There’s not a lot the Clinton campaign can do about has-beens like Gloria “where the boys are” Steinem and Madeline “special place in hell” Albright running their mouths telling young women voters how they should support their betters. A has-been has very little to lose – their best years are in the rear-view mirror. And, of course, some of them, like Steinem, do apologize.
A wanna-be like Debbie Wasserman Schultz is another matter. Here’s an example, her defense of superdelegates:
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: Well, let me just make sure that I can clarify exactly what was available during the primaries in Iowa and in New Hampshire. The unpledged delegates are a separate category. The only thing available on the ballot in a primary and a caucus is the pledged delegates, those that are tied to the candidate that they are pledged to support. And they receive a proportional number of delegates going into the — going into our convention.
Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grass-roots activists. We are, as a Democratic Party, really highlight and emphasize inclusiveness and diversity at our convention, and so we want to give every opportunity to grass-roots activists and diverse committed Democrats to be able to participate, attend and be a delegate at the convention. And so we separate out those unpledged delegates to make sure that there isn’t competition between them.
This explanation is flawed in conception and execution. First, the weasel-word distinction between pledged and unpledged delegates, designed to get around the term “superdelegate”, just muddies the waters. Then there’s the risible notion that the Democratic Party created superdelegates to open the way for the grassroots: donnez-moi un break. The real reason for superdelegates is to give the party establishment more control over the nominating process. And Debbie’s usual slow-on-her feet delivery doesn’t help matters.
The bare fact is that Clinton leads Sanders 394-42 in the delegate count because she has the superdelegates locked up. All the re-wording in the world will not change that fact, and young voters who are new to the process (not to mention olds like me) deserve at minimum an honest explanation and defense of superdelegates. This wanna-be either needs a better script or she needs to be hidden away, because she’s doing damage to the party and to the Clinton campaign.
Update: I walked out the door after writing this post and I returned a few minutes ago to see that “has-been” came off as sexist. I didn’t mean it as a sexist insult – I meant it as non-gendered categorization. Here are some male has-beens, in no particular order: John McCain, Black Francis, Bob Dole, Morrissey, every male pro football, baseball and basketball player over the age of 50, John Edwards, Dick Cheney — the list goes on and on, and when you add in women, the list includes Madeline Albright and Gloria Steinem. Each of those people accomplished something important in life, and now their best days are past. This does not mean they are worthless – far from it. It does mean that their motivation to tow the line as surrogates is less than a wanna-be like DWS, because they have nothing more to prove.
And, yes, Madeline Albright is a surrogate – when Clinton was asked about her remark in Thursday’s debate, Clinton in no way disowned her (how could she?) Instead, Clinton had to weakly fob-off the remark as something Albright has said for years. Finally, yesterday, as a few of you pointed out in the comments, Albright did apologize. I’ll bet if she had swallowed her pride and done it sooner, that question wouldn’t have come up.
This is the damage a poor surrogate–male or female–does to a campaign. It isn’t deadly, but it sure isn’t pretty, and it adds up. And, I maintain that has-beens–or whatever kinder, gentler name you want to give people who were once in the limelight and are now mainly offstage–are tougher surrogates to control.
James E Powell
Superdelegates – Evidence that the owners of the Democratic Leadership will never recover from 1972.
Albright apologized, too, and it was a real apology, not a GOPish non-apology. I was really glad to see this because I’ve always admired her and was stunned by the ham-handedness of her statement.
And Debbie Wasserman Schultz is an abject asshole.
Not to mention, the new voters will be mighty upset when they realize their votes were diluted. Will they vote for HRC in November then?
Just Some Fuckhead
OMG, you BerniEmos are going to wear us all out before November. Nothing stopped Sanders from courting the superdelegates. But he was too pure to be a Democrat all those years.
Encourage him to run as a third party candidate.
Wasserman Schultz and Priebus have convinced me that party chairmanship is an affirmative action program for slow-witted masochists.
Absolutely nothing sexist about that first paragraph. Nothing. Nothing at all.
I don’t think Hillary should be held accountable for what Steinman said; Steinman was on a tv show commenting. Albright is a different story but she did apologize; but why she is involved at all I don’t understand.
The rules of delegates/superdelegates is ridiculous but that is the system as it is now. You can’t fault Hillary for this.
DWS is an idiot.
Wonderful. So now experienced, accomplished women of a certain age are “has-beens” because they don’t agree with you or prove themselves human by putting their foot in their mouth. So what can be said about a man running for president who still hasn’t learned how to talk to the minority constituencies he needs? Never-was?
@Just Some Fuckhead: It’s not to late for him to threaten them with reeducation when the revolution comes.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
And an idiot, as Renie noted.
@Just Some Fuckhead: So are you a Thought Leader or not? Inquiring minds want to know.
Just Some Fuckhead
Non-democrat can’t swoop in and secure Democratic party nomination, investigation demanded.
@Emma: That Uncle Joe Biden: he’s so charming when he puts his foot in his mouth! Unlike those washed-up old bags.
A noun – a verb – and Wall Street bankers probably thinks the other Democrats are too tainted by money to court.
Remember, this is the guy who has been in Washington 25 years and has zero foreign policy advisors. When he fabricated some, they all denied being advisors when asked.
Maybe Sanders’ campaign adviser Tad Devine should apologize for superdelegates since he helped create them.
Bernie has specifically chosen not to be part of the party for decades. Then decides, because he knows it’s the only chance he has at becoming president, to change his party affiliation to Democrat. And then he refuses to campaign or raise funds for down ticket Democrats because he doesn’t feel it’s his job (a feeling he seems to carry over as an independent in Vermont, where he didn’t feel the need to help other Independents either). Knowing all that, he’s going to have to convince the party that he’s willing to work with them.
The superdelegates are not fixed. They can change their minds up to the voting at the convention. Convincing them is part of what it takes to win the Democratic party nomination. Obama had to do it, and he did.
I don’t comment much here. But the “has-beens” remark was deeply offensive. What am I to take away from it, that mister mix thinks when women get older their opinions aren’t valid anymore? They should just fade away, disappear, the way younger people treat them anyway? Shame on you.
“Victory is not defined by your petty election.”
I don’t like superdelegates. I also don’t like the primary schedule. After this election, maybe it’s time to reform the whole process.
@Tegdirb: funny how the guy with 3 failed campaigns behind him, is an anti-establishment thot leader.
Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Allbright are simply “has-beens”? Sexist much? What have you accomplished in your life that comes close to what those two women have done?
@ruemara: You go to war with the candidate you have. You don’t go to war with the candidate you wish you had.
@Baud: Hey, you know, I never did find out which nomination you were running for.
@Belafon: This. Candidates earn superdelegates by working for the party over time, by fundraising for and supporting other Democrats (down ticket races). It is part of being a member of an organization and contributing to it. One cannot expect to swoop in late in the process and reap the reward of an organization that one has not helped to build.
@different-church-lady: All of them, different-church-lady.
In tough times like this thread, it’s always good to remember that Cruz is a shit-weasel, Trump is a fascist, Rubio is a moron, and the rest of them are assholes.
@Baud: Will you be going negative against yourself in the general?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
starting off a post by calling Gloria Steinem and the first female Secretary of State “has beens” is not at all taking a giant shit in the punchbowl. Are we going for a record on Tbogg threads in one day?
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q): He’s Officer Fuckhead of the Tone Police
@Benw: But none of them are has-beens, with their best years in the rear-view, rite?
@Tegdirb: I went to go look him up, and I found this on his wikipedia page:
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
And apparently he’s off-duty today.
Jesus Fucking Christ.
I believe DWS is being primaried!
Long shot of course, but at least makes her do some work, maybe actually pay attention to constituents.
Once the GOP nominee is set, someone should photoshop a picture of Inauguration Day 2017, with Obama and Biden sitting there watching one John Roberts giving the oath of office to one of those weasals. Just in case some people need reminding.
Criticizing DWS for using “un-pledged delegates” instead of “super delegates” seems petty, since super delegates is not an official term of the party as far as I know.I believe it was coined to mock the process.
DWS has many problems with her explanation. This is not one of them.
Why won’t bitches do what mistermix tells them to do?
@different-church-lady: Whatever it takes. Politics ain’t beanbag.
@different-church-lady: Baud! has us for that.
Tissue Thin Pseudonym
It really isn’t clear to me why a political party shouldn’t have some say in who its nominee is.
@p.a.: Do we know that her constituents don’t like her?
@Belafon: I guess he forgot. Actually, that would explain Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
am I the only one who, since Larry David is Bernie Sanders, wants to see Hillary Clinton do a Susie Essman imitation?
“FUCK YOU! Bernie, you fucking moron!”. I guess now that Bubba’s a vegan, she can’t call him “You Fat. FUCK!”
@different-church-lady: the washed up has-beens are all on the D side, apparently. The Republicans have all the up-and-coming assholes.
Holy shit, mistermix, is this parody?
@Baud: for reals.
Careful planning is a relic of the status quo.
@different-church-lady: Yep. I am getting sick and tired of the goddamn sexism that keeps popping up in these pages. Tie it with the female-only ageism and all we need is a good female-only color comment. The trifecta.
@Baud: No idea. But if she serves her district as she serves the party, indications are… not good.
@Benw: Rethugs are never-were’s. And assholes, yes.
@slag: What’s the problem? Those old hags haven’t been remotely fuckable since the 70s.
The Sheriff Endorses Baud 2016
@Tissue Thin Pseudonym: The political party should bend to the whims of whoever spontaneously decides to show up to one election every four years.
That’s possible now? Is there an app? Apple and Android? Coo-el.
SiubhanDuinne, Annoying Scoundrel
Wow, Mistermix. That is possibly one of the most patronising, ageist, and sexist things I’ve ever read — certainly from you. My tired old has-been gob is smacked.
Tissue Thin Pseudonym
Fortunately, I have a dick, so I’m a still-am.
AOL chat rooms, my friend. Pre-Tinder tech.
@Scout211: Male achievements are permanent. Female achievements expire.
“The superdelegates are not fixed.”
This is true, but I’ve seen bullshit being posted that a bunch of super delegates flipped in 2008. They didn’t. There were substantially more undeclareds compared to 2016, and a far more competitive battle for their support. Once the primary\caucus slate ended, a block of them put their finger on the scale so Obama secured the nomination before the convention.
Obama had a LOT of Democratic party structural support in 2008.
Ouch. Let me just pick up that mic for you…
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
Is it free from the Google Play Store? I’m sure Apple will have monetized it.
Elder Statesmen vs old lady hag has-beens.
This will all be overthrown by the people rising up in revolution. And moar debates.
I am fine with superdelegates which are a device created by a political party in which membership is optional. Just like I am fine with a particular type of democracy known as a republic.
Fellow Ohioan and playwright Sherwood Anderson once wrote in one of his plays that, “The masses are asses.” I will back away from that just a bit and assert that this is true sometimes and for the times when it is true there needs to be a bit of a check on stupid decision making.
Just Some Fuckhead
You talking to me? You talking to me??? You calling me Has-Been?
These comments are hilarious.
@Technocrat: Tks. I O U 1. ?
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q): If it’s free it’s for me!
Which is something, mistermix, you might want to consider at this point,
The sexism angle of this post has been well covered, so I’ll leave that.
I am getting pretty sick of how everybody who says or does anything for Clinton is a ‘surrogate’ and sign of what a bad campaigner she is, but the assholish things Bernie’s actual high level campaign staff say or do is non-news that disappears into the memory hole in seconds.
I’m still pissed Sanders has addressed his supporters’ treatment of John Lewis.
Just Some Fuckhead
I didn’t hear him call out Rockey Bojangles, Badger of Death and SatanMyMaster666 yet.
@Betty Cracker: Goddamn. I really did not expect to see this kind of thing here. It’s like Redstate for Democrats—completely lacking in all self-awareness.
Anybody remember Geraldine Ferraro in 2008?
I don’t know if this is some feature of feminism or something about Hillary in particular… In the latter case it’d be odd, considering Hillary herself seems to have no interest in claiming victimhood. Ferraro went on to resign from Hillz’s campaign, became a Fox News contributor and occasional Palin booster.
(Of course a lot of Obama supporters said dippy things about privilege too.)
Just Some Fuckhead
I’m pretty sure none of Sanders’ supporters are guilty of war crimes, for crimes against humanity, and for offenses against common or customary or international law, including conspiracy to commit murder, kidnap, and torture.
If ever. Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright became famous for their achievements, not their looks.
In the matter at hand, it seems to me they were both careless with their words: Steinem said that a young woman’s politics go where the young men are, which strikes me as a silly thing to think, let alone to say, in any age. I doubt it’s ever been generally true. Albright was using a catchphrase of hers, which if I recall correctly was so famous that at one time it wound up getting printed on Starbucks cups. She failed to be sensitive to context, that’s all.
In this Democratic primary season, the, um, especially passionate among either side’s supporters have been quick to take offence over the.petty slights that are part and parcel of normal campaign banter between rival sides. The Republican candidates and their supporters say far worse things about Hillary and Bernie, and their respective supporters, and Democratic voters in general. Why not send some outrage over that way?
I have to hope that the Superdelegates realize that if they override the popular vote they are very likely to bring us a president Trump or Cruz. I previously could not see any clear plaths to the White House for the likes of them, regardless of the Democratic nominee, but I now can see several. A superdelegate appointment would, I believe present them with a path that is not only clear, but downhill and greased.
@Wrb: Sanders ain’t winning any nomination if he doesn’t fix his tone deaf problem.
@Frankensteinbeck: Maybe all the people stricken with outrage (on both sides) need to just find other things to set their minds to. I recall four years ago when someone associated with the Obama campaign (or not) opined that Ann Romney had never worked a day in her life. There were days of shitstorm. Why?
It’s such a foolish game to be played. Start with a perceived insult by someone who may or may not be actually associated with a campaign and then progress to the overstated pearl clutching reaction to that insult. It just gets so tiring. And yes, all sides seem to do this.
@Just Some Fuckhead: Kissinger is a Hillary supporter?
Tissue Thin Pseudonym
In most countries, a party’s candidate for prime minister is chosen solely by dues paying members of that party. It doesn’t seem to hurt democracy any. Neither do superdelegates.
Just Some Fuckhead
Maybe, but SpoogeBucket crossed the line on Huffington Post comments.
The Democratic primary is a veritable love-in compared to the Republicans, and frankly it’s been quite tame compared to ’08 and ’04, probably not least because the situations seems so favorable for the Dem ticket generally. I guess it could get worse but I don’t see it. Is some Hillary supporter going to say Bernie is a Mossad plant? Or is Bernie going to start talking up Benghazi? The dynamics of the people involved are just not there.
@Tissue Thin Pseudonym: I had recently learned about that. An intriguing possibility for Democrats, although I suspect a nonstarter because of the discriminatory effect on the poor.
@Doug R: I’m unaware of that problem. Could you explain? Linking herself to Kissinger and accepting Goldman money seemed to me disconcertingly tone-deaf, but I’ve yet to be struck by the tone-deafness of a Sanders comment. There must be some that are, but either I missed them or I share the particular deafness.
Davis X. Machina
@Tissue Thin Pseudonym: Precisely.
A US president is the head of state, the head of the government of the day, and the head of his or her party.
It would be strange if there were no superdelegates..
@Just Some Fuckhead: Why don’t you go over to the DailyBern and post a diary about how calling folks Berniebros is the real racism. Also maybe explain why liking Churchill is better than Kissinger while you’re at it.
Apparently when they eventually arrive at that special place in hell, it’s filled with men telling them they’re washed-up has-beens for all of eternity.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
This sums it up for me.
I’m putting this post down as mischievous trollage. Because otherwise…
@Wrb: I couldn’t possibly imagine any worse thing the democratic party could do than select the loser of the democratic primary vote over the winner via super delegates. It would destroy the party. I don’t think for a second they would actually do it.
Why copy ¿Jeb?
@Amir Khalid: I think Gloria probably meant to imply that young women felt secure enough that they could vote aspirationally like their male counterparts as opposed to pragmatically which groups on the margins have to do.
How many super BJ delegates does BAUD2016 already have in his pocket? It would be irresponsible not to speculate.
Hillary and Bernie themselves have generally treated each other with civility. It’s been Bernistas and Hillaristas getting all wee-weed up over what the other side says. I don’t foresee HRC and BS going at each other in any blatantly unfair way. But look at Bernistas calling Hillary a corporate shill, a hawk, untrustworthy; look at Hillaristas questioning Bernie’s Democratic credentials, doubting the ethics of his campaign people, calling him naive and parochial.
I agree that for all that it’s been more elevated than the Republican party’s primary season, which has been full of playground taunts and name-calling.
This is stupid on so many levels. First, “super delegates” have been around for decades. Were you complaining about them in ’12, ’08, ’04, and on and on? The only reason I can see for this misleading and petty post is that you are in the tank for Bernie.
Second, should Bernie roll into the convention the obvious people’s choice, the super delegates will vote for him. You are swallowing the media’s chum. They are always looking for controversy, and you have fallen right into their trap. Given that the mainstream media has always loathed Hillary, and want to destroy her, that’s beyond sad.
Third, you seem to have a problem with the party building in some safeguards. Perhaps you weren’t around for George McGovern. Oh how we happily jumped off the cliff in that election. Handing a 49 state landslide to Nixon. Yeah. Brilliant. Keep it up. Keep dividing Democrats, and practice this phrase: “President Trump.”
@Wrb: Are ya kidding? Planned Parenthood/Human Rights Campaign are the establishment. Black people voted for Obama due to race and acknowledge that racism is over. Economic justice cures social justice. The “accidental” copying of the supporter database. Campaign operatives pretending to be part of a NV workers group. Using logos of groups on mailers to insinuate endorsements. Last night’s disastrous forum in Minneapolis.
Bernie has advisors, I hope they start advising him soon to get a handle on his people.
Snippets of his talk here
And the 30 second video, where I get what he’s trying to say, but I also see what he is not understanding.
These are tone deaf. They’re unforced errors.
@Wrb: Sanders: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/bernie-sanders-black-community-forum-219232
The bare fact is that Clinton leads Sanders 394-42 in the delegate count because she has the superdelegates locked up.
Sure. It also doesn’t actually matter. If Hillary Clinton needs some significant chunk of those 394 super-delegates, it means she came in with fewer delegates from actual voting and caucusing than Sanders. She would then be vetoing the voters. If those super-delegate votes are not enough to give her the nom, it doesn’t matter.
In the latter case, she doesn’t get the nom, in the former case she would be committing electoral suicide. I don’t think she’s that far gone and if she is, then I wouldn’t expect the super-delegates to vote for her anyways.
In either case, we’re nowhere near there yet, so it simply does not matter either way and is not worth arguing over at this time. (‘I have all these super-delegates so I have a crushing lead that proves you can’t win’ is a stupid argument because it doesn’t prove you will win, it just proves you have establishment support but not a lot of votes yet which is not exactly classified info, and honestly, ‘Hillary Clinton will prevent us from winning with super-delegates!’ is also a stupid argument at this point, because first you’ve also got to get the votes.)
[‘Torch that bridge when you come to it.’]
the Conster, la Citoyenne
If I had spent my life active in the Democratic Party working to build an infrastructure and some guy who has been nothing but didlsdainful towards joining or supporting in anyway decides he’s not too pure to use it when it’s convenient, it wouldn’t bother me at all if he was told to go fuck himself and the horse (of ours) he rode in on. But the likelihood is slim to none that they’ll deny him the nomination if he’s earned it. What a bunch of whiners.
@different-church-lady: That’s what’s special about it. It’s full of men mansplaining everything in extreme condescending detail.
I tell ya, steam is coming out of my ears. I definitely am going to have to watch my participation on this site during this primary season. WTF,mistermix. WTF!!!!!
True that not a lot switched, but some did, and that’s the point. Bernie could do the work to convince them to switch.
And why did Obama have this support?
I hate the primary schedule. It definitely needs reform but to me the superdelages is useless & archaic system. HRC was way ahead in the superdelegate count in 08 and where did that get her? They all changed their vote to Obama as soon as he became the nominee. Wasserman Schultz is a hack but she’s not trying to steal this primary from Sanders. I am really tired of this primary. I want it to end.
This. At some point, a failure to keep his campaign consistently on the right side of the ethical line must start to look like a failure of Bernie’s leadership. Whereas the most that Hillary’s people have been guilty of is not getting their tone quite right.
I have been lurking, and sometimes commenting, on this website pretty much daily since very shortly after the scales fell from Cole’s eyes and he did his 180 on the Iraq War, Bush and the Republican Party generally. And in all of that time I have never seen anything as shockingly, obnoxiously awful and wrong than this post. Nothing even in the same order of magnitude. None of the idiotic shit Freddie DeBoer used to post here was in the same league. The infamous ABL-AL dustup was a mere tiff among friends. This is simply awful.
In what fucking universe do you imagine that you have the moral standing to sneeringly dismiss Gloria Steinheim and Madeline Albright as “has beens?” For fuck’s sake, it’s like some lily-white totally not racist oh-so-progresssive sophomore dismissing Andrew Young and John Lewis as “has-beens.”
Steinheim put herself on the front lines of a transformative movement. No, she didn’t get her head broken or thrown in jail or blasted by firehoses, but she endured decades of the grosses, most demeaning harassment and threats of sexual assault to make this a world where a woman who aspired to be something other than a housewife, a teacher or a nurse could do it without having to meet impossible standards or endure sexual harassment or, for that matter, give up her sexuality and become a secular nun in order to be the one woman in the medical school or law school class photos. Madeline Albright shattered one glass ceiling after another, making things young women who were born when she was U.N. Ambassador seem normal today.
If any two human beings in America had the moral right to tell young women that it’s wrong for them to take the historic nature of Hillary’s candidacy for granted, it was these two women.
Time and again, I look at the shit people who profess to support Bernie Sanders write online in what they fondly imagine to be support of him and wonder just what the fuck it is about supporting this fine old guy that seems to have driven them quite out of their senses and what it is that makes them think writing the kind of shit they write is helping his cause. And invariably, they don’t see it, waste not a second on self-reflection and take the kind of petulent umbrage one normally associates with self-righteous fifteen year olds.
@NCSteve: *Toasts you*
I am watching the normally “much smarter than Republicans” develop a screeching case of deafness, historical amnesia and obsessive adoration. Just wild.
I’m not sure I’d go down the road of honesty, this is politics after all. Her answer was indeed a bunch of gobbledegook that made it sound like she was hiding something, but I think the politic answer would have been “we set aside X number of delegates for those who have served the party so well over the years, blah, blah, blah” and then emphasize that they are free to vote for whomever they choose.
Wait, did I miss something here? Didn’t Bernie have the same opportunity to go after and get support from “super delegates”? And doesn’t the fact that he has very little support among those super delegates say something about his relationship with the Democratic Party and the competence of his political organization?
Those don’t bother me, and I actually think the stand in he took in Minneapolis, smart, and one that will win him and the democrats the election. It isn’t tone deaf, instead it is unusually tone-sensitive. I know this because I live among many white who live in crushing poverty, doubtless like those he got to know representing Vermont. They are open to progressive measures that are based on economics, that advantage the poor equally, black or white. They become Republicans when the Democrats suggest that their lives aren’t equally worthy of improvement. In terms of electability in the general, Sanders insistence on sticking to the economics and refusal to give priority by race is one of the smartest things I’ve seen.
No One You Know
@different-church-lady: Male achievements are easily come by, as John Scalzi noted in “The Lowest Difficulty Setting There Is.” Females need not apply.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I wonder if Mix’s post has Cole pulling his hair out, or is there none left to pull after yesterday?
@feebog: I can’t imagine things like St Bernard calling for a primary challenge to Obama in 2012 (after Obama campaigned for him in VT in ’06) was off-putting to any career Democrats
As a young (ish) woman, I have a lot of respect for what both Steinham and Albright managed to accomplish in their careers, especially considering just how much the cards were stacked against them in their time. I have even more respect for them as they have apologized when other women complained about what they said.
If they were men, they would be distinguished diplomats and community organizers. Since they are women, they are just washed-up has-beens, eh, Mistermix?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Please to explain.
This is an entirely disgusting post by mistermix. Appalling.
I’ve been around long enough to see more than a few Democratic Presidential campaigns roiled by the Shiny New Thing – or by people who think elections are about “sending a message,” and decide to send one by not voting at all.
Obama in 2008 is the only time I can think of when the Shiny New Thing was a genuine phenomenon, who went on to win the nomination and the election.
Bernie has become a Shiny New Thing: the man on the white horse who will save the country through the power of his message. I have nothing in particular against him, but his increasingly petulant and obnoxious supporters? – they can bite me.
The Sheriff Endorses Baud 2016
@Wrb: “I’m not racist. I have black friends. I don’t see color. All lives matter.”
Remember when Obama supporters in 2008 high-fived each other about how their superior understanding of delegate selection rules meant they could win more delegates than their percentage of votes actually cast? I guess that was different because reasons.
My, this takes me all the way back to 2008, when Clinton had a massive superdelegate lead…that went away when Obama started winning more and more.
Christ, the level of panic and righteous indignation on this blog (or Coles twitter) is hysterical. Would everyone just let the primary play out? Let the actual states vote and at the end, if this is a “thing”, then complain, but it’s so damn early for this.
And enough with DWS or the DNC being the evil thing that will cost the Democrats the election. Guess what? No one other than the most hardcore political observers knows or cares who Debbie is, or what the DNC is.
I’ll eat my hat if Superdelegates end up mattering in this thing. Or if DWS decision to allow PACs to contribute to the DNC matters. Or if a Clinton supporter on TV lowering expectations on an upcoming primary will matter. I mean, that was the most laughable one. “Golly Mike, was gonna vote Clinton over Trump, but I just remembered that one of Clintons supporters said Nevada had 80% whites, when it’s actually 67%. Looks like it’s Trump for me!”
It’s all so silly, and I can’t believe that political watchers, people who write blog posts about politics every day end up falling into these dumb narratives that have never mattered in any single election.
@FlipYrWhig: Hillary actually won the popular vote in that primary! Not by much, but…remember how angry her supporters were and then they didn’t vote for Obama because their votes didn’t count as much????
Yeah, me either.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
Every word of this I agree with. Thank you.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Jim. I’m not sure what part you wish explained. It has been a topic much ruminated over. “Why do poor whites vote against their interests?” One reason, I’ve observed, a sense that those who advocate programs that would help the poor disrespect and insult poor whites. So the they give their support to the ones that wonks consider their enemies, instead of to those who feel to their hearts to be enemies. I read Sanders’ refusal to go as far as black activists wanted to go in supporting a specifically black analysis, and I sting on sticking to a color-blind economic approach designed to lift all who are downtrodden, as being both strategically and intellectually correct. And I think it quite impressive that a New York Jew has learned to be so sensitive to rural white feeling. It speaks well of him.
And, really, the tendency among Bernie Sanders supporters of sniffing out machinations against their glorious cause, and egging each other on about how it shows how much they threaten the Establishment, is getting way out of hand. There have been superdelegates for 40 years, but OMG LOOK WHAT DWS IS DOING TO DESTROY US has to be a week’s worth of fulminations. THERE ARE TOO FEW DEBATES was an enormous issue for months. Just settle yourselves down.
@Belafon: Bernie doesn’t play by your RULZ man! He’s like….beyond rules man….you just have to open your mind and visualize the Bernitute, dude!
@Wrb: Yes, it’s practically pathbreaking to be sensitive to rural white feeling as a politician in a rural white state.
Sanders’ supporters are going to destroy Sanders’ campaign. I wonder how the character lynching of John Lewis will play in S.C.?
Good grief, mistermix. I can not tell you how disappointed I am with you for this terrible post. Maybe you should have a time out for a while, read some books, take a hike, whatever. *sigh*
@ruemara: @ruemara: Thank you. This.
@feebog: Aren’t Senators superdelegates? How many of Bernie’s colleagues have endorsed him?
@FlipYrWhig: It’s more impressive that the man who, apparently, led the entire Civil Rights movement is so popular with heavily armed white people.
@Wrb: Democrats don’t say that. Republicans say that Democrats say that-that’s part of the appeal to racism.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@NCSteve: This should be repeated and repeated and repeated. Thank you.
@inventor: Not very g*d damned well is my guess, because the folks who quietly applauded Dylan Roof will not vote in the D primary.
@NCSteve: Thank you, too.
As tone deaf as Sanders.
@NCSteve: Thank you.
How crafty of Iago Rosenberg Schultz to borrow Obama’s time machine and go back to 1982 to implement the superdelegate system so that Hillary could steal the primary election in 2016 (but not 2008 for some reason).
the Conster, la Citoyenne
All the bros who paid no attention to anything 8 years ago have all become unassailable experts on economics, social justice, history, politics and gender dynamics. The power and glory of the Bern is ours to embrace, if we would just let ourselves feel it.
Probably the most pervasive affliction in this country, affecting all ages. I blame selfie sticks.
P.S. No one is a has-been.
P.S.S. Worse than women demanding other women support women is women undermining each other to get ahead.
So, it is a awareness and political asset he’s gained due to his life experience. So come assets and skills. Many a socialist New York Jew would have never figured out how to appeal to poor rural whites, but he seems to have managed.
@Chyron HR: Because she had already gone back to 1948 to make sure each president only serves two terms, so she could reward both Obama AND Clinton. Gore wouldn’t have a beer with her, so he was sacrificed to Nader.
Gonna confess, I try hard to stay polite when I’m not being actively insulted, but this one does drive me nuts. Everything is proof that Hillary is desperate and ‘will do anything to win’, IE is cheating because that’s the only way to defeat Bernie.
To all of you Bernie supporters who don’t fall into that crap, thank you, but… damn, bear with us. The few that do are like fingernails on a blackboard.
@Chyron HR: Isn’t Sanders’ campaign manager one of the architects of the superdelegate system?
Regardless of who wins, Clinton or Sanders, DWS will be axed, that’s the icing on either cake, and apparently she has a challenger to her House seat as well.
@Shortribs: Hope so. I think that’s one thing that’s united Clinton and Sanders supporters.
@NCSteve: right on!
@NCSteve: Most excellent last line is marvelous.
@Wrb: ok, but it’s also a blind spot: saying The Real Issue is class (sort of), not race, gender, sexual orientation, or any other kind of social difference, is to obscure a whole host of actual people’s actual problems, especially when the analysis is not only that class is The Real Issue but also that all other issues are reducible to class. It starts to become Jim Webb-ish.
IMHO the best recent Berrnie Sanders rhetorical flourish has been about how rich people get one sort of justice and everyone else gets stuck with another. That strikes a much more “intersectional” note than most of his political statements.
@Amir Khalid: Gloria Steinem was a Bill Clinton level horndog, so saying young women go where the boys are is not exactly out of character.
Iowa Old Lady
I don’t understand the point of Ds dissing their own candidates. Eyes on the prize, people, and by prize I don’t meant the nomination.
It just goes to show you how deep the Establishment’s tentacles reach.
ETA: Like one of my Japanese animes.
@Wrb: the portion of US population that is rural is under 20%, of that 78% is white. So the Bern has figured out how to appeal to a fraction of a fraction by pissing off a much larger demographic slice of the country? Yeah, that’s the kind of smarts I want in a President…not.
I really never thought I’d see a primary as nasty amongst the supporters of various candidates as 2008. This thread has given a lie to those thoughts. Jesus Christ on a cracker folks. The random statements of hackerdudez321 for Bernie is not going to sink his campaign, nor is Gloria Steinem’s tone deaf stupidity going to either. As for whether calling two women who last had power and significance in the 90’s in the public imagination “has been’s” is sexist, I’ll leave to other people.
Get some level of rationality folks. Bernie Sanders is not the reincarnation of St. George ready to lead us all to the destruction of the evil wall street dragon. Nor is Hillary Clinton the apotheosis of competence and intelligence in politics, that if everyone else would just understand how hard she’s had to work they would fall at her feet in appreciation.
Bernie Sanders is a pretty good legislator who’s played the gadfly for years in a small rural state. Hillary Clinton plays the inside game very well with a huge assist from the fact that she is the former first lady. Democrats in Vermont hated Bernie Sanders because he could win outside of them. Later they gave up and co-opted him.
Hillary Clinton got a senate seat on the basis of being Hillary Clinton (Name anyone else who could fly into New York without having lived there in 30 years and win a senate seat) She is obviously smart. She is also very comfortable being within the system. She also has done a crap job of constructing her elevator pitch for why she should be president.
Bernie Sanders says the same thing over and over. Apparently doesn’t care about foreign policy, must be somewhat intelligent on the basis of his ability of pass amendments in republican dominated congresses. That’s the election.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Wrb: still confused. Which elected Democrats (no, blog comments do not count) “disrespect and insult poor whites”? Your initial and subsequent comments sound like justification of the Jim Webb-ish worldview that unless a policy exclusively benefits the white working class, it is “forgetting” the WWC. In other words, the WWC see politics as zero sum contest between races, so they’re right because that’s who they feel.
@Wrb: Wow, a New York Jew can understand “REAL Amurrica !” ? Don’t know about other New York Jews, but this one here thinks you’re pretty damn patronizing.
Has-beens? Go take yourself to Red Lobster, mistermix.
Absolutely cannot believe how many people are openly defending the idea of stealing the primary for the losing candidate via superdelegates. Saying it’s fake controversy because it’s not likely to matter, sure. Saying the superdelegates wouldn’t be stupid enough to tear the party apart like that? I’d bet that’s correct.
But saying stuff like “Bernie had his chance to compete for their vote, too bad”? Really?
This primary is causing people to lose their damn minds. Get some perspective.
Sure, Bernie even wrote a song about it (although the Establishment later incorrectly attributed it to Simon & Garfunkel).
@SarahT: why? Empathy outside your cultural group is actually a fairly rare and praiseworthy things. Many rural Americans don’t understand New York Jews. Many urbanites write and post hateful smears about those who did not chose the city life. Empathy is good, IMO.
As I’ve stated many times, you can’t control the machine, you have to become the machine.
A little heads up on the caucus routine to those of you first timers going to them as well, the machine controls the agenda. If you want to insert platform issues you have to do it at the county convention level, in writing. If you want to have a debate on platform issues you have to have first and seconds ready to go before the county chairperson can close debate, usually when everyone is busy finding their footing in the general gathering, whence s/he will make a motion to close debates, platforms, etc, and have the co-chair second the motion, and then voice vote the proposal, which will naturally carry. In short, if you aren’t supporting the establishment’s candidate you’ll get clipped in the procedures. Hence, you have to become the machine. That’s the party leg work that the chairperson and party regulars have already done. It’s the mundane boring stuff that people do to keep the democratic process from becoming too democratic. ( Organize early, organize often peeps! Use your heads for something other than a place to keep your hats. Just sayin’)
Often after the general meeting to conduct business, the precincts will meet in separate rooms to select a delegate to attend the state convention. The trick here is to select a delegate and alternate. Everyone gets only one vote, the top vote is the delegate, the second top vote is the alternate. What tends to happen is everyone votes for their favorite best buddy from the precinct , and then the alternate is represents the other candidate with the second highest votes, because the grassroots candidate delegates didn’t figure out this mathematical sleight of hand. In 2008 that grassroots candidate was Obama, the establishment candidate was Hillary. Expect the same thing with Sanders/Clinton in 2016. Depending on the establishment’s ethics and morals, hi jinks will ensue to make sure the delegate voting at the state convention is the establishment candidate, so be careful of sex, drugs, alcohol. Rock n Roll – not so much.
So it isn’t just the super delegates that stack the conventions against the party base, and it isn’t exclusive to the Democratic Party. That’s the way the game is played. You can take your ball and go home, or you learn the ropes and rules.
But by all means keep your perspective on things. With the SCOTUS in the balance, and the progressive movement on a hinge, we can live with either one of the two candidates now before us, so don’t go getting your rocks off on being the most acerbic Democratic analyst. That’s my gig. (POGs are free to ignore the advice, along with science, math, facts and what the Bible says,like you always do.) *POG is assbackward GOP, JSYK.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: No, it is an argument that a policy that betters the lives of all, and tries to at least appear even- handed, is morevlikely to result in the sort of political coalition needed to make it happen.
Sounds like enough to swing an election. Why not consider why Sanders seems to have put at least some of this group of once New Deal democrats back into play, and considering whether this might be a very good thing?
Exactly. this is the most sexist post I’ve ever read on Balloon Juice. It’s akin to “Hey, old ladies, STFU because one false step and you’re stripped of your accomplishments and relegated to the dust bin of invisible womens’ history. The double standard is overwhelming.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Okay, What policy are you talking about, and who made it look less than even-handed?
I plan to vote for Clinton in the Illinois primary.
On this blog, Clinton supporters on balance seem way more obnoxious than Sanders supporters. (Since I only follow one other political blog, and don’t follow political people on twitter, I don’t see the obnoxious “berniebros”.)
So if I picked candidates based on their supporters, I’d be driven away from Clinton.
My fellow Clinton supporters: when it comes to advocating for your candidate, you’re doing it wrong. Might want to consider whether lashing out is more important to you than her candidacy.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Wrb: What numbers are looking at?
@Wrb: Man, we have ALL kinds of poor people here, and many of us are plenty capable of empathy, and many are not – Just like everywhere else. City dwellers don’t have any kind of monopoly on hateful smears, as you say. But in my experience, it’s not some rare and special thing for urbanites to be able to feel empathy for “the other”.
@BrianM: It’s not just you. If I voted based on how obnoxious a candidate’s supporters were on the internet I’d crawl over broken glass to keep Hillary from the presidency.
Piss poor post.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
That’s an awesome idea (a sketch with Larry David vs. Sue Esseman). has the potential to be both hilarious and epic.
@BrianM: based on this blog, you’d be right. If you went to the GOS, or tracked Facebook comments on sites like Salon, you might have a much different view. I think the disparity is because this blog skews old so there just are more Clinton supporters.
Superdelegates were created after the election debacle of 1972. The theory is that elected officials are stakeholders in the system and may counterbalance party suicide attempts. It is worth remembering that prior to 1972, there were only a handful of primaries and party hacks ran the show, giving us such obvious rotten choices like FDR, Truman, JFK and Johnson.
I myself am a has-been, in that the most influential part of my career is almost certainly over, but I don’t usually take it as meaning I’m now worthless. So, I can be charitable to Mistermix by thinking he means it in the same way I do.
Even given that, though, writing that “a has-been has very little to lose” shows no understanding of (1) how it feels to be a has-been, or (2) how someone who admires what a has-been once was will react. So, if I were Clinton, or DWS, or any reader of this blog, I wouldn’t give any weight to his thoughts about the reactions of “the youngs” to superdelegates.
Doesn’t mean it’s not worth talking about, though.
Yeah. White spiders can come out and they’re still good to go.
Mistermix, you walked right into this. I heard the women in the Bernie field office in Keene talking about both Steinem and Albright, over and over. None of them saw any need to call them names, just to repeat what they said, and that (at the time) they hadn’t seen fit to even walk it back or apologize, nor did Hillary see fit to disavow any of it. I think you’ll find I haven’t called names either.
Granted you could’ve used worse names, still. And granted you’ve brought out a storm of vituperation: still.
Try to have a better sense of context, OK? :)
It’s a reaction. There was a wave of ‘Hillary is a cheater and a Republican’ commenters at first, and the Hillary supporters got pretty pissed. They were really, really obnoxious. They’ve quieted down almost completely, and the HIllary supporters (I am one) are still a bit punchy, but also calming down.
Iowa Old Lady
I hope that’s not true but what do I know? Is there data? I’ve seen data that reading fiction (ie seeing something from a character’s POV) seems to increase empathy in kids.
It does seem to me (without data) that conservatives seem less able to imagine what it feels like to be different from them and gain empathy when something happens close to home. So an R politician advocates marriage equality when someone in their own family turns out to be gay. Liberals tend to advocate for programs that help people who aren’t part of their own group, so you see support for poverty programs for instance.
Can’t believe how upset some people are at mistermix calling Steinem and Albright “has beens”
Steinem was last relevant in the 1970’s, and Albright was in government in the 1990’s.
Only old-timers remember either of them or consider their opinions important.
Not every criticism of a woman is sexism.
Jim, My immediate stimulus was last night’s Minneapolis forum, in which Black Lives Matters and other participants demanded that he make special accommodation for blacks. He stood them down, arguing that his policies would raise all. Another poster asserted that this was, for him, “disasterous”. I disagree. I think it smart. Of course, I could be wrong.
@jsrtheta: You have to bear in mind that at the time, it was McGovern’s selection of Eagleton that broke the back of the campaign. He picked an ambitious guy with a history of shock treatments and the money people all went ‘nope’. At a crucial point in the campaign, he had to ditch his VP and find somebody else, this while Nixon went bonkers with dirty tricks campaigns, and all years before the Reagan Revolution which really drove home the swing to conservatism the country was prepared to do after the Sixties.
Pretty much everything is opposite how it was then. We were heading into the roaring Eighties and swinging sharply hippie-punch socially, plus McGovern really blew it with the money people over Eagleton. It was a Palin-like choice, for its day.
@Iowa Old Lady: I should have phrased that more carefully. Actually it is amazingly frequent, yet still often absent. So worthy of praise and respect. In my opinion.
And don’t get me started on the empathy our male horse feels for his baby goats, sheep,mchickens and peacocks,mind on how he protects and nurtures them.
Iowa Old Lady
@Wrb: I love seeing that in animals. Humans too, of course.
@Frankensteinbeck: Will do *salutes*
I’ve been pretty sure this whole time that Hillary’s people will do anything BUT cheating to win. That’s what makes her a truly formidable competitor, and I’ve said that all along. It is just insanely tough to go against Hillary Clinton, but we gotta because we think we can do better.
It’s not because she’s a nefarious wicked cheater with Vince Whoever’s entrails dripping off her teeth. It’s because she’s SMART AND EFFECTIVE and very, very experienced. It’s fair to talk about what she would be effective at doing, hence the Wall Street and hawkishness talk. But nobody sane thinks she’s not in control, and she only fumbles by overreaching and pushing too hard, not by making dumb mistakes. They’re only dumb in the sense that they are overkill and counterproductive.
It is not actually racism, but it is indeed the same type of language/dogwhistle which racists employ.
About the dudebros thing.
I’ve heard a lot about how there is this large contingent of Sanders supporters out there calling Hillary The C, and B words, and other horribly sexist derogatory terms. I don’t do much social media, or more than a couple blogs, so I haven’t seen really much of it. I’m sure it goes on, but I also haven’t seen it much on this site. What I have seen on this site is Hillary supporters claiming that Sanders supporters are shrill, and always attacking Clinton unfairly.
Even the running meme among them is Sanders, and his supporters, are all foolish pie in the sky blah, blah, blah, and seemingly everyone’s go to; “because Bernie”. As if Sanders hasn’t got any policy proposals at all.
Their favorite meme is that somehow Hillary supporters are the “adults” and anyone that doesn’t think she’s the best is simply foolish, and not to be listened to. While I don’t mind Hillary, and will definitely vote for her if nominated, her supporter’s might want to consider that there are reasons, beyond the right’s constant demonization, why the majority of people don’t find her particularly honest, or trustworthy.
Which brings me to their other favorite thing, which is to throw out the term Dudebros constantly. Interesting that it’s the same people that are complaining about “Dudebros” that have coined a derogatory term that they tacitly use to paint all Sanders supporters with. It’s interesting the Hillary supporters have so quickly, and completely glommed on to the rhetorical device so prized by bigots, and racists. Come up with a term that portrays a subset of a group as the “other” or somehow evil, then subtly apply that term to anyone in the entire group. It’s simply a slightly more subtle form of eliminationist rhetoric the right thrives upon. It’s demonization of all Sanders supporters via association.
But I’m sure that Hillary supporters will claim they only use the term to refer to those misogynists that are attacking her, not the “good” Sanders backers.
But the truth is it is a cheap device used to portray all Sanders supporters as something “less than” thus trying to completely dismiss the other side’s argument as unserious. Don’t like the other side’s argument, instead of putting forth your rebuttal, drag out the dudebros tag
I’m sure this is not a tactic they ever embraced in the past. It’s not like the last time somebody challenged Queen Hillary’s coronation, they came up with some snarky little term for that group which also served to denigrate that group, and portray them and their candidate as less than ………Dudebros indeed!
@Wrb: I think the deal with that is, Bernie did not make friends among those who want us to promise to pay reparations.
I feel that if anybody DID promise to make that happen, or even suggest that they’ll push for that sort of thing, they would be lying. Straight-up, cold-blooded, lying. Because both Bernie and Hillary and every other Democrat in Washington know that’s not going to happen.
So, Bernie, being Bernie, tells them so in his own way: refuses to say what they’d like to hear, and also blows it by getting into ‘all lives matter’ phrasing which could be read as a repudiation of ‘black lives matter’ when I don’t think it is.
I think he agrees that black lives are disproportionately ruined, most notably through police brutality gone uncorrected. I think he’s down for working to fix that.
I do NOT think he’s okay with fixing things economically for black people first and everyone else later and won’t even nod in that direction, and that’s what you see. One thing about it, he will not lie to you even if it’s to his advantage, and so here we are. He’s offended that group of people, and yes he’s not going to try to push for reparations. I think he feels it’s wrong, that we have to fix the larger structural thing and address specifically racial injustices outside of economics. He has said as much, when he touches on other topics.
And since the one big topic he’s got is economics…
what the fuck is this shit? go home, mixie, you’re drunk.
Oh, by the way Mistermix, has been falls under the same rhetorical device as Dudebros.
seriously, take this garbage to the wreck list at the GOS. it’ll rocket to the top, i’m sure.
bob woodward, thomas freidman, david brooks…
Well, though, Clinton wasn’t hitting at all on economic issues until Sanders became competitive. Up until a month ago she was spouting the “opportunity” line Democrats used in 2014, which was then and is now an absolute dud. Carefully crafted not to upset anyone who has any power, that line. Just grab onto the Ladder of Opportunity and hoist yourself up, workers! Green jobs! Skill up! Retrain and if that doesn’t work, retrain again! That is not responsive to stagnant wages and economic insecurity.
If Bernie is getting better at “intersectional” it is also true that Hillary Clinton has had to get better at speaking to peoples’ immediate concerns about an economy that doesn’t seem to work for them.
Has-been is not sexist, but definitely insulting. Gloria Steinem has not retired, she’s still actively fighting for women’s rights.
You tell those crusty old broads what’s what, Mixie.
I need a cigarette
Next MM front page post:
“John Lewis sells out to massa”.
i’ve always thought unpledged delegates were a relatively dumb system, given that they all should end up going with the pledged delegates at the end anyways.
one thing about em is, though, that they’re basically a bonus for candidates who are effectively ‘party builders’. and given the nature of the democratic party, and the fact that in reality congress is just as important as the president, it’s good for the candidate in any given year to be a leader of a unified democratic party. god knows it’s not like democratic voters get off their asses during the midterms.
unpledged delegates help make sure that the candidate is really behind getting other democrats elected which actually is a big important fucking deal. yeah, that means it’s a big negative for bernie, but that’s because bernie has never been all that interested in getting democrats elected for office, which really is not a good quality in a presidential candidate.
Meet Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s First-Ever Primary Challenger: Tim Canova
In primary challenge, Wasserman Schultz faces unprecedented test
George McGovern was, in effect, a ‘one trick pony’ in the 1972 Presidential election. Nixon overtly declared that he had a ‘peace plan’ in the works for Vietnam (with his companion-in-crime, Henry Kissinger), and McGovern was left with little else for an advocacy platform….
If you are not of an age that easily recalls the heinous acts/behavior of SOS Henry Kissinger, here is a recent article by Dan Froomkin reviewing his CV and the bruhaha regarding HRC’s relationship with him:
Henry Kissinger’s War Crimes Are Central to the Divide Between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders
Remember ‘Obama Boys’?…there are an increasing number of occasions in the 2016 campaign that bear an uncanny resemblance to 2008….