Just another example of why the GOS doesn't understand politics
You've probably seen the weekly hit pieces on Jill Stein.
You can spot them by their 1) slanderous half-truths based on taking things out of context, and 2) drawing hyperbolic conclusions from that slander.
What you haven't seen is the same treatment for Libertarian Gary Johnson.
Based on their treatment at TOP you would think that Stein draws from potential Hillary supporters while Johnson draws from potential Trump supporters.
If you have a binary, left-right/Red-Blue view of the world this makes sense.
The problem is that the numbers (i.e. the facts) show something else.
I've taken these from realclearpolitics. They are polling averages, not individual polls.
A solid 6.1% lead in a two-way race.
Here's where the problem starts.
When you include just Johnson in a 3-way race, he subtracts -5.4% from Hillary, but only -4% from Trump.
Obviously Johnson hurts Hillary more than Trump.
Including Stein in a 4-way race subtract another -0.5% from Hillary and -0.2% from Trump.
Obviously Stein hurts Hillary more than Trump, but Johnson hurts Hillary nearly 5 times more than Stein.
Ignoring Johnson while slandering Stein is not only a waste of resources, but also displays what the Democrats have been all about since the 90's: punch the hippies, panders to the center-right.
Just like Republicans, Democrats are reality challenged. Neither can do math.
Comments
Cults
have never been big on math and that's what GOS is.
Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.
I just spotted something interesting
Johnson draws almost all of his support from Hillary and Donald (8.5 from 9.4).
Stein, OTOH, draws a lion's share of her support from the undecided (1.9 from 3.1).
Stein draws about 20% of Bernie's "disloyal" donor pool
At least among those that are willing to back another candidate (which is only about 1.5% of the total pool.)
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
The same person wrote a diary about Johnson
And it's so full of shit, I couldn't read it.
Johnson has this on his website
The diarist must have forgotten how Obama didn't filibuster the FISA bill but expanded the NSA spying program. And that he pressured congress to renew the Patriot act, but according to the diarist, it just a few democrats not the party as a whole.
"government to look through your cell phone”? This is news to me, and news to most of us here on Daily Kos, I think. I would suspect that most of us oppose data snooping, especially mass metadata collection. There are policies enacted by certain individuals in the Democratic Party that seem to support such things, but I do not believe this is the statement of the Party as a whole. (And of course, the Patriot Act originally had mass bipartisan support brought on by the hysteria in the wake of 9/11, and since then has been controversial on both sides of the aisle.) Overall a poor attempt at false equivalence."
Again that so many people can be blind to the facts is just mind blowing.
And remember that this diarist is a new member who is one of a slew that only joined DK this year and write most of the pro Hillary diaries.
Back to the Stein diary, this comment stood out.
I'd like to see elfling back that up with some facts.
Can't say I've seen any Kossack running for President.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Don't hold your breath
In my interactions with elfling, she is long on assertion and short on facts. When challenged, she usually retreats first to clumsy straw-man argumentation and then silence. She's as lightweight as the blog has become.
Please help support caucus99percent!
I wonder how this diarist would dissect this article.
And how the rest of the Obama supporters could defend what's written in it.
Remember how upset we were with the way Bush ignored Katrina? I do know that Obama was very informed on what was happening in Louisiana after the floods and that he was involved in getting federal help to those who were affected by the floods, but it's the rest of the article that compares what he said about the actions Bush took regarding the war on Iraq and what he has done since he became president.
I don't think I'm explaining what I mean, but read this article and it should be clear what I'm trying to say.
(Migraine interfering with my thought process)
But so many of us joined DK because of the Iraq war, but once Obama was elected president, people gave him a pass on what he did and is still doing.
I keep reading how he ended the Iraq war even though he was trying to keep troops there after the SOFA made him withdraw the troops, but he keeps sending more troops back there over the Iraqi government's objections.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/08/29/president-obamas-now-watch-this-d...
Counterpunch punches, that's for sure.
They're not always balanced. But much of what they say here is true.
The golfing while Louisiana drowns thing, though, has been mentioned before. The LA governor even asked him to stay away. When a President comes to town, local police are put under the jurisdiction of the Secret Service and their first duty is to protect the President. No more rescues of the locals. And a no-fly zone is imposed. No more medevac choppers. So it really is best that he stayed away. And as I understand it, FEMA did a great job this time, much more effective under Obama, who kept track from afar. He should visit after cops and rescue personnel have completed their work.
That said, golfing at this time is terrible optics, and he should have left and gone home. Act concerned, even if he didn't have to.
Then again, he's no longer running, so probably doesn't care all that much about how he is perceived.
As for Over There, they'd probably start with "Nuh uh. Never happened that way!" and end with "Get outta here! Who needs ya?"
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
I was aware that he was asked to stay away
For the reasons you wrote, but it's the rest of the article I thought nailed his hypocrisy.
I recently read an article about what happens if the TPP doesn't get passed by Obama after he had spent over 7 years working on it. Imagine if he had put that much effort into the ACA? But I don't think he wanted it to be anything close to what he campaigned on.
And what he has allowed the countries that are involved in the TPP to do disgusts me to no end!
I am beyond disappointed with what Obama has done during his presidency. I remember him saying that he would rather be a one term president because he tried to get decent legislation passed than a two term president that didn't even try to help make people's lives better.
Yes the republicans blocked a lot of his legislative agenda, but remember during his first term how he pre caved on many bills and gave the republicans more than they asked for?
He signed the farm bill that saw over $4 million in cuts to the food stamps program while giving more tax deals to the large factory farms that rich corporations own. Why not use a signing statement like Bush did when there was something in the bills he didn't like or send it back to congress and tell them no more cuts to social programs because people are hurting enough already?
Instead of letting the Bush tax cuts expire, he extended them, again going back on his campaign promise.
He extended the patriot act, expanded the NSA's power, oversaw the increase of black people being murdered by the cops and continued to give them military weapons.
And let's not forget what his DHS did to OWS!
I am astonished that the first black person to be elected president is okay with slavery and human trafficking. By letting Malaysia continue to do those activities, he is saying that he's okay with it. Can you imagine what Martin Luther King would say if he had been alive to see the things that Obama has done to this country and the world?
IMO, Obama should go down in history as one of the worst presidents.
Can anyone say that he has made their lives better than what they were 8 years ago?
Millions of people lost their homes because of what the banks did and not one CEO has been held accountable.
Millions also lost their pensions and instead of fining the banks and putting the money back in those pensions, Obama let the CEOs of the banks receive huge bonuses.
After the BP disaster in the gulf, Obama opened up more areas for drilling. After touring flooded Louisiana he opened up more areas of drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
The United States is waging wars in over 8 countries without a declaration of war from congress, has been responsible for 2 coups in Honduras and Ukraine and even more people have seen their country and lives destroyed because of Obama and Hillary.
People wanted Bush and Cheney held accountable for war crimes, yet say nothing when Obama does the same things that are even worse than what they did.
And Hillary says that she is going to continue Obama's legacy, and people are going to vote for her.
Figure this out!
I know this is a rant, but I wanted to express how I feel about how Obama sold us out with his bait and switch campaign.
--
Re: First black president
Remember that Obama's father came from Africa. None of his ancestors were slaves. He grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii (a multi-racial environment). He never lived as a black man in America until he was out of college and a grown man. This makes him radically different from Harold Washington or Jesse Jackson. In America, black is not just a skin color but a way of life, a group of shared experiences, that he has only read about, not lived.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Yes, but I don't have to grow up in an abusive household
to have empathy for those who do.
I think Snoop's right on all the above issues. He has been beyond disappointing and Her Heinous will be more the same at best.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
I agree with you. It was an explanation, not an excuse.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
I love that they remain so willfully blind.
And I hope it barrels them over in November like a herd of wild mustangs. Failing to consider Johnson's effect could mean some really unpleasant surprises. And it couldn't happen to a better bunch of partisan hacks.
Jacobin Interview With Jill Stein
A little self promoting of my post here: http://caucus99percent.com/content/jacobin-interview-jill-stein
And particparticularly this response:
Polling aside, Jill Stein poses an ideological and political threat to New/Dems and The GOS that Gary Johnson does not pose.
"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn
They can't admit that
If they acknowledged that at the GOS then they would have to admit to being a center-right corporate party.
Hahahahaha
They've been a center-right corporate party social media arm for years. They put up with critics like us with increasing bad temper over time, but with the Clintonite takeover of the DLC, that was no longer an option. But of course they're "liberal" and "progressive" because they swallow the social wedge issue bait the Democratic party dangles out there.
Kathleen Geier pinned them like a butterfly to a display board recently:
And their dutiful little cheerleaders like the gang at TOP these days.
Please help support caucus99percent!
Yes and no
Yes, it's a meaningless term devoid of ideological content.
No, it does signify something...skin color, genitals, and Team Blue.
To them, maybe
I found it funny that the most dedicated practitioners of identity politics were the angriest when the topic of identity politics in the Democratic party came up for brief discussion last year. The censor hammer came down mighty fast, too.
Please help support caucus99percent!
What amazed me the most was the censorship by Markos
Most of the country hadn't even voted on March 15 when he decided that Hillary was going to be the nominee and no one could say anything bad about her even though it was the truth.
Any criticism of her was declared right wing talking points even if the information came from 'progressive' websites.
He made the decision that HIS website was going to be for Hillary come hell or high water, period.
And then there was the other ways to describe criticism of her. Sexist, misogynist, and the usual term, witch hunt
Then there was the influx of new members that got trusted user status in a blink of an eye, the pile on of HR'd any comment that didn't show enough deference to her.
And the front page was all Trump all the time or what some other republican said, but no mention of any down ballots candidates.
If the site isn't glorifying Hillary's latest, bestest speech ever, it demeaning everything Trump says or the weekly smear jobs on Jill Stein calling her an anti vaxxer and anti science no matter how many times she explains her statements.
Once a month Markos writes a diary about how well the site is doing while in the real world on real progressive websites I see comments about how much daily kos has changed and how many people have either been banned or just left.
And the kosbots like to go to the websites that sprung up after March and report back like little school kids about the things we are writing about.
I don't know how many times I have seen someone write that the person is on the wrong website and should come over here instead.
I am amazed how some of the strongest Bernie supporters are now writing diaries about how amazing Hillary is.
Right on!!!!
The only way to beat the hildebeast is
TO VOTE TRUMP.
Tic-tac-toe thinking
Not to win, but to block the opponent. Or, why almost all tic-tac-toe games end in a draw.
Doesn't work so well in the real world - Awful vs. Awful, you still get Awful.
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
I read that the number was more like 55%.
I find that more believable, though still a bit high--if 80% of that 55% turns out to vote, I'll eat my hat.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
They are so drastically underestimating the draw Hillary will
face.
I think those numbers are flawed, I doubt many Trump supporters are going to defect to Johnson, he is libertarian and they are against borders in general, and that is one of Drumph's biggest rallying cries. There are a bunch more examples like this as well.
I think both Johnson and Stein will draw much more from possible Hillary voters than Trump voters for a wide variety of reasons. (Maybe if I get bored I will throw a more detailed essay on why I believe this to be the case.)
I think the most likely scenario is Clinton's turnout is going to be incredibly low due to lack of enthusiasm, the constant scandals, etc, and the draw is going to effect her much more than Trump.
But that being said, when you can rig the results I guess it doesn't matter...
Embrace the Suck - Clinton 2016 {sigh}
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Your take on Johnson matches the July donor numbers
He draws the most from the GOP field, some from Cruz and Bernie and very little from Trump:
But I don't see much in the way of Clinton money moving to him. Of course those who put down money have no reason to switch when their horse is winning; those without money may feel differently.
Stein in that chart gets almost all her new support from Berners (the rest is just noise.) But then "possible Hillary voters" are mostly Berners too - although her second draw is... The GOP field (surprise surprise).
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
I don't see Clinton money going anywhere
... except to cover their bets with Trump. Hillary's donors do so for transactional reasons. They're buying a service (more than a product). Gary Johnson isn't selling either, and Jill Stein wants to shut the market down.
Please help support caucus99percent!
Johnson is going to make an impact
He's not going away
Do the polls or 538 really matter?
After all, they who count the vote, matter more than those who vote
and I know this is ZH, but can anything be discounted this election?
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-29/election-fraud-underway-nbc-aff...
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
Oddly enough, in this climate--
polls are sometimes accurate.
Wouldn't trust Nate, probably; was pretty clear where his allegiances lay.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Agree, polls are sometimes accurate
But this cycle Nates been wrong more than he's been right and most of the
corporate stream polls didn't get much right.
It will get more interesting as the election draws nearer, altough the hill had ads running here in her home state of Illinois not to long ago, I'm still
scratching my head on that considering Illinois was a given.
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
Speaking of Clinton ads...
I was in my Dr.'s office today here in Florida waiting for my appointment and a Clinton commercial came on the TV.
As I was sitting there reading, I heard one older lady speaking to a younger. The younger had said something to the effect of, "Ugh, I am a Democrat and I just cannot see voting for her, this may be the first election I skip a section of the ballot if I even bother going, every choice we have this year is between bad or worse."
The other replied, "I'm a democrat too, but this year I am voting for Stein I think. The other two choices stink."
The younger lady asked, "Who's that?" to which the other provided a pretty good summation of the Green Party Platform.
After that brief exchange the first stated with an almost excited tone, "Oh! I am gonna go check them out! Looks like I may have someone to vote for after all!"
I just sat there and smiled and my day brightened up just a little bit.
That my friends is how the movement will continue to grow, all of us out there every day trying to plant at least a few seeds wherever we see some fertile soil.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
I haven't had any luck yet
but planting seeds is the way to go, my wife is finally coming
around after always telling me I'm so negative about the hill.
My gut keeps telling me that Stein is way more popular than
any poll I've seen, and that's before I take my probiotics.
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
This election has not conformed to the norms of recent elections
Nate Silver's approach assumes a consistency of voter behavior that no longer holds because the negatives for the two candidates are so large. This is a black swan election.
I can see surprises everywhere.
It's been way to predictable so far.
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
I think polls have the same accuracy they've always had, but
…there's a new phenomenon in full bloom for 2016.
People have independently and spontaneously started lying to pollsters.
Weird but true. There are even a couple of Reddits on the trend. I definitely don't trust polling this year. On that note, the Brits also lied to the pollsters about their "Brexit" vote earlier this year. The outcome was a real surprise.
Is this' for certain sure'
Is this' for certain sure' not a case of these polls being adjusted in the hope of influencing herd behaviour by claiming that everyone really is jumping off the cliff, so they'd better join them?
Remember that there are international/global self-interests in the process of literally taking over the world and investing billions to embezzle the Earth and to con the population into thinking that traitors can pass/'agree' to illegal and unconstitutional 'laws' which are legal and binding upon them all and which make them eminently disposable serfs.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Yes, seems suspicious to me too. Just when the corporate types
are taking over everything, "people are lying to pollsters". What other reason could there possibly be for polls that don't comport with reality? Look, squirrel!
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Shhhhh!
Don't let them know!
Please do continue, Hillbots....
A corollary of this
might be that the stronger Stein and/or Johnson become, the better Trump's chances will be. I think this possibility is what motivates much of TOP's consternation and animosity. It is not an entirely unreasonable concern.
native
I think come the election, Johnson will pull from both Hill and
Trump. For those who are right-moderate ish, don't want establishment and don't want complete nutty whack job, they'll vote Johnson.
Hill will take the establishment votes leftish to right.
Hopefully Stein will take the moderate-left to left. And win!
And watch Hill's face when some other woman is President first!
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Stein's real threat to TOP and the Democrats
Corporate Democratic leadership have long taken their voters for granted, and justify their complacency and contempt with the classic phrase, "Where else they gonna go?"
Well, if Democratic voters discover they really have somewhere else to go, besides "Away," then Democratic pols may not be able to take their voters for granted anymore. They might have to actually try to earn votes. And they're so rusty at that they probably can't even remember how. That's a serious threat to the Democratic party. It's almost as ripe for extinction as the Republican party, but it doesn't know it.
Please help support caucus99percent!
polls without Stein are worthless
it's like asking
"who will you vote for? Your choices are the Mad Bomber, the Hairball, some guy you don't know much about?"
"well I'll vote for the person you didn't include in your poll"
"No, you can't choose that person. She's not in the poll. We'll just exclude you"
Because these polls would have us believe that Bernie's supporters are a zillion times more likely to vote for an e-Republican libertarian. Which makes the polls .....you know I'm repressed and can't use naughty language, right? Well I'm thinking of a word I can't use!
FYI
Wow! That map is filling in nicely since the last one I posted
a month or so back!
Could the Greens finally be getting their shit together now that the time is ripe for it? We can't know for sure, but if a bunch of Berners do decide to go "Green" we could indeed be seeing the creation of a viable new party.
I have stated before that I think the green party isn't the place we should be for the long term and that forming another party and having a coalition with the Greens being the better choice in order to avoid the possible infighting from a bunch of "New People trying to take over our party" and whatnot that we may face with the Greens, and their VP pick kinda solidified that opinion, but the more I consider it the more open I am to the idea of "Occupy Green" to build our movement around their already established semi-functional infrastructure.
I really wish she would have selected a better choice for her VP though, it just doesn't seem like the choice a serious contender would make with the other options she could have had open to her.
Heck Cornell West would have been a better choice, and I don't think he would be the best person for the role either, but at least he is a known quantity in the progressive community.
This selection almost makes it feel like a vanity campaign. (Before I get slammed, I know that this is not the case, but perceptions do matter.)
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Jill Stein on her VP Choice
Jill Stein:
From her Jacobin interview:
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/08/jill-stein-green-party-bernie-sanders...
"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn
One thing I found out about Baraka
is that at the time of Katrina and flooding of New Orleans, he was calling for the displaced inhabitants to be designated internal refugees. He sounds to me like a person of sense and I think he deserves some national exposure.
Mary Bennett
Alabama and Virginia are now Green
I count 451 electoral votes with another 13 filed.
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
fucked
Did you mean fucked? Or fucking rigged, perhaps?
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
heh...good enough! My x key is broken
no matter how hard I hit it it won't say "x". So that's an ex-Republican, not an e-Republican. I'll have to take this machine in and get it fixxed because it's not very exxciting trying to use the letter x and getting blanks...or not even blanks, just nothing.
There is another possibility.
I think it's quite likely that many of the defections from Hillary to Johnson are by Republicans who really want neoliberal economics but not Hillary. Hillary is for the Republican/conservative agenda without the overt craziness but is also a terrible candidate. Johnson is for the same agenda but is not Hillary.
-Greed is not a virtue.
-Socialism: the radical idea of sharing.
-Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
John F. Kennedy, In a speech at the White House, 1962
That might be true
but it doesn't change the electoral equation.
Of course not, it's just an aspect you didn't bring up. n/t
-Greed is not a virtue.
-Socialism: the radical idea of sharing.
-Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
John F. Kennedy, In a speech at the White House, 1962
The fact that Johnson used to be a Republican
Can't hurt in the eyes of Republicans who can't stomach Trump.
Beware the bullshit factories.
Same with Bill Weld ...
perhaps? I lived in MA when he was governor and IIRC (I didn't follow politics then) he was pretty well liked.
Their are actually some pretty significant differences between
those two.
For example, Clinton is totally behind maintaining the War on Drugs, foreign interventionism and Military bases all over the globe whereas the Libertarians are staunchly opposed to those things.
For those reasons alone if it looks like Johnson has a chance to actually win, it could be the only thing to get me to switch my vote from Stein to Johnson.
He is nuttier than a turd after a case of Snickers bars, but at least he isn't a warmonger and I do agree with him on more things than I don't... (Just not as many as with Stein, I am almost 90% in alignment with her goals.)
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
He was my Governor back in the day
Johnson was the Governor of NM when I lived out there. He was not all that bad actually. He actually would work with the Democrats in the state house and stuff actually got done. Stuff that actually helped the state and the citizens in it. Republicans in the state were trying to take him down all the time. I was not surprised he went Libertarian in the end. My vote is still for Jill stein, but in NC she was not a gimme for ballot access. My 2nd choice was Johnson based on personal experiences.
War, War Never Changes - Fallout Series
Agreed.
I didn't feel like writing a long post so used a shorthand method. My mistake.
You are right about the significant difference on militarism and drugs. My problem is with his Austrian neoliberal economics which are what are really causing all the militarism, etc., because of the greed inherent in the system and the corporatist mentality that goes with it. Let me elaborate a little.
We were falling into the trap when Eisenhower warned us about the "military-industrial complex," but we still had humanist, New Deal policies that we all agreed on. Then Reagan sold us neoliberalism and fear, and the subsequent administrations have been very effective at making them acceptable and "normal". Johnson is unabashedly a devotee of Austrian economics and supports the TPP which effectively voids any signatory's sovereignty. He may want to get rid of military bases and be against foreign intervention, but I can't see how an administration based on neoliberal economic theory will be able to justify reining in the defense industry or any other industry, for that matter. (I recommend James Galbraith's various writings on this subject. While "The End Of Normal" deals with inequality, I think it also shows the absurdity of Austrian/neoliberal economic policy. I really think the Austrian School is too extreme for actual implementation. It seems more like intellectual fun and games for people who read economics. I am not an Economist. I just read stuff.)
I don't use drugs so the legalization issue is not of much importance to me personally; however, it's more and more obvious to more and more people that war is not the way to solve that issue either. For one thing it's too expensive. It looks to me as if legalization is imminent if for no other reason than that our corporate masters may think that a sedated populace is easier to control (see "Brave New World").
To sum up, I think that Johnson is not in our best interests because Austrian economics is not in our best interest. The neoliberals have pretty much proven that.
-Greed is not a virtue.
-Socialism: the radical idea of sharing.
-Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
John F. Kennedy, In a speech at the White House, 1962
This election should be about Stein vs Johnson
There really needs to be some youtube debates between the two. Maybe the Clintonites are telling the media to include Johnson in the corporate megaphone debates to put the kabash on any Stein - Johnson collaboration for their own debates.
Beware the bullshit factories.
Honestly?
It should have been about Bernie vs Trump, because data seems to indicate that Trump really did win his primary.
I think Bernie v Trump expresses better where the majority of the people are. Hillary's got a sizable chunk of the top 10% of the economic ladder, and she's got majorities of black people over 45 and white & Latino people over 50. Her support starts to drop off under 60, drops off seriously under 50, and under 45 it craters. She's losing 1/2 of *my* generation, FFS, and we're a low-water mark of sorts for leftism! She's losing the folks in between us and the millenials, and she's losing the millenials hardcore. Something like 58% of the people dislike and distrust her. That number isn't improving, after a month or more of her being unimpeded by Bernie Sanders and contrasted with a foaming Trump. Never has so much been done by so many for so little.
Bernie vs Trump was what America actually chose.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Nothing could be more obvious: The Populist Revolution
Did folks miss two Outsiders, who for most of the Primary race were poised to topple the Establishment ideology of both Parties.
The people did that.
They rejected the status quo and what the US stood for.
To add insult to injury: Not only did the Outsiders shake the foundation of both parties, but Trump is not a Republican and Bernie is not a Democrat.
It's like the cat peeing in your suitcase when he figures out you're planning a vacation.
I meant going forward from here, not legitimacy-wise
Just saying we shouldn't play the establishment game and pretend that only Hillary and Trump count. F**k their contrived, manipulative debates. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson need to discuss having their own, real debates. Hillary and Trump would be too scared to join in.
Beware the bullshit factories.
You know that's right!
Preach it.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
My sleazy poll at TOP a week ago shows 60/40 Corporate/Stein
Not very scientific, but I asked everyone to rank the other three:
As one might expect, they prefer corporate types to real progressives.
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
Shocking!
Or not.
about the Johnson campaign:
His one path to the presidency is to carry enough states to deny the election to either of the major party candidates. That strategy relies on neither one winning in a landslide.
His best bet is Utah, where he is now ( latest poll I could find was in late July) at 26%. Trump is leading at 29% and Clinton has 27%.
Johnson is the sort of candidate Western voters like, laid back, low key, not formal or fancy, but with a solid record of varied achievement--two term governor, successful business owner, mountain climber. He is not good at interviews, and I am not at all surprised that Stein could out debate him.
What you need to understand about Utah, and Mormons, is that Mormons are perhaps the most successful minority group in America--course it didn't hurt to look like the majority. They are NOT ignorant hillbillies passing around snakes; Mormons are connected. There is significant Mormon presence in the FBI, CIA, other intelligence agencies, the officer corps, indeed throughout govt. and the higher echelons of business as well. In time honored minority fashion, once one opens a door, others can follow. Their schools and universities are as good as any and young people are brought up to be polite, diligent and successful. The cute kids on bikes "on mission" are only incidentally spreading the word of God, their real job is making the connections which will help their future careers. The point being that these folks already knew all about Trump before he showed up in their primary--and Clinton as well--probably know more dirt than has yet been revealed, and are not too impressed. Besides, Melania is a bridge too far. Mormons might have mistresses, might even have second wives stashed in distant places, as has been rumored, but nevertheless are big on marriage for life and "honoring" their (official) spouses. Appearances are important for Mormons, and nice Mormon boys DO NOT marry call girls.
The libertarians are calling for a non interventionist foreign policy, and drawdown of overseas forces and bases; my guess is that the Mormon minority, with its members salted throughout intelligence and the military, has a pretty good idea of just how unsustainable our present posture really is.
I would look for Johnson to do quite well in Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, wherever there is a significant Mormon presence, not because he is one of them, he isn't, but because he isn't Trump or a Democrat.
Mary Bennett
There's a strong Mormon presence in AZ
Just guessing, but they may also come out strong for Johnson there.
~annominous
Granted
but will not Hispanics carry AR and NM for Clinton?
There is also a strong Mormon presence in Eastern OR, and I think, WA as well...now if Libertarians and Rs could split the conservative vote in those two states, keeping in mind that Bernie won big in both, maybe Stein might have half a chance to come out on top? Just dreaming, I know.
Mary Bennett
imo AZ will probably go GOP, hope I'm wrong
I was raised in NM and lived in eastern OR, AZ, MT, CO and ID. Where the Mormons are strong it goes GOP ... until this year, maybe.
I think there's a lot of misunderstanding about the hispanic vote in NM that persists because we only have 5 Electoral College votes, so no one gives our electorate much thought. It's important to distinguish between the native hispanic population here (the ancestors of these folks came here before the place was in the USA, they were the ones who stole the place from the native americans fair and square, and whatever else they are, they are not immigrants) and the recent hispanic immigrants. Some of the old-timer hispanics vote democratic as a pushback to the strongly-conservative (formerly democratic and now republican) "Bourbon-democrat" power coming from the ranchers and ag folks in the south part of the state, and as pushback against the old timer gopers who supported the theft of property from their ancestors during the post-civil-war era (Santa Fe Ring). Some old-timer hispanics, a significant minority, vote gop because they are "family-value" anti-choice conservatives, following guidance of the RCC. While it's true that recent hispanic immigrants trend democratic over immigration issues, most have not obtained their citizenship and actually don't vote, no matter what the gop propagandists assume. There's not a lot of solidarity between the old-timers and the recent immigrants, although it seems to me that there may be more than there used to be. It's equally important, from my personal observations, to note that the killer cops here have tended to single out down-on-their-luck hispanics, which has horrified the rest of us. But some of those killer cops are themselves hispanics. It's complicated. Recall that NM went for GW in 2004, and currently has a democratic state senate and a gop state house and guvnah (Guvnah Pizza). Ugh. And we have our share of RWNJs. Double Ugh.
I wonder if AZ is truly in play. Hillary's history as a goldwater girl may help her in AZ, we will see. It's complicated there, too. The Mormons are a large gop voting block, but the state is also overrun by generic tin-foil-hat gotp nut jobs. The growth of the RWNJ population seems to increase in communities around the military bases, as if the gop has some kind of lock on imperialistic sentiments, go figure. (In NM we have more than our share of military bases, same as in AZ and in the deep south, think Tejas and Floriduh. Military installations represent an insidious form of federal welfare and imo have supported the local population growth of rah-rah "patriotic" RWNJ defense-industry "takers").
The Mormons have a strong presence concentrically around Utah, but so far as I can tell not enough population strength to actually swing a national election their way anywhere but maybe AZ.
~annominous
Nevada as well.
They are pretty influential in a "Behind the scenes" sorta way in that state big time.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Thank you for that detailed analysis.
What is a RWNJ. Right Wing.......?
I have lived in Eastern and Western OR, ID, and CA, central valley, not a nice place, IMHO.
The cop who shot Philandro Castile, and then just stood there, not calling an ambulance, is Hispanic, a detail some would like us to overlook.
Mary Bennett
RWNJ = right wing nut job nt
~annominous
If only someone would do an RCV poll.
After people grasp the concept that they can re-select if their first choice doesn't win, a poll might produce a very different result.
For those who still don't know, RCV is ranked choice voting.
Spot on on this one. Dem
Spot on on this one. Dem establishment fears the left more than their neoliberal rivals at the GOP.
We are rising, however. How to best proceed is the question. For those that want to submarine the process, I'd try to take a few scalps (so to speak) this year. DWS in FL23 has to go, regardless if she wins the primary or not.
However, we need the POTUS and Senate to get the Supreme CT nominee we need to overturn Citizen's United and Hobby Lobby and such. If the HillBill duo betrays us on TPP, Wall St, min wage, etc, we should revolt in midterms next time. Big time.
I know others disagree. And I'm fine with that. Of course, if you live in a red state, I'd vote for Stein in a heartbeat. I did last time in OH, anyway.