Some analysis of the Sane Debbie vs. Cenk Uygur Perspectives
I found WindDancer13's blog entry this morning very informative re: the current debate among Sanders 'revolutionaries' as to how we ought to be focusing ourselves from this point on.
I can tell you that while I agree with much that Sane Debbie has to say, I actually lean more toward Cenk's take on how Sanders followers might best respond to a Hillary Clinton nomination.
My perspective is ultimately informed by my awareness of just how difficult it is for economic progressives to prevail over the the massed resources of the corporate elite during a general election.
Yes, I think it is quite probable that Bernie Sanders would have become the Dem Party's nominee if nefarious doings by Clinton lackeys had not swung things in her favor (not just the cheating at the polling sites, but also the sophisticated character assassination strategy they orchestrated).
But I've never been under any illusions that it would have been easy for Bernie to win the general election against any Republican candidate had he been able to win the nomination outright.
Yes, I believe he would have indeed fared better than Hillary in the GE due to the support he would have rallied from among Independents, but I've seen the Republican slander machine work with extraordinary effectiveness (Karl Rove era) and this time the character assassination campaign would have enjoyed unlimited funding, thanks the the Citizens United decision.
For Bernie's revolutionaries, it would have been a titanic struggle for The Good against much corporate Evil, an emotional moment for the ages.
But it would have been extremely difficult to overcome the "Rumor of Bernie Sanders" that they would have created, just like Clinton did, because I don't think it would have been possible to raise the $2 billion that it would likely have cost to prevail over the Republicans' slander.
If you have any doubts about this, just look at how Hillary was able to create a negative image of Bernie Sanders in the minds of people (Democrats) who are far more likely than anyone else to warm up to his ideology.
I feel quite certain that the only way Bernie would have had a chance to overcome the Republican assault on his 'reputation' is if the rest of the Democratic party were to fall in line behind him and enthusiastically support his GE run.
Clearly, Bernie has always felt the same way, which is why he even bothered to run for the Democratic Party's nomination. In his mind, the revolution he envisioned required an absolute victory of his ideas over the Centrists' within the Dem Party.
And yet, it turned out that the Centrists did have enough power/influence to damage his reputation within the minds of roughly half of the Dem party membership.
Hoping for a big general election run was well worth all of our efforts, but the sober reality is that we need to first win over the people who are ideologically most receptive to the message before we can succeed in finally defeating The Oligarchy.
Surely this is THE first lesson that Sanders revolutionaries need to absorb at the present moment, which is that a way must be found to win over the vast majority of those who identify with the Democratic party. I definitely think this can be done over a period of time and I am looking forward to the educational campaign that is needed.
IMO, Bernie's awareness of this fundamental political reality is why he has been trying to convince the Dem party's establishment elite that he is ultimately a team player. IF Hillary's campaign continues to go south (e.g., her polling numbers vs. Trump continue to decline, or an indictment is announced), Bernie needs to be in a position within the perceptions of the party elite (think Joe Biden) where they can get behind his bid for the nomination.
This is where I depart from Sane Debbie's analysis and lean toward Cenk's. At the present time, there is still the outside chance that Bernie could become the nominee. Bernie is doing what he needs to do, Debbie, in order to keep this possibility alive.
.
Having said all of that, I must also mention that---because I believe that the Sanders Revolution's first priority is to win over/convert the Dem party---I think this may be the moment in time when it actually makes sense to give the Centrists in the Dem Party the reward they so richly deserve for the calumnies they perpetrated against Bernie Sanders.
I can tell you that soon after the New York results, my position has been that I either would not vote at all in November, or that I would write in Bernie Sanders name on the ballot. I've said that there is only one person who could conceivable persuade me to vote for Hillary Clinton, and that is Bernie Sanders.
Nevertheless, there are three reasons why I think it would be a good idea for all Bernie Sanders supporters to not vote for Hillary, no matter what kind of reason Bernie might give us to do so:
- There just isn't enough of a difference between Clinton and Trump to make me feel that a disaster could be avoided if the perceived Lesser Evil is elected. Indeed, Hillary being to the right of Trump on foreign policy makes me feel that she could actually end up being the Greater Evil. (War/Peace issues are very important to me...they are the reason why I supported Obama over Clinton in 2008.)
- At the present time, nothing will discredit the Centrists' superior position within the Democratic Party as much as them failing spectacularly at their approach to choosing the party's nominee. They rolled the dice when they decided to go negative against Bernie in January, knowing full well that they were taking a chance that could ultimately destroy the party's unity. Well now let them reap the bitter harvest of their dastardly and immoral attacks on a true friend of the party.
- It would provide a great deal of emotional satisfaction to anyone who feels like me to see these Centrist bastards lose in spectacular fashion. Their gambit all along was that they could trash Bernie and his followers for months and then be able to exploit their fervor against the Republican monster after their chosen candidate won the nomination. It would be pure justice to see them receive the just penalty for their sins. With so little at stake between Clinton and Trump, now is the time for such a dramatic withholding of support for it could ultimately produce great dividends for the Political Revolution we seek...
Comments
agree: I think Billary is the worse choice; greater of 2 evils
agree with the diary, Cenk is right.
Sea Turtle
The assumption is being made that
Donald Trump actually has policies. He makes contradictory pronouncements all the time, but he has no coherent policies, let along strategies for implementation. That alone is a huge negative for me that makes him even worse than Hillary.
Secondly, he is clearly unstable, speaks and acts before he thinks.
I have the same desire expressed in this essay: that Hillary and the Democratic Party be humiliated so that the rest of us have a chance to gain power. I have no illusions about the damage she can and likely will do as co-President, along with her power hungry and unscrupulous husband. However, IMHO, Trump has the capacity to do even more lasting damage. It is definitely a choice between death by many small cuts or several sword swipes, but I cannot convince myself that allowing Donald Trump to burn the place down is a way forward.
Which leaves us with trying to figure out how we can stymie Hillary and Bill. Perhaps it will have to be along the lines of what the Republicans have done to Obama. And may or may not do to Hillary. If she's sufficiently amenable to compromise to prove she can "do something, anything," we'll be fighting a two-front war against both parties, which is more or less what we're already doing. We need to get more allies in state and federal legislatures. Give our local and state Democratic Parties hell. We aren't going to win this going top down. Or in one or even several election cycles.
This is why I think he's slightly LESS dangerous
He literally has NO thought-out positions. A president can't just make laws on the fly, he/she must work with Congress.
Donald Trump has no clue how any of this actually works, and while he would surely spout his mouth on and embarrass the entire nation, he is unlikely to get anything done at all.
Hillary on the other hand WILL get things done, but they will be bad things.
I'm not yet resigned to having either of them, though. I'm still waiting for it all to play out.
But I can't in good conscience vote for either, and so I won't.
I agree with you: Trump is potentially less dangerous.
Trump is a person with no fixed views or policies. He knows Trump and he knows publicity. Not that I'd vote for either, but we know Clinton installs killers into power and has no empathy for the 99%.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
A President can do a lot without Congress.
Isn't that what Obama has done with his second term?
Sure. He has expanded the War Powers Act and
his drone wars. Congress doesn't object becasue that is right up their alley. He also said that the DNC could not accept money from lobbyist and his own party overturned that.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
So?
The point made was that Trump couldn't do much without the assistance of Congress. My rebuttal was that Obama did plenty without Congress, not that I agree with all or any of what he's done.
I thought my last sentence made the point, but
apparently not. Yes, the president can make executive orders. That does not mean that they will all be carried out. The reason that some are carried out is that they are actually agreeable to the opposing party.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
Agree, Trump is the less dangerous
basically because he has no idea what he's doing. He's bored, so he's going to try being "leader of the free world" , but he's going to get bored with that real quick, too. The world is still paying for Hillary's stint as Secretary of State; I shudder to think of her as president.
What Truman said about Eisenhower, applies to Trump.
http://bartleby.com/73/1514.html
True enough...
What you say is true, but then Hillary makes contradictory pronouncements quite frequently, herself...
The fact that Trump was for abortion before he was against it tells me that he is very unlikely to hop on the Religious Right's crusade against abortion rights. Some of his most grandiose proposals (e.g., The Wall) seem unlikely to ever get through Congress and over strident political opposition.
Because the man is all about his ego, I would not put it past him to propose some 'gifts' to working class types in order to win their political support, but then I wouldn't expect him to do anything to threaten the Oligarchy's power, but neither do I expect such from Hillary.
The problem for Hillary is that she is so Rightist (a true war hawk and defender of the banking industry), and Trump is so 'liberal' for a Republican, I really can't seen any evidence---so far---that tells me he absolutely would make things worse for average Americans than what we will see from Hillary Clinton.
Unfortunately (or fortunately?) the uncertainties I have about Trump are matched by my uncertainties about Clinton...
James Kroeger
Your point doesn't seem to make sense to me...
If he has no coherent policies what would lead you to believe he could get them through a House and Senate where both sides don't like or really support him?
I am more afraid of the policies that Clinton will get implemented with Bi-partisan support (I'm sure my mom is looking forward to decreased social benefits) than any nuttiness that Trump may propose but fail either to garner the votes for or to make it through a legal challenge.
IMO The DNC fucked up this year with their "Lessor Evil-ism" by putting forth a candidate that has a long history of evil against someone that is only known as being a loud mouthed wind bag...
Sometimes the Devil you don't know is the better choice.
I would rather fight alongside the Democrats against Trump than against both parties with Clinton, because that is damn sure what it will come down to. They are already lining up to back her (the Oligarch's that is.) and I am quite certain they will call off their dogs in the house and senate to get the bills that they want passed out of Clinton while blocking any other actually good legislation.
TPP and Clinton scare me more than an obnoxious Oompa Loompa. (Added Bonus, it will be a banner 4 years for Stand up Comedy.)
"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 didn't indicate how I will vote.
I am seriously conflicted, live in a swingy swing state, and will wait until November to decide. What I WILL do is re-register to unaffiliated or Green, when date is decided upon.
Is there an updated discussion about the date?
Last I heard it was July 4: Independents' Day. Good to make a bold statement before the convention!
Not that I know of.
I want to do it on the same date as others for maximum effect. But will do it on my own if something isn't decided by Labor Day.
Here are some problems.
Trump:
HRC is clearly unstable, and unfortunately DOES think before she acts. And what she thinks about is not good for the working and poor people of this country or for world survival.
No, we cannot. Not if we have given them our permission--by voting them in--to do what we KNOW they will do. Trump can not only be stymied by the Democrats, his own party is going to do its uttermost best to keep him in line. With HRC, they will make noises of disgust and go along with her policies becasue they are their policies.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
Exactly right.
It's like arguing that we can defend the hens after we let the fox into the henhouse. It's impossible. If Hillary becomes president, there is no unified opposition from the Democratic side and she gets the votes that she wants, regardless of how much people protest. The real danger is that she launches more wars, further crackdowns on civil liberties, expands free trade, and sells out social security to the Republicans. Those are the issues where there is widespread "consensus" in Washington DC.
Except this would be two foxes and
all their kin. Considering all the things that she will do that 99% of us are not going to like and will have to pay for, I am trying to figure out just what bone she plans to toss the masses.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
I would take exception
with the notion that Clinton thinks before she speaks. I think her unfavorabile ratings are tied to the fact that she doesn't think before she speaks. She says whatever she thinks will make her look good in the moment without any regard for its implications. That obnoxious Reagans hagiography is a perfect example. She got on TV and condescendingly intended to school the viewing audience about a part of history they might not know, that the Reagans were leaders in fighting against AIDS.
She has little respect for the truth or logical consistency. And when she makes one of her gaffes, she becomes laser-focused on wiggling out of it, which is when she gets really dangerous. I question whether she has a moral compass.
It would explain the barking.
However, I think she is very carefully scripted. It is when she goes off script that we get a truer picture of who and what she is. Fortunately, she is not very well programmed because hubris tells her that she knows better.
Rhetorical answer to your rhetorical question: No, she does not.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
Subsitute "he" for "she" and that is exactly what I believe.
Ummm, just because she consistently speaks in word salads and repeatedly makes contradictory statements even within the same minute.
The Donald is an UNKNOWN QUANTITY --
OTOH, we know EXACTLY what we are going to get with The $hill -- and it's all bad.
When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said “How well he spoke”.
When Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said “Let us march”.
assumptions
And how does that differ in any significant way from Which Hillary Wind-Sock Clinton?
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
I would argue
that we know what Hillary's intentions are because we have a record to assess, as well as her history. I'd say the public has become tuned to discerning the difference between what Clinton says and what she actually means or intends to do. The vague generalities ("stronger together") and equivocations alert the public that they're being lied to. With Trump you're not sure if he's lying or if he just doesn't give a shit (neither of which is a positive).
I agree.
Except for minor stances on a few social issues, Hillary is all right wing. Let Trump destroy it with a boom or let Hillary suck it dry like a vampire...either way it dies but at least the vampire goes hungry.
There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties.. This...is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.--John Adams
Problem I see
is that anybody who would have been receptive to Sanders' message has already left the party, leaving it full of corporatists. Republican voters have been more receptive to Sanders' message than those still in the Democratic party.
Hmm
Got anything to share that supports your point? (that Republican voters have been more receptive to Sanders' message?)
I don't think that most of the 'progressives' supporting Hillary are corporatists, but are rather victims of the corporatist's slander campaign against Bernie (e.g., many of the AA Dems who voted for her).
Our challenge from this point on is to enlighten them re: the truth of Bernie Sanders, and not just the negative rumors of Bernie Sanders that they've been hearing from Hillary's people.
That (their enlightenment) not the easiest thing to achieve in the world, at least not at the present time, but it will be a lot easier after Hillary's run for the Presidency crashes and burns due to the loss of our support they earned...
James Kroeger
Well, granted this is purely anecdotal...
But many of my Republican friends and expressed sentiments along the line of, "If it was Bernie/Trump or Benie/Christie they would have voted Sanders. But that is somewhat dated.
The most recent comment I have gotten from one of them made me spit beer right in his face! (accidentally, of course, lol!)
We were in my shop and drinking a beer and in a totally non-nonchalant tone and even face he looked me in the eye and said, "Well, now that you can no longer feel the Bern have you considered grabbing the Johnson?".
Who says all republicans don't have a sense of humor? lol!
No matter what you believe that was pretty funny.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
At this point, I don't think there is anything but
speculation and anecdotal information. The Rockerfeller Republicans are now Democrats and supporting Hillary. The TeaPots are squarely lined up behind Trump. My guess is that the old Reagan Democrats might want to come home, and Bernie - not Hillary - would be the one to help them do that. Anecdotally, I know Republicans too who would vote for Bernie but not Hillary. Sans Bernie, I think they will hold their nose and vote Trump.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Interesting thing though
Assume that Sanders became the nominee and then won.
Sanders, even as president is no savior. He can't change the entrenched Congressional and Senatorial malaise. There's only so much down ticket that will change. The big difference is, we'll hear him complain whereas Obama just started marching in time with everyone else while still pretending he was his campaign persona.
Skipping another Clinton, and Trump would be a good thing, but as far as getting anything accomplished - good luck. Sanders doesn't have a magic wand. Look at all the people who supported Obama and then lost their footing after he went Lucy pulling the football from Charlie Brown on everyone.
At best, Sanders is a temporary stop gap. Yes, it might stall some things but how much caving will Sanders be perceived to have done wince it is shown he can't get anything done either.
Sanders getting nothing done is loads better than Shillary getting things done the third way, but it will all still likely seem like more status quo in the end, and who is going to get blamed?
Man things are so screwed…
If voting actually allowed the populace any power, they wouldn't let us do it.
Unlike Clinton and Obama,
Unlike Clinton and Obama, Sanders actually does want to win congress back. He wants to govern as a real democrat. You do have midterm elections.
Not a savior, but
He would be the head of the Democratic party. Sanders would be able to remake the DNC significantly. Congress would still be a mess, but a remade Democratic party would be transformative.
Possibly...
or temporarily and seemingly transformative, that is, and until big business and money exerted their control over other aspects to ensure relative safety until the storm that is Sanders has passed.
Throw a pebble in the river and it ripples out. The pebble sinks, may even drift downstream a bit, but the mass of water still flows as before with few changes other than the now nonexistent ripples first observed.
These two parties have been working together against the American people for a long time. Don't make the mistake of thinking they do not have contingencies in place.
I really like your analogy.
How about if a boulder is thrown in? The water will have to stream around it. It causes a bit of a slow down and an impediment to the free flow. Sanders will appoint Cabinet members that could help stem the flow.
How about throwing in a couple more boulders, maybe a few logs? Forming new parties to destroy the two-party system, electing people from the bottom up, people's movements, etc. Moving boulders takes a lot of work and dedication, but a significant dam could be built fairly quickly. The river will still run, but it will brought under control.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
Let's build a dam and block the spillway!
Some of the 99% can pour concrete; some can become beavers. n/t
Can we use some of the 1% to caulk up the cracks? ;)
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
And we could trust him not to sell FDR Democrats up
the river - unlike Obama and Hillary.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Why would you feel confident about that?
I have no such confidence, other than he never has been supportive of FDR Democrats. Didn't he provide funds to one, the other or both Clintons? As well as Rahm Emanuel?
Yeah, why even bother.
No sense in a great leader, say, trying to lead, pffft. No can do. It can't be done. Might as well just give up on everything, huh?
I did not read that statement as futility.
I read it as an ackowledgement of the obstacles that would still be in place. Doing an environmental scan is important to any process on which to build a plan.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
I'm tired of hearing about that "magic wand" crap.
Bernie did pretty damn good for himself and us starting out at 3%. We all did great and can continue to do so.
It was an unfair election on many fronts.
Unfair is an understatement....
The Dems rigged that election from beginning to end.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
It's too soon to know how I feel about this yet,
but thanks for the thoughtful analysis. My mind is shooting in a thousand different directions, and my heart is pulling me in a thousand different directions, about what to do now that Hillary probably has the nom. Where to go? What to do?
I can't vote for Hillary, though, that's for sure. And I am definitely planning on leaving the Democratic Party in protest the day after the convention, after having been a reliable member for the past 28 years. Fuck those neoliberal assholes. I didn't leave the party -- the party left me.
I think Bernie woulda kicked solid ass in the general, though. I think American society has progressed in such a way that the window of opportunity for someone like Bernie Sanders to get elected POTUS is quite small, but the tenor of the electorate is remarkably pissed off and fed up and actually *engaged*, for the first time in what feels like forever.
Bernie coulda been a contendah! /grits teeth
I'm still very interested in helping out with the Brand New Congress peeps, because I believe that's a really positive way forward. Getting Bernie's platform realized on local levels all over the country could make a significant difference in terms of how Congress actually operates. The possibilities are fucking endless! So this is the kinda shit I'll donate my time and energy to, because it matters. I already know several people in Northeastern Wisconsin running with BNC in mind, and it's pretty inspiring shit.
Lots to think about and lots to do, man. It ain't over yet! Let's kick some ass, James!
I miss Colorado.
Hey Colorado is the Shiznit!
Welcome to C99! I bled for you when you had to leave Colorado; then I HAD to leave the GOS, because the ambience just became too awful. Glad to see that you have migrated to a more pleasant clime! Maybe you can move back (in person, not just in spirit) to the Centennial State one day.
BTW, we went HEAVY for Bernie in the caucuses back in March --
When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said “How well he spoke”.
When Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said “Let us march”.
Hi there, jwa!
Thanks for the sweet words! Yeah, it was really hard for me leaving the state, but I'm glad I'm in Wisconsin right now. My dad has multiple health issues and currently needs constant care, so it's good I'm here.
That being said, I definitely plan to move back sooner rather than later.
Little Shiz is still there, and that's where my heart is.
Colorado kicked ass for Bernie in the caucuses! Wisconsin kicked ass for Bernie in the primaries! LOL, yay!
Best to you!
I miss Colorado.
Hi there, jwa!
Thanks for the sweet words! Yeah, it was really hard for me leaving the state, but I'm glad I'm in Wisconsin right now. My dad has multiple health issues and currently needs constant care, so it's good I'm here.
That being said, I definitely plan to move back sooner rather than later.
Little Shiz is still there, and that's where my heart is.
Colorado kicked ass for Bernie in the caucuses! Wisconsin kicked ass for Bernie in the primaries! LOL, yay!
Best to you!
I miss Colorado.
sorry
I think if you're asserting that $$Hill's minions convinced 55%-ish of Dems that there was something to fear with Bernie Sanders, and that's why they voted for $$Hill, I have to disagree. I think the polling over the many months indicates that a majority of Dems like and trust Bernie, but have internalized the propaganda that $$Hillary is the stronger GE candidate. It's been a curiosity for many who have looked at the numbers, that but for their trepidation about giving up on their 'sure thing' in $$Hillary, the majority of Dems actually wanted Bernie more than they wanted $$Hillary as their candidate.
As for the might of the Repig smear machine, I'd politely suggest that it will work much better on $$Hillary than it could ever have worked on Bernie, if for no other reason than Bernie's track record of honesty and diligent and forthright representation of both his beliefs and his constituents.
As for not voting for $$Hillary: not me, not ever.
It will sound trite, but I do not vote for Republicans, and based on her history and her stated positions, I consider $$Hillary to be a Republican at heart, with nothing but occasional, insincere noises about progressivism emanating from her word-hole.
I assert that the Dems could have run almost any established candidate from their party, and that person would have destroyed Trump. By succumbing to the Clinton machine, they have allowed one of, if not the only nationally recognized Dem who can lose to Trump to be their standard-bearer in the race for POTUS.
If she loses, she loses...that's not on me, it's on those that voted for and funded her. After decades of fighting for the rights and needs of others with my votes while my personal position steadily worsened, I am done conceding everything and getting nothing from 'my' party.
$$Hillary and the Dems have flipped me the bird, and told me they don't need me.
Fine.
Their wish is granted. They can beat Trump without my money or my vote.
And they'd better not dare to whine to me when they lose, because I will show no mercy with my reply.
Fuck me? No, fuck you $$Hillary.
Indeed, with the current state of things we may need to stop
saying "I will no longer vote for Republicans" and move to, "I will no longer vote for CONSERVATIVES."
We need to make the point of showing the average uninformed voter that the Democratic Party is infested with almost as many conservatives as the Republican, they just tend to be more "Fiscal" conservatives that pretend to also care about social issues.
Just because they have that all powerful (D) doesn't mean that they are actually lower case democrats.
"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 think the Democratic Party is fucked.
Even though Bernie will probably stay with the party, it's definitely time for me to go. I no longer believe that change can be achieved inside the party, but I have good friends who do and they're gonna be delegates at the convention in Philly.
More power to 'em, I s'pose, but I don't think that's where it's at anymore. The Democratic Party, at least to me, is literally beyond repair. I have zero hope that they're the party of the people now, and I don't understand how anyone else could, at this point.
If Hillary loses the general, she and her Third Way pals will have no one to blame but themselves. I reject the Democratic Party throwing this fucking albatross around OUR necks prematurely, like this is OUR fault, just like they did in '00. Fuck that noise, they're lying assholes.
I miss Colorado.
THIS:
NO lie!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
I turned on msnbc last night and they
had a former republikkkan senator on saying she was absolutely more the conservative stance on military and foreign policy issues and he actually said don't sit on your hands conservatives, get out and vote for hrc. Gobsmacked.
#Never$hillary.
Ya got to be a Spirit, cain't be no Ghost. . .
Explain Bldg #7. . . still waiting. . .
If you’ve ever wondered whether you would have complied in 1930’s Germany,
Now you know. . .
sign at protest march
Ain't that bizarre? This has got to be the absolute
weirdest campaign season in my life.
I wonder if the Lincoln Republicans felt like we do when their party did a complete course change? I really think that is what is going on here. When all the "Moderate Conservatives" left the Republican party as it proceeded to get crazier and crazier a lot of them went Indie, but a whole bunch also switched to Democratic.
The Progressive Left was always at best had maybe half of the party plus a little bit, but now? While our stances and positions resonate with most of the Democratic Party members, the leadership has completely sidelined us and actively attempts to damage public perception of progressives, no more so than they have this cycle.
It is an odd, but not unprecedented, time.
The Democrats have become the conservatives, the Republicans have become the "God, Guns & hate the fags" party and we have no left wing party to go to currently. (Hence the whole, "Where ya gonna go attitude" from Clinton.)
What they didn't realize is that today's young people have a set of tools, and are masters of it, that no other new generation has ever had before. Social Media and the web.
I am very confident that they are not going away, and that they will accomplish as much, if not more, progress with their Net-Fu than has ever been done by a single generation in as short of a time span as they will do it.
Not only do they have the ability to organize that we never did, they have the ability to get out there and actually obtain the information.
All it's gonna take is a few more Snowden and Manning types at the right time, so we need to start working really hard to push for whistleblower protection acts.
THAT is gonna be one of the biggest weapons in our arsenal I would think.
There are a lot of holes in that fucking dam, and the only thing holding the water back is a thin veneer of fear.
Let's work on stripping that fear off...
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Meg Whitman
Has all but endorsed her. I'm saddened by how easy it seems for HRC's supporters to turn a blind eye to the stuff that is happening. All the corruption Ds complained about they are now defending. SMDH
"Politics is not evil; politics is the human race's most magnificent achievement." Senator Tom Fries, 'Podkayne of Mars,' Robert Heinlein
Yeah...
That really is her only chance of winning in November: if she can get enough 'real' Republicans to vote for her.
Well, that, and getting the corporate media to all skew the contest her way in October...
If she could actually pull that off, it could be enough for her to win it. But only if Bernie's supporters don't decide to move from 'not voting for Hillary' to actually voting for Trump.
It's going to be interesting to see how it all plays out...
James Kroeger
Suspect there will be a lot more of this
HRC is the Establishment candidate not just the Dem Establishment candidate.
“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” -Voltaire
No, she is the oligarch candidate.
Are you saying
that she is not the establishment candidate?
“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” -Voltaire
Not at all. She most definitely is the establishment
candidate but more importantly an oligarch, as is Trump. At least the way I see it.
Definitely an oligarch
I think that the other Oligarch's would much prefer a Clinton presidency to a Trump one.
“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” -Voltaire
pick one: Trump will make
pick one: Trump will make deals that benefit him Hillary will make deals to whom ever pays her thru the back doors of the Clinton foundation --Chelsea . middle class your screwed again
Nice essay
Not only won't I vote for $$$hillary in November, since none of my congress critters supported Birdie I'm not voting for them either (I'm in CT).
And I tried hard to wait until the day after the convention to leave the party, but couldn't. I switched my voter registration to Unaffiliated the Wednesday after the CA primary. I felt sick to my stomach so I had to leave.
Weekly I get recordings of $$$$hillary's voice on my home phone. When hubby picks up, he just slams the phone down. Next time I'm gonna wait to press whatever number to donate (b/c that's what the call is about) and tell them to take me off their list.
Lololol
Don't believe everything you think.
... sow the wind--
reap the whirlwind.
When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said “How well he spoke”.
When Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said “Let us march”.
Question this cycle is Effective Evil.
After 44 years as a Democrat I have much experience in the "lesser of two evils" on the Democratic ticket. (Dukakis and Joe. By. God. Lieberman spring immediately to mind!) But this time the Evil is so pervasive and on such a scale that the term "lesser" cannot possibly apply. So my thinking is which of them will be the most Effectively Evil.
Donald Trump's effectiveness is entirely dependent on who he finds for his Karl Rove - a brain capable of rational, if evil thought and who his Dick Cheney - not the blustering chicken hawk bit, he's got that down but the inside the Beltway power struggles over enough decades to know where the bodies are buried bit. So far he's surrounded himself with sycophantic mirrors, so hard to say how those roles will be filled.
We know for an absolute FACT how effectively Hillary Clinton will complete the conversion of the Democratic Party of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt, the New Deal, Lyndon Johnson's Civil Rights legislation (Bless his corrupt tho good hearted, politicking soul), and Jimmy Carter, also savaged by the Democratic establishment, into the corrupt cesspool it is. The Democratic Party after Hillary will no longer even be the Neo-Liberal party of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama but the full on Neo-Conservative party of Hillary Clinton.
Even if California is in play, I'm voting for Jill Stein.
An image
keeps coming to mind of Hellary as a female Sauron in her designer, tent-like robes lording of Washington like Mordor. On the flip side of the image is Donald sitting in the Whitehouse preening every night in televised fireside chats, spouting endless folderol...but neutered by the balance of power.
Then again, she could be too busy fighting off attempts to impeach her to actually get anything done - but to quote the Beastie Boys, "she's crafty"... though she sure ain't any 99%er's type.
I will not vote for either of those two presumptive nominees, only Bernie who I'll write in if possible or not vote at all.
"So it goes."
Kurt Vonnegut
Trump is just a clown
He won't cause anything near the damage that Bush Jr caused.
We've been through much worse. Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush.
Trump is amateur hour. There's nothing to fear from him. Not really. Hillary, OTOH....