This, in today’s Grey Lady, got my goat:
While Mr. Sanders’s direct rhetoric is an enduring source of his success, Mrs. Clinton has a way of meandering legalistically through thickets of caution and temporization.
Asked whether she would fire the head of the Environmental Protection Agency for failing to remedy water problems in Flint, Mrs. Clinton gave a nearly 200-word response emphasizing the need for a full investigation to “determine who knew what, when.” Mr. Sanders’ 16-word response drew enormous applause: “President Sanders would fire anybody who knew about what was happening and did not act appropriately.”
On the one hand, fine: as a performance critique, that’s a perfectly understandable distinction to draw (though in this case even the stated critique is patent BS, about which more in a moment). But there’s more to political journalism than amateur theater criticism.
Some interest, even a glimmer of curiosity in the quality of the content of the answer would be welcome.
So, let’s take a look. When asked if she would fire people at the EPA over the Flint crisis, here’s what Clinton actually said:
CLINTON: Well, I think that the people here in the region, who knew about this and failed to follow what you just said, rightly, the law required, have been eliminated from the EPA.
COOPER: So far, one person has resigned.
CLINTON: I don’t — well, I don’t know how high it goes. I would certainly be launching an investigation. I think there is one. I was told that — you know, some of the higher-ups were pushing to get changes that were not happening.
So I would have a full investigation, determine who knew what, when. And yes, people should be fired. How far up it went, I don’t know. But as far as it goes, they should be relieved, because they failed this city.
But let me just add this, Anderson. This is not the only place where this kind of action is needed. We have a lot of communities right now in our country where the level of toxins in the water, including lead, are way above what anybody should tolerate.
(APPLAUSE)
We have a higher rate of tested lead in people in Cleveland than in Flint. So I’m not satisfied with just doing everything we must do for Flint. I want to tackle this problem across the board. And if people know about it and they’re not acting, and they’re in the government at any level, they should be forced to resign.
So — yes, she’d fire people when and as they were found to be culpable, but such actions, she argues, are not enough. I’d go further, and say that they’re cosmetic, unless the same duty of care that Flint deserves is applied across the board.
And I don’t know about you, but to me, the demand to take the lessons of Flint on the road is hardly a legalistic detour into “thickets of caution and temporization.” The gap between that characterization and what was actually said (and not quoted in the offending thumb-sucker) is, shall we say, interesting. Given the Times‘ history with Hillary, I’d even say, suggestive.
I know it’s a lot to ask (it isn’t, actually. It’s merely impossible for current practitioners to answer — ed.) but I’d like to see even a hint of acknowledgement that what Clinton said may have been less dramatic than Sander’s reply, but, just maybe, contained something worth thinking about. Even more, some recognition that two hundred words is not too much to spend on the problem of failed infrastructure, the abandonment of governmental responsibility, and poisoned kids.
Just for perspective — the average speaker takes roughly 80 to 90 seconds, maybe a skosh more, to utter two hundred words. I’d have thought a hero of the English language like a New York Times reporter might have the stamina to stick it out that long.
Color me grumpy.
Image: William Hogarth, An Election Entertainment from the Humours of an Election series, c. 1755
Cermet
The thugs have spent the better part of twenty years smearing Hillary and the knee-jerk reaction of many people is to say “where there is smoke, there must be fire”. In that, she has a major up hill battle.
maryQ
I love you for this. That is all.
Bill E Pilgrim
It would have been nice if this could have avoided becoming a rah rah Clinton booster site, alas.
Bernie Sanders is not going to be nominated, there’s really no need to work the refs. In the meantime the most important thing to me is how much influence he’s able to have in pulling things away from the New Democrat rightward positions by the time she’s elected — limited amounts, I’m sure, but every little bit helps. And no, not all the way to Bernie land which deserves criticism, just not the demonization I see here now so often.
With that approach, then you could cheer for both of them, and provide more interesting observations. Well, more interesting to me anyway.
Frankensteinbeck
@Bill E Pilgrim:
Do you know ANYTHING about her policies? Increased capital gains taxes, taxing high speed stock trades, infrastructure, education, and green energy investment, expanding Obamacare coverage, peaceful negotiation as foreign policy? She didn’t go to this stuff because of Bernie. She came out of the gate with it while people were saying ‘Sanders who?’
Calouste
So Sanders thinks he can fire the Governor of Michigan and his cronies? He really is the Trump of the left.
coin operated
Policy takes nuance…and Bernie is dissolving into bitch-slap, sound-bite, low-information politics. Same as all my right-wing friends…they love a good meme on FB over an actual policy discussion.
gwangung
@Bill E Pilgrim:
Actually, I would think this is going to be a pre-requisite for the coming election. All the rhetorical points are going to be necessary ammunition to deflect the more egregious anti-Clinton points.
Miss Bianca
@Bill E Pilgrim:
Sorry, but however much I appreciate Sen. Sanders’s presence in the race possibly pulling the Overton window sideways to the left, I don’t think it’s “demonizing” to note that a). Clinton’s response may have been slightly more nuanced than his, and b). that we might expect less – I’ll go out on a limb and call it as I see it – anti-Clinton bias from the NYT.
Now, would it be demonizing to note that I personally found his performance shouty, hectoring, and condescending to Sec. Clinton? Woman was the Secretary of State and he’s wagging his finger in her face as if she were an erring student. Not Cool. Not Cool At All.
Pogonip
Public service announcement: the person who was hoppin’ mad about Rod Dreher talking about some deceased priest being incorruptible should NOT, repeat NOT, read today’s The American Conservative.
Cleverly seguing to the actual topic, I think Democrats would all be a lot happier if they conceded that Hillary is, indeed, corruptible and corrupted, and take a she’s-a-crook-but-a-crook-in-favor-of-the-average-person. Or at least not actively against the average person.
Me, I’m voting for Baud, Jane, and whoever those other two people were.
Just One More Canuck
So she gave a thoughtful, thorough answer that recognises that the problem may go much deeper than Flint, as opposed to a sound bite/applause line and the NYT is complaining?
Pogonip
@Miss Bianca: Go ahead and demonize. It’s good for the soul. *chortle*
Brachiator
I don’t have much of a problem with the critique. Both Bill Clinton and Hillary come across as mastering the complexity of a subject, but Bill Clinton was a master at delivering a pithy summation and giving an answer that was emotionally responsive. HRC does not do this. She can’t help but be wonkish.
To say “hell yes, people should be fired” might be too simplistic, but that’s what people want to hear.
On Meet the Press, she was once asked about a Republican’s anti-abortion stance. She went into a wind up about, “I’ve had a long record of supporting women’s reproductive rights …” and ultimately demolished the GOP position, but her statement was pointlessly discursive and legalistic.
Just Some Fuckhead
So, yes, 193 words is nearly 200. I’m guessing someone counted. On the plus side for Mrs. Clinton, she didn’t belabor the meaning of the word “is”.
Pogonip
@coin operated: Yet another reason to avoid Facebook!
Mnemosyne
@Bill E Pilgrim:
Neither Cole nor mistermix have been Clinton boosters. It seems to have been pretty evenly split on the front page.
The comments have not been kind to Berniebros (who are a specific flavor of Sanders supporters) and other Sanders supporters have been defensive on their behalf, but I wouldn’t really say this has been a wretched hive of Clinton boosterism.
I know it sucks to see your candidate go down — I was a Deaniac in 2004 — but I hope you’re not planning to sit the election out once you lick your wounds and think it over. I want to crush these motherfucking Republican assholes in November regardless of who’s representing the Democrats, and we need every vote we can get to deliver that humiliating defeat to them.
Elie
@Miss Bianca:
I agree with your observations about Bernie but figure he is a mild example of what she will experience when she does Trump who you know will be extremely rude, interrupt her all the time and at times be grotesque. Hope that she and her team are trying out some approaches
KS in MA
Well said!
maryQ
Ever increasing evidence that Bernie Sanders does not know how the government works.
Hildebrand
Of course, this feels all too familiar – every time President Obama has tried to respond to complex problems with thoughtful, nuanced answers, he has been pilloried by the press for being to professorial and aloof. The dumbing down of America starts not with the schools, but with the media.
I think so many people flock to satirists like John Oliver because he actually respects intelligence, and we have been starving for that attitude.
Allen W Snyder
“They failed this city.” OK, Arrow.
[Note 1: Not making fun of Clinton, whom I like, but of the writers of “Arrow.” My wife and I have suggested a drinking game to take a drink whenever someone says “this city” on “Arrow.” One would inevitably die of alcohol poisoning sometime within the first season.]
[Note 2: We do like “Arrow,” but one cannot say that either it or “The Flash” do not have some issues. That said, they’re still far better than any of the live action superhero shows of the past.]
maryQ
@Elie: Josh addressed that one already. Our side is better than theirs, and I suspect that the 10% will agree. No need to dumb it down for everyone. We lost dumb voters quite some time ago.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/lust-for-destruction
Yossarian
Part of the problem here is that “who will you fire” is considered the epitome of the “tough question” by the elite press corps, when in fact it’s often the laziest and even most dangerously distracting inquiries you can make about issues like Flint. Avoidance of “yes/no” to questions like that isn’t just dodging the question — it’s shifting the topic to something that is frankly far more productive — in effect, answering the question that should have been asked.
The press corps loves to see heads on pikes–and sometimes that’s appropriate, to be sure–and even more they love to see big issues reduced to questions of individual fault and corruption. In a case like Flint, you have both individual fault AND systemic issues, but someone like Anderson Cooper is in no way going to ask a substantive question about infrastructure or systemic anti-urban policy in favor of a “give me a name to go after” sort of demand.
Miss Bianca
@Elie:
I’m thinking a Hannibal Lector-type muzzle would be the appropriate approach to advocate.
Frankensteinbeck
@Elie:
No worries. Remember, Hillary and Sanders are trying to be polite to each other. I think Sanders just doesn’t have a mode other than ‘angry professor.’ Hillary has much more experience being nice to people she hates. It’s a major part of the Secretary of State job. She also has more experience making people she hates look like morons than anyone I can think of, except MAYBE Obama. (I’m not convinced Obama hates anybody.)
bobbo
But you don’t understand. There is The Narrative to think of, and all acts and words must be shoehorned into The Narrative. Sure, if someone actually read Hillary’s answer, they might question whether it fits into The Narrative. But what kind of nerd does that?
Chyron HR
I guess “IT BAD BECUZ TOO MANEE WURDS!” is no longer just a Republican complaint.
Roger Moore
@Brachiator:
At least it might be good to lead with “yes, people should be fired” and then get into the nitty gritty.
aimai
@Calouste: Right. This is what “I’d fire anyone” means. That Sanders has either no idea of the limits of presidential power, or he rightly assumes his voters don’t.
Roger Moore
@Chyron HR:
That assumes that the NYT isn’t Republican.
SiubhanDuinne
@Elie:
@Miss Bianca:
I don’t know why Southern Beale no longer comments here (at least, I haven’t seen her at BJ in months, if not longer), but her most recent blog post, “Don’t Shush Me, Bro,” is apt and well worth reading. In it, she discusses at some length the very different ways in which males and females communicate. I suspect Bernie Sanders, for all his wonderfulness, doesn’t understand that there are differences. I suspect Hillary Clinton, for all her flaws, understands all too well.
TOP123
@maryQ: what maryQ said
Marc
Hillary’s delivery is ineffective, it is a problem, and trying to shame people out of saying so changes nothing. She has a tendency to wander around a point with a squid ink cloud of words even when she’s right.
Mnemosyne
@Yossarian:
This. Not to mention that if an organization’s first reaction after a huge mistake is always, “You’re all fired,” that only encourages people to cover up and finger-point to protect themselves. There may be a specific person who needs to be fired, or the problem may be that there’s a process or chain of command that failed. But if people are more interested in protecting their asses than in figuring out what went wrong, the problem will never actually get *fixed.*
Chyron HR
@Bill E Pilgrim:
Wait a sec, are you trying to cheat me again?
Ultraviolet Thunder
I’ll go with the wonk who thinks about the problem first and then formulates an answer every time.
Marc
@aimai: or it means that he understands the difference between clear communication and not, unlike Clinton
This business of imagining bad things about anyone who disagrees with or about Clinton is already tiresome well before November.
Miss Bianca
@SiubhanDuinne:
I’ve checked her blog out before and really dig it. Thanks for the rec!
Ugh, I swear, that kind of sexist shite makes me crazy. Makes me wonder if I really am fit to run for any kind of public office *except* dogcatcher, because my impulse is to bite the finger that gets stuck in my face.
dr. bloor
@Brachiator:
And yet, her more-complex response drew applause.
Ultraviolet Thunder
@Mnemosyne:
Yeah, ask Volkswagen how that corporate mentality worked out for them. They had one big problem that could have been dealt with if they owned up to it. Instead people covered up to save their asses and now it’s a bunch of huge problems that will cost tens of billions. Sadly typical.
ETA: In VW’s case it was well known that ‘Do your job or we’ll find someone else who will” was upper management’s attitude.
Joel
@Bill E Pilgrim: You realize that Sanders is barely mentioned in this post, right?
The New York Times will be covering the general election (and beyond), so they should be called out when they engage in Politico-level bullshit.
BGinCHI
Shorter NYT: Hey, they said there wouldn’t be homework!
Easier to just cover the GOP, where there is no icky substance to worry about.
Joel
@Hildebrand: This has been, in fact, the reason why I always detested Bill Maher’s shows. There’s enough uninformed, spur-of-the-moment bullshit out on the air as is. I don’t need to hear it in a roundtable debate involving Ann Coulter and Honey Boo Boo.
Technocrat
It’s a fair political critique, but it would be fairer if she were losing to Bernie.
Maybe Trump should repeat his answers robotically…and sweat more.
dr. bloor
@srv: I thought the consensus was that Cruz would be the preferable opponent.
Chyron HR
@Marc:
Well, what else can you expect from a “rah rah Clinton booster site” where people constantly “demonize” Sanders?
SiubhanDuinne
@Miss Bianca:
I subscribe to it via email, and I’m glad I do. She is especially good on tracking all those “accidental/responsible gun owner/who coulda known?” firearm injuries and deaths that generally fall under the radar as news items. She writes very well, I think. I wish she’d come back here, even occasionally.
Mai.naem.mobile
I’ve talked to two people(early twenties,liberals) in the past week who say they don’t give a crap,are not going to vote and none of this affects them. I just want to shake the crap out of them. No amount of explanations will get these morons to spend 15 mins to vote because watching the Walking Dead is going to do so much for them.
Ruviana
@Ultraviolet Thunder: A good time to remember “that it’s not the crime it’s the cover-up.”
chopper
sanders had the benefit of the second answer advantage. you get to make the same basic point while letting the first person lay down the background and the long-winded explanation. you walk away looking like the straight shooter, all while piggy backing on the other’s demonstrated knowledge of the subject.
Tom Levenson
@Bill E Pilgrim: You noticed, I hope, that the piece is about the New York Times’ coverage, and not the relative merits of Bernie and Hilary.
If so, carry on. If not, perhaps to mull a bit.
Linda Featheringill
Dear Hillary supporters:
Bless you. I hope you have a happy life.
BUT . . . if you are going to get this bent out of shape over the too many words criticism, what are you going to do when she faces Trump?
Trump will call Hillary a liar because half of what she says sounds like prepared propaganda and a quarter of the remaining statements sound like carefully crafted evasions. Trump does say exactly what he is thinking, even if we wish he didn’t.
Trump will harp on her dependence on Wall Street and the big banks. He will point out that he is not beholden to anyone because he can finance himself. He will point out repeatedly that Hillary will be beholden to the oligarchy. He might even say that she’s running for president because she wants to be a member of the oligarchy.
Trump will say that what Hillary calls pragmatism is just weakness in the face of opposition. He’ll say that anybody from anywhere can just run right over her. All the aggressors have to do is just negotiate with her and walk away with most of the goodies.
Clinton is a lady and Trump is a street fighter. It will get dirty.
Then what are you going to do?
Cacti
Maureen Dowd wouldn’t have a career in journalism, or (ye gods) a Pulitzer for “political commentary” if not for the NYT’s giant hate boner for all things Clinton.
Let that sink in for a moment.
Miss Bianca
@SiubhanDuinne:
Maybe you should suggest it to her. : ) I remember from my long, long lurker days that she would come by round here – that’s how I ended up finding out about her blog.
Miss Bianca
@Linda Featheringill:
We’ll keep deploring the boorishness, bad manners and sexism, and cheering her on when she sticks it to him, in her “ladylike” fashion. Problem?
SiubhanDuinne
@Miss Bianca:
I will. I’ll send a comment to her blog indicating we’re talking about her and we miss her.
Bob In Portland
@Mnemosyne:
For a site that claims to be rational and somewhat left-leaning there is a core of posters who immediately devolve into personal attacks when someone represents another opinion.
If everyone here was sure that the Democratic race were over you wouldn’t be talking about it every day. That at least suggests an interest in the race.
As far as personal gestures like fingerpointing, sure, if your candidate is the object you will object. My girlfriend and her friend were particularly upset about Clinton’s filibuster tactics while often not answering the questions. If the primary were a sports season I’d suggest both candidates need an all-star break to let their voices rest a little.
As far as nuanced positions, I don’t think a debate is going to offer much hope of that. Clinton’s nuanced
“What are you going to do about our lead?” answer came off as a bureaucrat’s answer to bureaucracy. Sanders had similar problems with why you can’t simply make gun manufacturers liable for what someone else does with a gun. But neither candidate’s answer is going to be squeezed into a soundbite.
There were a number of questions that were stupid. We don’t need to drag religion into the Democratic primary but somehow we always get a little piety added to the process of sausage-making.
That’s how I saw it.
Stillwater
I think this is missing the forest for the trees, actually. Sanders said everything Clinton said, and did so in 16 words: He’d fire anybody who knew about it and didn’t act appropriately. But he also said something else: that he’d fire them IF they had knowledge and failed to act. Clinton said she’d fire them ONLY IF they had etc yadda yadda.
Which is actually a very stark contrast in the content each conveyed, moreso than merely their respective styles.
scav
@Bill E Pilgrim: Funny, I saw it as an attack on cheap journalism primarily, going for the trite bumper sticker response, but if everythings always political, always about Bernie v. Hillary, then likely that’s all your going to see.
“It’s a nice day.”
“Could be a better one if I was assured that my preferred candidate was getting properly deferred to on the path to a two-term presidency.”
Cacti
@Linda Featheringill:
One wonders how she was able to sit through 10 solid hours of grilling from Trey Gowdy’s partisan witch hunt, but is too delicate to handle Trump.
Mai.naem.mobile
Hillary and the Dems use too many ‘big’ words. You have to aim your regular speeches at a third grade level. If you did a man on the street survey I’m guessing 80 percent of people would not understand ameliorate, inimitable and juxtaposed. I’m not even talking about economic terms like capital gains taxes, carried interestand depreciation.
Brachiator
@Roger Moore: RE: To say “hell yes, people should be fired” might be too simplistic, but that’s what people want to hear.
Yep. And keep it simple. Keep the gritty, omit the nitty.
oldgold
When evaluating ‘debates’ such as this, getting down in the weeds is a waste of time.
Except for the junkies and the candidates’ acolytes, no one cares. Rather, viewers form a very general opinion of the entire ‘debate’ performance. The only exception to this is if a candidate makes an awful gaffe. Of course, that did not occur last night.
In my opinion, last night, using this general measure, HC won decisively.
chopper
@Bill E Pilgrim:
if sanders isn’t going to win and it’s going to be clinton then why shouldn’t this be a “clinton booster” site? what, you want us all to root for trump?
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@Mai.naem.mobile:
This is why I laugh at people who keep trying to tell me how important it is to target millennials this election cycle, when election after election they don’t show up, with the exception of 2008 for Obama. Attending rallies isn’t the same as voting. It would be nice if they were reliable voters, but they won’t be taken seriously until they show up at the polling station, and they don’t show up at the polling station if they know they’re not taken seriously. I don’t know how to break that cycle with them.
Chyron HR
@Linda Featheringill:
Sit through several months of you guys pissing and moaning about Clinton stealing the nomination from Sanders, followed by 4 to 8 years of bitter “don’t-call-us-PUMAs” sniping at the first female President.
But that’s just my best guess.
Linda Featheringill
@Cacti:
You may have a point there.
But my rant wasn’t about Hillary’s toughness, it was about the thin skins of her supporters.
Ella in New Mexico
@Calouste:
Given the question was concerning an Executive Branch agency, and was in regards to those employees a President might have the authority to fire, his response was entirely appropriate. He clearly was not referring to the Governor of Michigan.
dww44
Thank you, Tom, for this post. And I’ve not read any of the comments here prior to posting.
HRA
No matter where I go to read about last night’s debate, I come across so many who did not seem to be listening to the debate with both ears. Of course, someone who has been in government over 2 decades knows you cannot fire a governor or state employees. Right before his answer the federal EPA was introduced into the conversation.
I am a woman. If I am going to deal with men in my occupation, you better believe I am not going to use my gender for points or any advancement. I will use my education, history and ability to participate on the same level.
Take a deep breath and realize Hillary knows Bernie from being in the Senate much better than any of us here. You would get to know him as well if you ever watched the Senate on C-SPAN. He speaks loudly. He waves his arms. He points his finger in the air when he wants recognition. Move on away from this nothing burger.
Ultraviolet Thunder
@the Conster, la Citoyenne:
Maybe show them pickups with Confederate battle flags outside polling places and point out that those people are choosing their government?
I dunno.
TallPete
You’re grumpy. I don’t think the NYT author is off base in describing Clinton’s propensity to equivocate and meander legalistically through thickets of caution and temporization. Take the two candidates responses on fracking for example. Maybe that a feature, not a bug.
Mr. Twister
@Linda Featheringill: What will he say about Bernie ?
Corner Stone
Appears I have been blog-napping during most recent months. Can someone please tell me when Balloon-Juice became a pro-Clinton booster site?
Southern Beale
@SiubhanDuinne:
Thanks for the link-love, Siubhan! The only reason I don’t get over here as often as I’d like is because of time. I’m working again and just don’t have time to comment on blogs, or even write on my own blog, as much as I wish. I do come over here and read the posts, though.
Brachiator
@dr. bloor: RE: To say “hell yes, people should be fired” might be too simplistic, but that’s what people want to hear.
I have not watched the entire exchange, or the larger context. I don’t know how much of the applause was enthusiastic, and how much was “OK, here’s the pause where we insert applause.”
Ella in New Mexico
@Miss Bianca:
Given that it’s a political race for the Democratic candidate for the President of the United States, I would HOPE the candidates are heartfelt and energetic in their debates. Which is what you saw.
Can’t have it both ways–either she’s tough enough to be an equal on any stage or she’s to be deferred to due to her “gravitas”–or worse yet, gender.
And I truly doubt that when she stands on the stage with Trump or Cruz that either one is going to show proper deference to her in any way, shape or form.
NotMax
Hey, there are those here who have embraced grumpy as the optimal choice for well over half a century.
C.V. Danes
Once upon a time, maybe. But these days the attention span limit is something less than 140 characters.
Cacti
@HRA:
Do you think that the above may have something to do with 0 of his Senate colleagues endorsing his campaign?
chopper
@Linda Featheringill:
right, it’s clinton supporters who are thin-skinned.
Miss Bianca
@Southern Beale:
Right on with your latest blog post, btw.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@Linda Featheringill:
I’m curious about that “thin skinned” thing, since it’s been pretty clear from when Sanders’ supporters first started appearing here (and everywhere) with opinions that clearly showed they had paid zero attention to politics until this cycle. I was a lean Sanders, until his supporters pushed me hard into Clinton’s camp. The nonstop hagiographic Sanders hero worship, coupled with the demonization of everyone and everything Clinton, including now apparently the demonization of Elizabeth Warren, has been like something out of Invasion of the Body Snatchers. There is a lot of warranted skepticism about Clinton’s judgment, but the right wing framing and talking points used by so-called “progressives” needs to be pushed back on, and hard. The constant stream of Salon click bait articles that feed into the “poor poor pure Bernie being cheated out of everything because of a vast corrupt Clinton/Democratic Party conspiracy” is not healthy.
Frankensteinbeck
@Linda Featheringill:
The post was about an article criticizing Hillary’s debating style. We are debating whether that criticism is valid or idiotic, with a brief break to make fun of a troll who introduced incendiary language. How is this ‘thin-skinned’?
Linda Featheringill
@Mr. Twister:
He would probably harp on Bernie’s Marxist ties, and the fact that he’s not a businessman and thus doesn’t understand stuff, and he’ll say that Bernie has had so little experience in actually running things that it would be laughable to expect him to run the country.
Also Bernie was arrested and so I guess has a criminal record and he fathered a child out of wedlock.
And Bernie is grumpy and funny looking.
Did I leave anything out?
jl
It would be nice if US corporate journalism could churn out something besides trite capsule reality show and horse race cliches. But they won’t.
HRC should give shorter punchier answers, but would be nice to note what she said.
Sanders needs to understand how his gurmpiness looks to people, but he is not doing Trump insult schtick.
Would be nice if the media could understand subtle things like that.
TPM says that Sanders strategist suggested an HRC/Sanders ticket this weekend. I cannot imagine HRC thinking that would be a good idea, and it is not direction I expect Sanders to go. I find it hard to believe Sanders would be good or happy VP (unless HRC is willing to give him a chunk of policy to run, along lines of Bill Clinton or Obama administration and their veeps Edit: but even then I am skeptical). The way the Sanders hack said it, right now I take it be signal that Sanders will want to do some bargaining and get something in return for his support in general. I hope those negotiations go well.
Sanders Campaign Strategist Suggests a Clinton-Sanders Ticket
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/sanders-strategist-opens-door-for-clinton-sanders-ticket
Ella in New Mexico
@aimai:
Aaaand this is what taking a false narrative and running with it looks like.
As I pointed out above, the question was concerning an Executive Branch agency, and was in regards to those employees a President might have the authority to fire, his response was entirely appropriate. He clearly was not referring to the Governor of Michigan.
Linda Featheringill
@Frankensteinbeck:
I’m sorry. I didn’t realize it was an exercise in literary analysis.
Cacti
@Ella in New Mexico:
Speaking of having it both ways…
Could Clinton, or any female Dem candidate for that matter, be taken seriously if they were prone to shouting and to finger wagging and gesticulating wildly to emphasize their points?
Steve in the ATL
@Cacti:
Bernie is the Ted Cruz of the left!
gvg
Funny, I read the original blog post as a critique of current journalism, not Bernie vrs Hillary. I think people are predisposed to continue a rut they have been in recently. Lousy journalism is one of the things I view as a threat, part of the reason IMO we are actually probably going to have a chance Trump will be the next President.
I already knew the President can’t fire a Gov. and doesn’t control state EPA’s etc. It’s a good thing I knew, because the press isn’t mentioning things like that.
Ella in New Mexico
@Tom Levenson:
Which quickly devolved into the latter. As is customary, of late, on this site. :-)
But, seriously, did you actually expect us to focus on how the crappy media didn’t do it’s job again? That’s pretty the new journalistic standard now, isn’t it?
Felanius Kootea
Sometimes nuance is called for, sometimes a clear and succinct response works better. I thought Clinton was clear and succinct in her gun industry comments and Bernie more nuanced and that it was the opposite for most of the other questions. I found it to be an excellent debate with loads of substance and I like both candidates. I did wish sometimes that Hillary would be more succinct but she often brought in relevant details I was unaware of, like the fact that lead contamination in pipes is even worse in parts of Cleveland than Flint. Both candidates pointed out the need to overhaul infrastructure nationally. The only time Bernie made me wince was when he talked about race and not understanding being poor and living in the ghetto. There are tons of middle class and wealthy black people who have experienced racial discrimination. As a black woman I found that response to be tone deaf but overall I feel that Bernie means well, so it didn’t reduce my regard for him.
I watched the Republican debates for the first (and last) time on Thursday. Rubio failed to say anything about what he would do to help the residents of Flint when asked and Cruz blamed the lead poisoning problem on “60 years of failed liberal policies.” No solutions were offered. After watching that sociopathic shitshow, I am proud to call myself a Democrat and happy that either Hillary or Bernie would make an intelligent and empathetic president.
Linda Featheringill
@jl:
Clinton-Sanders ticket would be interesting. They have good chemistry together on television. It would take some serious negotiation to make it happen, though.
As a Bernie supporter who doesn’t hate Hillary, I could swallow that.
Mr. Twister
@Ella in New Mexico: I point you to comment #3.
Frankensteinbeck
@Linda Featheringill:
Debate style analysis, yes, until Sanders supporters showed up to whine.
jl
@Linda Featheringill: Bernie is soft because he let the BLM protesters take over one of ‘his’ rallies. Bernis is soft because he won’t kill terrorists’ families and won’t build a wall. Sanders can diagnose economic problems, but being soft and a commie, totally unable to fix them.
Actually it was not a Sanders rally, he was an invited speaker, but Trump and his supporters expect a real strong man to take over everything he is involved with.
Trump will say HRC has committed ‘serious crimes, many many serious and grave crimes’, must be some conspiracy that she is ‘allowed’ to run. HRC is on the take with corporate money, is a servant of Wall St.
Miss Bianca
@Ella in New Mexico:
It’s not a question of whether Sec. Clinton is “tough enough”. I think she’s amply proved that.
What *Sen. Sanders* has proved to me, beyond the shadow of any doubt I may have been willing to give him, is that I consider him an inferior candidate. Whether or not Sec. Clinton is “tough enough” is not the point. The optics of an old guy bellowing one point over and over and being rude and dismissive? If that’s your idea of “passion”, I’ll just say I’m not of your opinion, myself.
Maybe I’ve just had enough of old lefty guys shouting in my face. Brings back bad memories of all my old community organizer college days, with the Young Socialists telling me I didn’t care enough about The Revolution if I wasn’t willing to waive my silly little feminist concerns till the Glorious Workers Paradise was in place. No. A guy who is acting like that is doing so out of a sense of privilege that is none the less obnoxious for being possibly unconscious. And I don’t have to like the messenger even if I like parts of his message.
jl
@Cacti: The Sanderr’s hack hedged the idea in a way that makes me think it was a signal that Sanders will want to negotiate something with HRC and is not going to just throw his support to HRC.
Part of it is that I have a hard time believing that Sanders is, or even could think he is, suited for VP.Unless he thinks it unlikely Democrats retake Senate. But I could be wrong.
schrodinger's cat
@Linda Featheringill: Hillary is fighter and a survivor. She has had a lot of BS thrown at her and she is still standing. Trump may turn out to be paper tiger, we don’t know how he will react to a real push back. He hasn’t really been challenged by the Republican field. Hillary is not going to be kind to him, she is going to challenge his BS.
Ella in New Mexico
@chopper:
I think when the references get snarky, demeaning, inaccurate or outright false, both sides have thin skins.
Felonius Monk
@gvg: Right on.
LAO
@the Conster, la Citoyenne:
Couldn’t have said it better. Seconded.
C.V. Danes
@Linda Featheringill: I think we’d be better off if Sanders stayed in the Senate and used that position to help keep Hillary honest. Warren needs all the help she can get.
Eric U.
I know people that are nominally liberals and don’t understand how dangerous that republicans can be. Living in a college town where the university hasn’t got any state money for 8 months, it seems like they would be more attuned. Who knows who is going to be laid off if state money isn’t released? I know I will be. Hillary is boring, might be embarrassed I vote for her. So what? The nation will be a lot better place
Cacti
@Linda Featheringill:
High taxes and naïve hippie peacenik.
Mnemosyne
@Linda Featheringill:
You mean other than defend her strongly and shoot down Trump’s talking points as fast as humanly possible?
I’m not sure why you think we’re supposed to do anything else. And if you think we’re getting all shouty over the very mild criticisms between Sanders and Clinton supporters, just you wait.
Thoroughly Pizzled
@jl: I hope he has something to negotiate for, like a list of progressive candidates he wants the party to support.
jl
I am cautiously optimistic about a Trump campaign against either Dem.
Sanders could chew Trump up on his economic populism, and hold his own on foreign policy against the likes of Trump.
HRC could chew Trump up on his foreign policy fantasies, and with key Dem constituencies, beat back Trump’s economic populist appeal. Enough of Trump’s economic plans are same old GOP BS and fantasy that involves throwing money at rich people that HRC could do it.
Both will be able to stand firm and throw Trump’s bluster and BS back in his face during the campaign. Neither will appear ‘weak’ against Trump and that will take air out of his buffoonish attacks. Trump won’t be playing his game in front of crazed GOP reactionaries and fantasists. And I think Trump will have a much harder time switching gears from GOP primary loon to distinguished and adult general election candidate with presidential gravitas than Trump thinks. Trump has said it will be easy, very easy. I don’t think so.
WaterGirl
@jl: I want a much younger VP than either Bernie or Clinton, so I think it would be a mistake for either of them to choose the other as VP.
Amir Khalid
It doesn’t strike me that Hillary’s tendency to give a long, wonkish answer rather than a crisp, sound-bitey one reflects badly on her. Remember that one of her selling points as a candidate is that she has a deep knowledge of how the Federal government machine works — more so than any Republican candidate, for sure, and (if I may add) more so than Bernie as well. Bernie’s answer might move me to punch the air and say, “Yeah!” Hillary’s would reassure me that she will look at things thoroughly, and not be the kind of president who goes off half-cocked.*
*Yeah, I went there. Shrug.
chopper
@Frankensteinbeck:
quite a few berniacs are at stage 2 1/2: projection.
Thoroughly Pizzled
@Frankensteinbeck: I think he legitimately hated Romney by the end of the 2012 campaign. That’s what brought out “Please proceed, governor.”
SenyorDave
@Linda Featheringill: If Trump brings his opponent’s personal life into the mix and can get away with it, then the end times have truly arrived.
chopper
@Ella in New Mexico:
both sides do it, indeed.
FlyingToaster
@the Conster, la Citoyenne: This.
I want Sanders to stay in the race. I think he’s performing a valuable service, both from a policy perspective and from getting any coverage at all for the Democratic primaries.
However, between a) Berniebros in my twitter timeline b) Sanders supporters on blogs like here who WILL NOT read the damn results from the various SoS’ pages and c) Bernie’s shouting radio ad when I’m driving WarriorGirl to/from school, I was long since pushed into the Clinton camp.
I don’t get to watch debates (parent, homeowner, only adult with two working arms at the moment); I do get to see clips from debates and rallies. I do get to read their own websites. I’m not relying on the surrogates to make my choices. The actual positions espoused by the candidates are what I’m basing my support on.
And we’ve already had our say here in Massachusetts. Time for the next round to put in their 0.02.
Felanius Kootea
@WaterGirl: Biden worked just fine as Obama’s VP in spite of his age and we have great candidates even though Biden isn’t running. I’d like to see one of the Castro brothers as VP but don’t see Hillary doing that. Bernie would make a great VP but I’d prefer to see him in the senate and as the head of the DNC, replacing DWS.
Calouste
Any lawyers want to comment on the Supreme Court decision regarding adoption by a lesbian couple.
As far as this non-lawyer sees it the Supreme Court said: “Dear Alabama, RTFM* & STFU.”
* Specifically Article IV, Section 1.
Any wider implications?
Stillwater
@LAO: This is an amazing admission. You’re saying your support for Hillary has nothing to do with her policies, politics or even liking her, and isn’t even based on rejecting Bernie’s policies (which you’ve said you like!). Instead, it derives from reacting to the behavior of people who support Sanders.
Which is sorta unbelievable, actually. For a thinking person, anyway.
ETA: and you’re not alone, apparently. I’ve counted three other commenters who have made their decision to support Hillary for the exact same reasons!
Eric U.
I want to know how they got someone in the epa to resign over Flint, I suppose it was a political appointee, not civil service? I wouldn’t go down without taking the republicans with me, that’s for sure
jl
@Amir Khalid: I think it is definitely an HRC selling point on national security and foreign policy. Trump will come off like an ignoramus. Ignorant simple minded bluster probably helps him in GOP primary. But crowd thinks committing war crimes is a great immigration enforcement and anti-terrorist policy. And Cruz’ blather about ‘targeted saturation carpet bombing’ and his famous ‘We Win They Lose’ universal elixir foreign policy strategy get big applause.
The general election will be a whole other world, a brave new world, for the GOP candidates. I hope that whatever GOPer is the candidate looks completely lost, and is befuddled or outraged when people don’t cheer and applaud ignorant nonsense and insults.
Cacti
@Felanius Kootea:
Sanders distaste for fundraising would make him a poor choice for DNC chair in a post Citizens United world.
Goblue72
Pointy headed liberals lose election after election because they’ve convinced themselves that policy matters and that he/she with the more articulated, nuance and technocratic policy should win.
Tom – usually like your stuff, but this post just comes off as amateurish and naive. Clinton’s inability to give a straight answer to a question without driving into the weeds IS a problem. We aren’t electing the head of a university department at MIT here. We are electing a chief executive – one of whose skills is to take complicated, divergent issues and synthesize them into clearly articulated, streamlined goals.
It’s: Fire the bastards vs We need to do the proper research to analyze the responsible subcomponents in order to properly fire the correct bastards.
redshirt
@Stillwater: I’m voting based on one issue: Who can beat the Republicans.
I think Hillary has a far greater chance then Bernie, and thus I support Hillary.
Pretty shallow reasons, right?
Mr. Twister
@Stillwater: That’s kind of a nasty comment bro.
Technocrat
@Calouste:
Well, it’s kind of blindingly obvious in retrospect, but Scalia’s death makes the court less conservative. It’s as if we added a tenth liberal judge to cancel him out. I think the GOP are actually shooting themselves in the foot by blocking nominations. They should be pushing hard for Obama to nominate a more-conservative-than-average justice.
Ella in New Mexico
@Cacti:
@Miss Bianca:
Seriously, I just don’t see what you did. He’s a character who has always had this particular style of speaking and it’s not even that bad. She stood toe-to-toe with him. He got a few great points made and so did she, both with their own unique styles and choice of speech and personalities shining through. I was so proud to be a Dem watching this debate. I wish it was the “Good Ole Days” when these debates were nationally televised on all networks. The entire fucking nation should have had a chance to watch it because they would have had an opportunity to see that “good politics” still exists.
The issue is not that i don’t think Hilary can take it. The issue I have is with her supporters jumping on every single little frigging thing with “He’s being mean to Hilary” and demanding what she doesn’t: kid glove deference.
She’s tough as frigging roof nails. I am going to assume, given how she’s survived worse situations than an old Jewish man’s cracky Brooklyn accent and hand gesturing that she’s not asking for her supporters to demand she be treated differently from any other candidate in our party.
Steve in the ATL
@Calouste:
Yes, this was clearly an FU bitch slapping of Alabama and Roy Mooreism.
Any wider implications? Yes, that Alabama is a backwards ass place and that SCOTUS will not tolerate their continuing refusal to follow the precedent established in Grant v. Confederate States of America (W.D.Va. 1865). Since book learnin’ hasn’t seemed to take hold, maybe a refresher invasion is in order.
chopper
@Stillwater:
neither poster said that. “lean sanders” in no way implies “no support at all for Clinton”. where did you get that idea?
Amir Khalid
@Goblue72:
Can you think of an instance where Hillary has been paralysed by indecision?
jl
@Cacti: I think that Sanders would have most real public influence, and most leverage with an HRC administration, in a Democratic Senate. For example, he would have more ability to ‘correct’ any HRC legislation that was not sufficiently progressive for his tastes in the Senate. He would get on TV more to spout his progressive views in the Senate than as VP. Especially if he is successful at building a loyal and noisy following for his beloved political revolution.
And I agree with others that HRC/Sanders ticket, or vice versa, not the best for the general election.
Amir Khalid
@jl:
Not just in national security and foreign policy, I would think.
Calouste
@Ella in New Mexico:
Clinton’s answer on the other hand included this:
“I want to tackle this problem across the board. And if people know about it and they’re not acting, and they’re in the government at any level, they should be forced to resign.”
So she definitely included the Snyder and his cronies. Sanders on the other hand, if I buy your explanation, let himself be dragged into the Republican phrasing that the EPA was the problem. Or maybe he just cynically assumed that his audience would misunderstand him.
SiubhanDuinne
@Southern Beale:
It’s good to know you’re there, even if not always commenting! Have always loved your blog, and in your gun-related posts in particular you are performing a great service.
Steve in the ATL
@Stillwater:
Most people interpret her statement as hyperbole, and many of us Hillary supporters love Bernie and his ideas but feel that Hillary (1) has great ideas also, (2) has a better chance of winning the GE, and (3) will be much more effective at getting things done because of her far greater knowledge of and experience in wielding the levers of power.
But congrats on your big discovery–it netted Sanders a total of -zero- delegates.
Bob In Portland
@Miss Bianca:
One of posters last week equated the primary season to “cognitive dissonance.” I think that politics is more like a Rohrschach test. Apparently, Miss Bianca had some bad experiences with “old lefty guys”. I understand. I’ve heard it too. I’ve heard old rightie guys. And gals. Regarding the fingerpointing complaints here, my girlfriend said, “Well, he didn’t point directly at her.” That suggests that these emotional triggers have a lot more to do with personal prejudices than rational content. Some people just see old white men and presume…
Even when I think that Sanders does well I always look at how others looked at it. It depends on what you bring to the debate. For example, it’s hard for me to imagine Clinton to be much of an advocate against Wall Street when she takes so much money from them. Likewise, if you know that Clinton took money from the charter school advocates you have to wonder why the heads of teachers’ unions support her over Sanders and pretty much come to the conclusion that they did so in fear of the consequences of Clinton’s wrath. I guess that’s where the cognitive dissonance fits in. If you are a Clinton supporter you don’t see a problem with her conflicts of interest or accept as part of how politics must be.
CONGRATULATIONS!
@Steve in the ATL: Sherman’s autobiography (which is great for early California history more than anything else) has a few pointers. He made a deal; every town he went to, he told the residents “my men come through here OK, no problems. One potshot and I burn the whole fucking place down”.
They couldn’t help themselves. Hence, he burned his way across the South.
They have a history of being warned and doing it anyhow. Sherman knew who he was dealing with. He urges that the South be wholly disarmed – forever – and be occupied by the military for several decades.
jl
@Goblue72: I think both HRC and Sanders have the ability to stand up to Trump or Cruz assaults of insults, fantasy, deranged attacks and bluster and not blink and eye and then tell them to go shove it on the campaign trail and during debates. And I agree that will be very important.
Amir Khalid
@Ella in New Mexico:
You are quite right: Hillary is a lot tougher than some of her supporters give her credit for. But partisans will be partisans.
raven
@CONGRATULATIONS!: Except for Madison and Savannah.
Mike J
If a VP dies in office, the replacement has to be confirmed by the senate. Perhaps a 74 year old veep isn’t the best choice.
CONGRATULATIONS!
@Bob In Portland: Clinton has a known record with labor. It’s not great. It’s not awful.
Sanders does not have that. He might be the best but how would you know? Rough thing to bet your career and pension on (remember, teachers DO NOT HAVE SOCIAL SECURITY). The teachers went with the lowest-risk option they were presented with.
Cacti
@Calouste:
After looking at the story, the Court actually ruled on a pretty narrow, full faith and credit issue.
The Supreme Court of Alabama ruled that the adoption was invalid under the laws of Georgia.
Alabama State Courts do not have authority to rule on the validity of another State’s laws. Disputes of laws between States must be settled at the Federal level. Alabama overstepped its bounds and got rapped on the knuckles for it.
Applejinx
@Stillwater: It’s a rhetorical trick, pay it no attention.
It’s the most basic trick in the book, to claim
Not really a sophisticated argument, so much as a sophisticated technique: of course you claim to have started out with X. (seems not the most serious commitment, surely?)
Functionally, that means ‘I’ve thought about this for both of us so you don’t have to’.
redshirt
@Applejinx: Yeah that’s not condescending.
Thoroughly Pizzled
@CONGRATULATIONS!: Go to a southern town and people will claim that Sherman burned everything while also pointing out their fine antebellum architecture.
LAO
@Stillwater:
If that’s how you want to interpret my comments fine. But here is how I actually feel. When the election began I was happy with both Sanders and Clinton. I LIKE Hillary — I don’t listen to or adopt Right Wing tropes or messaging to make up my mind about a Democrat. Is she part of the Democratic establishment?– damn straight she is. She fought hard for that position. You want to get things done in Washington — that how it’s done (reality check, last outsider President, Jimmy Carter — how much did he accomplish?)
Truth be told Sanders struck me as some what naive but I like his economic message. I was hopeful that he would push Clinton to the left on those issues. These two are much closer in message than you would like to admit. Had he gotten the nomination, I would have voted for him. Because the Republican alternative is worse,
What I don’t like is the relentless hawking that Bernie is the one true vessel of change. That by his election, a magical transformation of Washington DC will occur. The lame shall be healed and the blind shall see again.
Grow up.
Also, as a woman — I’d like to see one of us in charge for a change.
Steve in the ATL
@raven: And, IIRC, Roswell, because he had a mistress there.
Also, my wife has been gleefully telling me that Matthew McConaughey is moving his family to Madison.
Steve in the ATL
@Cacti: This is true, but I still read it as a warning to Alabama against its continued Roy Mooreism.
Mandarama
@Southern Beale: Happy to see you around these parts, SB! Since we’re in the same ZIP, I’ve been following your blog posts on our less-than-illustrious Lege. The story about Stacey Campfield being kicked out of the Bistro is a personal fave.
Marc
@Frankensteinbeck: come on. Seriously. It’s easier to see things that annoy you in people who favor another candidate.
And, on the main point, critiquing a comment on a debate by reading a transcript misses the difference between the written and spoken word.
Linnaeus
@C.V. Danes:
Seconded. Sanders isn’t VP material. He’s much better placed in the Senate.
Bob In Portland
@CONGRATULATIONS!: Exactly. And that’s how a lot of political endorsements go, whether you are a right-wing pig castrator or a politician who is comfortably set up in a safe district and getting some bones thrown your way by the party elders. Killer Mike can make his endorsements without any political consequences. He’s not a politician. Whenever you weigh the endorsements you have to follow the golden chains and ask yourselves how much is genuine passion for a candidate and how much is self-interest and cover your ass behavior.
Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class
@Pogonip:
That was me. If I go there, is there a prophylactic BP med?
Paul in KY
@Southern Beale: Glad you are working & busy!
MomSense
@Frankensteinbeck:
I don’t read Sanders like that at all. When Secretary Clinton discussed his verifiable voting record on several issues (guns and auto bailout) he was getting red in the face and angry. Whenever she said something he didn’t like, he immediately began with the gesturing and trying to interrupt. I recognized a common intimidation tactic. He didn’t want her to speak. I find it really arrogant and condescending and I bet there are other women who recognized his behavior and find it troublesome as well.
ETA I didn’t read Sanders as angry professor and trying to be polite at all.
HRA
Cacti questioned me above about no senators endorsing Bernie Sanders.
According to Google there are a number of candidates for the Senate endorsing him. Tom Cotton R from Arkansas did a tongue in cheek endorsement.
Harry Reid and his acolytes (38) have endorsed HRC. That is no surprise if we remember his rout of casino workers to the caucus for her. Also back in the past during the new Obama administration I wrote a piece here about how Reid was denying President Obama on his agenda and got slammed for it. So, yes, Reid running the D Senators is no different from the casino workers IMO.
Bob In Portland
@Linnaeus: Sanders would not be a team player. That’s just not his style.
Cacti
@Steve in the ATL:
I didn’t have a chance to read the decision text. But yeah, I think the SCOTUS is getting weary of Roy Moore’s lawlessness from the State bench.
Even if Tony were still alive, I don’t think he would have found that Alabama has a right to make judicial rulings on Georgia law. This was about as easy as a reversal gets.
Paul in KY
@Linda Featheringill: He’s a secret commie who vacationed in USSR.
Applejinx
@redshirt: I think the word you want is ‘disrespectful’. Condescending would imply it’s not an effective technique, or that the people doing that are dumb or ineffective. On the contrary, ‘they know exactly what they’re doing’ and I just don’t like it, so ‘disrespectful’.
Paul in KY
@jl: Good idea, I think. Want to keep those young idealistic Bernie voters voting (in Nov, for us).
Calouste
@Cacti: Ruling narrowly is Stand Operating Procedure for the Supreme Court, right? (Except when Scalia writes the majority opinion)
So they’re waiting for Roy Moore to come up with some different bullshit, which will be slapped down for a different reason.
Kay
@CONGRATULATIONS!:
Did you see Boston Public Schools students walked out today to protest budget cuts?
That is a LOT of kids.
You go, young’uns :) I don’t think they can ignore that many of them.
Mnemosyne
@Bob In Portland:
Yep, no one more oppressed than old white dudes in this country.
And even after saying this, you’re still not going to understand why people say old white dudes are out of touch and need to work harder to understand where other people are coming from.
Redshift
Calling out bullshit theater-criticism analysis from the NYT is all well and good, but can we also focus on the fact that both the question and NYT’s coverage completely adopt the GOP’s bullshit framing that “all levels of government” failed because, while it may be true that the Snyder administration was willfully evil in deciding to risk poisoning Flint and has lied repeatedly about it (including lying about local government having any role in the “failure”), the EPA that Republicans want to abolish failed to stop them from being willfully evil, so the federal government is almost equally to blame.
I, for one, wish both candidates had challenged that premise more forcefully. The question of whether they were clear and forceful enough in accepting the bullshit premise seems secondary.
SiubhanDuinne
@Stillwater:
I’m reminded of that quote from Gandhi (I think) to the effect that “Your Christ is just fine. It’s Christians I don’t like.”
aimai
@Marc: “Clear communication?” Look–its a debate in which both parties are laying out actual answers to actual questions. I’m sorry if you think the voter can’t handle more than a 5th grade level of discourse or words of only one syllable.
LAO
@Stillwater:
My second attempted at replying — so if my prior comment show up — sorry for being repetitive.
I appreciate your mis-characterization of my endorsement of another’s comment — which I do adopt and agree with. First, I LIKE Hillary — I think she is an awesome, empowered, brilliant woman. I like most of her policies and I thought she was a great Secretary of State, Second, Bernie, I find to be naive and one note — but I appreciate his economic message. Had he gotten the nomination, I would have voted for him because the alternative is unimaginably horrible to me.
It was my hope, that Bernie would push Hillary towards the left on economics (which I think he has).
What I can’t stand — is the attitude of the Bernie fans — your holier than thou belief that Bernie is the “one true savior;” elect him and the blind shall see again and the lame shall walk again. That is not how Washington works and I actually understand the limitations on the power of the presidency. What a joke. Grow up.
raven
@Steve in the ATL: “War Like a Thunderbolt” is a really good telling of the Battle of Atlanta. Despite being from Illinois I learned that I had an ancestor killed at the Battle of Atlanta after fighting Illinois troops all the way from Chickamauga.
Maybe Mathew and his dogs will show at White Tiger!
jl
@Paul in KY: Sanders does seem successful at building a national small donor base. I read he brought in around $20 million in Jan, and then $44 million in Feb. I wonder how that enters into his post-primary calculations.
Miss Bianca
@Ella in New Mexico:
The general point, perhaps, is that I see sexist and dismissive attitudes where you don’t. Maybe you just haven’t had as much experience with sexism as I have. Good for you, seriously, in that case.
Maybe I am “thin-skinned” about it, not so much on Sec. Clinton’s behalf, but on behalf of *all* women I’ve seen in the course of a fairly long life being talked over, whose speaking styles have been criticized for everything from being just as shouty and “passionate” as Sen. Sanders gets lauded for being, to being wonky and thoughtful and “discursive”. To me the salient point is not, “Can she take it?” but “Should she HAVE to?” If you dismiss that question as irrelevant, nothing I say is going to convince you otherwise. OK.
Maybe I just haven’t seen enough of Sen. Sanders shouting down and talking over his male colleagues to know whether that’s just a hallmark of his personal style or not. What I do know is that he’s going to get a pass on it where a woman, usually, would not. Again, I speak from personal experience, where when I get to the point of yelling and jabbing my finger, I’m not “passionate” – I’m not “heart-felt and earnest” – I’m “intimidating.” I’m a “know-it-all.” I’m “too big for my (theoretical) britches.” I’m a “ball-buster.” I’m a b*tch, in other words.
Does it stop me? Sometimes. Sometimes I let myself get intimidated into presentlng less threateningly, sometimes I just suck it up and go on. Depends on the stakes.
Yes, Sec. Clinton has a hide as thick as a rhino’s (if not a RINO’s). Yes, the Democratic debate was head-and-shoulders – Gargantuan head-and-shoulders – above the Republicans’. Granted. I will merely assert, for the record, that it is just as easy – easier, in fact – to dismiss and diminish the issue of how men and women – and non-white men and wome, because Whiteness or its lack also plays a role in perception – are allowed to present themselves, as it is to point it out and insist on making a point of it.
President Obama, for example, wouldn’t be able to get away with what Sen. Sanders does. it would present as too threatening. Neither would Sec. Clinton. That is the point that brings us back to Tom’s critique.
If you want to see nothing but “healthy debate”, fine. If I choose to see more than that, also fine.
That being said, I can’t wait to see Sec. Clinton square off against Trump. >: >
Cacti
@Bob In Portland:
Knock me over with a feather. I agree with you, Bob.
Redshift
@Applejinx: Weird how you always know what other people are thinking, and what hidden motives they have that prove you correct. Are you psychic?
redshirt
@Applejinx: No, I think condescending applies. Like when you think you know another person’s motivations better then they themselves do.
Paul in KY
@Mike J: We gotta win, before we can think of replacing dead veeps.
aimai
@Cacti: How could Bernie be the head of the DNC–up until recently he wasn’t a Democrat and I see no evidence that he is willing to consider himself a Democrat in the near future after the election. He will go back to being an independent who shows no signs of putting himself out to get other progressives or democrats elected around the country.
I would like to see Elizabeth Warren get elected to be Majority Leader or Minority leader in the Senate. But that isn’t going to happen because Chuck fucking Schumer is in power. But there is no way that Bernie is going to have any more influence after this election cycle than he did before. His voters, in each Senatorial district, could have clout. But he isn’t organizing them for that so I think they will just vanish into the general electorate.
pseudonymous in nc
The establishment media template for HRC is clear enough: two parts Clinton Rules for innuendo, plus one part Gore Rules for booooooring wonkishness. Hey, remember the 90s!
They’re probably going to treat El Trumpador like W Bush, which may be why El Trumpador went after Jeb!
Stillwater
@LAO: What I can’t stand — is the attitude of the Bernie fans
Heh.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@HRA:
Do you have any idea why Nevada even has a caucus? It’s because Harry Reid, as a lifelong Dem, worked hard with his party to get one there, for his constituents in Las Vegas (including the entertainment and hospitality businesses that are his constituents) and elsewhere, and to make Nevada somewhat relevant. He made some phone calls to the executives at those certain establishments to let people caucus, but he didn’t route them to Hillary. You’d think that working the levers of power that you’ve spent a lifetime working to control, in order to enable union workers to vote in a caucus is something that a progressive should value. I guess you’d think wrong.
The stories you folks tell yourself about how everything is corrupt without having any knowledge about anything works in real life is a huge fucking problem.
Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class
@Calouste:
It means that even Thomas and Alito are not inclined to want to upend the current status quo on Full Faith and Credit issues, and aren’t interested in new decades of nibbling. The issues are completely resolved.
Cacti
@aimai:
No disagreement here.
A DNC Chair needs to be a few things. They need to be simultaneously a cheerleader for the party, a fundraiser for it, and a party builder. DWS fails at party building. I’m not sure that Sanders would be comfortable with any of those 3 hats.
LAO
@Applejinx:
How about we make a deal? You don’t tell me what I think and I won’t tell you what to think. And while we are at it, you don’t misstate my position. I started off with a lean (51% Bernie — 49% Hillary) liked them both. Spent some time reading — I know longer lean Bernie.
I assume you are an adult. Go make up your own mind.
aimai
@Miss Bianca: This. Wonderfully put.
I’d like to add that cries of “playing the sexism card” in this election are like the cries that Obama unfairly played the race card in the 2008 and 2012 elections. In both cases you have a candidate (a woman or a black person) who has no option but to stand before the electorate in a marked category, a category marked (to play with the term) in the most unpopular and difficult ways. And every fucking time its the white guys who complain that they are being hamstrung and hurt by the ways in which their own behavior is constrained by the viewer’s response. Its not a problem for HRC or Obama that they can’t afford to display anger because one will be considered a bitch and the other a savage thug. Its a problem for the white guy at the podium next to them because treating them like children, lecturing them, hectoring them, or demeaning them (or their accomplishments) triggers their supporters into remembering the same treatment by other white male authorities in their own lives.
I’m not all about identifying with “my” candidate. But people do identify with their candidate and candidates need to take note of this obvious fact in how they speak of and to their opponents. I’msorry for Bernie that HRC’s voters have the world experience they do of being stifled and lectured by older white guys. But its a fact of their existence and he would do well to stop triggering flashbacks to it if he wants their vote. It has nothing to do with HRC–it has to do with the optics of the situation for her voters. Just like Obama didn’t ask for any special treatment because he was black, but it behooved his opponents (including the Clintons) not to attack him in ways that would hurt or insult his voters. Its just common sense. Women and minority people have known it for years but white men are continually surprised that you have to pay attention to the body/race/status of the people around you.
Fair Economist
@Linda Featheringill:
We’re going to call out his sorry ass for the **** he spouts, same as we’re calling out the NYT for *their* ****. I think we all learned from the SwiftBoating business you can’t ignore the turds and let them float around stinking up the bathroom. You flush promptly every time and don’t “save your flushing” for the really stinky ones.
Brachiator
@pseudonymous in nc:
No, Gore was often just plain boring.
HRC has always been wonkish. You hear it when she talks about how hard she’s going to work. It’s not a template, not a 90s throwback. It’s how she comes across.
I have no idea how anyone could compare Trump to Dubya.
aimai
@Fair Economist: Right–this isn’t “bent out of shape.” Its pushback. Which is what every candidate needs from their voters.
Steve in the ATL
@raven:
Will have to read that. Speaking of Chickamauga, did you read Ambrose Bierce’s work on that? Powerful stuff.
Ella in New Mexico
@Calouste:
For review, my response
was to your earlier statement:
So if I understand you correctly, you no longer have a problem with a candidate not knowing the limits of his or her authority and power because Hilary thinks she could do what you accused Sander’s of saying? But Sanders was actually NOT saying what he said but some brand new meta-message you divined from reading his eyeblinks?
Jeeeeezus fuck some of the Clinton supporters here really spend a lot of time and energy tying themselves up in knots to make their case.
aimai
@Brachiator: She is wonkish and she is a hard worker. But the point that is being made here is that the narrative could be “just what the country needs!” or it could be “boooooo-ring.” We know that the media is going to go with “booooo-ring” and if the race is going to be written in a binary way (which they almost always are) then Trump/Bush were both assigned the sunny, visionary, guy you want to ahve a beer with category of coverage and Hillary/Gore will be slotted into “tedious top student.”
Ella in New Mexico
@aimai:
Well, seeing as it was YOUR candidate that allowed the race card to be played AGAINST Obama during the 2008 primaries, I’d say it’s pretty rich to pretend it’s cool for her to now play the gender card. WHICH, by the way, SHE isn’t.
Again, it’s her supporters.
CONGRATULATIONS!
@the Conster, la Citoyenne: My wife’s a school teacher and I’m DoD. We don’t even dare tell people what we do on the rare occasions we have to go out to a social event. The tales are out there and we don’t have 24 hours in a day to walk people through why they’re all bullshit. Here’s my two faves:
“900 dollar hammers”.
Teacher’s unions put pedophiles on paid vacations while making sure kids need summer school so they can make more money. They also only work 9 months a year.
Heard ’em all, folks. It’s all bullshit but nobody even gives a fuck about the truth anymore.
Bob In Portland
@Mnemosyne: I see old white men in homeless camps all over America. Maybe they get to be first in line at soup kitchens.
Since old white men don’t agree on everything, then I guess you are being sexist and ageist as well as racist. Generalities can do that.
If you can’t accept that your views are colored by your experiences and your understanding of your experiences then there isn’t much point in discussing this further. But, once again, by the time I was a freshman in college I was marching with the Black Panthers against the Young Americans for Freedom (who were mostly young white men). When I was in the army I took the job as a race relations instructor, trying to patch up the racial hatred that was breaking out in military bases across the US in the wake of the Vietnam War. I worked for about thirty years as a shop steward and union officer defending the rights of minority women and men on the workfloor. And your resume shows what besides grudges which you manage to cleave into racial and gender divisions?
Excuse me, but from your high horse I can’t quite see where you know anything about me or my understanding. I do agree that people need to understand other people, but I don’t think that white men alone cause all the misunderstanding and oppression in the world (although, quite a bit). Conversely, the crap that women and people of color suffer at the hands of the powerful are also visited upon old white men. Not all opposition to Clinton is based of sexism, and not all support for Sanders is because he is an old white man.
goblue72
@Amir Khalid: This wasn’t a critique of her ability to decide something. It was a critique of her messaging and communication. Which is what the original post by Tom was saying wasn’t a problem. I disagreed.
But if we want to get into her actual decision-making and her judgment ability – I’d say her record is mixed – HillaryCare was a disaster (both in its formulation and its rollout), she was wrong on Iraq, wrong on Libya, and her record as SoS is pretty thin in comparison to Kerry (most of the big achievements in bilateral and multilateral international agreements – the primary goal of a state department – happened under Kerry’s watch, not hers)
FlipYrWhig
@Bob In Portland:
I think this is my least favorite aspect of Team Bernie online: the presumption, which is rather frequent, that people supporting Hillary don’t really truly mean it but must have been intimidated into it. This basically implies that most everyone in a vacuum would prefer Bernie, and that the thing that needs explanation is why anyone _wouldn’t_ do that.
chopper
@Ella in New Mexico:
i like the use of ALL CAPS. really gives it some ‘attitude’.
Iowa Old Lady
I’m trying to remember why I was so happy when this site came back up this morning.
AliceBlue
@raven:
Covington too.
SiubhanDuinne
@Miss Bianca:
The minute the general election debate schedule is announced, I’m putting the dates in my calendar and declining any other events or invitations that may come my way.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Like at the debate where he slipped from the success and popularity of of UHC systems in other industrialized countries, and then pretended UCH and Single Payer (his plan!) were synonymous? Or when he waved away, as he does, that he called for a primary challenge of Obama because it was “many, many years ago” [ETA: less than five] and “on a radio show” (never understood how than makes it irrelevant)? Or his content harping on “speaking fees”? I guess that is “clear”, if not completely honest.
chopper
@FlipYrWhig:
you obviously haven’t had to knuckle under the Wrath of the Clinton. it’s pretty wrathful. like, the wrathiest.
Mnemosyne
@Ella in New Mexico:
Interestingly, neither the initial post nor the first comments on the thread said word one about Bernie’s response or criticized his response. The criticism was of the media’s framing of the issue. Are we no longer allowed to criticize the media’s coverage of the campaign and have to reserve our criticism for Hillary v Bernie?
WarMunchkin
Holy balls, what happened to this comment section. Also, I once again conclude that debates have no value for the political process. Make me chairperson of the DNC and I’ll make the primary great again.
LAO
@Iowa Old Lady:
You and me both.
FlipYrWhig
BTW, the Clinton answer that led to the OP in the first place doesn’t strike me as particularly roundabout.
Mnemosyne
@Bob In Portland:
Wow, you really have absolutely no capacity for self-reflection, do you?
It’s true, I didn’t march with the Black Panthers. I spent the first half of 1969 in my mother’s uterus, and the second half pooping in my diapers and drinking formula. I’m sorry if that makes me a slacker.
redshirt
@Iowa Old Lady: I’m trying to remember if 2008 was similar and I think it was, but for different reasons.
It’s interesting how the dynamic has shifted – in 2008 I was 100% Team Obama and in 2016 the same is true for Team Clinton. For the same reasons though – who’s better able to get elected, and if elected, get stuff done.
FlipYrWhig
@WarMunchkin: BUT HAVING TOO FEW DEBATES IS JUST WHAT DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ WANTS CORONATION THUMB ON SCALE SILENCING
Chyron HR
@FlipYrWhig:
Okay, let’s be fair, “Bob in Portland” is an Alex Jones-level crank who thinks Beau Biden shot down MH17 as part of a plot to get Ukraine’s sweet, sweet oil. He’s not actually a Sanders supporter so much as he’s woven Hillary into his rich conspiracy tapestry.
Ella in New Mexico
@Miss Bianca:Maybe I’ve just had enough of old lefty guys shouting in my face. Brings back bad memories of all my old community organizer college days, @aimai:
And can I add that old school, victimologist crap like THIS is just fucking ridiculous.
I’m a 53 year-old woman with a Master’s Degree who worked for over a decade doing actual work–not “college community organizing”– with domestic violence and sexual assault victims. I’m talking “picking them up from the ED in the middle of the night to take them to a secret shelter location with their six kids who had just seen their mom stabbed” actual work. I have LITERALLY stood toe to toe with powerful judges, police officers, and politicians who threatened or insulted or attempted to demean me and my organization for standing up for my clients. I have LITERALLY gotten between an charging abuser and his victim in a courthouse lobby and with a quick foot-shot to the gonads took his ass down before the cops had a chance to lick their lips. I’ve been a nurse for almost a decade now, and since then have had to challenge the authority of many a powerful, entitled white doctor or administrator in order to get good care for my patient’s who are illegal, uninsured or just uncared about.
No one “triggers” or “stifles” this woman. Certainly not a liberal Democratic candidate who wants universal health care and is not afraid to say he absolutely doesn’t support fracking or would fire whoever is responsible for the Flint crisis he could in 16 words or less.
Let’s just say I–AND HILARY–get traumatized by a whole lot less than most of you Hilary supporters writing here today in this thread. Especially not fucking BERNIE SANDERS.
Funny thing is, I had to have the same arguments way back in 2008 with you people. When I supported Obama.
Miss Bianca
@aimai:
Thanks. Yeah, I do get worked up. And maybe it’s because I’ve made a commitment to putting my neck out to call out sexist and racist BS when I see it – and try to absorb the critiques when I’m guilty of it myself – only to have other people, people I might consider allies – say “Wait, wait, I don’t see anything wrong,” to wonder “am I being too sensitive? Or am I being gaslighted?”
I can’t even imagine how POC put up with it, particularly women, with the “double jeopardy” effect. And it’s not, as we’ve seen here, a left-wing/right-wing thing – lefties are just as capable of being either honestly blind or wilfully obtuse about sexist and racist behavior as right-wingers. It’s just that it smarts more, because I expect more from “our side”. Because, gosh darn it, I expect progressives to be more open to the optics.
Doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate honest debate, by any means. But HONEST debate means being able to look at the whole picture – words and actions both.
aimai
@Ella in New Mexico: I pointed out that Hillary and Bill played the race card in the previous election. I was deeply ashamed of them both and, since I was an obama supporter, very angry about it. What’s your point? That its wrong? Yes, its wrong. And its wrong for the reasons I’ve stated as well–that its just a very bad idea to fail to recognize that the base Democratic voter isn’t an older white guy but is, rather, a minority person or a woman. Just don’t piss off the voters you think you want to attract.
I get that Bernie’s voters are all about how they are the most important part of the Democratic base and their needs/desires/feelings should be catered to but I don’t think that is quite accurate. A large number of Bernie’s voters aren’t democrats, and can’t be relied upon to vote for the democrat at all. Certainly many of them are making noises about not voting for the nominee. So I don’t think HRC has to tailor herself to them as much as Bernie needs to tailor his comments to attract HRC’s voters. Its perhaps not right or evenhanded, but it is true.
pseudonymous in nc
@Brachiator:
You’d better get used to it: as aimai notes, the establishment media are really fucking lazy and also very familiar with a binary construction, so Trump will pivot towards the Dubya model of affable swagger and encourage the media to apply Clinton Rules and Gore Rules to HRC.
The non-drinker who wins “most want to have a beer with” polls? Happened before, will happen again.
Stillwater
@Mnemosyne: Are we no longer allowed to criticize the media’s coverage of the campaign and have to reserve our criticism for Hillary v Bernie?
Well, there’s a lot more going on in this thread than just the media’s coverage of Hillary, but to that point, Levenson’s strained critique in the OP that the media was unfair to Clinton is just another example of the general pattern: Sander’s answer, rather than being precise and unequivocal, lacked nuance (“Does he really think he can fire the Governor? He’s as big an idiot as Trump!”); Clinton’s answer, rather than being legalistic, indecisive and equivocal, was imbued with nuance derived from experience.
Down is up!
jl
Just heard about a news report about a sighting of the endangered GOP RNIO: Arnold the ex-gubernator endorses Kasich!
Good thing. I don’t want to see Trump with Christie and Arnold standing behind him. Might trigger some kind of political seizure in my brain stem.
Eric U.
@Mnemosyne: ok, let me fill in. Fuck Bernie’s response to the question. Fuck the Bernistas that can’t see any defense of Clinton as anything other than an attack on Bernie.
My only criticism of Hillary’s response is that the EPA is third in line in who should resign. Once Snyder and the local water people resign their jobs, then we’ll go after people in the EPA
One thing the purity pony bullshit has made me realize is that I really like Hillary. She did great in front of the Benghazi committee, so I’m not sure I can generate any worry about how she’ll react to anything that the republicans can come up with
Amir Khalid
@goblue72:
I disagree. HillaryCare happened (ETA: or more correctly, didn’t) nearly a quarter of a century ago. I don’t recall the thing itself being all that greatly flawed as policy; it drew on work that been done over decades. It never actually got rolled out, as I recall. Republican intransigence killed it in the legislative stage.
Her work as Secretary of State made possible a lot of what happened on Kerry’s watch, which would have taken years of prior preparation. I think Kerry would be among the first to tell you that. She shouldn’t have voted for the AUMF in 2002, but she’s done many more things than that, especially after she became SoS in 2009. I’d rate her work in foreign policy as much more of a success than a failure.
aimai
@Ella in New Mexico: Oh stop already. No one is saying Hillary was hurt by Bernie sanders. No one. Some of her supporters saw the debate through their own experiences, that’s all. Nothing wrong with that. Its just something that happens. Stop acting as though Bernie needs to be protected from all those hysterical women. What you are doing is just as annoying and insulting to Bernie as what you are accusing unnamed Hillary supporters of doing to him. For fuck’s sake Bernie is a 78 year old Jewish guy from Brooklyn. He’s a lifelong politican. If he doesn’t know how to handle his own stage appearances so that he is more appealing to all the voters, not just his own supporters, he can just go back to politician school. This isn’t rocket science.
retiredeng
@Roger Moore: The NYT isn’t even a good newspaper any more. Our local suburban daily is head and shoulders over the NYT in balanced reporting on politics.
FlipYrWhig
@aimai: Was the “playing the race card” something more than Bill’s pointing out that Jesse Jackson won South Carolina and Hillary’s “hardworking white Americans” gaffe? Because I was a Hillary supporter early in 2007-2008 who gravitated to Obama before the voting started, and all I remember is those two incidents and thinking it was a lot of nothing.
redshirt
Maybe I’m just a masochist but I’m thoroughly enjoying the Bernie v. Sanders debates here. It’s real and perhaps previews the future politics of our country.
It’s certainly more interesting then talking about the latest Republican outrage, though that can be fun too.
Technocrat
@WarMunchkin:
Signed. Seriously, the polarization of the electorate has turned extended electoral contests into a months-long tribal hatefests. How bout everyone gets a week to read up on the candidates, then we vote. Done.
Remember when your mother used to take 16 months to pull off a bandaid? Me either.
WarMunchkin
@FlipYrWhig: I don’t understand.
pseudonymous in nc
@Amir Khalid:
It suffered the death of a thousand leaks and delays, and by the time it was actually announced the GOP declared that it was dead in the water.
It also had a big sales problem in that it involved changing everybody’s insurance, which is the reason for most of the ACA’s clusterfuckery around keeping existing plans in place, and a problem for all of the Bernie fans who want to… change everybody’s insurance through sheer force of will and righteousness.
stinger
@Felanius Kootea: Dunno, think I’d rather see an actual Democrat as head of the Democratic National Committee.
Kay
Kasich-mentum. Now we to decide which would be better- Kasich wins Ohio – and maybe Michigan- or Trump wins Ohio and maybe Michigan. A split would be best, I suppose.
The reason it’s important is that both candidates are saying they can win these states in a general, along with PA and perhaps WI. They don’t have any other way to get there.
I think “Kasich” just because it would be an ordinary ( if very competitive) D v R race, and we know how to do those, also, the only way Kasich gets there is thru the convention so all the Trump voters will be pissed off.
Trump is just bizarre. No telling what happens there. I’ll take the devil I know, I think.
FlipYrWhig
@WarMunchkin: A few months ago one of the most commonly voiced complaints by Team Bernie was that there were too few debates scheduled, which was clearly evidence that Debbie Wasserman Schultz was trying to deprive any competitor for Hillary’s crown from the chance to compete fairly. Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes complained about it quite a lot, and it was quite au courant in all your better precincts of the progressive blogosphere.
Bob In Portland
@Mnemosyne:
Thank you for still making pronouncements about me. At least my quick resume should tell you what I’ve done and where I stand on issues of social justice. Apparently, you have been literally and/or figuratively beaten about the head and shoulders by old white men. Were they in uniforms and carrying billy clubs or were they your dad sending you to your room? Please explain how can a hateful old white man self-reflect like you? Or maybe we are genetically incapable of it because of our age, sex and gender.
This is the point in the discussion where the train goes off the track. You’ve made racist, ageist and sexist statements which do not serve to clarify anything. You skip over the point of my posts in this thread, that much of what may seem offensive to you is colored by your life experience. What a shocking theory of human thought!
Amir Khalid
@pseudonymous in nc:
Thank you. I sit corrected.
HRA
Reid himself was instrumental in pushing for the Nevada caucus system in the first place, in 2008, which gave Nevada early state presidential voting status with nominating contests held in January, third only to Iowa and New Hampshire. That brought unprecedented attention to the small state during the primary fight between Barack Obama and Clinton, registering tens of thousands of new Democratic voters who would help Democrats win in 2008 and 2012 — and, not coincidentally, help Reid himself to re-election in 2010 when he was being written off as politically dead.
Sigh -So it becomes clearer as to why he was “instrumental”. Everyone can make their own assumption. I demur from making mine and wander off to more personal pressing issues.
Cacti
Bernie tries to clarify his “ghetto” comments from last night’s debate, shoots other foot:
WarMunchkin
@Kay: I’d pick Trump. Every time he speaks, it makes things easier for me to register someone to vote.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: What were the racist statements?
Brachiator
@Cacti:
This is sad, because Bernie is Jewish and, I understand, lost family members in Europe.
Miss Bianca
@Kay:
No, no Kasich,please! I’ll take the “no Kasich” card for $1,000, Kay.
Felanius Kootea
@stinger: I think having a DNC head who is for organized labor, may come up with ingenious ways of tapping small donors beyond presidential elections, may bring more progressives into office (by following his populist template, which is resonating in states like Kansas and Nebraska, etc.), has enormous credibility with young voters, and is willing to state unequivocally the values that the Democrats stand for, would be refreshing. However maybe we should stick with shills for the payday lending industry. I’ve seen others state that Bernie wouldn’t be a good fundraiser or cheerleaders for Democrats. I think he could if he had a hand in shaping the direction of the party. I mean, his message clearly resonates and he does know how to be pragmatic on certain issues (e.g., guns).
Bob In Portland
@Cacti: The question itself was bogus. Political blindspots, by definition are unseen. I thought the story about the black congressman not being able to get a cab was okay. But, yes, the ghetto line was a clunker.
goblue72
If you find yourself arguing “But the President doesn’t have those exact powers, blah blah blah”, then you’ve effectively chosen to make the pointy-head argument. Which ain’t wining you anything with the vast mass of voters who couldn’t give a shit about what it says on Page 132, subsection C of the “Presidenting Manual V 3.2”
The Democratic Party is extremely lucky that the White House is up for grabs in the year in which the GOP’s decades of living inside an echo chamber finally imploded on them in complete temper tantrum mode. Which temper tantrum they can still recover from as the Lizard King could still pull it off in terms of winning the nomination.
Not that the Party will learn anything from it. The Party – and much of the base – will pat itselves on the back for winning the White House while failing to win either House of Congress and be effectively shut out at the state level. And then in 2020 lose even worse in the midterms in the middle of an inevitable recession that everyone wants to pretend isn’t going to happen within the next year or so, and find themselves gerrymandered into irrelevancy for another decade wondering how they lost to the “wingnuts” again.
When the other side is able to get away with running a neo-Fascist billionaire and Dominionist Lizard King as their prime standard bearers without it hurting any other elective branch up for election, they aren’t weak. They’re strong.
The GOP can even lose the Senate in 2016 and still win. The status quo is the upward transfer of wealth and the weakening of working and middle class household wealth/incomes (with the activity at the state level being a further attack on wage-earning households as the majority of states are either GOP controlled, or have the GOP controlling more than the Dems do). As long as the status quo is merely maintained, the non-wealthy will continue to do worse. Merely holding the line on the WH doesn’t change this dynamic – this what gives the GOP veto power in the House (and Senate) so much power. And even if they lose the Senate, they maintain the status quo via control of the House and the states. And 2020 favors them in the Senate.
Democrats are waging battles. The GOP is waging a war. A war they are winning. We had one small window that opened in 2008 and we fucked it up by rolling out policies that didn’t do enough for the people who actually show up to vote every election, and didn’t do enough to visibly punish those that the “great unwashed” rightfully were angry at for fucking up the economy.
Bernie Sanders is a very old leftie from a state most Americans think is located insider their ice cream freezer who does a upstanding impression of an angrier version the Doc Brown and who literally is running as a socialist. He shouldn’t even be polling in the double digits ANYWHERE. The fact that he is getting the kind of traction he has managed to date is evidence of a problem in the Democratic Party. A problem that the Party at leadership levels still has no clue – or interest – in solving.
glory b
@FlyingToaster: I read something a while back that I’m still trying to track down. I believe the author’s name is Lipschitz.
Anyway, he found that the longer a primary goes, the less likely it is that the party wins the general. He bases this onlots of historical data, and sayd that the longer it drags on, the more enternched and invested the voters are and the longer it takes to “get in the groove” for the general. People feel bitter, burnt out and unwilling to put in the time and effort for the bigger fight.
I find this more woorisome because so many people seem to think the opposite. Instead, a good, but relatively short, fight is best.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@redshirt:
Me too. I feel like Buffy the Berniebro Slayer. There’s no more football, baseball hasn’t started, the Trump/Cruz shit show is well, a shit show that no amount of light or heat will disinfect, and so sadly this is my entertainment. Also, Mr. Conster is still a Bernfeeler although I browbeat him into voting for Hillary (or so he says – who knows), so I can argue with him here, by proxy.
Mnemosyne
@Bob In Portland:
Like I said, zero capacity for self-reflection.
Bored now.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt:
In politics white is a color. To be dismissed because of the color of your skin is off-putting. “… you’re still not going to understand why PEOPLE say old white dudes are out of touch…” You see, if you are an old white dude you’re not even a person.
That.
les
@Linda Featheringill:
So noticing that the NYT continues to practice lousy journalism is being excessively bent out of shape? How cool does one need to be to meet the Laid Back Linda standard? Is noticing sleazy media in any context too bent? Is having a preference on politics too bent? Any preference on anything? Hey, man, just chill, it’ll all be cool, right?
Ella in New Mexico
@aimai:
Seriously? You guys/gals are the only ones who get to dish it out, now? I’m responding to those two specific poster’s comments, as well the way the pro-Clinton commentary here has devolved into this”i’m being triggered” and “angry white men hurt my fee fees and I feel like they’re being mean to Hilary” garbage.
Guess what? I saw the debate through my own experiences, too. Bernie waves his hands and beats the Wall Street narrative to death at times, but you damn well know he is being straightforward when he answers “easy” questions cleanly, simply, succinctly. And while most of them will vote for her in a heartbeat, it’s the reason Sanders supporters want HIM. He’s imperfect, but he the genuine article imperfect.
Clinton does ramble, does parse legalistic responses to touchy issues and sounds like she’s carefully choosing her words in order to cloak her delicate relationships with people she’s claiming to want to reign in. She DOES try and have things both ways, leave escape hatches. She’s a politician, they all do it. But given the meta-narrative about her being untrustworthy, it not only plays right into the hands of her enemies when she does it, it’s distasteful. Maybe that’s why the Hilary supporters here today seem to be so very, very sensitive–when she does that, it kinda hits a nerve?
Bob In Portland
@Mnemosyne: Off the tracks. Good day. Cheers.
redshirt
@Mnemosyne: A Willow reference, I hope.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: Yes, racism against white males is one of the least discussed persecutions. It’s truly tragic.
les
@TallPete:
Jesus. What’s your appropriate attention span; 10 seconds? We’re not really going after that demographic; Trump may be more your style.
Technocrat
@goblue72:
Nah, they’re not winning. Donald Trump is about to burst out of the GOP’s metaphorical chest like something from Aliens. That is a repudiation if ever I saw one, despite their inarguable electoral success.
goblue72
@Amir Khalid: There was indeed a roll-out. The roll-out before I Congress. You aren’t an American, so may this is fuzzy for you. But Hillary’s approach to healthcare reform was to sequester herself with a bunch of wonks in a room, highly control all information coming out, and then roll out an enormous piece of legislation from whole cloth on Congress lap. And then expect Congress to pass it once she explained it all.
Obama took a lot of flak from the pointy heads about not having as fully formed a legislative proposals and instead outsourcing it to Congress where it ground through the legislative sausage factory for a year. Which flak was entirely underserved as he had far better judgment on what was needed to get legislation passes than the pointy heads.
And you conveniently ignored her poor judgment on Libya. Which us dirty hippies were criticizing from day one.
As far as SoS, you can’t prove an unknown or what Kerry might say about something when asked. We only have as evidence what actually happened and what actually occurred under whose watch.
Ella in New Mexico
@Brachiator:
So, now we can’t use the word “ghetto” anymore because it’s somehow derogatory?
Someone shoulda told Elvis he was being insensitive. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6am8V5KNJ4A
Felanius Kootea
@Felanius Kootea: I meant cheerleader not cheerleaders. Too late to edit.
I’m tired of Democrats simply reacting to Republican intransigence. I want leaders in the Democratic Party who clearly, forcefully set out an inclusive and thoughtful agenda that reduces income inequality, improves infrastructure, addresses institutional racism and improves affordable access to quality healthcare. And who stick with the message and tell the Republicans to eff off when they claim we can double the size of the military but cannot do anything to reduce childhood poverty.
redshirt
@the Conster, la Citoyenne: Bernie’s primary loss in MA didn’t change his tune?
Also, Buffy references always make my day. :)
goblue72
@Technocrat: Seriously? If you think winning ONE elective office due to the other Party having a meltdown over ONE elective office is some proof that we are winning, then you are part of the problem.
Again, if all you can see is the White House, then you aren’t paying attention.
Mnemosyne
@redshirt:
It was a happy coincidence that the Conster made a Buffy reference right above mine and managed to highlight it.
redshirt
@goblue72: What was wrong about Libya?
Ella in New Mexico
@aimai:
Such projection.
Miss Bianca
@Ella in New Mexico:
For the record, I was an Obama supporter pissed at Hillary myself, back in ’08. Your point? You want to trade war stories about how tough you are, great – I’ve had guns stuck in my face, been arrested and slapped around, and been screamed at and followed home from the abortion clinics I’ve worked at. So, again, your point? Are we seriously having a cock-measuring contest over what tough feminist cookies we are? I decline to play. Christ on a cracker. all I just said, this is what I see and YMMV. But that’s not enough, apparently. You’re tougher and leftier and more feminist than those p*ssy Clintonistas and you think Sen. Sanders is awesome and we should just shut up because he’s awesome. Fine. FINE. Jeezus, woman.
redshirt
@Mnemosyne: Very happy. “Bored now” is one of my favorite quotes from the show, given the context.
stinger
@Felanius Kootea: You make some good points about much of his appeal. But, taking Bernie as an individual out of the equation and just speaking in general, I don’t think I’d take someone brand-new to an organization and immediately give them that kind of power (especially after they’ve spent decades refusing to join). Isn’t there a proven Democrat who is not a payday lender shill who could take on the job?
redshirt
@goblue72: While your point is generally true and the Repukes are healthy and poisonous at the state level, let’s not forget the Supreme Court. We are on the verge of setting the direction of the court for the next 25 or so years.
WarMunchkin
@stinger: Vote WarMunchkin for DNC Chair. I promise to rig the debates to support the Baud ticket!
goblue72
@redshirt: Far be it from me to jump up in support of Bob, but that’s not what he is saying. Whether articulated or not, its about winning elections – and ALL of them, not just the White House once every 4 years.
And that means assembling electoral coalitions composed of voters. Not coalitions of those merely eligible to vote – but of those who actually vote. Democracy only rewards actual voting. And that means if your electoral coalition assembly is zero-sum – if you chase one set of voters in a way that chased OFF an equal set of voters, then you have won nothing. And winning is the entire point of the exercise. This isn’t church or a civic activity. This is about power. And the securing of it through a certain process.
That doesn’t mean going the Trump route. But it does mean figuring out a way to draw more voters in without chasing other voters off. And voters who show up every 2 years and not just every 4 – are votes that a Party cannot afford to necessarily chase off.
Linnaeus
@Ella in New Mexico:
It was a clunky way to answer a shitty question. I suspect that Sanders was trying to say something like, “Most white Americans don’t know the conditions under which a disproportionate number of African-Americans live”. But it comes off as equating black and poor.
Mr. Twister
@goblue72: Popular vote as of 3/06/16:
Clinton: 4,180,853
Sanders: 2,659,254
Just this past Saturday:
Clinton: 246.548
Sanders: 117,810
Looks like Hillz is cleaning his clock to me.
goblue72
@redshirt: Certainly. And as important as the SCOTUS is, it is the least powerful of the three branches of government and the one whose power is most circumscribed. This is not say it is unimportant – just that it is far less important than the other two branches – and less important than control of the states.
Democrats – for some reason that I just cannot fully understand – seem bored by state politics. And then complain about the GOP gerrymandering Democrats into irrelevancy. Or wondering why there are so many wingnut state judges. Or unions keep getting their knees cut off in state by state.
goblue72
@redshirt: Are you fucking kidding me?
Ella in New Mexico
@redshirt:
No, but it’s smarter to direct your anger against the ones who spend their lives exercising their white, male privilege to hurt women and minorities. Not the ones who are working along side us to eradicate it.
Callisto
@Mnemosyne:
Bob mentions the fact that he marched with the panthers in 68 pretty often. It’s his ‘I have a black friend’ get out of racial trouble free card.
Kay
@Miss Bianca:
The best would be Kasich OH, Trump MI and Rubio FL. There’s one poll with Rubiomentum in FL.
Then they all stay in along with Cruz and they don’t sort it out until Labor Day.
Ella in New Mexico
@Linnaeus: only if you wish to see it that way. And seeing as it’s a fundamental Democratic issue that a disproportionate number of black Americans ARE trapped in poverty due to racial discrimination and injustice, why is that such a grievous error of reference?
stinger
@Felanius Kootea:
I agree with this 100%.
redshirt
@goblue72: Apparently I am. Explain it to me.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@redshirt:
Re the Mass. results: there’s always a reason why Bernie hasn’t lost, and is actually really winning, or the states he’s winning are more relevant than the states he’s losing, or will be the front runner any day now, or by July. That’s what my FB feed is full of, all day every day.
redshirt
@Ella in New Mexico: Sure. But anyone who plays the racism card against white males has questionable judgement, don’t you think?
Bob In Portland
@redshirt:
How weird. I never said that. You know, arguing with someone over something he never said doesn’t seem to reach the point of critical thinking in my book. White people have gotten the best deal since the Europeans started colonizing the world in the 16th Century. But not all white people. White men who would have been old white men today, died in Vietnam. There are white homeless men today. If you use someone’s race as a cudgel against him in a discussion then your understanding of racial relations is pretty shallow. If you don’t understand how poverty affects women and men of every color, if you want to dismiss someone’s opinion because they are not the same age or in the same income bracket, then your superiority only extends to the edge of your ears.
Get it? There is no point in arguing with me about something I never said.
If you compare and limit what you expect someone capable of doing by their race, it’s racism.
Memn said:
Old=ageist. White=racist. Dudes=sexist. By what characteristics should we use to prejudge you?
Train off the tracks. Cheers.
les
@Felanius Kootea:
Good stuff, all. I’d add, “and is a Democrat.” Or maybe put that first.
goblue72
@Mr. Twister: I know the Clintonistas like missing the forest for the trees. So let me summarize what I wrote above in terms you can understand:
This isn’t about Clinton wining as proof of something. This is about the fact that she is challenged at all, has lost various states, and actually has to fight off a challenge from a candidate who you couldn’t make up if you tried as the “candidate who shouldn’t even have a shot in hell of polling over 2%”.
To repeat – He’s 78 years old. From the smallest state in the entire country that isn’t Wyoming. Whose entire campaign involves being angry while looking like he’s the love child of Doc Brown and Howard Beale. While telling America he’s a Socialist. Last time we had a Socialist running for President – at time when we actually had real honest to god Socialist activity in the country – Eugene Deb’s votes could be fit inside a shoebox.
But yes – please keep sticking your head in the sand.
Ella in New Mexico
@Miss Bianca:
Hey, like they say on Law and Order, you opened the door with the “Bernie’s finger waving is demeaning her and trigger-trips my community organizing days” yak. Now it’s all “poor, poor pitiful me I was just sitting here nicely saying how much I love Hilz”. Don’t make me cut and paste every single thing you’ve said here to help you remember.
Like I said before, you can’t have it both ways, my friend.
goblue72
@les: If “Being a Democrat” means favoring a pay-day lender corporate Democrat over a working peoples’ politician in terms of what is important and what is not, then screw the Democratic Party. It deserves to be lose every House race at that point.
Mr. Twister
@goblue72: First of all f*ck you and your condescending attitude. Second, f*ck you and your condescending attitude.
Cacti
@redshirt:
Racism against white males does not exist in the United States of America and never has.
Kay
@WarMunchkin:
Then you have to make calls for Trump in MI because Kasich can’t beat Trump in both OH and MI or Trump is wounded:
Go Trumpsters!
I’ve been asking Republicans here if they’re “Trumpsters” because I like the word and they’re horrified by it :)
I love that no one asks “is that the word”? They just accept that I have the right slang.
goblue72
@redshirt: Maybe you haven’t been paying attention, but Libya is a complete shitshow at this point.
A failure.
Because certain elites were obsessed with getting Gadaffi, a two-bit, has been. Because Terror. Or some such nonsense.
Ella in New Mexico
@goblue72:
Yes. THIS is what I’m so terribly, terribly afraid of this year. They’re ignoring the polls that say she won’t do as well as Sanders against the Republicans, ignoring the reasons that the kids are flocking to Bernie, denying that she’s got real flaws that have to be addressed for the General should she win (which is highly likelly).
Instead, Bernie is not deferent enough to her.
redshirt
@goblue72: So we should have invaded then? I’m sure you have a better answer than the Obama Admin.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Bob In Portland
@Callisto: I didn’t see Hillary in that black church I was in. And I didn’t see Hillary in that demonstration either.
We can all play this game.
If I mention the Black Panthers it generally follows an accusation of racism against me by a stranger. I also mentioned being a race relations instructor in the US Army. I mentioned working for a union where the majority of the membership were women and men of color.
When I mentioned the Black Panthers, being a race relations instructor and being a union rep, I moved from being a racist, sexist old white man to being a racist, sexist old white man who is using his history to point out who I am.
But in fact, all of this was in response to me saying the rather unconfrontational and uncontroversial statement that a lot of what we read as body language in others is influenced by our own personal history. If you think that you arrived in front of the TV last night without being affected by your previous life and are therefore more even-handed than “old, white dudes”, then cheers. You must be something in person.
redshirt
@Ella in New Mexico: Crikey. Bernie has ZERO national profile until last year. Hillary has been enemy number one for almost 30 years. You don’t think that makes a difference in current polling?
What do you think would happen were Bernie to get the Dem nomination? That it would all be sunshine and roses? Bernie just floats above the hurricanes of bullshit launched by the Repukes?
Do you remember 2008? Obama was feted and loved by Republican media until the moment it became clear he was going to win the Dem nomination, and then of course everything turned 180 degrees. The same thing would happen to Sanders and he would not handle it nearly as well as Barack did.
Linnaeus
@Ella in New Mexico:
I’m actually inclined to be charitable to Sanders because I think he was trying to speak to a very real problem in this country and the question really wasn’t very good – asking candidates about their “blind spots” in a nationally televised debate is almost asking for someone to stumble over their own words.
That said, I can see where it comes off as a bit tone deaf in that it implies (unintentionally) that the problems facing African-Americans are all a function of being in ghettos and that only African-Americans have any experience with ghettos.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: You’ve already said you’re not voting for Clinton if she’s the Dem nominee.
So at this point, who cares what your background is? Your vote and your voice are irrelevant. You might as well be a Republican.
Ella in New Mexico
@Cacti:
No. But obstinate refusal to restrain from self-defeating emotional gratification and kicking the players on your own team reigns here at the Ballon-Juice comment section. ;-)
Bob In Portland
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I think that we can agree that Clinton supporters skew more conservative, richer, older, and more southern. In Massachusetts Sanders got 41% of “nonwhite” voters. These are all fragments of the whole that won’t be played out until there is a nomination. Will Sanders do better with voters of color farther north? Since there haven’t been many of these primaries I haven’t seen. Sanders did well with minorities in Colorado. Yes, there are black people, as well as Hispanics and Native Americans.
As far as Sanders doing better with independents and Republicans, that’s already been shown. But maybe things will shift as the primaries move farther north.
Bob In Portland
@Ella in New Mexico: Thank you, Ella. Cheers.
retiredeng
@srv:
“Trump is going to go populist left.”
Not with all those fascist boogers plastered on the wall from the GOP debates.
Callisto
@Bob In Portland:
See, this is part of the pattern. You went to a black church once. The fact that you refer to all these experiences with the word “resume” just goes to show your thinking here; black people were fighting for their livelihoods while you were polishing the ol’ resume, getting feathers in your cap you could point at later on. After marching with the Panthers in ’68 you got to go back to your white male privilege with an experience you could point to. It’s almost cosplay; the next best thing to actually being black in America.
Ella in New Mexico
@redshirt: I totally agree.
So Bob, even though I agree with you on a ton of your posts, if you actually have stated you support Sanders but would vote for any one of the slime-demons that manages to crawl out of the primordial soup on the Republican side over Clinton, then you have lost all right to comment on the Democratic candidates here.
That would be fucktardism of the highest order.
WarMunchkin
@Kay: I don’t think I could actually talk to a Trump supporter as a nonwhite person. At least, not without body armor. Even through a phone.
But I’m trying to figure out how to get involved in the Dem Party. I’d be glad to formally volunteer some time, but I’m having trouble figuring out what, exactly, they do. I’m also unsuccessfully trying to read about successful party building and voter organization and all that. I don’t want to end up being an e-mail party.
I mean, I get how revolutionary direct-mail targeting was and how targeted e-mails help raise awareness, but it’s not really the same thing as building civic communities and voter turnout organizations, and I’d rather the DNC spend its money doing that. Right now, I don’t think we need much over-the-air publicity – the Republican debates are enough. So why not just go all-in on registering voters when our stars are at their highest: when Republicans open their mouths?
Stillwater
@goblue72: This is about the fact that she is challenged at all, has lost various states, and actually has to fight off a challenge from a candidate who you couldn’t make up if you tried
Exactly. The fact that she’s even being challenged by Bernie says more about her as a candidate than it does Bernie or his policies, seems to me.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Any politician relying on kids to win an election is committing political malpractice and should be beaten like a dead mule.
Calouste
@Cacti: Ai caramba!
Sanders sounds so tone deaf on racial issues that I wonder if he has given much thought to them since he was involved in the movement 50 years ago. Not that he had to in Vermont of course.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: Okay, if you don’t want to discuss politics with people who don’t support Hillary then please don’t respond to my posts. As a few others have pointed out, “…obstinate refusal to restrain from self-defeating emotional gratification and kicking the players on your own team reigns here at the Ballon-Juice comment section.”
Are you for social justice? Do you want to end poverty? Do you want people emerging from college and not be indebted for their lives? Do you want to stop endless wars?
redshirt
@Stillwater: So you’re saying Bernie’s success has nothing to do with him or his positions but rather the weakness of Clinton?
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: Well, since you’re not voting for an actual viable candidate, I’m not sure what your opinion matters for? Unless maybe for downticket races. But who knows who will fail your purity tests at that level.
Ella in New Mexico
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Democratic leaning Millennials, particularly those in upcoming state primaries.
Your last point: refer to my first point and the fact that it’s hard to rid people of their first impressions–which, right now lean more positive for Bernie and negative for Hilary. Our party will have to shape and support and counter for both, but there will be more deeply ugly shit thrown at Hil, and whining that it’s not fair or shouldn’t happen won’t do much to counter it.
Peale
@redshirt: yes. How many “socialists” from Nebraska, Maine and Kansas have you met who don’t work for a university? They like the free college idea, sure, but dyed in the wool socialists? Who knew this agricultural state Dems were so liberal?
redshirt
@Ella in New Mexico: I believe he’ll be casting a vote for Jill Stein if not Bernie.
Keith G
For me a key consideration is that Hillary’s style, as exemplified at the top, is very successful at communicating with her base (folks a lot like me), but winning the emotional investment of others usually means being able to use more than one set of communication tools.
“Lawyerly” has never been a favored description of a political speaking style. No matter what the Times prints, and no matter what is typed here, this is a challenge for Hillary as it has been for other politicians, eg. John Kerry.
goblue72
@Stillwater: And the state of the Democratic Party as whole. I’m a Sanders supporter and I will fully admit that he looks like a guy who had to be reminded to comb his hair. And that you can’t wear your suit on national TV after you’ve slept in it.
FlipYrWhig
@Felanius Kootea: Are you seriously suggesting that Bernie’s winning in Kansas and Nebraska _among Democrats_ shows that he’s cracked the code for getting progressive candidates elected to national office from states like those? Am I the only person who remembers the DailyKos infatuation with Scott Kleeb?
Bob In Portland
@Ella in New Mexico: If would be if it were true. I cannot vote for Clinton because of her political positions, her lifetime foreign policy positions and her coziness with the 1%. I also see her as playing a large part in moving the Democratic Party to the right over the last several decades. That doesn’t mean I’m going to vote for Cruz or Trump. I’ll vote for Jill Stein because I see destroying the Democratic Party’s left wing is pretty heinous. It would bring an end to democracy eventually if the only choices that voters have are the status quo or right-wing fascists.
My vote means something to me. It won’t swing an election by itself, but despite voting Democrat all my life (except, as I’ve noted, the time when Carter conceded before I got home from work; I think I voted for Benjamin Spock or someone like him) I am not going to be consigned to someone I see as having played a major part in destroying progressivism in our political system. I’m willing for someone to convince me otherwise, but there is a core group of BJers who would rather take what someone else said out of context and pin it on me. That’s being dishonest. You saw that, and for that I thank you. Don’t worry. I’m not going to vote for anyone in the clown car.
goblue72
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: More Republicans a whole turned out in most states than Democrats. So yes, I would expect that MORE Millenials voted for the GOP candidates as a WHOLE, than Millenials voted for a SINGLE Democratic candidate.
Because proportions and math are hard.
Bob In Portland
@goblue72: Yes.
Stillwater
@redshirt: No, I think his message is actually something people can get behind. It’s an important message, too. My comment was directed more at the way this whole primary has played out: when CLinton announced it was supposed to be a coronation; Bernie entered the race with the hope of pulling her and the part a bit to the left; DWS rigged the entire debate structure and etc. to limit Bernie’s exposure; etc etc. Now she’s in a real race, one she was supposed to receive only token resistance to because she was the consensus Dem candidate. She was The One.
Just like last time…
Look, lots of people don’t like Hillary’s politics, and plenty of em are within the Democratic party. I think that’s inarguable at this point. The next question is whether her unfavorables nationally are going to end up higher or lower than Trump’s or Cruz’s. And I think there is a very good chance they will be becuase both of those candidates are not only better at retail politics than she is, but her weakness happen to play right into their strengths (she’s an establishment triangulator down to the tips of her toenails).
The shorter is this: I much prefer Bernie’s policies, politics and positions to Hillary’s, but I think he has a higher ceiling in the general because he’s got less political baggage to be exploited by the exact thing Trump and Cruz are best at, both in their policy-points but in their retail politics as well.
daverave
Nooooooooooooooooooooo! Bloomberg not running for prez!
Ella in New Mexico
@Bob In Portland: PHEW! I was worried for a minute there ;-)
I do understand your choice and your positions. I will vote for Clinton in the fall should that be the option because in my state, for as few Electoral Votes as we have to offer, we literally loose entire statewide elections by less than 50 votes. I can’t risk that.
FlipYrWhig
@Keith G: But what Tom quoted isn’t especially lawyerly, is it? Somehow Bill Clinton has a reputation now as an effective political communicator but he’s always been verbose rather than pithy himself. And I don’t find Sanders to be especially economical either. Seems like the writer started with a contrast and went shopping for evidence to fit around it. This doesn’t seem all that incriminating to me.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: I’m voting for Sanders. That’s the first election on my calendar.
Bob In Portland
@Stillwater: Very good.
goblue72
@FlipYrWhig: You mean Scott Kleeb who ran in a district that was held by the GOP for almost 50 years, voted +50 for G.W. Bush, forced President Bush to make a personal appearance days before the election, made it the most expensive race in that district in decades, and finished 55-45? Kleeb punched completely above his weight class in that district.
chopper
@daverave:
it’s as if a million villagers’ voices cried and and were suddenly silenced.
Stillwater
@goblue72: And the state of the Democratic Party as whole.
Yes, excellent point. I totally agree.
Mr. Twister
@Stillwater: “when CLinton announced it was supposed to be a coronation” Got a link to the announcement or speech I missed that one.
FlipYrWhig
@Stillwater: Uh, so, Trump’s whole campaign is about the glories of kicking foreign ass, and Bernie Sanders always seems vaguely annoyed and bored by having to talk about foreign policy and national defense. That might be a weentsy problem in a general election.
goblue72
@redshirt: We should have left well the fuck alone. The option set isn’t “bomb or invade”. Maybe it is if you are a centrist Dem or just can resist punching hippies. But contrary to Democratic Establishment and Professor Silverman, the option set includes – “Don’t do anything and let the third world dictators vs. wanna be dictators punch each others clocks out”. If Europe wanted to get involved – let ’em. They suck at our national security teat well enough that they can go make a mess of it all by themselves.
redshirt
@Stillwater: Good response. I fully respect your position and mean no disrespect.
I view the Dem primary as pure intra-party squabbling, but ultimately of secondary concern when it comes to facing and beating the Repuke nominee, whomever he is. That’s the real fight and if Bernie is the nominee I will gladly and proudly vote for him.
But he won’t be. And so it dismays me to hear Bernie supporters say they won’t vote for the Democratic nominee in November if it’s not Bernie.
Bob In Portland
@Mr. Twister: There is a difference between metaphorical and literal. I note that this tactic of confusing the two is often used by BJers as a rhetorical tool. It’s as smart as someone saying you are full of shit and you arguing that, no, you’d recently evacuated your bowels.
So, who was the candidate who was determined to block Clinton’s Democratic nomination at the time when she announced? Biden? Please, we await your further wisdom.
redshirt
@goblue72: That’s naive of course. European security is our concern – quite literally. I’m sure you’ll disagree but that’s the naivety.
goblue72
@the Conster, la Citoyenne: You mean like President Obama?
dww44
@aimai: Agree with everything, except Bernie’s age. If elected he will be 75 at his inauguration and 79 at the end of his first term, thereby besting the current holder of oldest at inauguration and oldest at the end of his Presidency, St. Ronald Reagan.. If elected to a second term, he’d blow the second record out of the water by about 6 years.
Darkrose
Sorry, Bernie, but I’m just not buying this: Bernie Sanders: I’ve done marijuana twice..it made me cough a lot’ – video
You were an activist in the ’60’s and you only smoked weed twice? (Who “does marijuana”?) Not sure I can vote for you now.
goblue72
@redshirt: Are you seriously suggesting that Libya under Gaddafi was a meaningful threat to European security?
Really? When you make those kind of statements it make it pretty clear you are willfully ignorant of reality.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: If you want me to go through a point-by-point argument why I won’t vote for Clinton then please demand from the powers that be here that I be allowed to write a short essay on why I won’t. Otherwise, buck up. Clinton and Sanders are not interchangeable parts.
redshirt
@goblue72: They thought so. But I’m sure you know better.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: You need the Front Page to truly express yourself? Comments aren’t enough?
How about you compose it here and if it’s good enough a Front Pager can quote it?
FlipYrWhig
@goblue72: Was he a Bernie-esque liberal? See also Stephanie Herseth Sandlin. The successful Democrats from the plains haven’t followed the Sanders template, which is what FK was suggesting.
Mr. Twister
@Bob In Portland: Sorry, still waitin’ on that link.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: redshirt, have you noticed how many of our wars and regime changes over the last several decades seem to happen in places that are not threats to European security but produce petroleum products? Do you think that may have anything to do with our targets?
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: Yes, securing natural resources is an age old war rationale. Oil is pretty important to just about everything, hence, all the wars.
Chyron HR
@Mr. Twister:
Just look at how Clinton continued her campaign after a great man and true progressive like Bernie Sanders decided it was time to become President. And now she has the gall to keep winning. How entitled can Hillary get?
Bob In Portland
@Darkrose: If he was coughing, at least we know he inhaled. No, in the sixties a lot of people didn’t smoke marijuana or didn’t like it. The stuff you can buy over the counter today puts most 60s marijuana to shame.
Over the counter in a few selected states, like Oregon, where there is a fundraiser called “Burn one for Bernie”. We bought two.
dww44
@WarMunchkin: From your mouth to the Dem party leaders ears!:
There is nothing more important to assuring a victory in November than a focused on the ground GOTV effort. I was involved in 2008, 2012, and 2014 ( in our Senatorial effort, which we lost), and strongly believe that voter engagement will get the less likelys to the polls on election day.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: On what battlefield do you want your child to die?
Mr. Twister
@Bob In Portland: Yep, nope, haven’t seen that link yet bro. As they say “pics or it didn’t happen”.
Mr. Twister
@Chyron HR: Yes, how dare she !
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: Have you ever wondered why so many bad men live about petroleum deposits? Except for our exceptional friend in Saudi Arabia who cuts off heads.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: I’m hoping Ethiopia. Maybe in the South China Sea.
Goblue72
@redshirt: So basically war for oil is ok?
It’s either that or your position is that if the powers that be support war for oil, that it’s the right decision?
Or, you just aren’t that bright when it comes to your own internal logical inconsistencies.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: Indeed. Resources are valuable, making the holders of those resources rich, leading to wars and power politics. How shocking! Why can’t we just discuss what is best for everyone and do that instead?
redshirt
@Goblue72: I’m saying you’re naive and innocent to how this world actually works. But that’s cool. The world needs Berniebros too.
Betty Cracker
@redshirt: I wouldn’t worry about that too much. Whichever Dem prevails, almost all of his / her supporters will vote for whomever wins the nomination, especially when they get a gander at whichever hairball the GOP horks up.
Ryan
Also, if Sanders had gone first, he wouldn’t have had the issue framed such that he could simply approve.
Bob In Portland
One line I expect Sanders to use on the campaign (if he hasn’t already):
“Look inside your wallet. Do you have a social security card? Then you’re a card-carrying socialist.” If nothing else the day after he says it a lot of people will be leaving their social security cards on their dressers.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: How condescending. Unnecessary. Cheers.
Mr. Twister
@Bob In Portland: I know you’re avoiding me BiP, but I’m still waiting on that link.
redshirt
@Betty Cracker: Agreed. But there are few Bernie supporters here who have unequivocally said otherwise, so I’m interested in their rationale.
Mr. Twister
@redshirt: And more importantly how many exist.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: America has a world wide empire, the most powerful empire that’s ever existed. This might produce things you don’t like or don’t want to acknowledge. Like, the entirety of European military security is America’s responsibility.
Harsh, I know!
redshirt
@Mr. Twister: Nationwide I suspect less then a million but they’ll be over represented on the internet due to the nature of their dissent.
muddy
@Bob In Portland: I just got a replacement and it said don’t carry it around with you.
goblue72
@redshirt: God you are a moron. Your argument boils down to “the establishment is going to wage war for oil regardless, so we should just line up behind the establishment and go rah rah rah for our ‘team'”
Mr. Twister
@goblue72: I think he was kind of having you on a little bit, probably since your such a dick to everyone who disagrees with you. You seem rather humorless.
goblue72
@redshirt:
Moron. Unmitigated. You have so disappeared down a hole of mindless boosterism, blind forelock tugging and faux-realism as to constitute a celestial event.
redshirt
@goblue72:
Wow you just opened my eyes. We should stop using oil, develop local renewable resources, and power our modern, future economy with American jobs!
redshirt
@goblue72:
Probably true, but I have some faith your Bernieism will save me, America, and the world from such dark realities.
Felanius Kootea
@Ella in New Mexico: I am black. I’m a woman. I have a doctorate in the sciences. I have never lived in a ghetto. I have experienced racism.
If Bernie had worded his statement as you did, there would be no issue raised about tone-deafness. He didn’t. Many people understand that he meant well (see my previous comment at @Felanius Kootea) and have decided to give him the benefit of the doubt. You do him a disservice by acting like there was nothing wrong with his statement. It is a turn off. Frankly, I’m wondering whether you actually watched the debate or are just determined to attack postings that you see as pro-Hillary on this blog.
I will continue to donate to both Bernie and Hillary even if some of their supporters make me roll my eyes.
gwangung
@Felanius Kootea: He definitely means well, and he’s definitely teachable…but how long will the process take? And is it going to be substantially longer than with Clinton? I think those are fair and relevant questions….
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@goblue72: so all those excited young people are excited, but not yet. Kind of like that Revolution that Bernie thinks Mitch McConnell sees out his window.
If he says it, they will come.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
But it won’t happen with Bernie because Bernie is magic?
I wish we lived in the country you think we do.
chopper
@Ryan:
exactly.
Mark k
I know I’m late to the thread, but, I just wanted to point out that everyone seemed to miss that this part was a shot at Kasich, just in case and telegraphing/warning them, shot across the bow so to speak:
Linnaeus
@Betty Cracker:
Yeah, we heard this kind of thing back in 2008 when Obama won the nomination, but I don’t think that had any serious effect on Obama’s turnout.
Bob in Portland
@Felanius Kootea: @redshirt: So when we went we invaded Aghanistan as a police action and stayed for fifteen years for women’s rights, yada yada, you realized at the time our government was lying. And you’re okay with that?
Fine.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@goblue72:
He had his coalition. The AA community and other POC make up around 40 million reliable votes- Sanders would have a MUCH higher hill to climb for those votes. It’s really simple math- there aren’t enough white votes left for Sanders to make a difference.
Keith G
@goblue72: Jimminy Crickets, this is an highly accurate set up. That fact is evidenced by the reality that nonaligned political science types (eg Theda Skocpol) tend to say very similar things.
Similar, but not in total agreement. While Skocpol seems to agree that the Democrats have been less strategic than the opposition, she does talk about how the GOP is currently ripping itself apart.
She does note the groups of Americans who are doubtful that the leadership of either side will serve as protectors of the common folk’s needs.
Bob in Portland
@Felanius Kootea: It was an awful question ipso facto. If you have a blindspot you can’t see it. So if Clinton talks about attending black church services she isn’t answering the question. But it’s a question you can’t answer. Both candidates got a little staggered by that question. Yes, there are mistakes said here and there during the campaign but focusing on an inarticulate answer to an impossible question doesn’t really advance anyone’s understanding.
redshirt
@Bob in Portland: This may shock you but I don’t actually agree with W.’s decisions while President. I still vote for Al boring Gore.
redshirt
@Bob in Portland: Who did you vote for in 2000, by the way? Sorry if I’m intruding.
Bob in Portland
@Mr. Twister:I think you’ve come off the tracks too. This was generally about Clinton’s coronation this year. I didn’t write the original question asking you for a link, as I recall. I have no need to look for a link. Clinton was set up for the nomination. Last August I wouldn’t have paid any attention at all, considering the race already wrapped up.
We know that the coronation, which has been used often in the media, is figurative. It’s possible but highly unlikely that you misunderstood the original statement, nor does anyone here also care about any link to prove that Clinton was expected to be made an actual queen.
It was a fight between you and someone else about something that everyone who’s followed politics knows: Clinton was supposed to be the Democratic nominee without much interference. If you think that the field was wide open last year, then it’s incumbent on you to provide some link, not me.
Quite honestly, can’t you just take it out on your kids, or maybe punch a hippie? I have no time or interest to prove something that we all know. Work out your frustrations with someone else. Toodles.
chopper
@redshirt:
apparently ol’ bob voted for gore. and before that bill clinton twice. and after that kerry.
but he can’t make himself pull the lever for hilz cause “corporate dem”.
redshirt
@chopper: Such loyalty to the Democratic Party!
Bob in Portland
@redshirt: I voted for Gore. I’ve said the only time I didn’t vote for a Democratic presidential candidate was in 1980. Jimmy Carter had conceded to Reagan before I’d gotten home from work, so when I voted I chose a leftist third-party candidate (I seem to remember it as Benjamin Spock, but it’s irrelevant) because I wanted maximum value for my vote after the election was already over.
redshirt
Posting here as a non-zombie after the Zombie Wars.
True Human 1027 representing.
Felanius Kootea
@Bob in Portland: I’m assuming that you included me in this reply by accident. I’m a naturalized US citizen from Nigeria, a former colonial British state that I love but that is widely considered a basket-case by non-Nigerians. Please don’t get me started on the evils of disrupting other people’s countries for exploitative reasons couched as noble assistance and the long-lasting damage that results.
@Bob in Portland: I agree that it was an awful question and that’s mainly why I said I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I don’t want or need you or anyone else telling me how I get to think or feel about it. Totally not cool.
Bob in Portland
@chopper: Yes. And 2016 offers an alternative to a corporate Democrat. Also, and this is no endorsement for any Republican candidate, Clinton is the most war-mongering candidate of the bunch.
I am generally against war.
redshirt
@Bob in Portland: That’s cool man. I wish all our liberal votes won – the world would be a better place right now because of it. But no longer.
chopper
@Bob in Portland:
Jill stein is an alternative to “corporate dem”? one that wasn’t offered in the last 30 years?
Betty Cracker
@Linnaeus: I wonder how many of the folks who say they won’t vote for HRC if she wins are Green Party peeps anyway.
Bob in Portland
@Felanius Kootea: I apologize. It was a mistake. There are a lot of cross-conversations in the comments section and often someone gets linked when the intention was to link to someone else. I think I was trying to link to red shirt. I hope that one day Balloon Juice eventually changes its format so that replies to comments are adjacent to the original comment.
redshirt
@Betty Cracker: An insignificant percentage of people overall to be sure. But a select few are still pissed…
Bob in Portland
@chopper: chopper. We all grow and change. Some of us change and abandon beliefs when we outgrow them. I will not vote for someone I don’t support out of fear that a Republican will get elected. I voted for Bill Clinton in 1992 but wrote an editorial about the anti-labor consequences of NAFTA in December 1992. When I look back at the Clinton and Bush II years I find them sadly similar.
Mr. Twister
@Bob in Portland: Do tell.
redshirt
@Bob in Portland: What’s your question?
Felanius Kootea
@Bob in Portland: Understood.
chopper
@Bob in Portland:
well, if you’re telling us all that your “true liberal sensibilities” only really started kicking into gear a few years back then that’s fine, but then why do you keep bringing up your ‘liberal resume’ from 50 years ago?
it’s almost as if there’s something strangely, undescribably different about this one “corporate democrat” compared to all the other ones in the last 30-something years that you could pull the lever for. something hard to describe; like you just can’t put your finger on it, or cup it in your hands…
Linnaeus
@Betty Cracker:
I’ve wondered the same thing.
Callisto
@Bob in Portland:
Yet in 2012, rather than voting for Jill Stein, you voted for Barack “Let’s not jail the bankers, let’s drone brown people instead!” Obama.
I find it odd that as someone who came to ‘true progressivism’ only a few years ago, you get such joy out of lecturing everyone else on how inadequate their votes are. “Zeal of the converted”, I guess?
mclaren
@Linda Featheringill:
Hillary will point out that Trump is wholly owned by Wall Street and the big banks and he can’t put his hand on his own dick without getting prior approval from all the Wall Street oligarchs to whom he owes money.
Hillary will point out that Trump is so mobbed up that’s hilarious.
Hillary will point out that Trump is the oligarchy.
Hillary can laugh and say “Better to vote for someone who merely wants to be a member of the oligarchy, that for someone who already is.”
Same, set, match for Hillary.
mclaren
@goblue72:
Sure it is. When America descended into undeclared martial law after 9/11 and turned into an armed garrison state, we became the land of Forever War. Heads we bomb…tails we invade. See? Never say America has no foreign policy options!
Source: “Failure as a Way of Life: The logic of lost wars and military-industrial boondoggles,” William S. Lind, The American Conservative, 15 February 2016.
Paul in KY
@Felanius Kootea Certainly agree!!