Centrists say this is proof Sanders or Warren can't win. They're wrong

Homepage | Forums | Main Forums | General Discussion | Centrists say this is proof Sanders or Warren can't win. They're wrong

Viewing 19 reply threads
  • Author
    • #238072
      • Total Posts: 5,157

      The exit polls for the UK general election had barely been published and US pundits were already tweeting out the lessons for next year’s US presidential election. It’s almost as if their conclusions had been reached before the results were known. “Right populism will always beat left populism,” tweeted Yascha Mounk, which might be true, but I know of few elections in which right populism and left populism went head to head for first place – leaving aside whether the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, is a left populist, which even Mounk admitted is “not obvious”.

      Jonathan Chait published a piece entitled American Leftists Believed Corbyn’s Inevitable Victory Would Be Their Model, which mostly challenged the optimism among the US left following Corbyn’s surprise performance in the 2017 elections. The point of these interventions was obvious: Corbyn’s defeat shows that the Democratic party should not elect a “hard left” candidate, such as Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, and can only win with a “moderate” candidate such as Joe Biden or Pete Buttigieg. Joe Biden said as much, arguing “this is what happens” when you move “so, so far to the left”.

      This could well be true, although I remain unconvinced – especially as the UK elections definitely don’t provide any specific evidence for this conclusion. In many ways, the results were in line with broader trends in Europe, notably that (radicalized) mainstream rightwing parties are quite successful, as, for instance, in Austria and the Netherlands, while social democratic parties are getting hammered virtually everywhere, irrespective of whether they are “moderate” or “radical”.


      Bernie figured he could do more good ALIVE,
      than dead in a small plane "accident".
      I think he's right.

      Don't you?

    • #238075
      • Total Posts: 939

      As if Warren is “hard left”… That’s a Whopper right there.

      "If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States."
      - Henry A. Wallace
      (FDR's Vice President until he was forced out by the corrupt forces of obscene wealth.)

    • #238085
      • Total Posts: 2,684

      The Centrists say the Left can’t win.  The Leftists say the Centrists can’t win.  The Rightists say neither can win.

      I guess we’ll have to wait for next November to see who’s right.

      Image result for johnny carson

      Tell me, great captain, how do the angels sleep when the devil leaves his porch light on? Tom Waites

    • #238089
      • Total Posts: 2,328

      I hesitate to suggest without proof that there was any “meddling,” but I think it’s fair to say that defeating Corbyn was almost as important to the ruling elite in the United States as it was to their counterparts in the UK.

      I’m reminded of Bernie’s “loss” in the California primary in 2016.

    • #238111
      • Total Posts: 1,472

      @RufusTFirefly  There was an excellent article from Caitlin Johnstone about the meddling in the UK elections.

    • #238131
      • Total Posts: 2,328
    • #238149
      • Total Posts: 1,785

      As if the “Centrists” have such a great winning record.

      Run an R-Lite against a real R and guess who wins every time. Truman’s statement still holds.

      I don't waste my time teaching pigs to sing.

    • #238169
      • Total Posts: 2,005

      Wouldn’t surprise me if the British election was stolen.

      The system was never going to allow Jeremy Corbyn to win any more than this system will ever allow Bernie to.

      • #238237
        • Total Posts: 2,609

        ironically the two-step party-controlled state-by-state election might give us a Sanders 2020 that they cat stop: we’ve always been going on about how a parliamentary or direct-representation system or IRV will save us, but Canada, Australia, Britain, Germany, France, RUSSIA are in the same boat; so what worked against Corbyn would have no equivalents in the US

        Corbyn was also facing cooked-up nontroversies like Brexit (all the flipped seats voted  Leave) and Labour anti-Semitism: they can do that, and will do it, and do everything they can, and may even well screw over Sanders and make him concede again after we’ve put more millions into him

        and Assange remains in his cell

      • #238756
        Ohio Barbarian
        • Total Posts: 14,561

        Stolen? How? The exit poll showed the Tories doing significantly about 20 seats better than they actually did when the paper ballots were counted by hand. There was a lot of perfidious propaganda that went unchallenged in most of the British press, but that’s not the same thing as stealing. it.

        It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.--Eugene Debs

        Show me a man that gets rich by being a politician, and I'll show you a crook.--Harry Truman

    • #238230
      • Total Posts: 2,644

      Like anyone should listen to the Mondale’s, Dukakis’s, Gore’s, Kerry’s, and Hillary’s of the world on winning elections.

      All governments lie to their citizen's, but only Americans believe theirs.

    • #238236
      • Total Posts: 2,328

      Once again, like Jeffrey Epstein’s initial aborted suicide, I fear the results of this election may be used as a setup to supply a plausible explanation should Bernie “lose” in the general election.

      • #238306
        retired liberal
        • Total Posts: 2,697

        The plan is Bernie will lose, even if they have to burn millions of ballots in several bonfires. And this is just in the Primary.
        If he could somehow win the Primary, then there will be numerous big bonfires on Election night.
        Bernie is not nearly corrupt enough to be President.

        We are an arrogant species, believing our fantasy based "facts" are better than the other person's fake facts.
        If you are wrong, it will be because you are not cynical enough.
        Both major political parties are special interest groups enabling each other for power and money, at the expense of the people they no longer properly serve…
        Always wear a proper mask when out and about. The life you save could be both yours and mine.

    • #238336
      • Total Posts: 571

      How many elected seats were lost during Obama’s tenure?

      And we are getting scolded by the Master Artisans of losing?

      "I welcome their hatred" Franklin D Roosevelt

    • #238365
      • Total Posts: 5,699

      Why Bernie Sanders Is No Jeremy Corbyn


      There’s no doubt that Sanders shares some of the Corbyn view of the world. He will sometimes invoke the inglorious American history of intervening in Latin America. But Sanders is less conspiratorial and more open-minded than his British cousin. Consider how differently they have reacted to Vladimir Putin. When the Russians poisoned an ex-spy and his daughter in Salisbury last year, Corbyn expressed immediate skepticism about how quickly the British government apportioned blame for the crime. Sanders hasn’t similarly hesitated to criticize Putin. He readily condemned Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. And he has said that he would make opposition to authoritarian kleptocrats central to his foreign policy. (His speeches linking global inequality to illiberal authoritarianism contain a theory of kleptocracy that other candidates should borrow.)

      While Sanders might have been a foreign-policy outlier in the years immediately following 9/11, his views aren’t so far from the prevailing post-Iraq consensus. He doesn’t reject humanitarian intervention on principle, even as he rails against endless wars. Sanders supported the U.S. air strikes during the Kosovo War; he was sympathetic to Barack Obama’s intervention in Libya, although he eventually came to view that policy skeptically. Where Corbyn has said that he wished NATO never existed, Sanders has merely bellyached about member states paying their dues.

      At the core of Corbyn’s foreign policy is an obsession with Israel, which has manifested as incessant sneering about Zionism. Sanders hasn’t stoked rage against Zionists, perhaps because he is the descendant of Holocaust survivors, who spent several months living on a Kibbutz near Haifa in his early 20s. Although he tends to avoid talking about his ethnic identity, he published a recent essay in Jewish Currents, in which he wrote about his “pride and admiration for Israel” and the “enormous achievement of establishing a democratic homeland for the Jewish people after centuries of displacement and persecution.”

      That said, Sanders is often highly critical of Israel. He has toyed with the idea of leveraging U.S. military aid to prod Israel into ending the occupation of the West Bank, for instance, a substantial break with the consensus. And he has proved reluctant to call out anti-Semitism in the ranks of his own supporters, including one of his surrogates. On the subject of Corbyn’s bigotry, he has remained disappointingly silent.

      Jesus: Hey, Dad? God: Yes, Son? Jesus: Western civilization followed me home. Can I keep it? God: Certainly not! And put it down this minute--you don't know where it's been! Tom Robbins in Another Roadside Attraction

    • #238556
      • Total Posts: 1,199

      I would seriously consider the possibility that MI6 declared the winners, but probably discount it. It’s much more likely that Labor’s policy of undercutting Corbyn combined with their claims that working people trying to defend their jobs and wages as nothing but “racism” were the cause. Telling was Jonothan Pie, who is normally wonderful, saying that the Torries were terrible because the threatened the NHS (which they apparently did, but they also heavily increased funding after Tony Blair’s cuts) and cut the number of police. (while forgetting that British police have spent the last 3 years charging people with hate crimes for silly dog tricks and heated tweets)

      Our Democraps have a lot more inertia, but we are certainly going the same way.

    • #238640
      • Total Posts: 1,335

      As most of us here know, if Corbyn had won, the argument from pundits in the US media would have been, that’s THERE.

      But he lost, so instead, we get, “that’s HERE, TOO!”

      It will work on some people, but not on me or others who’ve been observing matters for decades now.

      The opinions and personal views expressed herein are solely those of the author, and should never be taken seriously.

    • #238679
      Cold Mountain Trail
      • Total Posts: 8,791

      Chait:  A voice to be ignored.

      “On September 26, 2011, Chait, while admitting he hadn’t read Gilad Atzmon’s book The Wandering Who…responded to John Mearsheimer’s comment about Atzmon’s book by citing passages which he regarded as characteristically antisemitic

      In February 2016, Chait argued in New York Magazine that “Liberals Should Support a Trump Republican Nomination”, predicting among other things that a Trump presidency would develop similar to the governorship of Arnold Schwarzenegger in California…In 2019, The Outline selected this piece as one of the “worst takes of the 2010s”, opining that “Chait’s immensely confident take […] is a humiliating crystallization of the wrongheaded thinking that propelled [Trump] to the White House.”

      Chait’s spouse, Robin Chait, is an analyst and pro-charter school advocate at WestEd. Jonathan Chait has written extensively in support of charter schools….On January 14, 2019, he accused Senator Elizabeth Warren of selling out to “powerful interests” for her opposition to an initiative which would have expanded the number of charter schools in Massachusetts….”


    • #238689
      B Calm
      • Total Posts: 837

      So they are saying the only way we can win is to vote for someone like a Hillary Clinton!

      Yea, like that worked out for them in the last presidential election, so let us do it again.  Bwhaha, they haven’t learned one damn thing!

    • #238702
      • Total Posts: 4,077

      For all the reasons above – bullshit.  The UK oligarchs beat Corbyn with lies and smears.  Which will pretty much be the approach of the oligarchs in the US if Bernie is the candidate.  In fact, already starting.

    • #238752
      Ohio Barbarian
      • Total Posts: 14,561

      It’s an absurd comparison, for several solid reasons that the American kleptocracy and their grossly overpaid lackeys in the media nearly always fail to mention. First, this was the Brexit election according to the corrupt British corporate media(like BBC, Sky News, and many others), and most British voters did vote as if it was.

      The Tories had a simple, clear message on this issue: Brexit no matter what. Labour? Not so much. Labour sat out the original Brexit election because it was divided itself on the issue. Corbyn had opposed Britain joining the EEC, the predecessor of the EU, back in the day for fear it would erode labor rights.

      He was right about that, BTW. Regardless, this time around he offered to renegotiate Brexit with the EU and then have another Leave/Remain referendum on the new deal. I think most English people really just wanted it done and over with, and so they didn’t vote Labour. That does not mean, however, that they voted Conservative. In fact, they didn’t. The Tories got what, 43% of the popular vote?

      Second, there was perfidy and collusion afoot between the Tories and the Brexit Party. The latter did not run any candidates in parliamentary districts where the incumbent was a Conservative. They did, however, run in every district where there was a Labour incumbent. In those districts, from what I’ve seen the Tories performed 2-3% better than they did two years ago, but the Brexit Party picked up 10-13% more while Labour support dropped by a similar amount, thus giving the Tory candidate a plurality and thus the win in Britain’s “first past the post” electoral system. I think this is yet another example of why Instant Runoff Voting is a Very Good Idea.

      If the Brexit Party had contested every district, the results might have been significantly different. We will never know. Nonetheless, I think it’s clear that strategy had a decisive impact on the election.

      Third, thanks to a lot of propaganda, Corbyn was painted as some kind of anti-Semitic bigot, which had to have hurt him with at least a small percentage of voters who may have otherwise supported him. He is, in fact, one of the least popular candidates in the UK as a whole.

      In America, there is nothing remotely similar to Brexit that’s a political issue. There is no single-issue populist party that can take a significant percentage of votes away from the Democratic nominee. There’s the office of the President itself, where every American can vote for one individual for that office and split their party vote downticket, whereas in the UK voters can’t do that. For example, they couldn’t vote for Johnson or the Lib Dem or the SNP over Corbyn and still vote for a Labour MP.

      Finally, unlike poor Jeremy Corbyn, Bernie Sanders is the most popular national politician in the country, and he has a growing working class movement behind him.

      It all boils down to: We’re not England. The irony is that, as someone pointed out above, if Labour had won a majority the same people would be going on about We’re not England instead of saying that what applies in the UK applies in the US. I’m sure they had those talking points ready to go, just in case.

      It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.--Eugene Debs

      Show me a man that gets rich by being a politician, and I'll show you a crook.--Harry Truman

    • #238773
      • Total Posts: 1,199

      One slightly different take OB, Corbyn was not unpopular because of media smears (If he even was unpopular, which he probably was. For the MI6 theory see how well they managed the Skipral story) He became unpopular because he failed to stand up for the British workers after claiming that he was. If he had stood up to the blairites and said the the British working class was not racist, they were British, and they deserved to live in a just society that supported them, not chewed them up and discarded them he would have retained his early popularity. Corbyn was not Bernie, he was more like Obama.

      • #238792
        Ohio Barbarian
        • Total Posts: 14,561

        @doh1304 I don’t think it’s fair to say that Corbyn just abandoned the British working class-his policies certainly didn’t-but it is true that he didn’t stand up to the Blairites, or Vichy Labour, when they were throwing their hysterical allegations of racism and Russia! around.

        We can certainly agree that he waffled. A lot. And that always hurts leftist candidates. Perhaps the rightists get away with it because they do it most of the time.

        It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.--Eugene Debs

        Show me a man that gets rich by being a politician, and I'll show you a crook.--Harry Truman

    • #238837
      • Total Posts: 1,443

      Oh they’ll make it up as they go along.   What else can they do?  They don’t want either Sanders or Warren so that centrists say they can’t win is totally predictable.

      I feel much better since I gave up hope.

      "If everyone demanded peace instead of another television set, then there’d be peace." – John Lennon

Viewing 19 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.