.@WhipClyburn: “When I say, ‘I don’t get mad, I get even’, there’s one person who is going to hear from me.
His name is Michael Moore.” https://t.co/FvzXpSoi3v
— Reily Connaughton (@reilyseanconn) March 28, 2020
Whether Trump likes the idea or not, there will be an election this fall. Among other things, some interesting suggestions from Rep. Clyburn on Biden’s potential VP:
… I met Clyburn for the first time shortly before last month’s South Carolina primary, where his endorsement of Joe Biden almost single-handedly saved the former vice-president’s campaign. The 14-term lawmaker would not say then which candidate he was going to endorse. But he had told some people at his accountant’s funeral the previous week — because, he says confidently, “they would never betray Jim Clyburn”.
As we sip our drinks, I ask him when he told Biden. The pair met on the USS Yorktown, an old aircraft carrier turned museum, six days before the primary. He delivered the good news, but included a stern warning to his friend to stop reading speeches from a script.
“Here’s what I said to him,” Clyburn tells me. “You know these issues well enough not to be reading from a text . . . People can’t feel you when you read it.”
Using lessons he learnt from his father as a “PK” (preacher’s kid), he gave Biden some advice. “There’s a reason that preachers preach in threes,” Clyburn recalls saying. “I want you to answer every question in three ways: here is what my presidency will mean to you, here’s what it will mean to your family, and here’s what it will mean for your community.”…
Armed with Clyburn’s backing, Biden won in a landslide; according to the exit polls, 61 per cent of the voters said the endorsement influenced their decision. That dramatic victory then propelled Biden to win in a slew of states the following week, earning him clear frontrunner status over the leftwing Vermont senator Bernie Sanders.
Clyburn is used to having power in his state. For the past three decades, he’s hosted a fish fry during the Democratic primaries which has become virtually mandatory for would-be candidates to attend. In the course of the 2008 primary, Clyburn criticised Hillary Clinton; on the day that Barack Obama beat her in South Carolina, Clyburn remembers Bill Clinton phoning him at 2.15am, bellowing, “If you bastards want a fight, you damn well will get one.”
Did he ever think his endorsement of Biden would have such an impact? Clyburn says that people underestimated the latent support for Biden — before proudly adding that two women approached him after the primary to say, “Thank you for saving the Democratic party.”
Clyburn has come a long way since his youth in Sumter, a city near Columbia. In his 2014 memoir, Blessed Experiences, he recalls how his high-school band was asked to participate in the Sumter Christmas parade in 1955, the year after the Supreme Court struck down the segregation of public schools. But he and his black bandmates were forced to march at the end of the parade, behind the horses…
He says he lives by an adage from John F Kennedy, which goes something like: “I never get mad, but I will get even.” I joke that Oscar Wilde said it first, with “revenge is a dish best served cold”. Clyburn breaks into a smile: “Kennedy stole a lot from other people, he might have stolen that line.”…
But inexorably the conversation is drawn back to Biden. Clyburn says he would restore civility in politics. For instance, he says, Biden shuns the “bombastic” approach taken by the “Bernie bros” — the moniker for the most radical wing of Sanders’ movement.
Centrist Democrats worry that, should Biden win the nomination, Sanders will hold back from actively campaigning for him. Clyburn does not sound confident that Sanders will help unite the party, or rally his supporters behind Biden. “What’s that old mafia saying — that fish rots from the head.” As he slowly knocks off his crustaceans one by one, he has a warning for one famous supporter of Sanders.
“When I say, ‘I don’t get mad, I get even’, there’s one person who is going to hear from me. His name is Michael Moore,” Clyburn says. The film-maker and longtime Sanders supporter claimed after Biden’s victory in South Carolina that the state was “not representative” of the United States. “I don’t want to say much but I’m going to have a lot to say.”
Come on, I press, and he happily obliges. Reminding me that Biden won more than 60 per cent of the black vote in South Carolina and bigger percentages in Alabama and Mississippi, he says: “According to Michael Moore, South Carolina doesn’t matter because here’s what ‘the people’ want.” He says Moore is dismissing the voices of the most important segment of the Democratic electorate — black voters.
I ask whether Clyburn thinks Biden will pick Stacey Abrams, 46, the African-American former minority leader of the House in Georgia and rising Democratic star, as his running mate to help woo younger voters in November.
“I doubt it,” he says. “There’s something to be said for somebody who has been out there.”
Clyburn does want to see a black woman on the ticket, though. And some Democrats believe that Biden, who has vowed to pick a woman, will also be under heavy pressure to repay Clyburn for his critical endorsement.
Clyburn says there has been a lot of talk about Kamala Harris, the California senator who struggled in the Democratic primary. He says a “sleeper” in the race is Susan Rice, who served as national security adviser to Barack Obama. But he also stresses that “the bench of black women is much deeper than people think”.
While he believes Abrams does not have enough experience, he has his eyes on another Georgia politician. “There is a young lady right there in Georgia who I think would make a tremendous VP candidate, and that’s the mayor of Atlanta, Keisha Lance Bottoms.”
It’s getting late, so we secure “one for the road”. I ask the former history teacher how he sees America’s place in the world. “We’re where Germany was in 1933 after the election of Adolf Hitler,” he warns. But he adds a note of optimism, saying that African-Americans can lead the charge against Trump. He cites as inspiration a hero of the 1930s: Jesse Owens, winner of four gold medals at the 1936 Berlin Olympics…
Michael Moore retweeting something calling Nancy Pelosi a white supremacist. This coming from a man who recently said South Carolina does not “represent the United States.” pic.twitter.com/IKtbpf6ekn
— Michael Bennet secured unemployment benefits (@gdigitalzsmooth) March 28, 2020
Bogart
I love Mayor Bottoms, but she is in no way ready for a stage that big.
geg6
Good on Clyburn. Michael Moore, as always, showing his big, pasty, white ass.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
woo hoo! politics! ( and I am utterly and completely sincere)
I’m not sure if I can donate to his campaign right now. Will they take a rain-check?
Now I will read the interview
germy
Heywood J.
I like Jim Clyburn a lot, but I disagree with his thoughts about “restoring civility.” I have zero interest in being civil with people who are comfortable with killing the vulnerable and stealing from everyone else. This shit has got to stop, and they have made it clear that they won’t stop it without a real fight.
A Ghost to Most
I wish I truly believed that.
Fair Economist
I don’t see Mayor Bottoms as having more experience than statehouse Minority Leader Abrams. Anybody knowledgeable about GA politics have an idea why Clyburn would prefer Mayor Bottoms?
Also, while browsing Wiki:
Ugh, a reminder of how backwards we still are
Edit: troll cleanup on Aisle 7?
International Mikey
Kudos to Clyburn for calling out Michael Moore. Moore’s support of Sanders has bordered on insanity and his comments about the State of South Carolina and its relevance to the nation are revealing of what’s really on his mind. He’s made millions acting like he’s one of the underdogs. He’s a shameless self promoter much like his candidate, Bernie Sanders.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Wow, the bat signal went up quick.
I love how the Screechers all glom onto this moment of performative indignation as the thing that got the bill written and passed. Bernie came in and bellowed with righteous sarcasm, and magic happened! No concept of the actual work done, no reflection on the fact that the bill passed 96-0, only Bernie! Shouting!
WaterGirl
In the wise words of the Thin Black Duke:
kindness
I’ve seen BernieBros coming apart at the seams a lot lately. Yesterday in a Charles Pierce thread one was gratuitously insulting every single other person in the thread who wasn’t bending the knee to St. Bernie. I wasn’t sure if it was a Republican/Russian troll but their history file seemed to be good. I don’t understand it really. For the Rank & File to be lashing out at their fellow Democrats like that is going to change minds is such small minded shit….I want to think they are R/R trolls. Sadly I’m wrong all to often there. These are people who call themselves liberals who aren’t mentally all that different from Trump. Case in point: all the BernieBros who are burning AOC at the stake right now
Damn BobbyK, I wasn’t meaning to talk to you on this but….
beef
@BobbyK:
Tara Reade was publishing pro-Putin propaganda a couple of months after the Salisbury poisonings. You have to be pretty dumb to believe what she says about Putin’s #1 political threat.
Baud
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I still am unsure whether the bill was the Great Betrayal or was The Bestest Thing Ever thanks to Bernie Sanders.
Baud
@kindness: The recent story about AOC “distancing” herself from Sanders is the best political story I’ve read in a while. I hope it’s true.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Baud: Like the crime bill, Bernie did all the Good Parts, the DNC all the nasty, nasty Bad Things!
Calouste
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: More operate like Labour under Corbyn, another magic grandpa. Lose election after election.
Baud
@Calouste: Didn’t Corbyn say he was going to step down after his last beating?
8 man shell
What better way to spend a pandemic than promoting intra-party squabbling?
Barbara
@BobbyK: Nancy Pelosi shows how an opposition party is supposed to operate. I am still amazed that the ACA survived and I don’t think it would have without her leadership.
L85NJGT
@kindness:
Like I said last night, when AOC is doing a “I wasn’t really that into you…” buy a clue, it’s over. But we can’t control whether the Senator and his flying monkeys are willing to acknowledge the here and now. Flinging a 2016 redux at the wall won’t work, because it is no longer 2016.
Baud
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
BTW, I’m with you. As important as the Covid stories are, I’m not interested in resting on our laurels in a primary that is not officially over.
zhena gogolia
@8 man shell:
You mean by supporting the person who is going to be the nominee?
Barbara
@Baud: Yeah, sometime in the distant future. It’s hard to give up power.
WaterGirl
@Baud: ooh, I would love to read that story. can you point me in some direction so i can look for it?
Taken4Granite
Somebody upthread is now eloquently discussing his dessert preferences.
First time I have ever used the pie filter. It works like a charm!
Baud
@WaterGirl:
I believe this Politico story is what set off all the other commentary.
L85NJGT
@8 man shell:
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz………………
Jim, Foolish Literalist
While I personally think more attention should be paid to the sheer stupidity of Sanders and his “movement”– “Look out the window, Mitch” is really all you need to know– I do wish somebody at MSNBC would tell Hayes that if he wants to keep gazing lovingly at Bernie a couple of times a week, he should at least ask Himself why his “movement” is so hate-fueled and obnoxious.
crm114
One of the first documentaries Michael Moore worked on was called “Blood in the Face” about white supremacists and neo-nazi groups in Michigan in the 1980s.
Moore’s not a racist but he’s deeply sympathetic to white people who turn to racism and he’s a pedantic “class-not-race” agitator who believes racism is just symptomatic of economic injustice. Racism is never the “real” problem, and racists would only come around if they had a good job.
trollhattan
@Fair Economist:
Yeah, this one deserves the Orkin man, stat. “Oooh, Real Clear Politics said…[flaps arms]”
Lemme stop ya right there.
NeenerNeener
@Taken4Granite: Yes, DuckCakes and Pupcakes! Woohoo!
WaterGirl
@Baud: Thank you! Reading now.
Calouste
@Baud: The Labour leadership election to replace him is under way, and has been since January or so. Not sure how long it is going to last.
Chyron HR
@BobbyK:
Agreed, but I don’t know why you expect Democrats to be grateful that we have two “opposition parties” to deal with now.
Baud
@Calouste: Ah, thanks. I hadn’t heard.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
negative 1
@BobbyK: That is… not good. Has Biden made a statement on that yet? Is he denying it? I haven’t heard anything from the campaign. One the one hand, it’s easy enough to ignore because the news is obviously elsewhere. On the other hand, I can’t help but feel that if he goes the ‘dismiss it until I have to say something’ route that it may look bad later.
Baud
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
See, for me at least, the problem is not his “ideas.” It’s him and a great many of his followers. That’s why I could easily have Warren high on my list and Bernie near the bottom.
Of course, most voters may actually reject his ideas.
debbie
@germy:
Yeah, spoken by a member of the party using the coronavirus pandemic as an excuse to shut down abortion clinics. ASSHOLE
ETA: And if anyone is taking advantage of this situation, IT’S BIBI NETANYAHU. Nice how he’s wriggled into maintaining control of the government.
Calouste
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: They also don’t see Wilmer’s loss as data that he just might not be a perfect candidate.
Shalimar
@BobbyK: As someone who didn’t have Biden in his top 10, no, i don’t believe her. She also came forward last year when Biden had his inappropriate touching scandal, it was just with a different story. She saved this one for when Sanders was the only perceived alternative. It screams bullshit ratfucking, and somehow has made me think even less of saint Bernie.
ThresherK
@beef: If I’m Tara Reid, the model (who has not said anything stupid that I know of, and for a celebrity, keeping your mouth shut sometimes is the wisest thing to do), how much am I posting on my Twitter that Tara Reade is no relation?
negative 1
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: It is alarming. I don’t really care about the candidate per se, but both candidates espousing universal healthcare, an end to student loan usury and continued focus on closing the already-ridiculous-and-getting-worse wealth gap were absolutely destroyed. That is alarming indeed — which is why I don’t understand why an ostensibly liberal blog and its commentators are so interested in just making fun of anyone who supports those things.
Redshift
If only the party he was in opposition to wasn’t the Democrats…
schrodingers_cat
@Baud: She seems to be more politically astute than Elizabeth Warren. Who was sending feelers to BS about endorsement, which he reportedly ignored.
zhena gogolia
@negative 1:
We need to stop dicking around and defeat Trump. I had a different candidate at the beginning. She has dropped out and enthusiastically endorsed Biden. Biden is the presumptive nominee. We need to stop dicking around and get behind him.
L85NJGT
@negative 1:
Concern trolls is concerned.
Do you clowns all have the same source IP?
schrodingers_cat
@Baud:
He doesn’t have ideas he has slogans. He doesn’t have policies he has a stump speech. Most people can see through that.
Baud
@schrodingers_cat:
I’m not sure I trust the “feelers” story. In any event, I can’t compare AOC and Warren because they are in radically different positions. (I do wish AOC would have endorsed Warren. ) AOC does seem to be more politically astute than other Bernie cohorts.
Baud
@schrodingers_cat: Yeah, I know. But I didn’t reject Bernie because of his slogans or the ideas those slogans were supposed to represent. (Not to say I agree with all of it, but I don’t agree with all of anything.)
Comrade Scrutinizer
@BobbyK: Yum. Tasty pie.
Mandalay
@Calouste:
The next leader of the Labour Party will be announced on Saturday, and the red hot favorite is (Sir!) Keir Starmer.
negative 1
@kindness: I mean — this is in a thread where Jim Clyburn actually threatened revenge on Sanders. The whole party is coming unglued. The whole tweet from FT was about his attack on Moore. Maybe everyone just stops talking about it? The primaries are over. At some point, we’re all supposed to get along right?
I support Sanders’ ideas, I wanted to vote Warren but she dropped out before I could and then I wanted to vote Sanders. Now I’m voting Biden, but honestly this stuff pisses me off… and for what gain? Why? It will now be probably 12 years before any of these ideas are realistically back in play. What would be the point about laughing at everyone who supported them? Are we trying to ensure that Bernie voters don’t vote Biden so we can all be pissed and mock surprised later?
Mike in NC
Per an article in today’s WaPo Online, St Bernard still thinks he has a shot at the nomination. Utterly clueless and useless.
hueyplong
@Baud: My recollection is that the “feelers story” as written had Warren staffers talking to Biden staffers, and merely Bernie supporters in Congress doing likewise with Biden counterparts in Congress.
IOW the details of the story itself didn’ t support the headline.
Shalimar
@negative 1: Most of us support those things. We’re not making fun of Bernie supporters for wanting the same things we do. We’re pissed at them for thinking that those things are going to rise from the ashes after they burn everything down.
negative 1
@L85NJGT: Yes, I’m concerned. Your epic comeback is I must be a bot? Read the link — she’s got a convincing story she apparently has a history of telling. Vox is reporting on it. Fine, I’m a bot — as I said, she’s a liar or a paid shill, which you know how? Or is she lying and ‘you just know’? And has the campaign actually gone on record?
Baud
@negative 1: The primaries are not over until Bernie drops out or Biden gets a majority of delegates. Just because your team is up by 15 runs in the 7th inning doesn’t mean you can quit playing the game.
Shalimar
@hueyplong: How many Bernie supporters were there in Congress? The only two I can think of were Tlaib and Ocasio-Cortez.
negative 1
@Shalimar: But why is it that those ideas aren’t just going to go away? There were two candidates that espoused them, and both got trounced.
Baud
@Shalimar:
According to wikipedia:
WaterGirl
Biden actually has a more progressive platform than Barack Obama did.
negative 1
@Baud: Ok, sure — but the primaries are over. The coverage is rightfully over, it’s over. I mean, my choice(s) didn’t win and even I’m saying it’s over.
Baud
@WaterGirl: So did Hillary in 2016. The party has been moving steadily to the left since 2004. You wouldn’t know it from the discourse, however.
Mandalay
@negative 1:
Because it’s not a liberal blog at all! The hatred for Sanders here is far stronger than that for Trump.
While the politics are different to (say) RedState or DailyKos, the overall mindset is the same: there are goodies and there are baddies, and if you disagree GFY.
There are loonies here who whine and squeal about Sanders in the cooking, pets and gardening threads. Just accept it, or find another blog.
Baud
@negative 1: I’m not disputing what the result is going to be. I’m saying I’m not going to stop talking about the candidates while there’s still an active contest going on.
schrodingers_cat
@Shalimar: AOC, Tlaib, Omar.
Also Raoul Grijalva, Ro Khanna and Pramila Jaypal endorsed him IIRC.
Just Chuck
@negative 1: Gosh maybe it had something to do with the likes of BernieBros like Moore helping elect Trump, and now doing their damndest for a repeat?
germy
Andrew Cuomo just said his brother Chris tested positive for the coronavirus.
WaterGirl
@Baud: In response to your #62, I wanted to say:
that’s a lotta links! but i knew no one would hear it the way i did, with the accent of “that’s a spicy meatball”
trollhattan
@Mandalay:
Here’s your chance to show your work. Otherwise: Grade F.
trollhattan
@germy: Yikes!
Shalimar
@negative 1: Warren and Sanders are still senators, Warren in particular very influential in crafting legislation. Their ideas aren’t going away.
Baud
@WaterGirl: I just copied and pasted. I’m surprised FYWP allowed it.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@negative 1:
actually, most of the candidates supported those things, it’s just not all of them tied themselves to unrealistic, and unpopular, absolutist positions, and declared that they would have no allies to the right!
Just for starters, and because it’s one of my pet peeves: “Universal Health Care” (your term) and “Single Payer” (BernieCare) are not synonyms. There are ways to get to universal coverage (popular) without announcing you are going to eliminate existing insurance for most voters (unpopular), while raising their taxes (also unpopular). A public option (the battle cry of the Jane Hamshers and Glen Greenwalds ten years ago, now a marker for neo-liberal corporate sell-outs) would be a big fucking deal, and a big heavy lift, and you don’t get there by making the Dem primary a campaign commercial for Susan Collins and Thom Tillis.
The first step to being a good (or great) President is being a good (or great) candidate, and that requires understanding what the electorate wants and doesn’t. You have to actually win elections (general elections, in different states) not just primaries or, god help us, caucuses, to effect change.
Just Chuck
@Mandalay: It’s a liberal blog in that we support people who don’t have a history of sandbagging liberals who actually get liberal shit done.
Where was Moore with the ACA? Oh yeah, vociferously opposing it.
JPL
We have visitors today.
WaterGirl
Thin Black Duke (repeat from above)
(and now I’ll be quiet)
Jeffro
@germy: Andrew’s busy giving some really heartwarming remarks about Chris and growing up with Mario as a dad.
cain
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
He is a naughty boy!
trollhattan
@negative 1:
1. Politics ain’t beanbag.
2. This isn’t the party coming apart because the person on the losing end is not a member of the party, by his choice. They owe him, what?
Shalimar
@Baud: Not many, but a respectable list of people I mostly admire.
Mary G
I can believe that Biden isn’t very good with maintaining physical boundaries without believing that he is a sexual assaulter. The hard push to argue that he is a predator rather than a too-touchy-feely old school pol appears to be coming from the same sources that have decided to hard push the argument today that Twitler fucked up on the coronavirus because he was preoccupied with his impeachment.
laura
Michael shite-bag Moore coasting on the fumes of Roger and Me. Spokesmodel for mansplaining, manspreading, and all things white male privilege. Michael Moore who declared himself the Leader of the Women’s March and jumped in front and took over the stage and microphone. Michael Moore who “others” wide swaths of the Democratic electorate, wide swaths of the US and still gets booked on the shows. Yeah, Michael Moore – fuck that guy.
Betty Cracker
@negative 1: Consider the source, which is Josh Barro, an idiot. FWIW, I don’t think the primary outcome was a rejection of progressive policy ideas. It was a crowded, fragmented field, and people are scared shitless and voted for the candidate they think has the best shot at beating Trump. Regardless, the Democratic Party platform in 2020 will be the most progressive platform ever.
L85NJGT
Latest three polls:
Biden +29
Biden +25
Biden +26
Biden 1217 – Sanders 914
Every poster in this place could start clapping madly to keep the Wilmer-bell campaign alive, but it just wouldn’t matter. The polity have decided they don’t trust Senator Sanders to implement the policies he’s advocating.
the dogs bark, but the caravan moves on
gwangung
Liberal is not the same as progressive.
And progressive politics center on policy and issues, not individual politicians.
Way too many people conflate progressive issues with specific candidates. And that ain’t so, Joe…
trollhattan
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Trump was tried and convicted in the House for actions taken to harm Biden and kill his chances of being the Dem nominee. How is this not a refutation of Biden’s supposed “weakness”?
OTOH he and the Republican machine relish the idea of running against Sanders.
negative 1
@Just Chuck: OK, here’s my work: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/02/bernie-sanders-defends-hillary-clinton-recording
so now since you’re civil and not attacking, where exactly was Bernie saying we should vote Trump? Or support Trump? Or vote 3rd party?
You’re saying ‘fucking act civil’ (which is funny enough) but yet I see nowhere near the same amount of vitriol for Trump in this thread as I do for Sanders. Or for that matter in the story above. Biden already won — which apparently isn’t enough, so now everyone who voted for universal healthcare, against student loan usury and for fair wealth distribution is a ‘bro’ and rather than attack Trump we’ll attack them?
hueyplong
@Shalimar: I think that’s right.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Just Chuck:
hell, I’m so old I remember when rat-fucking Mike convinced a whole lot of people that there wasn’t a dime’s worth of difference between Gore and Bush. And when Cornel West endorsed Jill Stein (after Bernie had blackmailed the Dems into naming West to the platform committee).
Too long for an Onion headline, but why do all these rat-fucking, Republican-enabling, publicity-junkie shitstains keep turning up at Sanders HQ?
hueyplong
@negative 1: If you think there is insufficient enmity for Trump here, well, tu salud.
MattF
@Mary G: It’s very clear that the ‘Trump was distracted by impeachment’ argument comes directly from the Trump re-election campaign. Hewitt and McConnell are just reading from the morning ticker tape.
negative 1
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I understand the two are different. Plenty of people, myself included, understand that and voted for the universal option — private insurance companies by definition have every incentive to increase fees and decrease payouts. I’m also not denying it’s less popular, hence it lost. I do believe I should continue to support what I believe in, as I consider it to be the better alternative. What I’m saying is why the derision?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@L85NJGT: yeah, the people who think Democratic, if not national, politics are determined by Balloon Juice threads are kind of weird. Granted, you could probably count them on your fingers and toes, but they are persistent.
It’s just a fucking blog (comments section).
Fair Economist
@Baud: AOC isn’t “distancing” herself from Sanders. She’s just been talking about working with other Democrats, which in the context of the nutty invective coming from some Bernie “supporters” (mostly trolls and grifters IMO) sounds like “distancing”. She has a bright future of perhaps a half-century in politics and she’s doing what will get her more influence and a better chance of a top position with real power.
I think the real Sanders supporters must be realizing that if he’d held out an olive branch to the rest of the party rather than treating them as the enemy he’d be the presumptive nominee rather than Biden, and that has to hurt.
Shalimar
@negative 1: In this thread? Fucking seriously? We fling vitriol at Trump every time he does and says something stupid. Which is the vast majority of threads every day.
Chyron HR
@gwangung:
What part of “BERNIE OR BUST!” do you think we don’t understand?
hueyplong
@MattF: Hugh Hewitt couldn’t make his way across the street without talking points, so you can fairly reliably assume any meme he promotes is issued directly from 2020 CREEP.
Leto
Rep Clyburn was my representative before 2010 blew up the maps. When I was retiring from active duty I contacted his office, not Mick Mulvaney’s, to get my official flag. Absolutely loathe Mulvaney and no way was I having something as special as that flag being handled by him/his office. Rep Clyburn’s office was more than happy to help. If I ever get a chance to vote for him again, I’ll gladly do it.
Betty Cracker
@Mary G: I believe that in general, women don’t make accusations of sexual assault against powerful men lightly because the blowback is so fierce. So, my policy is to take such accusations seriously, look at the evidence and draw my own conclusions based on that.
I listened to Reade’s interview with Halper and read a few articles from seemingly credible sources, and I don’t find her story believable. I’m not sure if her motivations are political or if she’s got a screw loose or what, but her story did not ring true to me. Anyone familiar with my views on Biden can attest that I did not reach that conclusion due to pro-Biden bias.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@negative 1: the combination of self-righteousness and stupidity usually invites derision
negative 1
@trollhattan: Except that he lost, so he’s one vote (and he’ll probably vote Biden). The complaint here is that people who voted for him won’t vote for Biden, which we’ve attempted to remedy by calling them all assholes. No one’s arguing ‘Bernie’ (at this point a strawman, seriously) has to be given lands in the North of the Kingdom or whatever and then he command his followers to vote Biden. They have independent agency — maybe we instead try and persuade that agency to vote Biden.
I mean, if your argument is that this is just a blog and the only thing we should do in the commentary is call each other names I guess I got nothing on that. But at this point isn’t the 300th ‘so and so is a Bernie Bro what an ass I hate them all’ story kind of redundant, and not really topical?
negative 1
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Am I stupid for supporting those things, or am I self-righteous?
Citizen Alan
@Mandalay:
In my case, that may well be true BECAUSE BERNIE SHOULD HAVE FUCKING KNOWN BETTER! He should have FUCKING KNOWN that the 2016 election was a choice between the first liberal SCOTUS in 50 years or an ultra-conservative SCOTUS that will last for another 50 assuming were not all dead before then from environmental collapse after Trump’s Justices strike down the EPA as unconstitutional. Once it was clear he wasn’t going to win, he should have moved heaven and earth to help Hillary win. Instead, he made sure half the delegates at the convention booed every time her name was mentioned.
Everything Bernie Sanders claims to want has been put out of our reach for generations, sacrificed on the altar of his self-righteousness and egomania (and his willful blindness to how Russia was aiding his campaign), and NOW HE’S TRYING TO DO IT AGAIN! You bet your ass I hate the SOB.
gwangung
@Chyron HR: I’m just saying the folks focussing on personalities aren’t necessarily playing progressive politics.
negative 1
@Betty Cracker: Not arguing, genuinely asking — what part isn’t believable? Because I feel like I have maybe 3 months before this is being shouted back in my face during the general election or at the very least is a ‘both guys are rapists’ argument from the right.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@negative 1: well, I wasn’t necessarily talking about you, I was more thinking about Rose Twitter and the idiot who thinks Bernie personally passed a 96-0 bill with a couple of minutes of sarcasm (and that was a fine moment, a needed corrective to Sasse and Graham, but the hysterical reaction of Bernie world, my god…)
but the way you keep implying that only your position on health care (you say you understand that UHC and SP aren’t the same thing, but I’m not sure you do), student debt and wealth inequality is righteous and true, you make me wonder
and your precious trolling about Reade’s accusation– my gosh, Vox is taking about, shouldn’t we take this seriously?– you’re sea lioning
ETA: Not arguing, genuinely asking
yeah, sea lion
Fair Economist
@Betty Cracker:
I agree the primary outcome wasn’t a rejection of progressive policy, but I do think it was a rejection of progressive purity ponyism. Generally speaking progressive policy ideas have majority support within the Dem party, but voters were afraid to have every single one as a non-negotiable demand. As a result, in many states, Biden won single-payer supporters over Sanders.
The coronavirus makes purity ponyism even more wobbly-looking. Everything is up in the air right now and we will probably have to make big changes to our society to recover, both medically and economically. But, it’s very unclear what changes are needed and what’s going to be doable. A flexible politician like Biden will get *far* more progressive policy implemented in a likely 2021 environment than an inflexible ideologue like Sanders.
debbie
@Betty Cracker:
Seconded.
Any woman using Me Too–type tactics for political aims should be drummed right the hell out of the gender.
Ceci n est pas mon nym
I’m going to assume that #7 and #38 are paid trolls playing Good Cop / Bad Cop, possibly sock puppets of the same account, till proven otherwise.
I hope we can immunize our voters against the propaganda attacks this round, but I’m not sure how to do that other than repeating the message, “crawl over broken glass to support the Democrat against Trump”.
The Thin Black Duke
@negative 1: Goodbye.
Citizen Alan
@negative 1:
We do so based on personal recollection of how well Hillary’s efforts to treat them with kid gloves and try to win them into the coalition worked out — with Bernie’s official delegates walking out of the convention to declare they were voting for Obvious Russian Asset Jill Stein. If a segment of Bernie’s supporters shout NeverBiden from the rooftops, why shouldn’t BIden take them at their word, write them off, and move to the right in order to pick up disaffected NeverTrump Republicans?
TaMara (HFG)
@BobbyK: Aaaaaw, thanks for giving me the opportunity to try out the new pie images.
geg6
@Chyron HR:
Yeah, I literally LOLed on that one.
Ruckus
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Is it his ideas?
Or his wonderful personality and extensive record of……?
MattF
@Fair Economist: There’s also the very specific question of racism. Is racism just a cover for economic issues, or is it a specific, fundamental issue in and of itself? This is the one issue that I think Bernie & Co. just don’t get, and, tbh, I find their blindness about it baffling.
TaMara (HFG)
@WaterGirl: No, keep saying it. :-)
I’ll add, if you learn to Pie, you’ll see a lot more Penelope Pearl.
Just saying.
negative 1
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: How did I say only mine was righteous and true? You yourself point out there’s a difference. I guess at the heart of it my argument is this — Biden is not my first choice, hence by definition the vote is a compromise. I’m obviously happy to make that compromise, but I don’t think I should stop supporting the ideas that ultimately I believe in. But any time anyone does that, they’re being called a Bro or a Purity Pony or whatever other names people have come up with. Under the best of all worlds, incremental change will be made under President Biden. Which is great! But I feel like we should still support more if we think there’s more to be gained. What I don’t think is great, is that I face almost as much pushback here for supporting them as I do among the republicans in the membership of my organization.
And by the way, sure I’m whatever name you want to call me — but if you don’t think that the MAGAs are going to be screaming ‘Biden raped a woman’ in your face during the general election you’re delusional. And when you say you don’t have evidence but it seems political they’ll say the same thing back to you. So yes, I’m actually looking for something intelligent to say back rather than ‘yeah, that is disturbing’ because right now it’s all I’ve got. And since all you did was call me a bot or shill or whatever, I’m guessing it’s all you’ve got too.
CaseyL
OT: On a thread last night, someone was asking about soonergrunt. I said I thought I had seen him in a recent thread. I hadn’t: where I do see him is on Twitter. I follow him there and he’s very active. So whoever was worried about him needn’t be.
ETA: I pied negative1. Just toggled his most recent comment and, yeah: Sealion Supreme. No need to read, y’all.
Dorothy A. Winsor
@MattF:
Matt, two threads down, I left a link to a good you tube on making a mask from a kerchief or scarf and two large rubber bands. No sewing required. Take less than a minute.
geg6
@Citizen Alan:
This, this, this.
Just One More Canuck
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: There you go again, with your so-called “facts” and “logic” and “reasonableness”. You’ll never heighten the contradictions and bring about the glorious revolution that way
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Fair Economist:
Well put
The Thin Black Duke
Life is too short to be arguing with trolls, folks. Just saying.
MattF
@Dorothy A. Winsor: … and I’ve got the rubber bands and scarves… Hmm… Has the added advantage of not interfering with health care PPE.
Baud
satby
@Citizen Alan: right there with you.
Baud
@The Thin Black Duke:
Can’t go outside.
TaMara (HFG)
@negative 1: Adam Silverman had a very good breakdown on her lack of credibility in one of Betty’s posts a few days ago. I wish I had time to go search for it, but maybe someone can point it out for you.
WaterGirl
@Baud: WordPress threw you into moderation, but I released you right away.
Chyron HR
@Baud:
More like Lilly Establishmenter, amirite?
trollhattan
@negative 1:
Couple months ago a poll of remaining Dem candidate supporters showed Warren’s having the highest % committed to voting for the nominee whomever it was. At the other end of the spectrum was–you guessed–Sanders supporters. avec sad trombones.
Once the dust clears I expect that low percentage to reverse itself but fear that not-voting, rather than voting Trump, will carry the day with this cohort. In between, however, is the still-important question of whether the “DNC corruption” banner will be held aloft between July and November. That’s the sort of thing that loses firewall swing states.
negative 1
@Citizen Alan: I was here in 2016, too. I missed the kid gloves — I do remember the ‘dumb kids’ comments, as well as the ‘you’re just a misogynist’ and the beginnings of ‘Bernie Bros’. I also remember the PUMA shit in 2008https://www.salon.com/2008/06/23/pumas/. I missed the kid gloves in that, too. The well-documented loss of primary voters to the general (call it the bitter-dead-enders) in both parties in all presidential elections is around 10% (on primary voters, not overall). Beating that 10%, keeping it to, say, 5% would really, really help.
joel hanes
@kindness:
I’ve seen BernieBros coming apart at the seams a lot lately.
If you value your blood pressure reading, do not go to Biden’s twitter feed. A week ago it was interesting and valuable; yesterday it was a wasteland of emo posturing replies
Ruckus
One tell I like is that BS has two twitter accounts.
One is about how he’s running for the democratic nomination.
The second lists him as being the longest running independent. And is older than the other.
A Streeter
I consider this to be “soft” racism: the inability or refusal to understand that racism is a cause as well as a symptom of economic injustice.
negative 1
@CaseyL: I’ll bite. What’s a sealion?
hueyplong
Support on this site for Biden, which is pretty much 100% outside “visitors” (easily identified as taking offense at the reaction to their promotion of this news cycle’s GOP/Fox talking points against him).
But hardly a single person here had Biden as first or even second choice. We were all over the lot with respect to those first level choices. But the desire to beat Trump is all-consuming, and after the horror that was media speculation about Bloomberg as a candidate, all we asked was a palatable vessel — however empty or full it might be — into which we could put our best hopes of ash-canning the miscreant squatting in the White House. That literally everyone here has chosen Biden over Sanders for that designation says something about the credibility of the visitors’ arguments.
This place is about as immune as any can be to appeals from actual or faux Bernie supporters. They are literally wasting their time unless the goal is to increase anti-Bernie sentiment. I’ve saved room for more, so have at it, guys.
satby
@The Thin Black Duke: we should just laugh at them. And if the outcome wasn’t so deadly serious we could laugh at the idea that all progress in America hinges on the rantings of a scoldy demagogue who isn’t even matching his vote totals from the last primary. But we’re here in the most insane timeline with two egomaniacal opponents and Joe Biden to choose from.
Mai naem mobile
@germy: he has a radio show on Sirius. I don’t normally watch his CNN show but have been watching it recently because the clip of him and Andrew trolling each other are freaking hilarious. Anyhow I’ve been listening to his radio show for a couple of months and he comes across as a basically genuinely nice person. After this COVID virus thing is over I want a Cuomo Bros show with cameo appearances from Preet Bharara, Adam Schiff, Brian Schatz, Kevin Kruse etc.
Mary G
@Betty Cracker: Same. Also, in my experience when one woman comes forward, more come out because they aren’t going to be alone. I haven’t seen anyone come out about Biden except for the “rubbed my shoulders, smelled my hair” variety, which creeps me out and would trigger me as a survivor of sexual abuse myself, but it’s different from Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer, Mark
Halperin, Charlie Rose, even Al Franken. There’s no string of “MeToo’s” with Biden.
Coronavirus social distancing rules are going to cure Biden’s tendencies, too, if we even manage to get back to in-person campaigns before November.
The Thin Black Duke
@Baud: I think you must be younger than me, then (I’m 65). Debating trolls is exhausting. There’s not that much fuel left in the tank these days, so I try not to take rides that go nowhere. And, of course, that’s the goal of the damned trolls who derail threads; they want to wear us down, they want us to argue with one another, and they want to crush our spirits. No thanks.
Dorothy A. Winsor
@joel hanes:
High blood pressure is a risk factor for COVID 19. Use the pie filter. Click away. Look at dog pics. Ask yourself what the point of continuing to argue is.
Ksmiami
@Citizen Alan: Seconded. Bernie is all about his goddamned own inflated ego. We have a crucial election to win and yet somehow he thinks throwing sand in the gears makes him appealing?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Baud: I would be a large sum of money that Leahy voted for Biden
IIRC, Leahy was one of the old bulls who resisted filibuster reform when there was a boomlet for it early in the Obama years
japa21
@hueyplong: There were a few of us who had him as first choice once he announced.
negative 1
@Mary G: Not that I’m saying it’s OK, but he did apologize for the physical contact with women in the past and he’s a hugging kind of guy with men, too. It doesn’t make it right, but I don’t think his propensities for touching people are going to super hurt him in the general in that sense. Also, unlike the others on your list none of those women who complained about Biden touching their shoulders/hair (to my knowledge) were afraid for their jobs in a ‘quid-pro-quo’ kind of way
Just Chuck
@negative 1: Bernie himself I can forgive, he actually did come around. Too little too late after whipping his supporters into a lather, but at least some good faith.
You BernieBros can go fuck off. Forever. Go clutch your pearls at my incivility now.
joel hanes
@negative 1:
I don’t understand why an ostensibly liberal blog and its commentators are so interested in just making fun of anyone who supports those things
It’s not the intellectual support of those things that draws the contempt and opposition. Most people here support some version of many of those policies, and would like to see them enacted.
It’s the complete refusal to understand how politics works, and the inability or disinclination to engage with the real work of getting putting such ideas into effect.
Back in the 1970’s, I was enamored of political theater, and many people of my generation were too. But by 1988, when the earnest young person came to my door asking me to sign a petition to “make Palo Alto a nuclear-free zone”, I asked her what she thought such a resolution would accomplish. She said “it would send a signal”. I told her that “sending a signal” had no function other than making her feel good about herself, and that if she wanted to actually do something to change the US, she had better work for the defeat of Jesse Helms.
Policy goals are not achieved by posturing.
Politics requires hard work, and the ability to accept incremental progress: it’s the slow boring of hard boards. Political change requires _politics_ (actually dealing with others who disagree and have power), and will not be achieved by those who have contempt for the political process.
Brachiator
@kindness:
Coming late to the thread. I guess there is a surge to try to get people to look at Bernie Sanders again.
There is a New Yorker commentary piece, “Reality Has Endorsed Bernie Sanders.” I don’t have a link right now, but I guess it is easy to find.
And early this morning, I ran across an obnoxious YouTube political channel post trying hard to diss Biden. One commenter defiantly asked what was the difference between Trump and Biden. Easy. Pretty much everything.
These people might easily be part of a Trump/Putin disinformation campaign. Either way, I think they are overplaying their hand. They are more annoying than anything else.
ETA: The Financial Times article appears to be behind a pay wall. But good excerpt.
zhena gogolia
Haha, #139 is a perfect meta comment.
The Thin Black Duke
@joel hanes: Well said. Politics in the real world isn’t an episode of The West Wing, unfortunately. And it takes more than an eloquent monologue written by Aaron Sorkin to get shit done.
joel hanes
@Dorothy A. Winsor:
I am pretty skilled at walking away from fights.
My rule for myself in comment sections : reply at most once, make your point as clearly and forcefully as possible, and then walk away.
See my one reply to n1.
And now I’m walking away.
Brachiator
@negative 1:
Take this back to your Trump/Putin paymasters.
It is unfortunate that Warren lost in the primaries, but she is pretty much admired by a lot of people. And she can still do well in the Senate.
I think Sanders is a fraud, but even apart from that, he has sunk under the baggage of the worst of his base. But this has nothing to do with the legitimacy of his ideas.
The Democratic Party is fairly close to Warren and Sanders in terms of policy. The voters are not openly hostile to these policies; but they are rightly skeptical.
Ruckus
@Shalimar:
For myself,
I can’t recall me ever not having called trump shit for brains, shithead, dipshit, etc, etc. I’m sure I must have at least once or twice.
A day. OK an hour.Betty Cracker
@negative 1: She changed her story a lot. Now, I get that women who work for powerful men often won’t speak out against them or will even say nice things about them publicly because they don’t want to get black-balled from future opportunities. Anita Hill said something vaguely positive about Clarence Thomas after she left his employ, and that was thrown back in her face as evidence she was lying about the harassment — complete bullshit, IMO.
But Reade specifically lauded Biden as a champion for women’s issues multiple times, decades after the alleged incident when she was no longer in DC, including within the last few years. Then she jumped on the bandwagon when other women accused Biden of making them uncomfortable by invading their personal space last year (FWIW, I do believe that’s true), and then she amended THAT to include the assault allegation this year. That doesn’t make any sense to me.
Also, her explanations for the Putin puffery she’d previously published sounded like bullshit to me. I’m not saying she’s being paid by Putin or whatever, but she has given conflicting accounts of what led to her calling Putin “humane” and “loving,” etc., at one point saying it was a novel she was writing and at another point attributing it to reading a lot of Chomsky. Both explanations sounded like bullshit to me, and even if it has no direct bearing on the Biden accusation, it’s a credibility issue.
Lastly — and this is highly subjective — I heard her describing the incident in her own words in that Halper interview, and I didn’t believe her. It’s a personal and subjective reaction, I admit, but that was how I felt when I listened.
YMMV, and if you’re sincere about wanting to be able to push back when people ask you about this later, I encourage you to do your homework and reach whatever conclusion you reach from what you find.
J R in WV
@negative 1:
You and Bobby K have never looked up anything in your lives.
The accuser has also claimed to be engaged to be married to V.V Putin, of Russia. Maybe you’ve heard of him? Establishes that the accuser lives in a fantasy world, making things up to attract attention to — the accuser.
You guys are loons, falling for every Russian lie and misinformation about Putin’s worst nightmare, a Democratic candidate who can beat Putin’s biggest stooge, Mr Trump.
Back into the pie safe, for you AND Bobby K. Hm, could be a line from a song.
BobbyK
@beef: And you prove my point, nice job. Completely ignore the allegation because it’s biden.
sdhays
Indeed, I remember seeing polls after South Carolina that showed Biden winning people who most agreed with Sanders or Warren. That’s just a pretty stunning failure of the latter two’s campaigns.
West of the Rockies
@CaseyL:
That was me, CL. Thanks for the info.
West of the Rockies
@Ruckus:
Well, when you put it like that, it sounds like he’s some kind of poseur.
Brachiator
@crm114:
This may be endemic to the far left. Richard Wright and Ralph Ellison, in their essays and their fiction, remarked on white communists and socialists who insisted on “explaining” race to black and Latino colleagues.
And yes, Moore and his ilk are absolutely racist when they imply that black people just don’t “understand” what Bernie is trying to do for them, or that black voters somehow don’t represent “the people” in other states.
Ruckus
@gwangung:
Good (or bad), the vast portion of politics is personality.
Politics on the ground is about getting things done. A politician is on your side or not, depending on the things they want to get done or stop from happening. How they go about that is all personality and power. Politics is not a name tag or a lie about someone. The republican side of current politics is about the personality that is trump, a horrible shell of a human being, with every personality flaw that has ever been listed as horrible, demeaning, debased, discussed, and with every human failing written about in any book. And his premise is ME,ME,ME,ME…… Tell me how that’s not personality?
There are a lot of people with good ideas, even some of us on this here blog have good ideas. Some of us may have even contemplated running for office at some point. And some of us may have realized that we don’t have a personality to fit in, that would help mold the ideals that many, many more hold than could ever fit in a building in DC. Personality is what is good about politics, and bad. trump didn’t get elected because of his ideas, he got elected because of his crappy personality. And mainly because his ideas are all about his crappy personality.
J R in WV
@Betty Cracker:
Me neither. Well said. I fall on the screw loose side of the opinions. Also sounds fairly easy to manipulate, can tell what others want to hear and provide exactly that.
ETA: So MANY pastries in this thread today !!!
Betty Cracker
@sdhays: I think that’s wrong too, FWIW, but I’m no expert. Many books will be written by actual experts by and by, I expect. Should be fascinating.
J R in WV
@negative 1:
The obvious reply here is why not both, sir? They go together like — like Michael Moore and Cornel West…
Jim, Foolish Literalist
As I recall, NYC had shut down its bars and restaurants the weekend before St Patrick’s Day (Tuesday), and Chicago on the 16th
one of the lesser surprises of the trump era, to me, is Byron York. If for some reason it had occurred to me to think of him three years ago, I would’ve put money on him being a NeverTrumper.
Ruckus
@Brachiator:
Your last paragraph sounds exactly like what I used to hear long ago about communists explaining their concepts.
Which was exactly the same concept, that the subjects of the paragraph had to shut the hell up and take whatever was allotted to them. Blacks had to suffer racism, communism is good for you, etc, etc.
I’m saying that is spot on.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
negative 1
Thanks, I appreciate it. I didn’t listen to that whole podcast but I read the vox article and none of that was mentioned. Disturbing portent of the coverage of this to come if that’s the case.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Concerned sea-lion is Concerned. Someone throw him a calming herring.
Jackie
@negative 1: Sealioning (also spelled sea-lioning and sea lioning) is a type of trolling or harassment which consists of pursuing people with persistent requests for evidence or repeated questions, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity. It may take the form of “incessant, bad-faith invitations to engage in debate”.
MisterForkbeard
@BobbyK: “We think it’s bullshit because the accuser has huge credibility problems”.
BobbyK: “SEE! You’re just ignoring it because it’s Biden!”
No, the accuser in question has some real and definite credibility problems and also has a history of being weirdly into (and propagandizing for) the one foreign leader we know has already been maliciously interfering in our 2016, 2018 and 2020 campaigns for Republicans.
That’s why we don’t believe it. There’s not much reason to.
L85NJGT
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
genuinely asking….
I mean, there’s creepy buddy right there, just ugh.
Trump (and Sanders) are deep underwater with suburban women, so…. ark, ark, ark….
joel hanes
@Jackie:
The Wondermark cartoon that gave us “sea lion” as a meme
Just One More Canuck
@The Thin Black Duke:
Baud was born before the wind. Also younger than the sun
clay
@MattF:
Well if that’s what they’re going with, fine by me. “Our guy can’t walk and chew gum at the same time. Vote for us!”
negative 1
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Never mind. Anyone who disagrees with you (and I don’t actually even disagree with you, I just wish you’d stop calling out fellow democratic votes) is a sealion, or a troll, or a shill. You can’t point to a single nasty thing I said, nor a single nasty comment I made, but you must be right. The irony is that Sanders’ campaign is ‘so negative’, yet I’m actually trying to have a discussion with you but you can’t help but call me names. Epic comeback, bro.
L85NJGT
@MisterForkbeard:
Obama didn’t fuck around with vetting, and knew what closets held what skeletons.
J R in WV
@Brachiator:
It is pretty much the definition of racist to lump Black people into a solid group and make false claims about that group as a whole.
Or to say things like “My problems with the African-American community aren’t because they are Black, they are because …” and proceed to list racist and false qualities ascribed to Black people by racists.
Which is the capsule of how Bernie Sanders talks about the African-American community, now that I think about it.
Obviously that list could be much longer, but it encapsulates racism ashamed to call itself what it is.
negative 1
@Jackie: If that’s the case I don’t see how I’m doing it. I asked one question about Biden’s response to the allegations, and actually got an answer that was way more helpful and insightful than what was in the media (you know, like a question is supposed to do). The rest I’ve just been saying I don’t believe in continuing an internecine war, and saying that continuing to call out stories of Bernie Bros is doing more harm then good. It’s true I disagree with it. I’m not denying it, I haven’t denied it, I’ve backed up my positions as far as why I think it is a negative. But, names, so cool.
gwangung
@Jackie: Yeah, and accusations of it are used to block off legitimate forms of questionings by the usual suspects.
(It turned out the bozos simply didn’t read their sources and claimed it meant the exact opposite of what their source explicitly said on the website).
Ruckus
@West of the Rockies:
I think that Sanders is an old man who sees that his life hasn’t turned out exactly as he envisioned long ago. He seems to have skated through the first third of life without any, well anything. Didn’t vote, have a career, direction, seemingly nothing, just a placeholder. (I could be seeing this wrong BTW) And since then he’s been a politician, run for office and won. Convinced people that he was worth their vote. I think that most people who vote for someone expect something positive from them. Not necessarily personally positive, just expectations of doing something positive. I’d have to ask, what has BS done positive for the people who voted for him? What is his accomplishment? Seems to me his major accomplishment is his voice and the office he holds. He holds one of only 100 jobs in the country in the senate so well done there. Now on to his voice. It’s shrill, demanding and has gotten exactly what accomplished? Because I can’t tell what if anything his only skill seems to have gotten done. I wrote above that politics is personality and he seems to have one that convinces only the previously convinced. IOW has he changed a single mind? Or told people what they want to hear? I’m going with #2.
Barbara
@negative 1: So what say you to Michael Moore’s pronouncement that South Carolina isn’t representative of the nation? What does that mean? Do you agree with him? Is it less representative than Iowa and New Hampshire, and if so, why? I think Sanders and his supporters mostly backed off saying that kind of thing this year, but it still seems to come out when the chips get really down. You seem to respond to questions with other questions, not actual responses, and if you do that, I will not bite again. Just saying.
negative 1
@Barbara: I think that it’s a very conservative state, so I’m not super surprised they didn’t vote Sanders or Warren. Also, Biden did super horrible among young Latinos (where Sanders did well) but that’s not a state where it’s going to matter much.
In a huge sense, it’s why I wish we’d all just go to the polls together one day a year for the primaries. Super Tuesday has a ton of states that wouldn’t vote for a democrat under most circumstances, and could accurately be described as ‘conservative’. So, by the time the press is done reporting on the results, you get the familiar narrative of ‘there’s no way the liberal can win’.
chopper
@trollhattan:
if you think sanders is a blowhard asshole you are, by definition, not a liberal at all. QED.
it’s science.
Barbara
@negative 1: Okay, this is a version of “South Carolina won’t vote Democratic in November because it’s too conservative.” The fact that the “State” is conservative does not make Democratic primary voters conservative. In fact, it ignores that the overwhelming number of Democratic primary voters will vote Democratic in November and probably work harder than most people to reverse the status of SC as a reliable Republican stronghold. Moreover, as a voting bloc that is basically out of luck at the state level in getting its interests addressed (e.g., Medicaid expansion), those voters have an even bigger stake in knowing that they can rely on the federal government. And that is why they tend to vote for the person they think is best situated to beat Trump. So in one sense they are not “typical” of other places. And they are not “typical” because they are self-aware enough to know that they are especially likely to be among the biggest losers should Trump be reelected. So yes, they are less likely to shoot for the stars. Because they are the most likely to end up living in the ditch if it doesn’t work out. How this remains a mystery to people is beyond me.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Barbara:
if you look at the way not just Moore but Sanders (“corporate wing”) and AOC (“lobbyists”) responded to South Carolina, I don’t think they’ve backed off nearly enough. They just cannot accept, emotionally and/or intellectually, that anyone disagrees with them. And AOC is arguably the smartest one in the bunch, though I think she often acts even younger than her years. Just astounds me that anyone can look at Bernie and the misfit toys he surrounds himself with and think, “This man can carry the Electoral College!”
Another Scott
@Ruckus: Ditto.
Early on in college I attended some Spartacus Youth League meetings to argue with them about current events. I was astounded by someone “explaining” to me that we had to support the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan because the poor women there wore veils and were spreading and suffering from TB. (Not TP, TB.)
Um, what??! :-/
For too many, politics replaces religion. And it’s very bad when that happens, because fundamentally politics is the way we figure out collective actions to address collective problems. If we’re not using evidence and models and the scientific method to address collective problems, then we’re lost.
Beware the charismatic leader!!
Cheers,
Scott.
negative 1
@Barbara: Vis-a-vis responding with questions — if I don’t do that it’s just me screaming back at people who disagree or an echo chamber. I don’t know how to engage people in a discussion other than to ask questions.
If blog culture now has a great snark-name for ‘asking questions in a polite manner’ I have no comment other than that seems pretty sad. In real life I would say that fits the definition of a discussion. Also, comments like “people don’t like [x]” should really be supported, otherwise they really mean “I don’t like [x]”. Don’t we all get on David Brooks for doing the same thing?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@BobbyK:
Or because the evidence suggests that this woman is emotionally disturbed, and you and your fellow travellers are exploiting her in the quest for…. what, exactly? And as Congressman Clyburn says, your fish rotted from the head down.
middlelee
I confess, I did not read all comments. I’m sick of people talking about criticism of Sanders as “the Dems are falling apart.”
Bernie Fucking Sanders is not a Democrat. So we are not falling apart when we criticize a fucking independent who has twice taken a ride on the Dem train. Who the fuck gave him permission to do this?
Let me admit that I’m pathetically naive about politics. What do the rest of you know that I don’t about Bernie running on our ticket?
Jackie
@joel hanes: ??
negative 1
@Barbara: I don’t live there, but this is from the South Carolina local Fox affiliate’s own website
I have no idea about where that poll comes from, but it would seem to contradict your assertion.
WaterGirl
I just read the article about Rep. Clyburn, and I was surprised to see that he his answer was in the negative when he was asked about Stacey Abrams as possible VP. I am bummed about that because I think she would be great, but he points out that there are a lot of good options for a black, female VP.
edit: wow. 28 replies to negative 1 and 25 more comments by negative 1.
Well played, negative 1.
PJ
@negative 1: Your argument for holding all of the primaries on one day is based on Sanders’ strategy of winning with just 30% of the vote (and the reality that he has not been able to get more than 37% of the vote in most states, with zombie candidates getting a fair share of votes due to early voting, the exceptions being the population giants Nevada and Vermont). It’s only a winning strategy for Sanders if there is a wide field of candidates to divvy up the remaining votes. It’s the idea that a candidate with less than a majority of support (and in this case, a lot less) should be the President and representative of the party, despite the fact that they cannot put together a broad coalition of party members to support them. Primaries are spread out over the first part of the year in part to ensure that the candidate is actually someone who can put together a coalition of voters. (One of the other major reasons is to ensure that someone who has the most money or name recognition – which Sanders was counting on – does not automatically win on that basis.)
In other words, you want the weaker politician – the person who can’t put together a coalition, and who is unpersuasive outside of his cult – to be the nominee. That is a recipe for failure in a general election, as well as for down-ballot candidates, and, should they actually get elected, for their ability to actually persuade other politicians to support their policies.
Despite having far more money than any candidate besides Bloomberg, and the greatest name recognition (along with Biden, who was notably cash poor until after Super Tuesday), the fact is is that Bernie is just not that popular with voters. You might want to consider why that is.
Gravenstone
The downside of visiting here on a new computer, having to reload the pie filter…
WaterGirl
@Gravenstone: Bummer. :-(
At least you can search for nyms and add them.
Woodrow/asim
@negative 1: Well, I do live here, in SC. A few points:
I point this out because I’ve found your commentary in this thread deeply frustrating. You’re not paying attention to the information presented, here or in what you cite. The above is just from me doing a quick review of something I know about — again, born and raised and living now in South Carolina, as a Progressive. There’s other data you’ve chosen to debate, over reviewing and considering the inputs of others for.
That speaks directly to your credibility with those of us observing. I strongly suggest you re-think this approach to dialogue here, lest more folx drop you into their pie filters.
Gravenstone
@WaterGirl: Oh, they volunteer themselves with absurd gusto. I just have to remind myself whenever one appears to slither out of the sin bin that I haven’t put them there on this particular device, yet…
Barbara
@Woodrow/asim: And exit polls are not really all that reliable, for many well-known reasons. One thing that Sanders’ supporters don’t really seem to understand is that there are many people, but especially in places like SC, that are loyal to the Democratic Party, and they dislike Sanders casting Democrats and Republicans as basically equivalent. In SC, there is no question that they are NOT the same. It’s like saying that Clyburn, basically, is just like Lindsay Graham, and Graham isn’t even the worst. It’s so utterly tone deaf, at best, and it reflects a real lack of understanding of what matters to those voters.
negative 1
@PJ: I don’t care about it being a ‘winning strategy for Sanders’. I don’t actually care about Sanders. Why I think everyone should vote on the same day is so we can get rid of the ‘electability’ argument. I don’t think Sanders or Warren would win regardless — I think they are far too liberal for the general electorate. However, how far outside the mainstream? If 40% of the democratic electorate supported a candidate who backed a national healthcare system, it wouldn’t really seem like a ‘way out there’ idea anymore.
I’m a good example of a voter who won’t show up. The primary is over in all but name. I still haven’t voted yet in my state. When it gets to my state, I’m voting Biden. I’m doing so because he already won — so I’m trying to counter the narrative of ‘He only won [X]% of the vote in that state even though it’s locked up — democratic voters are in disarray’. However, I support the vast majority of Sanders/Warren platforms and it won’t show up in any way. I will register no support for national health insurance, or the student debt jubilee, or a wealth tax, or a return to the Reagan era tax rates.
It also gets rid of arguments like this. We all vote, it gets done, we go back to our computers and prepare for the general. Instead, we all call each other names.
Chris Johnson
Fuck me, but there are a lot of Russians apparently sheltering in place with their keyboards at ready.
Do they give you squares of toilet paper by the post? :D
negative 1
@Woodrow/asim: How am I not paying attention to what I cite? It wasn’t taken out of context. It was evidence that SC voted it’s preference, at a higher than national rate. It was also evidence against the idea that SC democratic voters are more moved by electability concerns (as you can see from the response). It’s appropriate and germane to the argument. All anyone has ever done to rebut me is call me names — and my only argument is that calling out Sanders’ supporters if counterproductive by now.
What inputs by others have I missed? People calling me a sealion? If I’m so frustrating, where is any evidence that SC voted more for electability concerns and that I’m wrong? It seems that what I quoted is correct and germane, and from a reputable source apparently.
negative 1
@WaterGirl: Is the definition of trolling now just disagreeing? All I have consistently said is I really wish we would stop with the hate Sanders stuff now that the primary is over. I don’t think it helped. I know everyone blames only Sanders for it last time. Great. Don’t feed it this time, then. All I’m saying is that maybe, just maybe, we could all stop it before it starts.
Darkrose
@WaterGirl: It’s exactly my concern about Abrams. She’s very good, and she’s certainly a rising star in the party. But the person who’s going to be VP for a 77-year-old needs to be ready to take over as president, and I just don’t think being a state legislator prepares you for that.
L85NJGT
In a proportional delegate system, there was no way forward for a candidate with a 30% hard cap. Failure to expand his voter base is on him and his campaign alone.
patroclus
I’m going to go against the grain here and argue that I don’t want Bernie to withdraw quite yet. Biden is desperately in need of media attention and another (or more) debate could be helpful for that. But if that happens, I want Bernie to actually change his usual shtick and spend ALL his time criticizing Trump and the Republicans and virtually none of that with his normal attacks on the Democrats. he should say things like, sure Joe and I differ on health care, but if gets a public option through the Senate, I will happily vote for it. And, yeah I’ve taken non-liberal protectionist stances on trade all my life, but if Joe and Nancy can improve a trade deal like they did with the MCA, sure, I’ll support it. And, yeah, I’ve been an idiot non-liberal on guns and immigration and crime virtually all my life, but now, I’ll support Joe once he gets in power. Now, I know Bernie has never changed his mantra for forty years or more and that doing so would be unlikely, but it would sure help convince his Bros that this time is no ordinary time. His switch would get a LOT of attention and would be very helpful to the cause of beating Trump and the virus-denying, economy-destroying Republicans.
Darkrose
I’m not seeing the pastry filter on Chrome on my Mac?
Another Scott
@Darkrose: Click on the red pie (above the word “Filter”) before the start of the comments.
HTH!!
Cheers,
Scott.
(((CassandraLeo)))
@Betty Cracker: I have also read a lot of Chomsky, and I can’t remember him once saying anything positive about Putin. If anything, he has decried post-Communist Russia for the wide disparities in wealth that resulted from the “shock therapy” instituted by Chicago School economists (ironically, one of the chief architects of those policies, Jeffrey Sachs, now frequently sounds quite a bit like Chomsky himself). Maybe Chomsky has changed his tune in the past five years or so, but I rather doubt it.
In short, her excuse for her Putin apologetics doesn’t ring true to me. I’m not going to touch the rest of this right now with a ten-foot pole – too many other things to deal with right now to get drawn into a long discussion of assault allegations. I just wanted to note that Chomsky is not a Putin booster, and claiming you started stanning Putin because you’d been reading Chomsky displays a lack of familiarity with the man’s work and entire political philosophy. Chomsky is an anarchist, FFS. Modern Russia is about the furthest thing from his political philosophy imaginable – extremely authoritarian and extremely right-wing. Chomsky might say, at some point, that Russia’s foreign policy has not been uniformly negative at every point since 1991, but that’s the closest I can imagine him to saying anything positive about the country in its current form.
Cēterum cēnseō factiōnem Rēpublicānam esse dēlendam.
Miss Bianca
@patroclus: In other words, you’re all for Bernie Sanders staying in the primary and the debate if he would just *stop* acting like Bernie Sanders?//
Not sure that’s even possible – I have seen little evidence that this particular leopard can change his spots *or* stop snapping at the faces of his ostensible allies. But good on you for being able to imagine it!
MB exits stage left, singing “To dreeeeeaaaammm…the impossible dreeeeeaaaammm…”
Hoodie
@Darkrose: Yeah, if this crisis proves anything, solid executive experience running administrative departments is very valuable. Just look at Cuomo. He can be an asshole, but he seems to know what he’s doing. It may be that Abrams has those abilities, but I wouldn’t want to experiment. Based on Clyburn’s suggestion, I’m going to pay more attention as to how Bottoms does in handling the covid crisis in Atlanta, especially since my son is supposed to start working there this summer.
L85NJGT
@Chris Johnson:
Susan Rice is publicly criticizing Viktor Orbán.
Fair Economist
@WaterGirl: I love how easy it is to add people to the new pie filter. Well done!
PJ
@negative 1: As I mentioned, a one day primary would heavily advantage the candidate with the most money and/or name recognition. Nobody can get their message out to an entire country of voters without a shit ton of money, and if that had been the set up this year, you can bet Bloomberg would have been a heavy favorite. Effectively, it would prevent politicians from small states or districts from ever gaining any traction.
With regard to the policies you favor, they have been discussed extensively throughout the campaign, and many candidates – including Biden – supported them in whole or in part. They aren’t going to disappear. More to the point, Klobuchar, Harris, Booker, Warren, and Sanders will still be in the Senate. If there is a Republican senate, it doesn’t matter who the President is, no major Democratic legislation will succeed. If, on the other hand, the Democrats control Congress, Biden will sign whatever laws they put in front of him. Moreover, he will fight for and show up for every down ballot Democrat. And he is popular, much more than Sanders. There is still a good chance that the policies you want will be enacted, and, frankly, a much better chance of them happening than if Sanders were the nominee.
PJ
@PJ: @WaterGirl: Last comment is in moderation due to typo in my email, WaterGirl please liberate it, thx.
Fair Economist
@Darkrose: Abrams wasn’t just a state legislator, she was minority leader, and got that job after only 4 years in the legislature, which is quite remarkable.
patroclus
@Miss Bianca: Precisely! If he could just say that the economic crisis and the health crisis are so severe that the times demand that, despite his differences, he’s going to act in the national interest for the next 7 months, he could really help the country. History would remember him favorably and he might just convince many of his supporters to do the same.
Sam Rayburn did something similar in 1940, when, after supporting Garner for President, he turned around and seconded Henry Wallace for V-P because the times demanded it.
Brachiator
@patroclus:
I think that Biden might wisely just take it easy for a while. The present pandemic pretty much occupies everything. I guess that politics must go on, but I don’t think that people much care.
However, I also noted that Sanders supporters see a lot of the reaction to the pandemic as vindication of Bernie’s policies and so are stepping up support for him. Or trying to. I think it is too late to help him.
I would love to see Sanders attack Trump more. I can’t see him really going with “If Biden supports my agenda, I will happily back him.”
Neldob
@joel hanes: thanks for this tidbit of clarity. I often want to ask Berners – which side are you on? Probably should sing it to them. I’ve lectured several phone callers.
Betty Cracker
@(((CassandraLeo))): Agreed. I haven’t read Chomsky in a while, but Reade’s explanation sounded like bullshit on that score and every other, tbh.
The stuff she wrote about Putin was just plain bizarre, including the assertion that American women love him, shirtless or fully clothed. Really? That’s news to this American woman.
Some folks concluded from that she is part of the Russian troll strategy, and maybe that’s true. But my impression is that she’s got some serious issues and is being exploited. And that’s awful.
Fair Economist
@PJ: I think the broad outlines of the current system are pretty good. A couple of early states, then large multi-state primaries. The problems are that the first 2 states are not representative – too rural and white – and the entire process is much too long. If you replaced New Hampshire with Rhode Island, had the starting 4 shuffle around (not always Iowa first), and finished within 2 months I think it would be pretty good.
Brachiator
@negative 1:
Sanders is politically irrelevant. The only thing left for him to do is to withdraw and support Biden.
Why do you keep going on?
Fair Economist
@Brachiator:
The problem for the sincere Berners (such as they are) is that the coronavirus crisis means we can get Bernie’s policies without Bernie. Mnuchin, and by extension Trump, was pushing for a (temporary) UBI, for crying out loud. Bernie is fundamentally an agitator, trying to move the conversation, but the coronavirus does a hundred times the agitation he ever could have, and it can’t be ignored or smeared.
Omnes Omnibus
@negative 1: A political candidate is more than a list of policy proposals.
Another Scott
@Brachiator: If you do a Google search for:
“I met Clyburn for the first time shortly before last month’s South Carolina primary,”
(with the quotes)
The first link (for me, anyway) is the FT article. Click on it and you should get the full thing.
That technique sometimes works with other sites with paywalls, also too.
HTH!
Cheers,
Scott.
(“Who assumes they change the number at the end of the URL depending on whether it comes from a search or comes from another site.”)
Omnes Omnibus
@Just One More Canuck: Cue Van Morrison’s legal team.
Barbara
@Fair Economist: I am also okay with staggered or staged primaries with a focus on a few smaller states going first. The first four this year, in totality, are representative: Midwest, Southwest, New England, and South. But I would be fine with others. BUT: get rid of caucuses. No state can be in the first month if it has a caucus. It leads to an incredible misallocation of funds by candidates just to overcome the difficulty of getting people to navigate the cumbersome process. That’s true for both Iowa and Nevada.
Brachiator
@Fair Economist:
This is true. Good point.
This realization might be making some of the Bernie supporters nervous, and anxious for ways to keep him in the picture.
OTOH, the mini-UBI is interesting in that the GOP will go along with anything that Trump suggests, even if it violates GOP “principles.”
negative 1
@Fair Economist: I wouldn’t call that a problem. See also “Andrew Yang laughs last”.
Another Scott
@Barbara: I think the problem with making changes to the primary calendar is: Who goes first?
Anyone thinking about running in 2028 (or FSM help us, 2024) is going to want their home state to go first or be very early. I can’t see anyone giving up on that desire. The 4 year rotation is a big issue for someone thinking about running in a particular cycle.
And the additional problem with “regional primaries”, beyond “who goes first”, is that it punishes candidates who don’t have a huge war chest at the start of the process, and rewards candidates who have name recognition (for whatever reason) and money.
I’m a big fan of public financing, but I don’t see how to make the system fair if oligarchs can spend as much as they want on themselves, and PACs can spend as much as they want on fake “issue ads” that trash other candidates and wink and nudge their support for their hero.
I, unlike some others, am a fan of an extended campaign. Candidates should be tested by the unexpected, be able to show that they can fight back, and be able to show how they manage a complicated endeavor. But the cost and the way the system is slanted toward the rich and well known is a big problem.
So, I dunno.
Agreed that caucuses need to go. :-)
Cheers,
Scott.
Brachiator
@Another Scott:
Worked. But I had to use a different browser. Thanks!
WaterGirl
@Fair Economist: Yay!
Darkrose
@Another Scott: Thanks! Much better now.
Ruckus
@WaterGirl:
We all have lots of time on our hands and quite likely are a bit pissed off. Encourages a lot of typing that probably would never happen in normal times.
I think Stacy Abrams will be great, her head is screwed on very well. I’d say she will be a far better candidate than a number of people who ran this time, in my book #3 out of all of them. But at this time, given the rancor and bullshit that has taken out my 2 favorites I have to go with the consensus, Biden. I see that people want to go with someone who has been in with a rather great 2 term president rather than someone who hasn’t. Someone who has an idea of how it works rather than less than the thinking ability/skill that it takes to gather 10 Lego pieces into a pile, like the current occupant.
The fact that Stacy Abrams has put herself in her current position rather than run for president tells me she’s smarter than a lot of people who did the opposite.
Barbara
@Another Scott: One thing that has been brought home to me is the disproportionate amount of resources that are needed in Iowa just to make sure people are there to support you, so that even if they know who you are, you have to spoon feed them by hiring a lot more people to navigate the process. And even then, many fewer people turn out to vote than in other states that hold primaries. And it’s not really the case that success in Iowa leads to the nomination. At least, it hasn’t as often as it has. But it’s a giant money pit. Of course they like that in Iowa but we shouldn’t have to humor them. My new slogan: “Caucuses Don’t Count.”
Ben Cisco (onboard the Defiant)
@Jackie: Any possibility of someone whipping up a sealioncake? Asking for a blog.
Another Scott
@Barbara: +1
Cheers,
Scott.
Morzer
@Ruckus:
Bipartisanship in action!
Morzer
@Betty Cracker: I’ll say this about the utterly unconvincing accusation against Biden – Barack Obama’s team vetted Biden very thoroughly. If this accusation had any substance to it, I am sure they would have found it and that Biden would not have been the VP pick. If Joe Biden was good enough for Barack Obama, he’s good enough for me.