, and it’ll be her own fault if it ends as a punchline in a Bugs Bunny cartoon.
We also know how the general public will react to mud-smearing on HRC. It would take a bombshell to change it up, but something that would sink the ship no matter how the primary went or goes. What the GOP will do to Bernie, and how the voting public will react to it, is the Great Unknown that spawns nervousness. Stay away from tanks, Bernie! :)
Tim C.
@cmorenc: If you find one, I’ll take one too.
Seriously. The wrath from both sides is stupid. Campaign and supporters both. It’s like the elves and dwarves fighting over irrelevant crap while the eye of Sauron is growing ever more malevolent and frightful.
Was that too nerdy?
Enhanced Voting Techinques
I don’t get all the Berni mania from the young people. The guy is in his 80s, heck my 72 yeard old dad won’t vote for him for that reason alone, and a sitting US Senator from a lily white sate. Were is the future in Berni?
Jennifer
@henqiguai: Really? You think that was a good showing given all the advantages she had going in?
We’ll have to agree to disagree.
Linda Featheringill
@Tim C.: +
It may be a bit nerdy. I don’t get the reference. But I did get your message.
Good job!
Bobby Thomson
@Jennifer: I love the “Clinton really lost because she didn’t stomp our guy. I mean, have you ever compared the two? He’s a total schmuck!” talking point.
shortstop
@Eric U.:
Worth saying again:
and again:
Germy
Good God almighty, if any paragraph deserved to go ricochetting through the ages, it is this.
Jennifer
@Bobby Thomson: Hmmm, you ascribe different meanings to words than most people who speak the language.
Iowa Old Lady
@Linda Featheringill: Tolkien? Lord of the Rings? You don’t get that? You score 0 on the Nerd-o-meter. Perhaps to your credit.
shortstop
@Jennifer: Nothing wrong with your analysis as far as it goes, but the flip side of that is that Sanders is going to have to do way better than 50-ish percent among white voters if he’s going to overcome his disadvantage among nonwhite voters. Let’s see what happens in Nevada and South Carolina.
Zinsky
I live in Minnesota and we prefer “the North Star State” to the “Gopher State” appellation. That said, Minnesotans have always been notoriously independent, back to Eugene McCarthy in the 1960s through Jesse Ventura in the 1990s to Ellison and Bachmann in the 2000s, who are as far to the left and right, respectively, on the political spectrum as you can get! Regarding Brock’s assertion about Bernie being skewered by the right-wing noise machine, I think the same holds true of Hillary, in spades! I, for one, do not look forward to four, or even eight more years of Whitewater, Vince Foster, cattle futures, Benghazi, private e-mail servers, etc., etc., etc. ad nauseum!
Bobby Thomson
@henqiguai: if she’s a weak candidate, what does that make the guy to lost to her with an electorate self identifying as 42% socialist? It won’t get any better for him outside New England.
Oatler.
@Germy: I already saw ” Gunt” at the Medford Art Walk.
msdc
@Jennifer:
It would be a mistake to extrapolate general election performance from primary and caucus results. Obama’s performance in NH, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and elsewhere didn’t mean he was a weak candidate.
Jennifer
@shortstop: No doubt. I actually expect Hillary to be the nominee; I’m just sayin’. Her showing in Iowa was not very impressive IMO.
Bobby Thomson
@Citizen_X: yeah, this. There are much better attack lines.
And Daou shouldn’t have any role at all.
shortstop
@Germy: It’s an awesome paragraph. The only mild improvement I can suggest is the insertion of “harridan,” “shrew” and “harpy.” A derogatory reference to post-menopause would also be icing on the cake.
Jennifer
@Bobby Thomson: Oh gee, I dunno. Maybe “less well-known” or “less well-funded” or “less endorsed by party bigwigs” or….
You see how silly your point is.
Felonius Monk
@Enhanced Voting Techinques:
Actually, Bernie is 74 yo, only 2 yrs older than your dad and 6 yrs older than Hilary.
Bobby Thomson
@Tim C.: winter is coming.
shortstop
@Jennifer: I would also add that Iowa’s Democrats tend to score themselves as far more liberal than Democrats in many of the upcoming states.
Miss Bianca
@cmorenc:
I’ll take one of those bumper stickers…
Chyron HR
@Jennifer:
PROTIP: If you have to write an essay explaining why your opponent didn’t really win, it means they won.
Kropadope
@Enhanced Voting Techinques:
He’s 74.
:: Dons helmet ::
ETA: @Felonius Monk: Beat me to it, but Hillary is 68. So the difference is 6 years.
singfoom
I agree. I don’t think Clinton or Sanders has much to gain by going negative / attacking each other. Regardless of who wins the nomination, the right wing will do whatever they’re going to do.
Also, I think the people who will respond to the rightwing attacks on Hillary / Sanders are going to believe that shit regardless of what is said. They’re primed for it. The sky is also blue and water is also wet.
Count me as a non-bro middle aged Bernie supporter that will pull the lever for Hillary in the general if that’s who wins the nomination.
I can’t get excited about HRC. I think she’s a corporatist through and through. The bipartisan agreement in our federal government to let Wall Street run amok is still in place. Maybe it makes me a one-issue voter, but when it comes down to it, I think that Bernie would be able to reign in the financial sector more capably than HRC.
That said, I know that what I want done to improve our economy / financial sector requires legislation and that requires Democrats in the House and the Senate. I don’t see either HRC or Bernie firing people up for downticket races.
This started out less morose.
Cheers.
WereBear
From what I can see, the young people left college with loads of debt. To discover there aren’t enough jobs, much less good paying ones. They share apartments because they can’t afford their own. They cluster in cities, in part, because they can’t afford a car.
They have been royally shafted and they know it. So when someone comes along who notices that, agrees with it, and tells them who is responsible and how to fix it… they get enthused.
I know how they feel.
Iowa Old Lady
@Bobby Thomson: That too. If Trump doesn’t represent the White Walkers, I don’t know who does.
Bobby Thomson
@Jennifer: when you praise your candidate to the high heavens for losing a contest he should have won, it diminishes him. It’s the soft bigotry of low expectations.
At least you won’t have that problem next week. I don’t see how he can avoid winning by 30+ points. Especially if NH independents abandon the Republican race.
Jennifer
@Chyron HR: She won. By less than 1%. Not disputing that, just saying given her advantages, not much of a win. He’ll get as many convention delegates out of it as she will.
cmorenc
@BR:
I wasn’t so confident about Hillary in this regard until I saw her hand Trey Gowdy and the GOP Benghazi! panel their asses under hours of hostile inquisition. Her actual weakness is when she tries too hard to be likable, and comes across as not genuine.
henqiguai
@Jennifer (#26):
A win is a win is a win; she got the bulk of the delegates. And yes, she will probably be soundly drubbed in NH. What advantages does she have over the 25 years in Congress that Bernie has? You mean the 20+ years of smearing that even Democrats and so-called progressives buy into? Regardless, I was specifically referring to your second paragraph as the basis for your criticism of her candidacy.
Tim C.
@Bobby Thomson: An even better example! Still I want a hobbit to come out in the middle of the next Hillary/Sanders debate and say, “I will go to Modor!”
Frankensteinbeck
A) I am a Hillary supporter and don’t agree with the BernieBro stereotype. They exist, but they’re an obnoxious, not representative fringe.
B) In terms of who will win, it’s over, Hillary won (or more accurately Bernie lost), but I respect the argument that his campaign should continue because it stirs up progressivism.
C) I don’t think Bernie pushed her much, if at all left. Obama did. She came out swinging to the left, and nobody paid attention because they assumed she’s her husband.
D) She’s not going to change her strategy. Why should she? NH is a known quantity and changes nothing. She will be gracious to Bernie as he is gracious to her, vilify Republicans as they deserve, and make a big point of minority issues because her time in government has shoved her up close and personal in sexism and racism.
Jennifer
@Bobby Thomson: Please, feel free to copy & paste ANY praise I’ve given to Bernie Sanders in any of my comments. Take your time. I’ll wait.
Calouste
@Jennifer: Clinton actually had about a 4% margin of victory in the popular vote, which was in line with the final polling average (actually slightly higher). I guess Sanders won more low attendance precincts.
Kropadope
@WereBear:
That’s hugely important, although the big thing for me is how he is putting massive infrastructure investment front and center. The least sexy issue imaginable, but it’s still vitally important. Not only are lives and health threatened by aging infrastructure, but it gets more expensive to deal with the longer we let it go.
Amir Khalid
@Enhanced Voting Techinques:
Bernie is in his mid-70s.
@Jennifer:
To make enough headway against Hillary’s huge national lead, Bernie needs to win big in the few states where he’s stronger. Iowa was one of those states. Her squeaker of a win means she gained two delegates on him there. As you can see here, he has a long, long way to catch up to her.
Felonius Monk
@Kropadope:
Corrected before I saw your comment. I guess us 74 yr olds can’t subtract too well anymore.
Goblue72
@Bobby Thomson: He wasn’t supposed to win. Outside an outlier poll or two, the bulk of polling – including those with the best Iowa track record – had him down 3-7 points heading into the caucuses, with his momentum stalled out for weeks heading into the caucus.
He outperformed expectations.
Frankensteinbeck
@Jennifer:
You’re looking at this backwards. Iowa was one of Bernie’s best states. If he couldn’t win it, he can’t win the nomination. You don’t have to be impressed with Hillary’s win, it’s moot. Bernie has no path to victory now.
Betty Cracker
@cmorenc: Agreed. She should embrace her inner Leslie Knope — the earnest, wonky striver who can be socially awkward because she’s just so darned focused. It’s who she is.
Jennifer
@Amir Khalid: Yeah, see upthread where I said I expect Hillary will be the nominee.
Linda Featheringill
BTW: A good explanation of New Hampshire delegate system:
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/2/3/1479118/-New-Hampshire-Delegate-Mathematics
Sawgrass Stan
hmm…Hillary fatigue. I get it.
I think it was Krugman (Charlie Pierce?) that pointed out how Fox and Fiends has ginned up one phony scandal after another, after another, after another on HRC. As false as these attacks are, it’s fatiguing to have to keep defending her. It’s been nonstop since she killed Vince Foster. For young people, it’s what they’ve been hearing all their lives. The positive stuff, her accomplishments– not so much.
Unless there’s an upset in the House and Senate, neither Hillary nor Bernie will have it any easier than Obama.
But Hillary has years of experience in dealing with nonstop slander, and Bernie just doesn’t.
singfoom
@WereBear: In addition, the shafting of the young has had knock on effects. If there were good jobs out there, graduates could start building families, buying houses, etc… spreading their income around to the various vendors and trades involved in buying/maintaining a house.
We all got shafted in 2008 with the collapse. The criminals who destroyed the world economy and ours still haven’t been called to account. I’m not going to hold my breath because it hasn’t happened yet, but I still have a sliver of hope that we might be able to make some common sense reforms to prevent another collapse.
Kropadope
@Frankensteinbeck: Hillary had all the institutional support, money, and literally over a year of running in Iowa. She’s also from neighboring Illinois (not that I care about that, but that’s how people will dismiss Bernie’s expected NH win).
She’ll likely have fewer pledged delegates once NH is over. She’s expected to do well NV and SC, but I don’t think we can take that completely for granted. This isn’t decided until the people vote.
Jinchi
This attack by the Clinton team on Sanders always seems to misfire. It immediately brings to mind Clinton’s own failings relative to liberal voter priorities. Specifically, her support for the Iraq war. A decision that was one of the most disastrous of the Bush years, and one she seems inclined to repeat.
President Clinton is unlikely to get meaningful gun control legislation passed. But President Sanders would be quite capable of avoiding another foreign policy catastrophe.
Bobby Thomson
@Jennifer: no, she got 23 pledged to his 21.
Miss Bianca
@WereBear:
Yeah. This. And I have to say that it’s about damn time some momentum got started about how shitty the economy is for young people in this situation – hell, for olds like me, expensively educated and underpaid. I mean crap…I’m only making $5 an hour more right now than in my first real job out of college. And my expenses are about five times what they were back then. And, as I said up top, I am not the only one. And if i were HRC’s campaign manager (ha!) I’d be planning to set up camp on that common economic ground between the disaffected yout’ and the disaffected olds, and say, “all y’all come on in”.
But that would be me…
hitchhiker
It’s just an attempt to point out that the people who say Sanders is a strong candidate based on national head-to-head polls might possibly be ignoring what will be done to him should he get the nomination. What’s a better way to say that without naming the probable smear?
Frankensteinbeck
@Kropadope:
I looked at the history of SC’s polling. Bernie can’t realistically win it. Hillary’s support hasn’t lessened, Bernie just steadily picked up the undecideds. If there was a shakeup that made people reconsider, like he won big in both Iowa and NH, that might have changed things. He didn’t get it.
Jennifer
@Bobby Thomson: Ok, so she got a couple more. Still waiting for you to cut & paste where I praised Bernie Sanders to high heaven. There’s more truth in what I said about the delegates.
Goblue72
@Calouste: Source for the 4% popular vote lead?
I’ve been checking the Des Moines Register and last I read, the delegate count margin narrowed to two and the raw vote totals have not been released.
Des Moines Register
DCF
@Sawgrass Stan:
President Obama, among other things, is known as one who ‘plays the long game’ (i.e., chess) vs. the instant gratification crowd whose attention span will only allow for checkers (the game of draughts).
Sanders is also playing the long game…he delineates positions on topics ranging from Social Security, pay equity/living wage, and higher education to single payer/universal health care…and in so doing, he is ‘raising the bar’ of our societal goals while simultaneously acknowledging the fact that some of them will demand more time, effort and commitment than others.
Do we, as a country, wish to settle for the bronze medal as the best we can achieve – or strive for the gold? In my experience, setting a higher – and yes, ultimately achievable goal – results in a superior result.
Neither of these candidates will face an ‘easy’ general election. Sanders is a 74 year-old, Jewish, Democratic Socialist. HRC is a Democrat (gasp), a Clinton (Sweet Baby Jeebus), and (for the misogynists of our population) a Woman (Holy FSM). What do you think the Republicans will do with THAT trifecta?
I believe we can find a coherent balance between aspiration (not utopian ideals) and the lowest common denominator (lcd) standard that we so often fall prey to in the course of ‘real politik(s)’…for those who agree (and disagree), I offer the following (the whole thing, or start at 33:40):
Lewis Black ” Red White and Screwed “
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRAZI3W2RDA&list=RDuRAZI3W2RDA#t=5
gwangung
@Jennifer: You know what they call a candidate who puts up those numbers in November?
Madame President.
Kropadope
@Frankensteinbeck: Well, my vote in the general election doesn’t count, so forgive me if I don’t want to write off the primaries after 2% of the states comprising less than 2% of the population have voted.
HRA
The generation gap is really evident when people attack Bernie’s young followers negatively. If the opposite was true, no doubt they would be defended for their enthusiasm.
What makes a great chunk of the population not want HRC running let alone being nominated is the immense history accompanying the Clintons. It will continue as it has been already right into the White House if she nominated and wins.
My greatest desire is to see a less talking point about nonwhite voters used as a failure in debating this election. They are no different than you or me. They have the right as citizens to vote their choice like all of us will do when it’s time to elect a candidate.
.
singfoom
@Miss Bianca: I’m with you. The central push of the democratic campaign should be the economy. For the college grads, it’s really bad. For a lot of other people, it’s really bad. The question “How do we make the economy work for everyone?”
30+ years of wages not going up while expenses go up and productivity soaring and the 1% (really the .001%) capturing all the gains.
That should unite both young college grads AND middle aged people struggling….
WarMunchkin
I am in favor of this idea. I will donate time, money, misc capital, sweat, blood and kittens to any candidate who publicly advocates this.
Frankensteinbeck
@DCF:
I respect this argument. The American people in general need to be pushed left, and Bernie is doing it. Good for him.
Chip Daniels
Just some anecdata, but my son and stepdaughter, both in early 20’s, are Bernie fans, and passionately interested in the political process, and determined to vote and drag as many friends to the polls as possible….REGARDLESS of which Dem nominee gets the nod.
Just as Obama raised the awareness of the entire political process in 2008, so here Bernie is raising awareness of politics in general among the Youts.
Which is a good thing.
Amir Khalid
@Kropadope:
See my link to the AP delegate count #60. She’ll likely wind up with only 11 or 12 times as many total delegates as Bernie, rather than 13 times as many, which is how big a lead she has now.
schrodinger's cat
@WereBear:
He has no idea of how to fix it. Saying that a revolution will fix it is wishful thinking. It took 30 plus years for the Reagan revolution to bear its poisonous fruits. Reversing course will take about the same time, not one or even two Presidential terms are going to do it.
He wants to completely change the way the financial system, higher education and immigration at once. Its like believing three impossible things before breakfast.
ETA: How is the pie-in-the sky that Bernie is promising different from Republicans promising to repeal Obamacare. I see both as examples of making unrealistic promises that you can’t actually keep. His intentions may be more noble but is that enough? We know what the road to hell is paved with.
WereBear
Absolutely. I was fortunate to keep my job, but my mother lost her house, a friend lost his job and went through his savings before he got another, several here on BJ are in the same leaky boat.
We had a little cat toy business perking along, and 2008 pulled its plug like a TV set. Sales just vanished.
I’m sure we are not the only ones. We are still trying to get the business going because we don’t have pensions or anything. We expect to work until we die. It has to be something we can do as time goes on.
Both Mr WereBear and I have had to start our lives over because we lost so much due to Republican policies. I want to see them savaged for the way they have trashed American’s lives and dreams.
The looting has gone on my entire adult life. So I’m really, really, tired of it.
Joe Bauers
I haven’t been reading BJ as much as I used to, so I didn’t want to say this until I saw it in multiple threads recently. But there seem to be about ten times as many butthurt Clinton supporters whining about “Bernie bros”, whatever they are, than there are Sanders supporters of any kind posting here.
Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class
@Yutsano:
Brock still feels a lot of guilt for his part in what the Wurlitzer did to the Clintons.
That said, I’m willing to place a sizeable bet on Team Bernie struggling to hold California should he become the nominee for November. I think he struggles to eke out a two point win there.
Goblue72
@Kropadope: There’s a solid contingent of regulars here who aren’t progressives. They’re a combo of totebag clutchers, centrists and recovering Republicans. You can tell because their knee jerk reaction to the call for actual progressive public policies is criticism, derision and outright anger.
Such has always been the case. Seattle won its $15 per hour campaign not due to squishy libs and pro-business mods in that city, but because a Socialist led the charge of the hard left to demand it & City leadership was forced to respond.
henqiguai
@Frankensteinbeck (#56):
Wait, is there really some dim bulb on the Left really saying Bernie should pack it in? Who? What’s their rationale (if it’s because he lost in IA, they’re idiots regardless of whether IA Democratic caucus-goers should have been ‘his’ constituency)?
Kropadope
@Amir Khalid: Most of the delegates she has now are superdelegates and are allowed to change their mind, which they certainly may do if the elections pan out differently than expected. The only delegates they can certainly count on right now are (I believe) Bernie’s 20 to Hillary’s 22.
Thor Heyerdahl
@WarMunchkin:
Baud?
Kropadope
@Goblue72:
What gives you definitional authority over who’s a progressive?
Kropadope
@schrodinger’s cat:
And he also wants to do several more manageable things. You can have both your pie in the sky and your feet on the ground. It’s not impossible.
WereBear
@schrodinger’s cat: When JFK said, “Let’s go to the moon,” did you think he meant to do it in a short time?
singfoom
@schrodinger’s cat: So, he does want to change those things. I think that you’re taking the word ‘revolution’ too literally. Yes, it took 30 years of the republican bullshit campaign to poison some things.
I understand looking at that and thinking “There’s no way that’s possible.” But you don’t inspire people by saying “What do we want? SMALL INCREMENTAL CHANGE!!! When do we want it? IN THE NEXT COUPLE DECADES!!!”
That doesn’t fire anyone up. I think it’s better to reach for the impossible and fail than to lower your expectations so that only tiny things can be done. Is it unrealistic? Yes, just like every presidential platform ever.
I respect your opinion but I think it’s at least worth trying those things. Your mileage may vary.
Thor Heyerdahl
@Kropadope: The super duper progressive decoder ring found at the bottom of a bag of organic cooperative cauliflower kale quinoa crunch?
singfoom
@Kropadope: @Goblue72: None of us are True Scotsmen. Nor shall any of us ever be.
Amir Khalid
@Kropadope:
If the primaries do indeed pan out differently from expectations. So far, though, Bernie needed a big win in Iowa to help him make up for the states where she’s expected to win big. Had he squeaked out the win in Iowa, he’d still be in for a bashing in those other states. That’s why Hillary is still the favourite in this race.
DCF
@schrodinger’s cat:
I (will not) beg to differ…Sanders does have ideas/plans to ‘fix it’…and the proposition that it took thirty years ‘…for the Reagan Revolution to bear its poisonous fruits’ is to obviate a significant proportion of that timeline (1981 – 2016).
We cannot, as a nation, afford the cynicism, defeatism and resignation that permeates your comment.
Jennifer
@schrodinger’s cat: No one’s going to change anything without first changing the House & Senate.
But I find your attitude defeatist. FDR did things that big and bigger in 2 terms. It’s not impossible as in “can never happen again.” I am not saying or implying that Sanders is another FDR because I don’t believe that he is and of course the current climate is vastly different. I’m saying you shouldn’t discard out of hand the idea that big change can happen quickly.
This one thing is certain, though: it doesn’t happen if no one is pushing for it. You don’t get big change quickly by nibbling around the edges with half-measures, putting bandaids on gaping wounds.
Kropadope
@Thor Heyerdahl: OMFZ that was funny, I shouldn’t be reading this while I’m at the library.
John D.
@WereBear:
“We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things,not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win.”
Yes, he did, and he said so in that exact speech.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@WereBear: JFK also ran on cutting taxes, which is like (I assume, I don’t have kids) like asking your kids if they want to go the candy store. And he barely won.
LanceThruster
This does not square with her pronounced fealty to Israel.
orogeny
On the issue of the winger Wurlitzer attacking Clinton vs attacking Bernie…the big difference is that Clinton’s polling numbers already take that attack into consideration. Hillary has been the object of virtually constant attacks for the last couple of decades on the points you listed. People have pretty much made up their minds one way or another about her.
Sanders, on the other hand, is an unknown quantity for a large swath of the electorate. He’s polling above his weight because lots of people haven’t heard much on the negative side about him. There has been no concentrated attack by the right because the right knows that they’ll be able to move his numbers considerably once the general election starts and they release the hounds at Fox and CNN and MSNBC and talk radio and all the other RNC surrogates out there.
msdc
@Frankensteinbeck:
This, a thousand times this. Her decision to embrace Obama’s legacy and cast herself as its defender did a lot to win me over. Also shows that she’s determined not to repeat the mistakes Gore made in 2000.
This too. To be fair, that’s not an unreasonable assumption after her stint in Congress and the 2008 campaign. But she seems to recognize where the center of gravity lies in the Democratic party of 2016. It’s not Bill, and it’s not Bernie either.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Jennifer: Obama and FDR were both able to run against economic (and in Obama’s case, foreign policy failures) massive failures that were associated with the Other Party. And as much as I suspect that in his heart of hearts Saint Bernard would love to run against Obama, that’s not a great strategy for a Democrat.
henqiguai
@Jinchi (#70):
Nobody is likely to get much in the way of gun control legislation passed any time soon, barring some gun-related holocaust effecting the Teahadists in Congress.
Sanders’ capability of avoiding another foreign policy catastrophe is comparable to mine; I haven’t come even close to any such thing. Or were you implying that a President Hillary Clinton is a guaranteed foreign policy catastrophe? Because Bernie’s foreign policy expertise and experience is so much more extensive than her’s? If so, please get beyond the content free complaint about her ‘hawkishness’.
Miss Bianca
@singfoom: The question “How do we make the economy work for everyone?”
THAT IS THE QUESTION. And the sooner all Dem candidates everywhere raise their voices and ask that question – and don’t for the love of God, shirk the attendant factors of how racism and sexism complicate it (ahem Bernie, clue phone ringing for you, line one) – the better off we’ll all be.
Kropadope
@henqiguai:
I wouldn’t be so sure. I would expect such a slaughter would prevent Congress from meeting some sort of quorum threshold. Those districts will still have the same voters who will likely elect more Teahadis. Teahadi Congressfolk are an easily replenished resource because the experience and competence requirements are so low.
randy khan
@Jennifer:
FDR had enormous Democratic majorities in the House and Senate. Bernie, if he were lucky, would have a bare majority in the Senate, and still firmly Republican House (because, these days, the chances of getting even 1 crossover vote for Democratic legislation in the House is essentially zero).
WereBear
@John D.: Perhaps my point was not clear; no one expected us to go to the moon next week, and likewise, the sweeping changes Sanders discussions will not be done overnight, either.
I think another important point about younger people is that they didn’t get civics in junior high… they haven’t seen dramatic evidence of government working… all they know is the screaming of the right wing… and I would say a lot of people, regardless of age, are stunningly unaware of how government works. And the Republicans have been saying for decades that government can’t work.
It’s encouraging to have someone come along and pinpoint the problems and the solutions. We’ve been thrashing it out for years. We have a high interest in wonkery and policy.
I’m thrilled Sanders is firing up the younger generation. Who else is doing that?
Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class
@DCF:
In other words, once the Revolution is done, the cynics and defeatists and impure will be judged politically.
Thank you, Tovarisch.
Kropadope
@henqiguai:
I think most Bernie supporters would say the relevant attribute is judgment.
Jennifer
@randy khan: I have to assume that was a willful misreading of my comment, since I prefaced it with “no one is going to change anything without changing the House and Senate first.”
shortstop
@Kropadope:
Er, that’s quite a stretch. She hasn’t lived here since the 1960s. We don’t consider her one of ours and Iowa considers her a “neighbor” even less. New Hampshire, on the other hand, has a history of preferring (recent or current) neighbors in its primaries.
geg6
@Goblue72:
Because you’re the arbiter as to what constitutes a “progressive,” right?
Myself, I’m not a progressive. That’s too Republican a term and I refuse to use it for myself. I’m a liberal. I’ve always been a liberal. Unlike the so-called “progressives” and their Republican framing demonizing the word “liberal.” It doesn’t mean socialist and it doesn’t mean neoliberal. Liberal. That’s me.
MomSense
@Frankensteinbeck:
Word.
Sanders is to the left on some issues, but not all and he didn’t push the country to the left after 25 years in Congress. It took Barack Obama successfully messaging and campaigning on progressive values and ideas to push the country left so that now we can continue to expand progressive policies.
I think Sanders is new to a lot of people but some of us have known about him for decades.
Kropadope
@shortstop: New Hampshire also has a history of choosing Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary.
singfoom
@Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: Yes, because pointing out apathy being a bad thing for the nation is the same as purging people for having the wrong political viewpoint.
Swing and a miss.
Belafon
Why should they hold back? I don’t see anything in that list that is an attack on Sanders’ private life or those around him. I also don’t see anything that’s a political smear. And I could split those into two categories: Those that Republicans won’t attack because they’re views they share (see the NRA) and those that they’ll attack him with. The first group he needs to answer for Democrats, and the second he needs to have answered before Republicans use them.
Obama, nor Bill, suffered when the Democrats attacked them, and I think it helped. Clinton and Sanders should be able to handle political questions.
Keith G
@WereBear: Your analysis is 100% correct. And then there is more. To put it simply one only needs to reflect on things said by William Jefferson Clinton. He is spoke quite eloquently on the power of using fairness and hope as a way to energize voters. As I recall there has been another presidential candidate who did pretty well using those ideas as well.
Some commentators here have spent a bit of time typing about how the current group of kids need to be schooled about how unrealistic their goals are. What a bunch of crab apples. My experience with 18 – 24 year olds is that they believe in their dreams and their ideals. They haven’t quite been shafted enough to have given up on the notion that even distance hopes have a chance of becoming reality.
When I was that age in the mid-1970s I worked hard for the very few candidates I could find who were against the death penalty, for gun control, and for gay rights. None of them stopped me to tell me that my goals were decades away from coming true.
Thank fucking god they didn’t!
Cacti
David Brock has said mean things.
The Sanders campaign has committed felony computer fraud.
Both sides do it.
shortstop
@Kropadope: Bwa! Dang, your goalposts are sprinting down the field under their own steam now.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Its Senator Dumbledore’s response when asked how he’s gonna get that pie baked and down out of the sky.
Are suggesting Bernie is…. inauthentic?
Marc
I think that the floor for both Dems and Republicans is much higher than it was in the 70s and 80s. Democrats have won the west coast, northeast (except NH, which Sanders would win), and upper MW (mich, wisc, minn, ill) every election since 1992 – that’s 28 years since a Republican could win any of these states. Republicans have won most of the south and mountain west states. Either Sanders or Clinton could certainly lose, but a losing Dem map would look like 2000, with a few states peeled off, not 1972. I doubt that Trump or Sanders or Cruz would drop below 45 percent in a 2 way race. A losing republican map might look like 2008, maybe a bit better in Appalachia or with a surprise in a place like Georgia or Arizona.
Marc
@Belafon: Attacks by one group of supporters on supporters of the other candidate, on the other hand, tend to make it harder to form a united front after the primary season is over.
Kropadope
@geg6:
Hey, Teddy Roosevelt’s progressive Bull Moose Party rocked my socks, OK?
One thing that really frustrates me is how political labels have twisted around words in the English language. “Liberal” is usually associated with the left, but means different things in different contexts. The left is socially liberal, but economic liberalism is a term for capitalism, which both sides embrace. Contemporary “conservatives” don’t want slow, non-disruptive change, they are actually rather radical, an antonym to conservative. Progressive just means you want change, what way? how fast? who knows?
The simple fact of the matter is you can be at once liberal, progressive, and conservative, and many other things and these are not contradictory ideas.
TylerF
None of the attacks on Hillary will be new news. Bernie has never been involved in a campaign that was remotely as relentlessly hostile to him as the general would be this year.
We know how Hillary responds, we don’t know how Bernie will. The problem with thus country is that congress is too conservative, not sure how taking Bernie out of the senate helps that.
WereBear
I was fascinated by the age breakdown being over/under 45. The overs have heard all the Republican attacks on Hillary Clinton already, and don’t care; while the unders do not have the reflexive fear of “s0cia1ism!” that Republicans rely on so heavily, so bashing Bernie Sanders for something he actually is will just look stupid to them.
Kropadope
@shortstop: What goalposts? No goalposts were ever set, let alone moved. My point is that NH’s proximity to VT isn’t really a good reason to dismiss Bernie’s expected win. Though some will dismiss, dismiss, dismiss away, no matter what happens.
ETA: In fact, why can’t we look at NH as a very worthwhile potential endorsement. They know him better than anyone. If they like him…
singfoom
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: There’s this thing called nuance. A revolution where people jump on the barricades and fight and die is one thing.
A revolution in voter behavior / against special interests is a different thing, no?
Nate Dawg
If Bernie wants to get vetted for the general, and prove to the skeptics that he could survive such an ordeal, Hillary should unleash the attack dogs. Let’s see how he and the bro’s handle that….My guess: it won’t be pretty.
ruemara
@BR: I’m with you on this. Not even touching the Mrs. Sanders stuff waiting to pounce. Brock isn’t sniping, when this has already started to be brought to light. The biggest feature for some on Sanders’ electability is his lack of scandals. Naw, son, this is mud pit. Ain’t no one getting out clean.
It’s not wrong that Sanders has been a little deaf to minority concerns, such as women. Want Clinton to take a hard stance? Did you not see her call for an end to the Hyde Amendment? Hello? You can’t see if you aren’t looking. You may not like a democratic spokesshill saying something, but you should know that this is coming.
If Bernie wins, I’m hoping he breaks things down for his people and they show the fuck up this year and 2018. It is the only way to get his proposals anywhere near reality. If Clinton wins, I’m just hoping the Dems discover how to build a bench of candidates down the line and a future for the party. This middling bullshit won’t work for much longer. I don’t think the planet can take an insane America for much longer either. God help us all if this is a Republican sweep.
Nate Dawg
@Kropadope: As I’m sure the Berniebro’s will dismiss away the South Carolina vote the following week. Is this y’all first time around? You seem *shocked, shocked* that a campaign plays the expectations games, creates a narrative, and tries to harness momentum while minimizing losses. Uh, this is how the game is played.
Back to reality.
shortstop
@Marc: Yes. But run the numbers on the few states actually (not theoretically) in play. I’m leaving out NC, which is gone, but the Dem can lose Florida, Ohio AND Virginia and still win as long as she/he gets Colorado, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Iowa and Nevada. Our candidate may not get every state on that second list — although every one of them is truly gettable — but I also do not think the Dem will lose all three of Florida, Ohio and Virginia and may well get all of them. It’s going to be extraordinarily hard for the GOP to prevail.
Nelle
Off topic – If anyone has low blood pressure, go to CSpan 3 and watch the hearings on the Flint situation. I’m watching the Republicans try to slam EPA and hold them responsible. That would be the EPA that the Republicans are trying to abolish and refuse to fully fund. Your blood pressure will rise
Archon
@Marc:
Agreed, I genuinely believe that Clinton has a better chance of winning the general then Bernie but the idea that Sanders would lose in some McGovern like landslide is ridiculous. If you voted for Obama twice you aren’t voting for the Republican candidate over Bernie which suggests his floor is probably around 46 to 48 percent. Now I doubt Sanders crossover appeal once the Republican kitchen sink comes at him but he would have a good chance of winning the Presidency if he won the nomination. Not good enough for me to support him over Hillary though.
Kropadope
@Nate Dawg:
I don’t know about them, but I won’t write off South Carolina’s vote, though I will keep soldiering on for my preferred candidate.
What I WILL dismiss is this obnoxious name-calling that makes you assholes look exactly like the strawmen you are arguing against.
Eric U.
if the OP is true, and David Brock is going to attack Bernie, i’m going to be really annoyed. So far the rule has been no attacking other Democrats. I think having arguments is good, not attacks. I always wondered how you could go from College Republican to dem operative. Maybe you can’t leave the College Republican too far behind
I think the Bernistas will vote for the dem, just like the PUMAs did last time. The people that really bother me are the nominally intelligent/liberal people I know that refuse to vote. I know some Obama 2008 voters that feel really let down by him and refuse to vote. ::rolleyes::
ruemara
@Jennifer: and there’s the deafness. Is it that hard to understand that Bernie has a good initial set of targets for this first set of targets? That he’s not an outsider in this area? You can’t just acknowledge that and say, we’ll see if she does better in more diverse areas?
This is what scares me about bernmentum. I want to join, but I like analyzing too much to not notice what’s happening over what I want to believe.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
If she can force the GOP nominee’s hand to an open discussion of abortion, which they’ve been avoiding since Reagan, that will be a very good thing.
Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class
I’m a white guy in a mostly recession/depression insulated field of law, kids gone and mostly educated. Aside from President Cruz turning my Medicare into a Val-Pak coupon set (after he beats the Bern), forcing me to buy some overpriced shit health coverage from some fat wingnut rhino, elephant and gorilla trophy hunter in Texas and raising my social security eligibility age to 80, I won’t experience immediate effects of his administration. After all, I can always fall asleep in the seats of the evangelical megachurch I’ll be mandated to attend.
I just hope my grandkids won’t get drafted to fight in the conflagrations in Iran, Korea, Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Turkey that he’ll start.
Progressive purists can then rub their hands together in glee over the contradictions that got heightened when Cruz gets elected. Just hope nobody needs contraceptives when Griswold gets attacked and gutted, gay marriage is gone and homosexuality gets criminalized again.
Heighten the Contradictions with Unity Ticket 2016: Sanders/Stein!!
Kay
Good piece on three Sanders supporters who are running for Congress.
Nate Dawg
@Kropadope: Logged on to facebook this morning and saw the c-word used twice for the first time ever, and by Berniebros’. The obnoxious name-calling is much stronger with that crowd. But don’t let that get in your way.
Cacti
Arthur Chu addresses the Berniebro problem in the Guardian.
The bros in the comments are not amused.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Archon: all depends on what Bloomberg or someone like him does (I still think he wouldn’t want to soil his hands with the proles, but if he gets a lot of Rendell types whispering in his ear , who knows?) or people stay home. I don’t think Bloomberg automatically give the race to a Republican, but he muddies the electoral waters.
singfoom
@Nate Dawg: Are you really making the argument that Bernie supporters are more insulting than Hillary supporters?
There is absolutely NO WAY that you can know that. Or that the reverse can be known. It’s all anecdotal.
Maybe we can try to keep it civil here and agree that insults don’t serve anyone but the Republicans….
Cheers.
Marc
@Nate Dawg: You don’t seem to be shy about aggressive name-calling.
Jennifer
@ruemara: I think the answer is the old line, “fall in love, then fall in line.” A lot of people seem confused about the meaning of that. What it means is “vote with your heart in the primary, then vote to save your ass in the general.” Which is what I plan to do.
Archon
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Never understood the idea that a Republican like Bloomberg running 3rd party would throw the elections to the Republicans.
Frankensteinbeck
@Kropadope:
You soldier on for a candidate you believe in, and I respect that even though I’m on the other side. Hell, I think he’s toast, but politics is weird and I respect even that you think he can win. That is what we’re supposed to do.
I do not respect the nasty tone of any supporter on either side, but… snarling jackals, man. I like BJ enough to accept that it gets pretty confrontational.
henqiguai
@Kropadope (#94):
First off, there should be a clear definition of terms. But beyond that, what’s all the hype about being a ‘progressive’? In the real world of obstructed politics, does it really matter if one is some sort of ‘progressive’ versus ‘liberal’ versus not-conservative?
gwangung
@singfoom:
Actually, I think it’s embarassing that certain supporters act that way period. Could we not have ANYBODY adopt Gamergate tactics?
Nate Dawg
@Marc: what is aggressive name-calling? berniebro? okay, i wont’ use the term any more, bro
Kay
@Nelle:
This is neat, though, on Flint. The Ford Foundation announced a while ago they were going to focus on income inequality. I wondered what they would do it- whether it would be the standard stuff.
One thing they did was fund an investigative journalist:
singfoom
@gwangung: It is embarrassing on either side. I’m all for not having anybody adopt said tactics.
henqiguai
@DCF (#101):
Too late! That package has been ordered, shipped, unpacked, and the purchase order paid.
El Caganer
I’ve seen a couple comments, both here and at a few other sites, claiming that the country is moving to the left. I’m curious what the evidence for that is – the composition of our two national legislative bodies would indicate that that claim isn’t true.
Nate Dawg
It’s not really anecdotal. We have the false equivalence of the term “Berniebro” with the terms “c*nt” & “b&tch”.
The former is more along the lines of “Obot”, “Paultard”, etc. and rather mild, while the latter are more like the n-word.
I wasn’t really putting much stock in the whole “berniebro” narrative this time last week, but they’ve been unleashed enough that even I, esconced in a corner of Facebook and cut off from the poor, huddled masses, have seen evidence that they are in fact worse than anything seen in 2008.
As a tireless Obot, I don’t recall ever seeing any of my peers use the c-word and b-word during the primary.
Oh, and the video at the Sander’s rally where the crowd is chanting “liar, liar” at Hillary is rather cute, too.
Keith G
@singfoom:
@Nate Dawg:
One can certainly see a lot of stupid shit on Facebook and Twitter. I think it would be really cool if folks here good spend all their time asking and answering questions directly posed on the threads and also bringing things said directly by the candidates in question.
Although I was an Obama supporter in 2007 and 2008, I never felt compelled to saddle Hillary with the stupid and seemingly racist crap that Bill Clinton would spout off with from time to time. He was not on the ballot.
singfoom
@Nate Dawg: No, it’s literally anecdotal. As in, there is no scientific way to measure the veracity of your statement that Bernie supporters are worse than HRC supporters.
Unless you’re volunteering to conduct a double blind study….
Nate Dawg
@Keith G: Fair enough.
Marc
I just hate the idea that some guy with a sign, or a jerk who writes nasty things on Facebook, defines a campaign that they support. It was used against us over and over and over again in the run-up to the Iraq War. It’s pointless, and it convinces no one. Campaigns aren’t responsible for jerks who support them, and claiming that everyone who supports a campaign is a jerk because some people are is a complete logical failure.
Hell, in a lot of cases it turns out that the people acting like jerks supporting a campaign are actually plants from their opponents. Which makes using them as weapons even more dubious.
shortstop
@Archon: Bloomberg isn’t a cookie-cutter Republican, though. He’s one of the biggest voices for significant gun control and is considered a RINO at best/a goddamned traitor at worst by most of the Republican base. He would attract some — some — establishmentarian Repubs if the GOP nominee is Trump, although honestly, most of them will suck it up and vote for the guy they say they’d never vote for. But Bloomberg would also attract quite a few Democratic-leaning men who don’t want to vote for Clinton.
Joel
@JMG: That would be the wise approach to attacking Sanders, and for a while, I reckon that Clinton was using it. But campaigns are stressful things, and you need preternatural vision to take the long view. I don’t think we’ll be seeing the “no drama Obama” approach for many election cycles.
Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class
Those 30 socialist state legislatures, the socialist domination in the House and socialist majority Senate are testaments to how far left the country has moved.
Any more contradiction heightening, and they’ll start criminalizing the practice of non-evangelical flavors of Christianity.
Jeannedalbret
@Enhanced Voting Techinques:
Think about where you heard Bernie was old, 80 years old.
He is 74; Clinton is 68; Biden is 69, Trump is 69. years.
Let stupid, fraudulent internecine attacks stop with us.
ellennelle
betty, most excellent post. i would only add to your splendid clinton graf a la daou dump, the bottomless pit of conservative archives of benghazi and emails and benghazi and libya and benghazi benghazi benghazi and benghazi.
i’ve encountered this vitriol in the oddest of places; the husband of one my patients launched into the benghazi tirade unbidden in our waiting area two years ago, so do you think that opinion has cooled? i’ve been making calls to SC, and i got more “i’ll never vote for her ever!” than i got undecideds. white folks, of course, all of those. but you get the picture. the woman has, rightly or wrongly, tons of baggage, and the GOP has never hesitated to make up more of this crap just to feed to the rabid base they created to literally hate her.
i find that appalling and beyond disturbing, but it is real. and it’s personal; how does one respond to that kind of hatred? going after bernie for being a socialist, at least he can respond with a quick list of socialist facts that will make folks rethink. not to mention, the numbers in our population who ever cared about that are now old and dwindling; young folks have a clue about those truths.
the treatment of hillary all these years, and now, has been disgusting; hence my frequent defense of her, even now. but we can fret and call it unfair all we like, but it is there, and it is really really deep, it has a loooooong history. that is NOT going away. partly because of the long history, but also because of misogyny that is as big, if not bigger, factor in the politics of these cretins than anything, including race.
that is also unfair. it’s not even real, in terms of the truth about HRC. but it IS real AND true about the political terrain we are facing. that segment of the population have a huge adolescent case of “you’re not the boss o’ me” that is way too easy to exploit if a candidate is black or a woman. a good bit harder if you’re an old white non practicing jew.
i’ve tried to keep an even mind about these things, but that requires remaining realistic. it baffles me that the CW finds hillary more electable, while ignoring these facts about the felt history of so many fox and newsmax fans, and simultaneously ignoring entirely the stunning enthusiasm generated by sanders.
ultimately, i made my decision to back sanders based on the fact that he so steadfastly rejects outside money, the only candidate to do so (but trump, who hardly needs money with all the free ads he gets). the rest of it just seem logical if the larger picture is truly assessed.
plus, i still cringe at the vitriol of the PUMA effect, and actually see too much of it across the net, even here, which surprised me; had expected more sophistication. if this nasty rejection of a decent man with the same policy ideas as FDR persists should he win, then we are truly doomed as a party. the saddest part for me is that it seems to reflect the not so subtle inclinations of party leadership, which have proven to be at best unfair. smelling irony?
so yes, we need more civilized debate. but save for your much-needed call, have seen none of it here, or anywhere else.
hope you get your wish! thx.
Joel
@Tim C.: Not at all.
Other pertinent examples exist in actual, historical revolutions. Iran might be enlightening here.
henqiguai
@Kropadope (#112):
D@mn Krop, you’re bringing me down here. But I really do think some sort of hit impacting either a significant number of Congressional Teahadists, or an important constituency or leader, would minimally ‘start the conversation’. At some point hard reality will start trickling through even to those people.
gwangung
@Marc:
To a great deal this is true. On the other hand, if this is an ongoing problem for a candidate, it’s certainly something that needs to be addressed one way or another…for volunteer recruitment if nothing else.
Tractarian
@DCF:
On electability, it’s advantage Hillary, and its not close. Recent actual election results show that the general electorate has no problem electing and re-electing a Democrat – yes, even a Clinton. And her gender is an unvarnished positive.
Meanwhile, the general electorate is more willing to vote for a Muslim, atheist, or gay person for president than they are to vote for a socialist for President.
Political science studies also show that a candidate’s perceived distance from policy mainstream (i.e. extremism) is negatively correlated with general election success.
@Goblue72:
You don’t have to be a centrist or Republican-lite to acknowledge that Sanders is clearly unelectable (see above). You just have to live outside a bubble of like-minded peers (which, admittedly is getting harder and harder to do with increasing polarization).
In fact, with this in mind, I have to question your commitment to progressive causes. Why would you vote for a candidate who is clearly unelectable – unless you want the GOP to win in November?
kc
@Nate Dawg:
Just because your FB pals like to use vulgar epithets is no justification for your repeated sneering use of “Berniebro” against commenters here.
I swear, every time I see one of HRC’s supporters insult and smear Sanders supporters, it just hardens my resolve to vote against her.
:)
kc
@Nate Dawg:
So far, the only person using those words in this thread is YOU.
Frankensteinbeck
@henqiguai:
I don’t. I think it would make them buy more guns and get more violent and preemptive against minorities – even if the shooter was a white Christian male. That is their chosen response to fear, and they’re already afraid. Something else will have to break their power. The Republican Party will fight against gun control for the foreseeable future.
henqiguai
@Kropadope (#116):
Not trying to start an argument with this. On ‘judgement’, those who are not necessarily Bernie supporters might suggest that his judgement that economic inequality is the be-all and end-all issue with respect to all things wrong in America including racism and misogyny is definitively a bad judgement call. Regardless, shallow analyses and ofttimes profound ignorance of even recent history makes things even more muddled.
Nate Dawg
@singfoom: My point is actually not anecdotal.
The words being used to describe Bernie supporters that Bernie supporters are alleging are qualitatively different than the words being used by Bernie supporters. The point is that.
Of course I can’t count the usage and weigh the number of times, but bro != c$nt.
1. Some bernie supporters have been called “bros”
2. Some bernie supporters have called HRC a “c$nt”
3. The two are equivalent.
^^That is what I’m taking issue with.
Nate Dawg
@kc: Not my FB friends. Friend of friend. I don’t believe any of my friends would use those words. I was actually skeptical a week ago at this time, until after Iowa the floodgates came, and comments on tangential threads made it clear to me that there are in fact ardent Bernie supporters who have no problem dropping the c-word even though their friends are very liberal and progressive.
henqiguai
@Kropadope (#121): Yeah, I’m gonna stop in a minute.
One primary. That’s a datum, not a history.
Nate Dawg
@Marc: That’s a really good point, and one I made last week when I was skeptical of the phenom. The video of the rally attendees chanting “you’re a liar” is a bit different.
Scotian
@ruemara:
“I don’t think the planet can take an insane America for much longer either. God help us all if this is a Republican sweep.”
Speaking as a member of that rest of the planet, and of your closest and largest neighbour, you got that right!!! Seriously, your right wing crazies over the past near 40 years now since the rise of the moral majority and the Reagan decision to bring them into his political coalition onward through the Gingrich Revolution and then the joys of the GWB years and finally the teabaggers has not been a comfortable experience for many of us. We just finally got rid of our own GOP/Koch fueled and inspired clone up here last Fall after a near decade of MASSIVE damage to our own political infrastructures, and we would really appreciate it if you could start really curbing your own, if only to keep your right wing powers from feeling the leisure to tamper in our system as much as they have been doing over the past few decades.
General:
I’ve been a lurker here off and on for many months to years, although more frequently more recently once we finally ended the Reign of Harper, the Destroyer and Salter of the Scorched Earth, which took my primary focus for a decade. However, I usually follow American politics because of the ripple effect it has into my nation’s, having as your sole neighbour a nation as powerful as yours makes that a necessity in my books, as well as needing a good understanding of how your political institutions and realities work. So having said that, I am a bit baffled by this notion that it is alright to hit Clinton all the time with the smears the right wing noise machine has been spewing for a quarter century now yet to point out how the same machine will inevitably go after a candidate Sanders and seeing how well he can take a milder form of it first is such a bad thing.
Sanders and his people need to show they can withstand what anyone with half a brain knows is coming that he has never been forced to directly face before, and it won’t just be his being a socialist either. No, that machine will find anything that makes him look like a non-traditional American, magnify it, distort it, and manufacture realities, just as they did to both the Clintons and Obama. One of HRC’s greatest strengths is that her numbers already have that baked in because we all know how she withstands that attack and deals with it, indeed she first named the source as that Vast Right Wing Conspiracy back when it first was getting going against her husband, and has recently reminded in her testimony in front of the Gowdy committee she still retains the capability of taking it head on and beating it back and leaving its elected mouthpieces looking like fools.
Sanders has yet to seriously face this sort of machine, and you cannot truly assess his viability until he does. So I would argue better he faces it now before he is the decided candidate than after and gives the GOP the trifecta of government this year. Do I like saying this? Not at all, but reality is as it is, not as we wish it were. One of the realities involved here is that the structure of the American political system as it was designed to be is highly confrontational and combative, and anyone seeking the highest offices in the land need to be able to show how well they handle that aspect of it. This is not a new thing either, this is part of your political traditions from the outset.
For me, the only real thing I care about is keeping a Dem in the WH this time, because the way your courts are going, especially your Supreme Court, a GOPer cannot be allowed to make further appointments for some time. That sort of thing does actually ripple beyond your borders too, and I would hate to see some of the rollbacks it is already willing to do be the beginnings and not the far reaches of where it is going to be going over the next decade or two. American politics, for better or worse, is a blood sport at best, Sanders needs to show he has what it takes on that side as well as he does on the inspirational side to have a true chance for final victory, especially in the hyper-partisan reality that currently exists in American politics.
Good luck to both sides down there, you all need it.
Nate Dawg
I mean, make your own call: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlxuul9ypSs&feature=youtu.be
Starts at about :20.
Tractarian
@Nate Dawg:
Ironic that some Bernie supporters tend to get upset over mild, non-derogatory epithets.
It’s almost as if they have never been subject to sustained, trenchant attacks, and are therefore having trouble withstanding them.
Cacti
@kc:
Has your innocence been abused? Your safe space violated?
I know things can get a little rough outside the rarified airs of campus life.
schrodinger's cat
@WereBear: Moonshot was a specific goal. One could break it into incremental steps to reach it. Sanders’ goals have two steps
1. Elect him
2. Revolution.
DCF
@henqiguai:
Given her record as a Senator and Secretary of State, it is clear that HRC is a ‘hawk’ with regard to foreign military intervention(s).
Second, experience is important – as is judgement. I find Sanders’ record with reference to overseas issues (i.e., Iraq, Libya) far more reassuring….
Mnemosyne
@singfoom:
It’s funny, but when Obama said he wanted to be a transformational president like Reagan was, people spent years telling me that meant that Obama was a secret conservative who wanted to do the same things Reagan did. But when Bernie says he wants to be transformational, suddenly he’s the best thing since sliced bread and no Democrat has said anything like that before. Except Obama, who got excoriated for it.
I guess the romance of the word “revolution” exists despite the many disasters that were labeled that way.
henqiguai
@Keith G (#124):
Almost stopped here because, from her #49 post “They cluster in cities, in part, because they can’t afford a car.” – nope, most analyses as well as observed patterns over generations, they’re clustering in the cities because that’s where the services are clustered, that’s where the entertainment is clustered, that’s where any given regions majority culture is clustered. Also, that’s where there’s liable to be mass transit options and more and more of the jobs. Let’s face it, unless you have a need, or strong desire, for a single detached house with large yard, there is very little to recommend living out here in the sticks (yes, I do, primarily because when were buying city living was already unaffordable). Oh, and current research seems to be indicating that younger generations also are *not* as interested in car ownership for a number of reasons.
DCF
@Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class:
No, comrade…we will all march forward together….
Nate Dawg
@Cacti: Agreed.
I never got upset over being called an “Obot”. In fact, I started using it to describe myself. I’m such a hardened cynic, I’ll even refer to myself as a f&gg*t sardonically, among friends. That’s me.
I do realize other people are different. And there is a long, long history of young, white upwardly mobile left-leaning males being persecuted. And that persecution has often occured while they were called “bro”.
And for some of these people, even just hearing the word “bro” can traumatize them and remind them of past abuse.
So I will refrain from calling the Berniebots “bros”, from now on. Mea culpa.
DCF
@singfoom:
It’s not that they have the wrong political viewpoint…it is that their attitudes are often negativistic, jaded, and defeatist….
Swing and a miss…strike two….
different-church-lady
There is no debate as important as the one liberals have about “using words wrong”.
schrodinger's cat
@Jennifer: Realism ! = Defeatism. I am pretty optimistic but my feet are firmly on the ground.
different-church-lady
I’m reading this thread from the bottom up. It’s going to be interesting to see whether it suddenly just veered into a ditch or collapsed steadily over time like an old barn.
shortstop
@Tractarian:
That’s so cute.
schrodinger's cat
Bernie’s proposals will also drown us in a sea of red ink.
Nate Dawg
I think Sander’s pitch isn’t as attractive to Democrats who live in red states. If he were to lose, then all the progress that has enabled us to merely survive here will be stripped away. The Republicans aren’t just promising this. They are voting over and over and over again to demonstrate that they actually mean it. Those are the stakes, and hand-waving away concerns about his general election viability does very little to assuage those fears.
Amir Khalid
@DCF:
How so? Bernie’s foreign-policy record is based entirely on his Senate votes. He’s never had to decide what to do in a crisis.
different-church-lady
@Goblue72:
I believe you’re having a hard time sorting “progressive public policies” from “people saying idiotic things on the internet in the most irritating way possible.” They’re two very different things.
different-church-lady
@Mnemosyne: You know who else was transformational?
DCF
@henqiguai:
Unfortunately, you clearly are willing to select (and pay for) that package…more’s the pity….
Marc
If you want to persuade people in the same party to change their mind, don’t insult them personally. it’s not complicated.
For background, my wife is a strong Clinton supporter – she’s always liked both of them. She also likes Bernie and prefers him in the Senate. Our son and daughter are both strong Sanders supporters. Some of their friends are registering for the first time to vote for Bernie. I like Sanders a lot and find it incredibly refreshing to hear someone that mirrors my values so well. I also agree with Clinton’s platform, which in detail isn’t radically different. I’m worried about her campaign skills and hawkishness – I’m honestly afraid that she’ll bog us down in wars – and I’m worried about whether Sanders can win, as the consequences of a Republican win are catastrophic.
There are a lot of folks like me, I suspect. Telling me that I’m bad for considering Sanders or Clinton isn’t gonna work.
Betty Cracker
@Nate Dawg: The same is true if Clinton wins the nomination and loses the election. That’s why it might behoove our candidates not to engage in scorched earth tactics that would alienate each others’ supporters.
Mnemosyne
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I’m trying to think if there’s ever been a candidate who successfully ran against a president from his/her own party. Truman and Johnson obviously ran on continuing the legacy of their tragically dead predecessor. Bush I ran on continuing the Reagan legacy.
The idea that Bernie wants to run against Obama’s legacy makes me very, very nervous. History shows that if you have both parties running against the president, the opposition party is going to win. Or, as Truman said, they’ll take the real Republican over the squishy Democrat every time.
different-church-lady
@Cacti: It’s a spittle-filled rant, except the spittle is digital.
If you’re a black woman in real life and this happens, you gotta show the Tone Cops your paperwork. But on the internet we immediately accept that their papier-mâché psyche is under real and present threat of being crushed.
Mnemosyne
@different-church-lady:
Alexander Hamilton?
(Hey, I have a reputation to keep up.)
moderateindy
@schrodinger’s cat: Are Sanders ideas , Pie in the Sky? sure. Will he be able to get them through Congress, no. But here’s where your wrong. Not in the fact that it will happen quickly, It won’t, save a real financial disaster like the depression. But it won’t happen at all if our leaders are like the Clinton’s, and they have right leaning policies when it comes to financial, and economic matters.
Sanders isn’t going to get what he talks about, but he is the only candidate that will be putting the party on the track towards those goals. Hillary is mostly a status quo type, I think as a country we nead a leader that is going to try to move the country exceedingly leftward, the same way Reagan moved us drastically to the right. Someone to put the ideas out in the ether if you will. Making them an actual part of the national conversation. Revolution often begins with small steps, and can gain momentum unexpectedly, same sex marriage for example. But such movements don’t take place if no one is out there pushing those ideas.
I like Hillary just fine, (concerned about her hawkishness, and history with corporations like Wamart), but I really don’t see her as someone that will try to do anything substantive about Wall Street, or the plutocrats that currently own this country.
I’d like my leader to at least have an agenda that is progressive, even if it fails.
If your negotiating with a right wing congress, and you start to the left, maybe all they can do is drag you to the middle. If your negotiating position begins in the middle you’re probably gonna end up a lot further to the right when it’s all said, and done.
Nate Dawg
@Marc: Well sounds like we are in the same exact boat. I prefer Sanders on policy, but like Clinton on achievability. I haven’t seen anyone claim supporting Sanders is “bad”. And I don’t see anyone employing scorched earth tactics.
We should look over the aisle and see Christie calling Rubio “bubble boy” and Trump calling Cruz an “illegal alien” and be very grateful. The intra-party vitriol is much, much higher over there. Y’all need to relax.
different-church-lady
@Betty Cracker: I believe the candidates already understand this. The supporters not so much.
different-church-lady
@Mnemosyne: I have no idea. That’s why I was asking the question.
DCF
@Amir Khalid:
Having known Sanders’ record with regard to foreign affairs/policy since 1981, I can say with great assurance that his perspective – and opinions/actions – have remained remarkably consistent over that period of time.
Mnemosyne
I honestly don’t get the butthurt over “Berniebro.” People have been calling me an Obot for years now. Grow a thicker skin or you’re never going to survive once the Republicans start hurling their shit at you.
And the notion that “Berniebro” is just as insulting as “cunt” … yeah, good luck with that.
Paul in KY
@Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: I would expect him to easily take California. Why do you think it would be a struggle?
Mnemosyne
@different-church-lady:
Then I’m sticking with Hamilton. He founded the Coast Guard, you know. Even Hitler can’t touch that.
Paul in KY
@Thor Heyerdahl: Only the vegan kind.
Marc
@Mnemosyne: No one is saying that. I’m saying that smearing all supporters of a campaign with the actions of a few people isn’t useful. It isn’t the name Berniebro that’s rubbing people the wrong way, it’s the insinuation that anyone who supports him is a bigot.
Paul in KY
@geg6: Me too. I’m a Liberal!
henqiguai
@DCF (#189):
I don’t. As I said on another thread, much to commenter C. V. Dane’s disdain, I grew up in a fairly violence-prone time/place, so hawkishness as part of a toolkit for survival is perfectly acceptable to me. Pacifism is what now draws my disdain.
ETA: corrected the referenced comment (188 to 189).
Nate Dawg
@moderateindy: There are shades of Ralph Nader, 2000, in this.
A sure way to move us to the right is to elect a Republican president when Republicans control the House and the Senate.
I admire Sander’s goals. I desire them. I believe a long, sustained effort that begins at the state assembly level and works up from there is the best way to achieve them. I do not believe in risking what we have accomplished (inadequate as it may be) for the chance to elect a symbolic figurehead that cannot accomplish these goals. That is not logical.
Amir Khalid
@DCF:
I say again, that’s his record as a legislator. Do you really not see the difference?
dogwood
@Nate Dawg:
As a red stater myself, I think this is important. I suppose if you are a democrat in Vermont, you can see Obama as a big disappointment. But for dems like me, he’s been anything but that. If a red stater is skeptical about Bernie’s electability, it doesn’t necessarily mean he’s not liberal enough. It reflects concern that when a Republican president scraps Obamas accomplishments on the federal level, we won’t have a state legislature willing to soften the blow. My legislature will double down. For 40% of the voters in my state that is a real- world concern.
Mnemosyne
@moderateindy:
And yet when Obama said that *exact thing* and that he wanted to try and be that leader, people on the left decided that meant he was a Reagan fan and secret conservative.
That’s why I’m nervous about the notion that Sanders is going to run against Obama’s record. Why does he want to start from scratch rather than build on what’s already there?
DCF
@Tractarian:
We’ll have to agree to disagree on this point…I believe that once people are reminded of how their (socialist) Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, police/fire departments, libraries and transportation infrastructure(s) are funded – and work – they may endeavor to reconsider equating democratic socialism with communism…or we could devolve into a Libertarian paradise like Somalia….
Sanders has a profound ‘crossover’ appeal; 25% of Republicans here in Vermont voted for him in the last Senate election. His problem, at this juncture, is one of time and exposure…his name recognition, personal story and policy positions are not as well/widely-known as those of HRC….
kc
@Nate Dawg:
Well, shame on them. Maybe report them for violating FB’s TOS. This is why I’m not on FB anymore, who needs that shit from friends (or friends of friends).
But do you really not remember any Obama fans calling Palin those names? ‘Cause I do. Heck, a self-proclaimed Obot called me a bitch on this very website, though I don’t hold it against Oabama. Every politician has some dumb and belligerent fans.
To be clear, I strongly disapprove of that kind of namecalling. It’s wrong, and it’s also stupid and counterproductive in a political context.
different-church-lady
@Mnemosyne:
Look, it was only yesterday that one person explained to us that the black woman was the real prejudicial oppressor, and a second person explained to us that another black woman was just having a little case of the vapors when that friendly gentleman failed to properly introduce himself in her face. Why must you insist that a third explanation be forthcoming?
kc
@Cacti:
Nah, I’m just responding to the incessant whining about “berniebros.”
DCF
@Amir Khalid:
His record – as an executive (mayor) and legislator (House Representative and Senator) – is both long and clear. You know he was the (single) Vermont member of the House of Representatives for years before his election to the Senate, right?….
Mnemosyne
@Marc:
I wouldn’t say that anyone who supports Bernie is a bigot — there are quite a few people in this very thread who are Bernie supporters that I know for a fact are not bigots.
What I will say is that many of his most vocal supporters (present company excepted) don’t seem to understand that improving the economy will do little or nothing to improve race relations. As I’ve pointed out before, the rising tide that lifts all boats still leaves a lot of them below the rest. The 1950s — probably the most economically secure time in US history — sparked the Civil Rights Movement precisely *because* the improved economic situation of African-Americans didn’t improve segregation and racism.
The fact that many Sanders supporters seem to be upset that people of color are skeptical about Bernie only adds to the divide. That’s not how you reassure people that their interests are important to you.
different-church-lady
@Mnemosyne:
Look, calm down — they’ll be saying exactly the same things about President Sanders the moment he tries to start governing. It’ll all even out in the end.
kc
@Nate Dawg:
It’s weird how you start out all aggrieved about (one person) using bad language on FB and immediately pivot to making fun of other people who complain about your namecalling.
i guess, basically, it’s okay when you do it.
kc
@Mnemosyne:
Huh? Who said that?
kc
@Mnemosyne:
Excuse me, lady, first of all, that’s bullshit, and second of all, who died and made you the spokesperson for “people of color?”
henqiguai
@Nate Dawg (#193):
Well, if ‘they’ would stop trying to appropriate our culture…
D58826
@MomSense: Same here.
As for the gop slime machine I wonder how effective the anti-Hillary stuff will really be. After all we have been listening to it for the past 25 years. It seems like it is baked into the product already. You believe it and would never vote for Clinton or you don’t believe it and move on. Bernie the socialist is another matter. First of all its true. Now I realize there are any number of shades of grey in what socialism means but in the US the default position seems to be socialism=communism as in Union of Soviet SOCIALS republics. I’m sure Bernie can explain what his version of socialism means but as the saying goes when your explaining your losing. Another thing to consider is that socialism in general as an idea has never really taken root in the US. Certainly not like it has in Europe. In short I just think the relatively unknown Bernie=socialist is a much bigger target than the well know Hillary the shrew therefore the gop will have an easier time framing Bernie than they would Hillary.
gwangung
@kc: Blogs and many commenters here at Balloon Juice were saying exactly that.
Monala
@WereBear: I know the debt load is a lot higher for students today, but beyond that, your description is very similar to what my cohorts and I experienced as recent college graduates in the early ’90s.
gwangung
@kc: Sorry, but since I saw this in real time on Twitter to various prominent POC, I wouldn’t call bullshit. We can debate the extent and how representative it is, but it does exist.
Nate Dawg
@kc: No it’s more like people dismissed my complaint about namecalling on facebook by whining about me using the term “bro”. That was their defense. I don’t think the two are equivalent. And there is an online horde of male Bernie supporters that throw around “vagina”, “c&nt”, “b&tch”, “[email protected]”, etc. like they are the worst of the worst of the 4chan crowd. I never saw that as an Obot. Not from PUMA’s or from the Obots.
Of course it doesn’t discredit Sander’s policy positions. I happen to agree with them.
DCF
Let’s take a trip in the Wayback Machine with Mr. Peabody and Sherman:
Insiders Predicted That Bernie Sanders Would Be No Threat to Hillary Clinton
https://theintercept.com/2016/02/02/insiders-predicted-that-bernie-sanders-would-be-no-threat-to-hillary-clinton/
henqiguai
@Amir Khalid (#201):
Well, with regards to the Libya situation, he apparently voted *against* working with our allies in dealing with the *immediate* crisis that everyone else was trying to avert.
moderateindy
@Mnemosyne: I’m sorry but I think you’re mostly making crap up. There were very few, if any people claiming that Obama was a secret conservative because he wanted to be transformative like Reagan. Perhaps a few morons took it that way, but such an attitude was hardly widespread. It was pretty obvious to the vast majority what he meant. Just because you recall a few fools positing such drivel doesn’t mean it was an actual “thing”
Also, I don’t think Sanders is actually running against OBama’s accomplishments. It kind of seems like that’s something that’s been put out there to make Obama supporters dislike Sanders. Having big ideas is not the same as dissing what the other guy has done.
Nate Dawg
@kc:
A) Excuse me, lady — UGH. Tone deaf a little?
B) you don’t have to be the “spokesperson for people of color” to point out that people of color are skeptical of Sanders. The implication is that some people of color are indeed skeptical of him. All you have to do is produce one. Ta-Nehisi Coates has gone into this subject. It’s all over the internet.
You’re a real piece of work, aren’t you?
D58826
@DCF: Yea like all of those old tea partiers who complained about the socialist Obama and Obamacare while demanding that he not touch their social security. ‘Socialism’ as a topic just seems to be a hot button word that shuts down any kind of reasonable discussion. That the police, fire and VA are socialism just gets lost in the shuffle.
And yes for the record if Bernie is the nominee I will vote for him.
Cacti
@kc:
From black Iowa caucus-goers re: The Bern
henqiguai
@DCF (#204):
Dude, your esper powers are weak. Also, too, I’m a part of one of those despised minorities; a minority in these United States that has been and currently still is quite optimistic. Otherwise we would have long ago either committed mass seppuku, or picked up arms and actually done what the more insane right-wing gun-fondlers keep fanasizing. So, swing and a miss…
pamelabrown53
@Betty Cracker:
Here’s a question that I’d like answered. How do we vet Bernie in light of the republicans holding their fire? I remember feeling apoplectic when the “Reverend Wright” shit hit the fan and it was non stop on all the media outlets. Then, President Obama gave his race speech in Philadelphia that will surely be in the history books.
I think it’s necessary to see how Bernie handles such a crushing onslaught.
Let me repeat my question: how do we appropriately vet Bernie when the GOP is keeping their powder dry?
kc
@gwangung:
It shouldn’t be too hard for you to find a couple of links then.
Nate Dawg
@pamelabrown53: Good question. Hillary or her close surrogates can’t do it.
This is a *real* problem with a two-person primary. And I must say I lay the blame for that squarely at the feet of Hillary and the DNC and DWS. If there were another establishment or leftist candidate, they could do it. (Christie attacking Rubio, for instance.) Quite a pickle.
pamelabrown53
@DCF:
Are you seriously generalizing from Vermont to the whole USA?
Mnemosyne
@kc:
Are you kidding? People have been claiming that since at least 2008. Somebody brought it up AGAIN just last week. It’s a zombie lie that just keeps getting unearthed over and over again.
And if you’re confused about the whole POC thing, take a look at a couple of threads from yesterday. People sure seemed to enjoy lecturing ruemara and gwangung (among others) about how they should feel about Bernie.
kc
@Nate Dawg: @Nate Dawg:
You only have to produce one person of color to prove that “people of color are skeptical?” Bullshit. “People of color” are not a monolith. Sanders has supporters who are poc and has picked up several prominent endorsements from black politicians in SC in recent weeks.
Back at you, bro.
Cacti
@kc:
You should fire off missives to Time, BBC, and The Guardian.
They’ve all picked up on the Berniebro phenomenon too.
Betty Cracker
@pamelabrown53: The attacks are out there, and the candidates should respond to them. My point is the campaigns shouldn’t attack each other. They’ve kept their powder mostly dry, but the race is about to heat up 100-fold.
D58826
Oh my from our health ins. guru Mr. Mayhew a couple of threads over
That’s a lot of missing aspirin tablets.
Nate Dawg
@kc: Were you sentient in 2008? Seriously. When Obama said that, the response from the Hillary-wing was precisely as described above.
Here’s just a little peek for you:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/16/437904/-
Cacti
@pamelabrown53:
My county has more people and is more diverse than Vermont.
kc
I tell you what I really look forward to is rehashing all the rape/molestation allegations against Bill Clinton. Juaniita Broadrick has already come forward once again and said that HC tried to silence her after she first came forward way back when.
it seems like that this would create a feeling of, well, awkwardness amongst the prominent (and non-prominent) Clinton supporters who have pushed the narrative that rape allegations must be treated as true, but I suspect they’ll find a way around this.
kc
@Nate Dawg:
LMAO, shit, I had forgotten that Obama actually said he admired Reagan.
Thanks for that reminder, sport.
kc
@Cacti:
Not sure what you think you’re proving here.
Mnemosyne
@kc:
You realize that Cornel West is not respected in the black community because of his repeated and continuing bitterness towards Obama since 2008, right? Several black commenters pointed that out in yesterday’s threads and were shouted down.
(And, just to be 100 percent clear, I am not a person of color. “Sharkbait” is my most common nickname. But it sometimes seems that I can explain things to my fellow white people in terms they can understand.)
Cacti
@Mnemosyne:
Darkrose and AxelFoley too.
I was near stupefied watching a Berniebro berniesplain to them what black voters will or will not care about.
FlipYrWhig
@moderateindy:
Uh, just to say, I have heard this REGULARLY here, LGM, and other places where people who are smart about a lot of things gather. It’s one of the big data points in the “Obama is really a Republican” complaint.
DCF
@pamelabrown53:
In a word, no…I’m suggesting that Sanders, based upon his electoral history, current polling – and present/future caucus and primary voting – exhibits a broad appeal across a variety of cohorts….
Mnemosyne
@kc:
Hey, look, you made the *exact same* deliberate misinterpretation I was talking about! And in real time, too.
Nate Dawg
@kc: This is just one way privelege shuts down minority views–by demanding the view be monolithic before it can be legitimized.
When you accuse someone of “being the spokesperson for PoC”, you are *actually* demanding the produce a spokesperson for people of color. The message is clear–one cannot point out the perspectives of people of color unless the source has been vetted and approved by you. Good job.
If you actually cared to determine if the point were correct, rather than using privilege to silence the debate, then you would be satisfied by even the most cursory examination of the black blogosphere that there is a real skepticism about Bernie Sanders among black Democrats. Ta-Nehisi Coates has written about this at length. So have many others. It is literally all over the internet
But, again, we will have to wait until we have a spokesperson that is acceptable to you, or a monolithic view that is shared by whatever percentage you deem necessary, for this issue to ever warrant your attention.
henqiguai
@kc (#234):
How about this? I’m Black, and I endorse her comment.
Cacti
@kc:
Skepticism of black voters about Bernie.
You asked for examples, one was provided.
Or you could read Jonathan Capehart’s WaPo editorial about his own Bernie skepticism.
different-church-lady
@kc:
I’m taking that statement exactly as written.
FlipYrWhig
@moderateindy:
I’m going to use this to sell my house for $1 million. Even though the comparables suggest it’s probably worth $250,000, I’ll list it for $2 million and then the fools will just meet me in the middle!
kc
@Mnemosyne:
To be 100 percent clear, I know damn well you are not a poc, and I’m not here for you or anyone other middle aged white liberal telling me what “the black community” thinks.
I know Cornel West pissed off a lot of black people. I also know that a lot of black people support Sanders. I expect that many black people will vote for HRC. Many black people will vote for Sanders. HRC will probably win the majority of black and white votes, she IS the frontrunner, but stop acting like the entire “black community” hates Sanders. That’s horseshit.
Nate Dawg
@Mnemosyne: Yup. KC is actually trolling now. Making demands of proof, and then just switching the argument when proof is given.
Mnemosyne
@DCF:
Actually, I do think that Sanders probably could win in the general election, especially if he goes up against Trump. I’m just a little skeptical he’s going to get the nomination.
kc
@henqiguai:
Welp, you certainly have more authority than her, then, but your voice does not negate the black people who support /have endorsed Sanders.
different-church-lady
@henqiguai: Yeah, but you’re not a monolith. So there.
different-church-lady
By my count this is now three non-black people telling us what black people ought to be thinking in just the last 24 hours.
Cacti
@kc:
I’m practically on the edge of my seat waiting for Bernie to get to Nevada in a few weeks, and try to explain away his vote to give cover to the murderous, anti-Hispanic hate group known as the Minutemen.
Nate Dawg
@kc: Basically the equivalent of Republicans saying that black voters don’t hate Romney because 10% of them still voted for him.
Good job, brah. Your work here is done.
Mnemosyne
@kc:
We’ll have to wait and see how the primaries go in South Carolina (strong AA vote) and Nevada (strong Latino vote). Who knows, maybe there’s a huge silent majority of minority voters champing at the bit to pull the lever for Bernie. But I am skeptical.
different-church-lady
@kc:
Oh really. Can you link to them?
Nate Dawg
Sanders has no problems with black community because Cornel West.
At least it’s not Herman Cain or Alan Keyes. So you bros aren’t quite as bad as the Republicans.
different-church-lady
@Nate Dawg:
Why do I have a feeling they’ll be staying for overtime?
Paul in KY
@moderateindy: I think it was more him choosing a Republican, rather than a Democrat that got people’s panties in a wad. FDR was transformational. Guess he was too old. I think it was Pres. Obama just trying to be bipartisan (before they clubbed him over the head about 400 times).
Mnemosyne
@kc:
I’m sure there are plenty of POC’s who are supporting Bernie for good and rational reasons. That doesn’t erase the fact that he has a skepticism problem with minority voters. Sticking your head in the sand and pretending the problem doesn’t exist is not going to solve that.
kc
@Nate Dawg:
That’s funny, bro, because in the very comment to which you are responding I said “People of color are not a monolith.” A
Incorrect. I said she was NOT the spokesperson for POC, and in fact I’m pretty sure there IS no one spokesperson for POC.
different-church-lady
@Nate Dawg: And Killer Mike. That’s a 100% increase in overall black-itude.
Nate Dawg
@Paul in KY: I think in fairness, Obama was trolling the Clintons. He was an extremely masterful politician, and his strategy in 2008 was very much to distract Clintons by getting under their skin and throwing them off their game. This was just one of many examples of him attempting to do that.
dogwood
@kc:
I think Cornell West is an equal opportunity pisser offer.
Mnemosyne
@Paul in KY:
I think it was also President Obama saying that he wanted to turn us in another direction like Reagan did (but, you know, the OPPOSITE ONE) but, again, there is a certain group of people on the left who are invested in a narrative that Obama is a secret Republican who’s going to end Social Security and take our organs, so using Reagan’s name fed into that.
moderateindy
@Nate Dawg: Well of course the actual heavy lifting will have to be done at the state, and local level. But a figurehead is an exceedingly potent catalyst to inspire people of like minded goals to get involved at the grass roots level. And having someone in the most powerful position in our country advocating for policies that Sanders supports, can give real motivation to those that might be reluctant to get out and try to make a difference.
Also, with the Republicans possibly nominating a Trump or Cruz, this may be a rare chance to nominate a candidate that isn’t consumed by the idea running to the middle right in fear that they will lose that small percentage of voters that could go either way.
Finally, Hillary doesn’t really inspire people. It’s a shame because her resume really should. I imagine that pretty much all Hillary’s supporters are going to go out and vote for Sanders. On the other side, I could see a lot of Sanders supporters, particularly younger ones just losing interest and staying home.
All that being said, I do worry about the media painting Sanders as crazy fringe socialist guy, so I see where you’re coming from on him being a risk. But I just think that because of the dynamic on the Republican side this might be our best chance to get someone like a Sanders into the office, and once there not only might he inspire some, but the most important aspect might be the fact that the public at large might get comfortable with the idea of having a Democratic socialist as a President. Which would in turn open up possibilities for more progressive candidates in the future.
Paul in KY
@Nate Dawg: OK. Sounds good.
Nate Dawg
@kc: You’re not quite bright enough to get my argument, brugh.
When you accuse someone of being a “spokesperson for people of color” in a sarcastic fashion, the subtext is that one would *need* a spokesperson for people of color in order to make a claim about them.
Since no such spokesperson actually exists, you are effectively silencing their perspective.
You ought to take a class in semiotics, gender and race theory. Might help you with the ladies, breh.
Paul in KY
@Mnemosyne: It was probably that too. We certainly did need to go in a completely different direction.
kc
@different-church-lady:
Certainly. Here. And here. Here. Here. And, here.
Lemme know if you need more.
pamelabrown53
@Betty Cracker:
I agree, that the campaigns shouldn’t attack each other mercilessly and gratuitously So my question remains: who does vet Bernie in the way Obama was? Fuck an A, you tell us who can’t do it and I agree. Still the point remains: who vets Bernie when the repubs are salivating for his nomination? WHO???
Nate Dawg
@pamelabrown53: Elizabeth Warren? Lol
kc
@Nate Dawg:
Oh, bullshit. If you’re gonna ignore what I actually said to make shit up, I’m not going to engage with you anymore. Also, I’m a woman, so fuck off with the bro/bruh/brah shit, asshole.
kc
@dogwood:
True.
different-church-lady
@Nate Dawg:
Fixed.
El Caganer
@Mnemosyne: I’m not sure Sanders is making the rising-tide argument.
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/02/ta-nehisi-coates-case-for-reparations-bernie-sanders-racism/
Mnemosyne
@kc:
I am not a spokesperson for POC here, but I am pointing out the names of several POC here whose perspective is being ignored or derided. If you want to continue to ignore what they say, that’s your privilege, but don’t pretend they never said it.
Cacti
@kc:
And yet, you feel great personal pique over obnoxious online male supporters of candidate Sanders being referred to as “Berniebros”.
That’s a little strange, bro.
different-church-lady
@kc: And who made you the spokesperson for all women?
henqiguai
@different-church-lady (#276):
Well, if we pull out one of them age ole stereotypes…
kc
@different-church-lady:
Welp, I posted links, but the post is in moderation – too many links, I guess. So I’ll just give you some names and you can google them yourself. Justin Bamberg. Joe Neal. Erica Garner. Keith Ellison. Wendell Gilliard.
Those are off the top of my head; by all means, let me know if you require more names. But do so in another thread, please; I’m out of this one.
Nate Dawg
@kc: I didn’t ignore it. I addressed it. The “who died and made you a spokesperson for ______” line as a rhetorical tool is well-known.
You got called out on it. Tough luck.
(And it’s a strange “lady” who says “Excuse me, lady,” before attempting to use a meaningless rhetorical device to silence her perspective.)
But your trick worked. Because you still haven’t acknowledged the skepticism for Sanders among minority voters. And we’ve wasted our time talking about this.
kc
@different-church-lady:
Um, I didn’t say that I was, nor did I say “Women think blah blah blah” so your question makes no sense.
different-church-lady
@kc: Are they a monolith?
henqiguai
@kc (#286):
Well, you’re wrong. She did lunch, yesterday, with the spokesman of the white peoples collective.
Nate Dawg
@different-church-lady: Over/under on kc troll actually being female?
pamelabrown53
@DCF: @DCF:
WTF? Bernie’s entire electoral history is based on the smallest, whitest state. Plus, he (wisely, in electoral concerns, voted against gun control issues and for states rights).
different-church-lady
@Nate Dawg: On the internet nobody can tell whether you’re a dog. But everyone can tell whether you’re an asshole.
Betty Cracker
@pamelabrown53: Are you worried that there are smears on Sanders that only Clinton campaign operatives can uncover? Clinton supporters who are NOT campaign affiliates seem to be doing a fine job right here on Balloon Juice and across the rest of the internet and social media in publicizing Sanders’ flaws. The same can be said of their counterparts on the Sanders side.
There’s also the media, which specializes in digging up dirt on both sides and funneling slime uncovered by all parties. You could argue that Sanders will only be prepared to be slimed by the GOP if he’s slimed by another campaign first, but I don’t think that’s a convincing argument, and even if there were some truth to it, I don’t think the benefit would outweigh the cost.
henqiguai
@Nate Dawg (#293):
I’m liking you more and more. You gotta comment more.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@Miss Bianca: @DCF:
Anyone who thinks that Bernie’s socialism can be sold to the Average Joe is just clueless. When Social Security was passed, 50% of the work force wasn’t covered – guess what kind of work that included? Work that black folk did. How many times here on BJ have we retold the “I’m willing to live under a bridge cooking sparrows over a fire with a curtain rod, as long as “those people” don’t have curtain rods” tale? If Bernie REALLY wants to start a revolution, he can start with having that little discussion with his overwhelmingly white supporters, and then we’ll see what happens to his support.
Amir Khalid
@DCF:
And over this long career as mayor, Representative, and US Senator, what was Bernie’s hands-on involvement in foreign policy?
Ksmiami
@WereBear: UM – Hate to be caustic, but the unemployment rate among college grads is around 3.7%. Most good jobs are in cities and they are more fun than suburbs for young people. Plus sharing an apartment or group home when you are just out of school is kind of a tradition. Yes, college costs should be dealt with, but being a poor recent grad is just not the end of the world. I feel worse for middle aged working class people with no pension, no retraining and facing age discrimination in hiring. Bernie is a Utopian and I don’t think he could ever deliver what he’s been promising. Sorry.
Howlin Wolfe
@cmorenc: I like it!
Linnaeus
@Amir Khalid:
No less than that of a certain senator from Illinois who was elected president in 2008.
Paul in KY
@henqiguai: I’m wondering how you pronounce ‘brugh’? Like the Belgian city, maybe?
Howlin Wolfe
@Enhanced Voting Techinques: Bernie (with an “e” at the end, in case you didn’t notice), was born in 1941, so that makes him 75 or so. Not in his 80s, which is a big difference.
Nate Dawg
@Paul in KY: very guttural. rattling vocal cord phlegm is a plus.
Miss Bianca
@the Conster, la Citoyenne:
Apparently, I *am* a dreamer… ; )
dogwood
@Betty Cracker:
I disagree somewhat. There’s plenty of criticism of both candidates here, but as a regular reader, I haven’t seen anything that appears to be a “smear” against Bernie. I may have missed something, but has anyone suggested there are scandals in his past? I also think that having the Reverend Wright flack occurr midway through the primaries rather than during the general, was a good thing for Obama. He handled it expertly.
Howlin Wolfe
@Zinsky:
We do? any polling to support that?
Ksmiami
@DCF: And he seems to have accomplished very little. It’s concerning. I just don’t think Bernie has the stature to be a viable candidate. sorry. Obama had more tangible legislative accomplishments as a first term Senator.
pamelabrown53
@Betty Cracker
“…smears that Clinton campaign can uncover” is not the issue. Because whatever oppo the Clinton campaign has on Bernie, the repubs have it too. The question I keep repeating is how do we vet Bernie when the repubs won’t do it? I AGREE that it can’t be Hillary. So the question remains: WHO? IMHO, he can’t remain unvetted.
The internet, while important is not the real world.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Linnaeus: Lewis Black, of whom I am usually a great fan, was making the case on the Wilmore show last night (and I’ve heard him say it before) was that Obama wasn’t ready for the Presidency, the phrase he uses is “on the job training”. I would respond that no one is ready for the presidency, there’s no job like it.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@Miss Bianca:
I think you hit the nail on the head. There’s way too much ignorance around the issue of how race trumps class for my comfort, to go around spouting revolution. The welfare queen/47%/Obamaphone/Ferguson narrative is deeply internalized in this country.
henqiguai
@Paul in KY (#321):
Was kinda going with an equivalent to ‘brough’; if that makes sense. Not familiar with the Belgian city. I suspect we would have better luck looking to some of the current Celtic language spellings and pronounciations; where’s Siuhan<sp>.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@the Conster, la Citoyenne: not just that, but when people say they want change, what they often mean is they want the boat to stop rocking. I think the best example of this was people who wanted to keep paying for shitty health insurance instead of a new, better (maybe slightly more expensive one). They didn’t want to read the fine print, they wanted to maintain a familiar if precarious status quo.
dogwood
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
You only have to read this blog to understand that most people think presidentin’ is easy.
Paul in KY
@Nate Dawg: Will try it sometime!
Paul in KY
@henqiguai: I was saying broo-gd, until Nate Dawg gave me some pointers.
El Caganer
@dogwood: Dubyuh didn’t think so – he said that presidentin’ is hard work. That’s why he let Cheyney do it.
Nate Dawg
@dogwood: There is the whole “rape fantasy” thing:(http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/05/29/410606045/the-bernie-sanders-rape-fantasy-essay-explained)
The Soviet flag in his office: http://www.keywiki.org/Bernie_Sanders
Honeymoon to Soviet Union: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/aug/12/george-will/george-will-reminds-readers-about-bernie-sanders-u/
Praising Sandinista leader Ortega and Fidel Castro: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3281335/Bernie-Sanders-praised-Fidel-Castro-1985-interview-educated-kids-gave-kids-health-care-totally-transformed-society.html
In other words == SCARY SOCIALIST.
Linnaeus
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
There really isn’t any job like it. Sure, it’s true that some candidates are more qualified and experienced than others, and it’s perfectly reasonable to make that distinction, but any candidate is going to have some gaps in his or her presidential resume simply because there’s so much for a president to do.
Linnaeus
@Paul in KY:
Since I like how “Bruges” sounds, I wouldn’t want to associate its pronunciation with something I don’t like.
Amir Khalid
@Linnaeus:
That Illinois Senator in 2008 wasn’t running against anyone who had done four years as Secretary of State.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Agreed, and it certainly explains why young people are his base. I’m too old for revolution of any kind, especially the kind that seeks to uproot whole swaths of the economy. No president can do that anyway, so Bernie’s support will dwindle away into disappointment and disillusion with this bunch too. That doesn’t make me cynical, it makes me mad, but clear eyed. Real change – the sticking kind – takes a long term commitment by a lot of determined stakeholders.
El Caganer
@Linnaeus: Have you seen the Martin McDonagh movie? I thought it was pretty good.
Miss Bianca
@the Conster, la Citoyenne:
I remember how shocked I was when I discovered how the SS legislation sponsored by my great liberal hero, FDR, excluded African-American workers. Because unless he pandered to the racism of the Dixiecrats, NO ONE was getting any pie. That was my come-to-Jesus moment about how progress is made. Which was why I refused to set my hair on fire when the ACA was passed the way it was. Because every piece of progressive legislation that we have and are currently, justly, proud of – like the Social Security Act- has had to be amended to make it better, fairer, more inclusive – in the teeth of retrograde opposition. And also in the teeth of fellow travellers’ (often just) criticisms of the suckiness of the original legislation leading them to the conclusion that all American politicking sucks and sucks equally, so REVOLUTION is the only solution, man!!
Betty Cracker
@pamelabrown53: I think online, TV and print sources have and will continue to uncover the candidates’ foibles and surface the issues that will be used by the Republican slime machine. They did in 2008 too — IIRC, it wasn’t the Clinton campaign but some crackpot wingnut media outfit that discovered the Reverend Wright issue, though the Clinton peeps used it gleefully. I thought that was a shitty tactic then. I think it’s a shitty tactic now.
Linnaeus
@Amir Khalid:
No, he wasn’t, but that didn’t stop people from being critical of his lack of foreign policy experience. Many – or even most – US presidents have been elected without significant foreign policy experience, [ETA: particularly in comparison with John McCain}. Carter didn’t have it, Reagan didn’t have it, and even FDR’s experience was limited to his service as assistant secretary of the navy under Wilson.
Linnaeus
@El Caganer:
Not yet, but it’s on my list. I heard it was good from friends who saw it.
Linnaeus
@Linnaeus:
Er, misplaced edit – the “comparison with John McCain” is in reference to criticism of Obama.
henqiguai
@Betty Cracker(#343):
And yet we have nothing, nothing, about Cruz being raised, not just sitting in Sunday services an hour or two a week, and continuously subjected to the acknowledged weirdness of his spiritual adviser, and father. How come?
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@Miss Bianca:
I think the “why couldn’t Obama have been more like FDR” is the Berniebro argument that makes me the craziest, hand waving away that little internment camp thing.
ETA: especially in light of his trip to the mosque today.
Betty Cracker
@Nate Dawg: I can’t be 100% certain that KC is a woman any more than you can know for sure I’m not an adolescent Piggly-Wiggly bag boy. But I do know KC isn’t a troll. At least, not in the sense that I understand trollery, which involves parachuting in to make pointlessly provocative statements to derail discussions and incite blog meltdowns. I disagree with KC on many things, but she seems to sincerely believe what she says she believes and to argue in good faith, if wrongheadedly at times, IMO. YMMV.
Betty Cracker
@henqiguai: What do you mean? There’s plenty out there on Cruz’s nutty beliefs and his fathers crackpot leanings. You can’t be asking why the Republicans aren’t attacking him for it, so I’m confused…
Nate Dawg
Iowa is over, so Republicans might pull it out if necessary.
henqiguai
@Betty Cracker(#350):
No, just frustration with the glaring difference in treatment over the fairly mild pulpit polemics of Rev. Wright versus the almost silence over Cruz. Where’s the demand that Ted explain his ‘faith’? I don’t really expect anything to come of it; even as loathed as Ted Cruz appears to be, even he could do the Trumpen shot a supporter in the streets with witnesses and he’d not suffer loses of any sort.
Miss Bianca
@the Conster, la Citoyenne:
Sadly, even the greatest progressives, like the greatest reactionaries, are products of their times, and are acted upon by their times’ social forces as much as they act upon them.
Betty Cracker
@henqiguai: It is unfair as hell, I agree. The phrase the Beltway media fixed on the most from Wright’s sermons — “Goddamn America” and “chickens coming home to roost,” etc., had been said in one form or another by every prominent member of hard-right Christendom back in the day when blaming natural disasters, AIDS, terrorist attacks, etc., on godless liberal licentiousness. Another case of IOKIYR.
RE: Tailgunner Ted: my guess is the GOP field is nutty enough not to consider Cruz’s beliefs extreme, but the father’s beliefs (and Cruz’s own) are loony enough to warrant a thorough airing during the general if Cruz gets the nomination. But I won’t hold my breath.
D58826
@Linnaeus: Truth be told most presidents come into office with little or no foreign policy experience. Ike had a strong background from his war years and some of that rubbed off on Nixon. LBJ from his time in the Senate,esp. as majority leader, probably picked up some. Bush 41 as CIA director and VP obviously.
Hillary can claim her 4 years at State and the inside perch as first lady.
Given that track record for the 20th/21st century I think its really a non-issue. What I want to see is someone who seems to talk sense on the campaign trail, is a quick study and is cool under fire (yea I know Obama). I want to see someone who can talk intelligently about the complex issues tin the middle east not someone who is trying to show how macho he is by recommending bombing everything in sight
D58826
@Betty Cracker: And if I remember correctly the ‘chickens coming home to roost’ was a quote that he heard on TV the week before from a former GOP state department official.
At the same time Falwell and preacher Pat were blaming the attack on the gays, liberals, witches and democrats.
Wright was certainly on the mark if you replace ‘chickens come home to roost’ with the phrase blow back from our middle eastern policies.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@D58826: I like to say if resumes counted Nixon and Buchanan would have been our greatest presidents
Nate Dawg
Yah it was rather precious, considering the outrage was that he would merely imply that America DESERVED to be attacked, which is what the Religious Right was saying explicitly! IOKIYAR
Nate Dawg
I think the freakout was because he was plainly stating that American Imperialism encourages Terrorism. And that critique is actually valid, whereas the gays caused Katrina nonsense isn’t.
The whole “rah rah American Exceptionalism” crap is so nauseating, and I hate that even Democrats have to do trot that stuff out and genuflect before the Flag to prove that they aren’t secretly terrorists. Which they are anyway, as we’ve seen.
DCF
@henqiguai:
Sanders is not a pacifist. I believe he is much more measured (cautious?) about committing U.S. armed forces to foreign entanglements, and is inclined to seek international cooperation in such matters. I hope we can agree that military involvement is the last option in a given situation….
D58826
@DCF: Actually I think after reaching the ‘last resort’ we should step back and think about it again before making it the last resort. It’s a blunt instrument with to many unanticipated consequences to enter into without being dragged into it kicking and screaming.
Sawgrass Stan
@DCF: Word– and I’ve already promised to ring doorbells for the Democrat, whether Hillary or Bernie. It’s going to be an uphill slog either way.
DCF
@D58826:
Amen and Praise the Goddess to that comment….
DCF
@moderateindy:
IMO, an impressive and perceptive comment….
I’m going to borrow a line from Sanders’ stump speech here: ‘Are you ready for a radical idea?’….
We – all of us – need to vote in MIDTERM elections…in 2014, 63% of the electorate failed to do so…how many times, in this thread and others, has the issue of an obstructionist/recalcitrant Congress arisen? Any ‘revolution’ in the political arena requires some degree of participation/involvement, and I can’t think of another ‘small step’ that would achieve as disproportionately large a result – one that would enable the process of change to expand and accelerate….
Just Some Fuckhead
@henqiguai:
This. John McCain said his pastor was John Hagee, the wackobird endtimeser in Texas. No one ever investigated the crazy shit Hagee said – televised even! Huckabee was a pastor for twelve years. He refuses to make his sermons public. Mitt Romney was a bishop in the Mormon church. His weird, secretive faith was off-limits.
Just Some Fuckhead
I read the thread from start to finish and it was pretty reasonable for the first 125 comments or so. People looking for common ground, trying not to look like the asshole they are convinced is ruining everything for their chosen candidate (thank you, Frankensteinbeck.)
But then the usual suspects, Cacti, Botsplainer Here Let Me Tell You About My Law Practice & Perfect Life Burns, Nate Dawg, FlipYrWhig, Mnemoysne and the reliably hideous different-church-lady descended upon the thread and turned it into the usual shitfest. My only surprise is that IRL bigshot David Koch didn’t turn out for the usual feces throwing.
As a now-Clinton leaner, thanks for nothing.
Just Some Fuckhead
The most amusing part of the the thread was coming upon different-church-lady at around comment 200 saying she was reading the thread backward (that I was reading forward) to see where it went off the rails and it was literally at her involvement where that happened.
You fuckers need to seriously buy a clue.
Just Some Fuckhead
Oh, and not that it matters to you johnny come lately political warriors, but female kc is a long long time Balloon Juice commenter, prolly near 8-10 years. You wouldn’t know that because you aren’t part of the community and you’re just hear to shit on everyone until the election is over.
Fuck you.
henqiguai
@Just Some Fuckhead(#370):
No, you’re not my type. All convex in all the wrong places, concave in the others.
So, JSF, what’s got you now leaning Hillary-ward? Honest curiosity, no hidden agenda in the question.
Just Some Fuckhead
@henqiguai: No hidden agenda suspected. I liked the positive case folks like Anne Laurie and Ruckus made. And I wasn’t thrilled with Sander’s post-caucus speech Monday night. I’m pretty good with predicting winners. I predicted Clinton back in the mid 80’s, saw Danger Monkey coming years before anyone suspected, warned all of my racist friends they needed to come to grips with the coming Obama presidency. I just can’t “see” Sanders.
BTW, that Obama prescience was based solely on his 2007 Jefferson Jackson dinner speech.
moderateindy
@FlipYrWhig:
No, it’s about not using this tactic my house is worth about 250 K so that’s what I’ll ask for it. After negotiating I didn’t get exactly what I asked for, I only got 230 K. I don’t understand…………… Only complete morons begin negotiating with an offer that’s equal to their desired result.
Hillary’s center right tendencies lead me to believe that she will start at the 250k threshold, and end up with the 230k, and we will continue the slow legislative drift to the right that was Bill’s presidency.
Paul in KY
@Linnaeus: Excellent movie!
FlipYrWhig
@moderateindy: Why do you think “beginning negotiating with an offer that’s equal to their desired results” is a remotely accurate description of anything that actually happened? And why don’t you see how circular it is when you say that your perception of Hillary Clinton’s “center right tendencies” is what shows that she has center right tendencies?
FlipYrWhig
@Just Some Fuckhead: I forgot how often you used to moan about how THIS PLACE USED TO BE COOL BEFORE YOU SHOWED UP.