• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on So, if we don’t like him and w…
    William on Trump disgusts the Republican…
    jmac on PSA: how to correctly complete…
    riverdaughter on PSA: how to correctly complete…
    jmac on PSA: how to correctly complete…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Trump disgusts the Republican…
    Catscatscats on PSA: how to correctly complete…
    Catscatscats on PSA: how to correctly complete…
    riverdaughter on PSA: how to correctly complete…
    jmac on PSA: how to correctly complete…
    jmac on PSA: how to correctly complete…
    riverdaughter on PSA: how to correctly complete…
    riverdaughter on PSA: how to correctly complete…
    riverdaughter on PSA: how to correctly complete…
    jmac on PSA: how to correctly complete…
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – September 27, 2020
      by Tony Wikrent Slouching toward denouement Capitulation Will Not Halt Trump’s Coup David Sirota, September 24, 2020 An important review of political events last week. Yoy may not agree with Sirota’s interpretation, but his analyses has proven correct repeatedly. Remember that Sirota accurately outlined the future course of American politics in his 2008 book […]
  • Top Posts

Andropov vs Chernenko- Get Ready to Rumble!!

We waited 4 years from the devastating loss of the 2016 election for this. We had a smart over qualified woman defeated by a Fox News guzzling, narcissist with ADHD and a sadistic streak.

Our candidate field this year was chock full of smart, energetic, enthusiastic women candidates. Gillibrand, Harris, Klobuchar, Warren.

And who did we narrow the field down to?

Two septuagenarian White males. Biden is probably going to be the nominee. Bernie has lost the plot. Then Biden will go up against another septuagenarian. All three of them look term limited, like Andropov and Chernenko, the presidents of the Soviet Union who were dragged into service as the communist government started its terminal phase.

They both died in office.

Is this the best we could do?

********************

Bernie’s jihadis were putting Warren’s voters to the sword yesterday. They are the most arrogant, entitled, obnoxious people I have ever interacted with on Twitter. One particularly galling trope they rolled out yesterday was that by running at all, Warren was actively conspiring to disrupt their glorious revolution and steal delegates from Bernie. For some reason, it just never occurs to them that maybe Warren was in it because she thought she was a better candidate with better ideas and that she is constitutionally allowed to solicit the votes of American citizens to become president.

This behavior strikes me as being creepily similar to that of the worst religious zealots I’ve met. The idea that you may have your own thoughts and feelings and beliefs is unacceptable to them. Their methods are very disrespectful because they do not acknowledge you as a person with your own free will. Bernie’s jihadis naturally assume without great reflection that after insulting Warren and her voters in every ugly way possible that Bernie will gain those voters when Warren releases them.

Nothing could be further from the truth and here’s why:

There will be paradise on earth just as soon as we convert everyone and they vote for us.

This is wishful thinking on a dangerous scale and I want no part of it.

Progressives may have lost the best chance of making progress in 2020 because of Bernie’s scorched earth campaign. Better healthcare, an economy with readjusted incentives to make life fairer for all of us, freedom from the indentured servitude of student debt, better child care, strengthened social security, we could have worked on them with someone like Warren who had the ability to adapt to her environment. But many progressives threw away those possibilities with Warren in order to chase a prophet who will preach the second coming and then leave them to deal with the lifetime fallout of the Great Disappointment.

It’s actually worse than that. Bernie’s campaign has all but assured that there will be no structural changes for years and years. Whoever is Biden’s VP will get a crack at the presidency or Trump will win again. In either case, the shareholders will continue to suck the lifeblood out of millennials while rent seeking behavior will keep the rest of the working class on the brink of insolvency. There will be more instability and anger at the wealthy and well connected and not much we can do about it.

So, wittingly or not, Bernie and his supporters have handed the country over to the corporations and shareholders they say they want to usurp.

According to them, the progressive side is owned by Bernie. If not Bernie, then no one.

Ok, then it’s no one.

81 Responses

  1. Two septuagenarian White males

    For this reason it is imperative that we hear from these 2 old geezers whom they plan to pick as VP

    • I’d submit that’s always the case, or as Bill Clinton replied when someone asked him why he picked Al Gore, “because I might die”.

      IMNSHO, someone like Klobuchar would be ideal (no matter who is at the top of the ticket), since she would add some needed geographical diversity. In Sander’s case, she’d also bring in the right wing of the party and show them they have a place at the table (something Clinton failed to do for the progressives when she picked Kaine).

    • Note that it would also be imperative if we’d nominated a septuagenarian woman. Dementia is almost twice as common among women as men (although longer lifespan certainly figures into that).

  2. http://tdmsresearch.com/2020/03/04/massachusetts-2020-democratic-party-primary/

    The 2020 Massachusetts Democratic Party presidential primary was held on March 3, 2020. Election results from the computerized vote counts differed significantly from the results projected by the exit poll conducted by Edison Research and published by CNN at poll’s closing. As in the 2016 Massachusetts primary between candidates Sanders and Clinton, disparities greatly exceed the exit poll’s margin of error. Sanders won Massachusetts in the exit poll and lost it in the computer count.

    The discrepancies between the exit poll and the vote count for Sanders and Biden totaled 8.2%— double the 4.0% exit poll margin of error. Warren’s and Biden’s discrepancies totaled 8.0%, also double the margin of error. These discrepancies replicate the total discrepancy of 8.0% favoring Clinton in the 2016 Massachusetts Democratic Party primary between her and Sanders. This time two progressive candidates exhibit the same discrepancies now favoring Biden representing the establishment’s choice.

    • Wow. Yet another instance of Big Money buying hackers to make the no-verify touch-screen computer voting come out “right”.

      *** The United States remains one of the few major democracies in the world that continue to allow computerized vote counting—not observable by the public—to determine the results of its elections.[ii] Countries such as Germany, Norway, Netherlands, France,[iii] Canada,[iv] United Kingdom, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Denmark, Sweden, Finland and many other countries protect the integrity of their elections with publicly observable hand-counting of paper ballots. ***

      Is it any wonder Both Parties refuse to halt “”computer vote counting”?

      • Zach,

        It has already been proven that the machines were “open for business” but the media, congress and the American people refuse to listen. Watch this and see how easy it is to manipulate the votes, “Hacking Democracy”. It’s an HBO emmy nominated documentary released in 2006 clearly showing and proving how dangerous these voting systems are to our democracy. It’s not only touchscreen machines that are dangerous but even the one’s with the so-called “paper trail”.

        This is why we MUST vote in unpresidented numbers, if we want to override the manipulation of the machines in those electoral states.

    • I’m going to raise my eyebrow at that TDM Research paper, the same way Lambert has over at NC. I don’t know who “TDM Research” really is (it appears to be a one-person shop), what axes they have to grind, or who is funding them. Just because somebody publishes something that appears to coincide with your personal belief system doesn’t mean they:

      1) know what they’re talking about, or
      2) are really on your side.

    • I would imagine the exit polls only sampled voters who voted in person on Election Day. Election results were from Election Day voters AND voters who voted earlier. Biden got a huge bite the the REMARKABLE change in the later vote. The vote after Sunday or Monday events.

      • Yup, although it’s apparently very hard to vote early in some states (like SC). It’s just possible that Bernie voters were more willing to talk to pollsters. You can’t ignore selection bias.

  3. *** Bernie’s jihadis were putting Warren’s voters to the sword yesterday. They are the most arrogant, entitled, obnoxious people I have ever interacted with on Twitter. ***

    Sanders is the devil because some of his supporters on Twitter are obnoxious! Let’s say Sanders has 10 million (round number) supporters. Suppose .01% are loudmouthed jackasses who “tweet”. That would mean a small army of 1,000 “arrogant, entitled, obnoxious” people are involved.

    Have you considered the possibility SOME of them are paid trolls – people deliberately stirring things up. Surely you’ve observed these types here at this blog.

    Naked Capitalism had a bunch of relevant links today.
    SC Exit Poll Versus Reported Vote Count
    http://tdmsresearch.com/2020/03/02/south-carolina-2020-democratic-party-primary/

    Bootstrapping. Somebody took a down-and-out loser and rehabilitated him with a glorious landslide in South Carolina. Biden = Winner! The article suggests ‘somebody’ stole several thousand votes from Sanders, Warren, and Steyer to create the unexpected Biden “landslide”.

    Super Tuesday – Massachusetts.
    “Why Massachusetts Voters Turned Their Backs On Elizabeth Warren”

    They still love the woman, but demand a winner. South Carolina showcased the hero who will take down Trump. Yes, the DNC propped up a corpse and turned him into a Knight In Shining Armor. Who else would any thinking Democrat who despises Trump vote for?

    Recall how the DNC also cleared the Super Tuesday field by stong-arming two other candidates to depart. Then came the flood of editorials and talking head speeches and endorsements raving about the wondrous Biden.

    From the final link:

    *** And now they’re working to install a corrupt, right-wing warmongering dementia patient as the party’s nominee. ***

    Notice how they DNC is working to change their rules again – this time to keep Gabbard out of the next debate.

    https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2020/03/04/dnc-scrambles-to-change-debate-threshold-after-gabbard-qualifies/

    I suggest you consider redirecting your rage from Sanders to the DNC.

    • I hold Bernie responsible for his own words. It is obvious that he doesn’t know what the goal of the election in November is and he doesn’t share our sense of urgency. That’s why he continues to focus on his revolution and bringing voters over to him.
      He screwed up. Badly. He’s responsible for misleading millions of voters into thinking their zeal would be enough. It’s not.
      He’s going to lose Florida in HUGE numbers. It’s going to be a blowout of monumental proportions. I suggest you get some rest. You’re going to need it.

    • And another thing, stop blaming the DNC for failing to go all out for a candidate who refuses to join its party. He should have never run on our ticket in the first place. All he did was suck voters away from committed Democrats and in the process screwed call progressives. If Bernie didn’t exist, the corporations you loathe would have to invent him. He singlehandedly gave them everything they wanted.

      • I still do not understand the mechanism that allowed him to do so without changing his affiliation. It is like telling your betrothed you’ll convert in order to have a Catholic wedding and not following through. Bad analogy. More like breaking through enemy lines to plant a bomb. I was speaking with my millennial son this morning and he was shocked to learn that Sanders was not a democrat.

        • I still do not understand the mechanism that allowed him to do so without changing his affiliation.

          I think I do. He has simply learned from the gop that if you say something often enough eventually things will start going your way. I support many of Sanders issues, but I think his ego is just too big for his own good. If he tried to play nice with Democrats instead of his scorched earth approach he might have had better luck… but by constantly banging the drum about the corrupt DNC he got what he wanted… he did not deserve to run as a Democrat after his last appearance.

          • I understand that the party is not a governmental entity and therefore the voter has no standing to sue (this was tried in 2008, although I think Ickes was going to attempt something along the lines of breach of contract on behalf of Hillary, who may have had standing as an aggrieved party). I was just wondering what the internal rules of the party are vis a vis allowing candidates in as “Democratic” candidates. The rules must be wide open to allow Sanders to participate.

        • You actually can’t “join” the Democratic Party. It’s not legally a membership organization, which is why it has no obligation to even follow its own rules in the nomination process. Yes, in some states (but not all), voters can declare an “affiliation” at registration – but that doesn’t make them “members”.

          Note that this was a key element of the DNC’s defense in the 2016 donor lawsuit.

          • When I got my driver’s license in PA, I was automatically registered to vote and was asked to pick a party. I am a registered Democrat. I don’t think it’s too much to ask for the person who wants to run on the Democratic ticket to register as well. It should be official. None of this “I want to take over your party but not belong to it because that would be too accommodating to the party establishment” shit.
            It’s like barging into someone’s house, changing their diet and programming the thermostat over the preferences of the people who actually live there.
            If he doesn’t like the party establishment, then he should join the party and try to change it from within. No shortcuts.

          • Not all states do this, RD. In some states voters don’t declare party affiliations at all. And regardless of whether you *think* you’re a member of the Democratic party I can assure you that the Democratic party has a different idea. American political parties are not like British political parties (which actually are membership organizations that have honest-to-God dues-paying members). You may have registered as a Democratic voter, but as far as the party is concerned you don’t belong to it and it has no legal obligations to you. That’s why you as a registered Democrat don’t have standing to sue the Democratic Party if it misuses your donations or fails to abide by its own rules in the nomination process.

          • I tried to nest my comment under propertius’s, but failed.

      • I want to have that tattooed on my body! SPOT ON!

        • The tattoo is for the comment above that RD wrote about why the Democrats should go all out for candidate that won’t join our party!
          And in reality, if there is a single person who brought us the orange monster it is BERNIE. His nastiness in undermining Hillary sure helped elect the demon we have in office now. Bernie, you should be ashamed to show your face! My opinion and I am sticking to it,!!

    • Honestly, I don’t think polling (even exit polling) is particularly reliable these days. I know lots of people who won’t even talk to pollsters (I’m one of them). I know others who will deliberately lie to them because they resent the intrusion. Yeah, I think computerized voting is a Very Bad Idea ™, but I think there are enough ways to suppress voting among selected populations that the effect of any hacking is just noise.

      • People who try and undermine exit polls are usually trolls who hope to have cover for election irregularities! Exit polls are very accurate. If they are not, then you can expect some cheating….. unless there are other reasons. Like a huge shift in sentiment in last days and early voting unable to account for late news.

  4. Well, we all have different perspectives. From my point of view, Warren ruined Bloomberg’s chances by furiously attacking him not on issues, but on her reading of an article which relied on things said by a few people, just as the article about Klobuchar. “You said, ‘kill it’!” Of course he never said that, he testified under oath he did not, and the idea is completely incongruous, plus people don’t talk like that. But for someone who is a true believer (now, after being a vehement Republican for many years) it is wholly believable, so she shouted it on TV, even though it was just something some disgruntled employee alleged, as various employees or brief acquaintances alleged things about Klobuchar or Franken, which also were purveyed as true. Bloomberg was never a threat to her chances, the threat was always Sanders, which Warren either did not realize, or did not care.

    So that cost Bloomberg his campaign, just as the article on Klobuchar ruined her from the start. Just as Castro shot down Beto by yelling, “You did’t do your homework” five times, when it was really just about a different political view. The media and too many voters feed off moments like that. The debates were almost always filled with questions which were deliberately intended to provoke emotional responses,, almost like Perry Mason trial questions, “Isn’t it true?…” The national campaign is almost never about issues, it is about personal attacks or misrepresentations like Willie Horton, or “I was for it before I was against it,” or “deplorables” or emails. And then we sadly wonder how we got to this point.

    I don’t know how this can be fixed, t is probably impossible. Social media has not helped at all. One may have varying feelings about past Presidents, but I don’t think that JFK could have been elected in this era, nor LBJ, maybe not FDR, not Truman, Eisenhower (though maybe his “war hero” image might have allowed him to get past his wartime affair). Not Bill Clinton. Ah, but Trump won? Well, that is because the Republicans control the media, always have. Democrats are mowed down by it. The wall to wall cable media which might be imagined to give us more in depth insights as to the candidates’ positions, actually make it worse, by magnifying the soundbites. Hillary was impeccable, but I would sit there anxiously watching her debates knowing that if she made one slip, said one thing wrong, we would hear and see it for weeks

    As to this election, Sanders is there because he has his zealous coterie of followers, enough to get a larger section of primary votes than most of the candidates. And Biden is there because people know him, and because those who pine for the Obama era prefer him. Almost impossible for anyone to secure more votes than those two, as we have seen. Next time, we will likely get whomever Biden picked for VP, vs. Haley, because they will be the two most known names. What are touted as wide-open political races almost always take a predictable course.. And candidates who don’t come in with a cult of followers, or a built-in approval rating, are far too easily cut down by hitpiece stories, or attacks in a debate, because there is almost no way to recover from that in the cable news cycles. Fifty campaign events, or a website such as Hillary’s full of carefully laid out positions, are no match for an endlessly repeated TV clip, or an article online or in a paper. As to whether the media virtually conspires to damage certain candidates and help others, I would say that is likely true, though their motivations may range from politics to personal animus to jealousy to junior high school group piling on. Most of us here, despite having different viewpoints or preferences, are able to intelligently look at the candidates and what they might do as President; but many people cannot, so move in the direction that the broadcast or social media want them to go.

    • *** Of course he never said that, he testified under oath he did not, and the idea is completely incongruous, plus people don’t talk like that. ***

      Of all the fluffers Mr. Bloomberg has hired, I’ll grant you are far above the average. Unfortunately Bloomberg is – like Trump – a rich jerk who has gotten away with anything and everything. Bloomberg’s history shows he talks exactly “like that”.

      https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/booklet-mike-bloombergs-wit-wisdom-haunt-presidential-bid/story?id=67744181

      Here is a link to the 30-year-old birthday present given to the wealthy swine.
      https://www.insider.com/michael-bloombergs-employees-created-a-book-purportedly-offensive-quotes

      As for the rest of your “stuff”, you really ought to stay away from the silliest nonsense. Stuff like this:

      *** Ah, but Trump won? Well, that is because the Republicans control the media, always have. ***

      Trump “won” because he was hand-picked to run against the most hated politician in recent US history. Anyone who watched the election returns in 2016 would understand “the media” was flabbergasted by the reports of the state votes as they came in. Nobody expected the US to prefer such a disgusting figure as Trump to the only alternative.

      The Democrats cheated Bit Time in California in 2016, and the Republicans cheated about everywhere else. Since election fraud benefits both parties, nobody has made any noises about reform. Had 2016 been a hand-counted paper-ballot affair, I suspect Hillary would have won rather easily. It wasn’t, and she didn’t.

      The 2020 Primary results – especially SC and Super Tuesday – shows why they STILL prefer election fraud to real vote counts.

    • “Warren ruined Bloomberg’s chances ”

      And thank God for that. The woman deserves a medal.

      • If we end up with Trump again because Biden cannot run the kind of campaign necessary to beat him, that is the kind of sentiment which might be revisited/ There are only so many chances that we as a country get, and in my opinion, we need to value them. Three years from now, we will see if Warren deserves a medal. She helped get rid or Franken, she said that the primaries in 2016 were rigged, she helped get rid of Bloomberg. These actions may have helped or gratified her, but they have done nothing to stop Trump’s assault on everything we value.

  5. One thing is that because we lost so many seats in the Obama tenure, there were not very many 40-60 year old Democrats who had become known to the public. Note how few governors we had up until the last couple of years. So the pool of candidates was much less than it was, say, 20 years ago. Just some senators, really, and a few congresspeople, and then some fairly little known Western governors. Oh, and of course Tulsi Gabbard, who somehow made the debate because she has one delegate, and who has vowed to stay in until the convention, during which time she will attack the Democratic Party. And who is funding Tulsi Gabbard?

    • It’s certainly true that Obama decimated downticket leadership in the party. The running joke out here in flyover country was that OFA (Obama for America) was really a typo – it was supposed to be OFO (Obama for Obama), after he gutted national party funding for downticket races.

      • I couldn’t agree more. He was poison to the party after he used it to get to the top. Then he just discarded it and walked away without a backwards glance.
        Someday, some historian is going to look at his presidency with fresh objective eyes and will not be kind.

        • One of the real eye-openers in Donna Brazile’s little tell-all article is the extent to which Obama bankrupted the Democratic Party for his own benefit.

  6. Sad day for me. I was for Liz in 2016 and have continued to admire her and think she was the best candidate, male or female, that we have seen in decades.

    FWIW I hope this doesn’t sound like sour grapes, and I don’t get into conspiracy theorizing much, but I think the media has a lot to do with Liz’s defeat. All horse race coverage, all the time. No examination of what they candidates would actually DO if elected. Not to mention the way she seemed to have been cancelled/ subject to near coverage blackout between for some crucial weeks. My guess: she would have been more effective in getting progressive measures enacted than Bernie and the media didn’t care for that any more than Bloomberg did.

    I do wish she had been better prepared when she was first asked about Medicare for All, maybe she would have had a response that made an ironclad commitment to universal coverage as a human right without necessarily staking her campaign on M4A. But once she was on board with Bernie she had to stick with it. These days you can never back down when criticized, it doesn’t work. Still this is a quibble. The relentless criticism of every real or imagined error was clear evidence of bias, either conservative, sexist, or a dash of both. The media would have allowed other candidates to survive that one, IMO.

    Re Biden resurrection: James Clyburn is the one who resurrected Biden. Joy Reid did the shoe leather reporting (as opposed to usual MSNBC punditry) in the South and showed how Southern black voters really do love Biden. And that they also voted for him out of fear, that white America would never do right by them by electing someone who would actually improve their lot in life, such as Elizabeth, or maybe Bernie. I don’t agree with this line of thought but southern AAs come by their desperation/ fear honestly and it would be arrogant of me to disparage them. They don’t care who the nominee is as long as they believe (rightly or wrongly) that said nominee will get Trump off their necks. Before the SC win DNC had left Biden for dead as was leaning Bloomberg.

    • *** Southern black voters really do love Biden. ***

      I doubt it – it’s my suspicion they badly want to be rid of Trump. To say they’re “low information” isn’t meant to be an insult, for how on earth can a person be well informed if all you have is the Corporate Media to inform you?

      Back in 2008 I was most definitely a “low information” voter myself when I voted for Obama. I despised Bush and Obama sounded mighty good. (mostly lies as I found out later to my sorrow)

      Regarding Bloomberg, he got his money’s worth. He had a genuine shot at the White House before Warren ripped him a new one in the debate. I’ll hand it to the DNC and the Power Elites it represents – they made a fast and extremely effective change in operations to resurrect the walking dead man Biden.

      With a November choice between Biden and Trump, I’m totally SOL no matter which of them is declared the winner.

      • Leave the ad hominem attacks elsewhere and look at Reid’s clip. There was footage of a well known black church in Selma, sacred to the civil rights movement, where the famous March was organized. Biden sat on the dais which is a high honor conferred by the pastor of a black church. Other guests of honor spoke highly of Biden. Bloomberg and the other candidates did not sit on the dais. When Bloomberg spoke parishoners actually stood and turned their backs on him. Again, a rare occurrence in a black church.

        I don’t give a shit what you suspect about black voters or anything else. In this case the reporter did first hand reporting and if you look at the clip and say otherwise, you are accusing her of lying without having information to the contrary. Evidence matters around here — that’s why I respect RD — and maybe you should keep that in mind before you even think of insulting other commenters.

        I don’t care for Biden either, I understand that he got wrong just about every issue in his career. Starting from his early racism, voting for war in Iraq, sponsoring the 2005 bankruptcy bill and so on. But he swept the South for a reason and if you actually care about the truth maybe you should be open to facts that neither of us like.

        • *** I don’t give a shit what you suspect about black voters or anything else. ***

          Thank you for this clarification.

          • @Zachary Smith, On second reading, I get (I think) that you were in fact concurring with me that the southern AAs should not be disparaged as low info. At first I thought you were saying the opposite about them, and also about me. So, kindly accept my apology if that is the case.

            Reid’s reporting on the personal regard that at least some black leaders –and black voters — have for Biden was an eye opener for me. But at least one other black commentator agrees that the Biden continues to benefit from the uncritical admiration that many black people have for Barack and Michelle. (Even if other blacks vote for him out of fear/ desperation).

            Similarly, from the Philadelphia Inquirer:

            “In interviews with 27 black Democrats over the age of 35 in Orangeburg, Columbia, and Greenwood, all but two said they would vote for Biden if the primary were held today (one picked billionaire Tom Steyer and another liked Bernie Sanders). Pushed on how solid their support for Biden is, they shrugged off the gaffes and the sliding poll numbers, and said they couldn’t imagine their minds will change.”

            https://www.inquirer.com/news/joe-biden-south-carolina-african-american-vote-primary-2020-endorsements-20191123.html

            I’d prefer this were otherwise. I’ll vote blue no matter who in the general but I’m not bothering to voter for either geezer in the primary.

    • FWIW I hope this doesn’t sound like sour grapes, and I don’t get into conspiracy theorizing much, but I think the media has a lot to do with Liz’s defeat. All horse race coverage, all the time. No examination of what they candidates would actually DO if elected

      I’d certainly agree with this. I thought the debates were particularly awful. They weren’t really debates at all – no substantive policy discussions, just personal zingers. No comparison of M4A versus the various “we’ll just add a public option, if that” suggestions. No foreign policy discussions at all. No discussions about social security, or what to do about student loans. Nothing about financial regulation or trade policy Any serious discussion of those issues would only have helped Warren. But I guess they don’t make “good television”.

      • Should be a surprise to no one as this is the same thing that went on in 2016. Trump said he was going to get rid of Obamacare and replace it with something better. The fact that he had no plan did not seem to matter.

        • Yes, it is exactly the same thing that went on 2016. The debates were much better when the League of Women Voters ran them, rather than the infotainment companies. The questions and the format are all oriented towards being “good TV”, which is a really lousy way to pick a President.

          • I date the decline and fall of TV news to the day ABC Sports programming genius Roone Arledge was tapped to run the News Division. Arledge made News into a profit center and destroyed the notion of news as public service. Remember the nightly newscasts hyping the 1979 seizure of the US Embassy in Iran that ended with the tagline, “X days of America Held Hostage?!” That’s on him and it certainly put Reagan in the White House.

            Then followed the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine (1987) and the rise of Fox…

            I sure wish he had continued to mint money showcasing “the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat” on ABC’s Wide World of Sports…

          • I date the fall of TV news to the day that ABC Sports programming genius Roone Arledge was put in charge of the News Division. Arledge transformed TV news from a loss leading public service to a profit center in its own right. Remember the nightly newscasts hyping the 1979 seizure of the US Embassy in Teheran as Day X of “America Held Hostage?!” That’s on Arledge, and it elected Reagan.

            After that we had the 1987 repeal of the Fairness Doctrine followed by the rise of Fox…

            I really wish Arledge had continued to mint money promoting “the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat.” For those of us who grew up watching that program, a quick nostalgia hit..

  7. There is, of course, still a female (and POC) candidate in the race.

    • Tulsi? Is she still in politics? I thought her campaign was just a vanity tour.

      • She’s got a delegate. She’s a force to be reckoned with.

        • No surprise you are a supporter.

          • I think she has some reasonable points on foreign policy (which hasn’t been discussed much at all in the primary season). I think she’s incredibly weak on domestic issues – without much of a coherent strategy for healthcare or dealing with student debt. But you can’t complain about female candidates being excluded if you’re the one doing the excluding.

        • Ha Ha. Hannity agrees.

    • She’s not a real candidate. She’s running to aid Putin. If she were a real candidate she would have dropped out already.

  8. The question that needs to be answered (for me, at least) is why Warren was unable to “seal the deal” with female voters. She pretty consistently placed third or worse with women voters. In the early races, her female vote totals and Klobuchar’s *combined* were less than the top-tier male candidates’ female totals. She exit-polled a little higher among women than men, but not enough to give her a significant base.

    • Women back men and support men and afraid of their own power. This is nothing new and has been happening since the beginning of time. Since the start of this race the narrative was that women aren’t electable or likable. When Hillary “lost” the country went apeshit “see! This is what happens when you nominate a woman!” All those fears came back ten fold. So you have the Bernie females who truly believe if we picked Bernie he would have won, these are the types who are all about being the “cool girl” and having the boys like them, the “I’m not like other girls” types, the ride or die types… then you have the Biden females who really just want daddy to come back and save them and return things back to normal.. they’re used to their uncles and fathers and male family members babbling on about bizarre cornpop stories and find it charming when he can’t remember their names, cracking nervous smiles is second nature to them.

      • “Since the start of this race the narrative was that women aren’t electable or likable.”

        It might have been the narrative, but anyone who could count knows that wasn’t true in 2016. Hillary did get more votes than Trump, so she was certainly electable. I think her campaign strategy was flawed (and she badly underestimated Trump’s appeal in the “Blue Wall” states), but that says nothing about her merits as a candidate or whether she would have won if her campaign paid less attention to flawed computer models and more attention to the observations of people on the ground.

        Honestly, I was on the fence between Warren and Sanders for quite awhile, but I found her strategy for implementing M4A to be completely unworkable and politically naive. Planning to delay the final vote on a major policy initiative until after the midterms was just a recipe for failure.

        • Her M4A plan was unworkable? As opposed to Sanders’ plan of a ‘revolution’ making it happen?

          Ugh. She laid out exactly how she’d pay for it and how she planned on getting it implemented. Sanders failed to do so. This is exactly why women don’t win. You answered your own question. You can stop asking. You’re willing to overlook a male being unprepared and willing to overlook a woman who is.

          FYI, Warren was the only candidate to put out a plan to address the Corona virus. The 2 old white men have still haven’t

          • Implementing any complex policy like that as a series of multiple votes, the last of which would occur after the midterms is indeed completely unworkable. Every single vote is an opportunity for parliamentary maneuvering to derail the process. It is almost universally true that the party in power loses seats in the midterm. Any plan that relies on passing major legislation after that is doomed to fail. That strategy won’t give you M4A. In fact, it’s unlikely to give you even a public option. At best it would restore the ACA cuts. Some of the preliminary votes would succeed, but the final implementation would be stuck in Congress forever.

            One unified piece of legislation with a fixed timetable (and the funding measures incorporated *into* that legislation) is the only way this is going to work. And even that will be very, very hard. I think her proposal was second-best and certainly infinitely preferable to any of the other candidates, but I don’t think it would have succeeded.

    • It’s shell shock from the 2016 election. When you have a lunatic like Trump in the White House, you absolutely can’t take a chance that your neighbor will vote for the woman candidate regardless how overqualified and dynamic she is.
      Plus, chuck Todd and friends essentially erased her from coverage. Even if we don’t think media coverage should carry so much weight, it actually does. People want to know that the press feel comfortable with the candidate. Instead, they deleted her almost completely and hardly made a fuss about any of her debate performances.
      I think the Silicon Valley billionaires and Wall Street guys didn’t want her and Todd types are their buddies. That certainly didn’t help.

      • “I think the Silicon Valley billionaires and Wall Street guys didn’t want her and Todd types are their ovine catamites. That certainly didn’t help.”

        FIFY.

        They’re not too crazy about Bernie, either. I guess the question here is, if the Democratic Party is so irredeemably corrupt then what’s the alternative?

      • The misogyny runs deep. There are many, many men (and more than a few women) who can’t abid the thought of a woman as CIC of the military and other macho attributes of this country.

        Plus, in their own lives, if a woman is POTUS it might mean their girlfriends or wives could get ideas about being equal and all.

        Just checking out the comments here, of all places, reinforces this for me.

        • Some of it is certainly misogyny, but some of it is also just naked self-interest. Let’s face it, anyone proposing the kind of reforms that Warren has advocated would face an uphill battle. After all, she actually had the gall to use the “c” word (“corruption”). The misogyny just makes it worse.

  9. Propertius,

    “Hillary’s campaign strategy was flawed” is another excuse that’s been beaten to death as to why she “lost”. Hillary lost because of the rampant sexism spewed daily by the media, republicans, comey’s sexist press conference about investigating Hillary’s e-mails again, sanders and his bros and finally the russians meddling in the election all over social media and, I believe, with the voting machines themselves.

    No man running could succeed with all of that thrown at them and not having the media constantly lower the standards for them, but she did win the popular vote by a wide margin, so it appears that her campaign strategy wasn’t that bad! It was the misogyny, stupid!

    • Her strategy was bad for a country that has an electoral college.

      Spending her time running up the vote totals in California and New York was a waste of resources – she was always going to win big there. And I don’t actually blame *her* for that. I think she was ill-served (which is why I blame her *campaign* and not her *candidacy*). And yes, lots of bad things happened to her in the campaign. Them’s the breaks. It’s not like she didn’t know to expect that sort of crap.

      • Wow, little did I know we have a national campaign manager right here in our midst.

        • So you think her strategy was good for a country with an electoral college? In what way?

          • What happened to Hillary, Propertius, were attacks by a totally biased media backed by a misogynistic country. Most men will never admit that their insecurity and fear of an extradinarily strong, intelligent, well educated women scares the crap out of them and they will do anything to boost the men (even one as flawed, not to mention too old, as biden) in order to make HER look “unelectable” and “unlikeable”. What a crock.

            Bernie did not have a better strategy than Hillary, or he would have won the nomination but no one EVER accused him of being a bad candidate with a flawed strategy when he lost!

            Men have a media that constantly turns “shit into shinola” for them and lowers the expectations and standards when they fail miserably or say something utterly stupid or inappropriate. How can you win when the game is rigged?

            The problem is not the women, it’s the men who can’t accept that a woman can do the job better. You would rather destroy our country than support the best candidate who happensto be a woman. That’s f__ed up!

        • And, no, not any experience on the national level. Just a House District Chair, County Vice-Chair, Vacancy Committee Chair, State Executive Committee member, and State Central Committee member, and Platform Committee member. And more State Assemblies than I can count.

          So, why the personal nastiness?

          • Because you’re being obnoxious?

            I await your book, How To Lose Friends And Alienate People.

            Dude, if this was a Disqus blog, I probably would have had you say hello to my little friend, the “Block” function, well before now.

        • Mansplainers gotta mansplain. 😛

          Sometimes, this is the only proper answer to them.

      • Whelp, I was here in PA in 2016 and she was here *constantly*. I can’t remember her going to California and New York. Or NJ. It’s almost as if… the voters in those states were solidly onboard and she couldn’t clone herself.
        The WI and MI narrative never did make much sense to me. After she lost Florida, she had to win PA. WI and MI couldn’t have saved her.

        • She did lots of fundraisers in the Hamptons, Silicon Valley, and Hollywood. Not enough retail politics in states where she was weak. Not only that, but there was way too much coverage of those fundraisers in the Times and other news outlets. It just didn’t play well.

          Even Bill pointed it out (and Bill Clinton, for all his personal foibles, has probably the sharpest political mind this country has produced in a century or so).

          I made a comment about that right here on this very blog. I know you worked really hard for her in PA, but I think the national organization could have done more. Her GOTV was certainly weak elsewhere (like where I live). She didn’t have any presence here until a week after early voting had already started. She won this state, but it could have gone the other way quite easily.

  10. ***Back in 2008 I was most definitely a “low information” voter myself when I voted for Obama. I despised Bush and Obama sounded mighty good. (mostly lies as I found out later to my sorrow)***

    So here you are, blogging in a spot which was founded because of those of us who weren’t low information, way back when.

    Perhaps you should investigate the history why The Confluence came to be. PUMA’s and all that.

    For my part, I was a delegate for Hillary to my state convention in 2008 and had to endure abuse and ridicule. In fact, the Obama delegates proudly sported “Bros before hos” T shirts. Perhaps you might recall the toxic misogyny of his campaign.

    Perhaps you could research Jon Favreau groping a cut out of Senator/Secretary Clinton, for starters.

    Anyway, welcome, but your attempts to “explain” things to this particular group of,have always been high information, voters may not go well.

  11. I am sick to death of being mansplained to, especially by Bernie acolytes. JFC, we get it, Trump is bad, Bernie is slightly better, if we’re stuck with him we’ll maybe vote for him. A man who didn’t bother to register to vote until he was in his 40’s and running for Congress, a man whose campaign has been funded for decades by the NRA (check out his voting record) a man who was only of one of two Senators to vote against the bipartisan Magnistsky Act, a man who still lauds Fidel Castro as a visionary leader, a man who has nothing to show for his decades in the Senate, not one bill with his name attached. Yeah, awesome, can’t wait to hold my nose for that vote.

    • I don’t think you’re going to have to worry about voting for Bernie. The rest of the races are likely to be bad for him and he’ll continue to lose to Biden. I guess he’ll keep going though until the end. Hopefully this time he won’t throw a fit but then he’s going to have to concede to a man not a woman.

  12. Per Propertius, regarding Gabbard:

    “I think she has some reasonable points on foreign policy (which hasn’t been discussed much at all in the primary season). I think she’s incredibly weak on domestic issues – without much of a coherent strategy for healthcare or dealing with student debt. But you can’t complain about female candidates being excluded if you’re the one doing the excluding.”

    By your logic, you should be all in supporting Trump, seeing as he’s a male candidate, amirite?

    • I’m not criticizing the absence of male candidates.

      • IOW, I’m not suggesting you should support her – just pointing out that denying her very existence doesn’t help your argument much.

  13. This is wishful thinking on a dangerous scale and I want no part of it.

    Not surprisingly, I don’t see it that way. I see it as an acknowledgement of just how bad things have gotten and just how much fundamental change is going to be required to set things right. It’s going to take a lot more than just winning an election. Warren’s right about this: one of the most important things that has to change is the role of money in politics, another is the relative priority of capital and labor not just in the economy, but in society as a whole. I submit that the real danger is not thinking this way.

    • It’s going to take a lot more than just winning an election

      .
      Yes! It will take more than winning an election. But first you have to win the election

      That’s not Bernie’s goal here. He says it himself. I take that back. It’s not his number one goal. And he’s right. He has to persuade everyone in the country of the rightness of his vision before they will vote for him. And here is where we see the tragic flaw for Bernie. He should have been working on persuading the voters to his vision BEFORE he decided to run. He needed to develop a movement that everyone could get behind.
      He didn’t do that. He assumed that voters would be swayed. But they’re terrified. And he’s not offering them calm. He’s offering them even more uncertainty because they are so emotionally overwhelmed that they aren’t able to do thought experiments. So he sends his followers out to break the knees of his closest allies- the Warren supporters – to help get to a critical mass. It’s not going to work because many Warren supporters understand that this knot can’t be untied until you win the election.
      For Bernie it’s always a short cut. He isn’t feeling the zeitgeist right now. And he can’t push voters in his direction because of that zeitgeist.
      Sad to say but he’s getting too old, he missed his chance. He needs to put the election first.

  14. Off topic:

    I DIDN’T CHOOSE THE METAL LIFE.

    THE METAL LIFE CHOSE ME.

  15. From a commenter on Cannonfire:

    Some people’s entire philosophy of life consists of “Fuck You”. The ones that lean right voted for Trump. The ones that lean left are voting for Bernie.

    I still don’t think Prop fits in that category, but many other Sanders supporters do–the ones who are nicknamed “Sandernistas” or “Talibern”. I hope they are a minority among the Sanders supporters, but they seem too numerous to all be Russopublican trolls or bots.

    • Just like the nasty minority among Obama’s supporters in 2008 seemed too numerous to all have been trolls or bots.

      • I met many of the IRL Obama supporters, during the 2008 primary, and they existed in the flesh. They were every bit as arrogant and bullying in person, as online. The IRL Bernie supporters with whom I interact now are less so, only because over the years, the over the top aggression tactics has been toned down (for optics purposes only), but they are definitely condescending, and, as RD referenced, absolutely disbelieving that I could have any other perspective than that of their Prophet Bernius.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: