Why I disagree with zealots on both sides of the “electability” question
April 9, 2020 at 7:58 PM - Views: 235 #300569The Internet is full of geniuses – several reside on JPR – who can already determine with absolute certainty what will happen in November. The striking thing is how many of these geniuses know the same thing: “If the Democrats nominate the candidate I like, that candidate will win easily, but if the Democrats nominate someone I don’t like, then Trump will cruise.”–When I put aside my personal preferences and try to predict an election that’s still several months away, what I come up with is: Regardless of whom the Democrats nominate, the general election could go either way.–Electability is overblown for two reasons. First, the vast majority of voters – left, right, and center – will vote the same way in either hypothetical election (Biden versus Trump or Bernie versus Trump).–Second, the small differences on the margin become even less important because they offset each other. The Biden boosters point to anti-Trump types who’ll vote for Biden but who wouldn’t be comfortable with a self-described socialist (they focus solely on that dreaded “S” word in the phrase “democratic socialist”). The Bernie boosters point to anti-Trump types who’ll vote for Bernie but who wouldn’t be comfortable with a comparatively conservative Democrat who opposes many progressive goals. I think both these views are correct. There are voters in each of those camps. The result is that the net difference between these two hypothetical elections is even smaller.–When an incumbent seeks re-election, the single most important factor is the electorate’s judgment of that incumbent. On that basis, my guess at this point is that Trump would be a slight underdog against any plausible Democratic nominee (say, the last half-dozen or so who were left standing, sorry Marianne Williamson). His main hope for re-election was a strong economy for which he would (falsely) claim credit. That’s now been blasted. Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush were denied second terms in circumstances that were more favorable than what Trump is likely to face.
April 9, 2020 at 8:29 PM #300582NV WinoModerator
- Total Posts: 5,675
The pandemic has hurt Trump. On the other hand, there’s Joementia. The swamp king or Mr dementia? 🤔 If the Democrats pull a viable candidate out of the hat at the last minute, I think they will win. If they stick with Joe, who knows.
April 9, 2020 at 8:30 PM #300584carrotguyBlocked
- Total Posts: 508
sucks to be them? (read as a sanders supporter)
April 9, 2020 at 8:36 PM #300587djean111Participant
- Total Posts: 4,465
ream us a lot more quickly and smoothly than Trump can. For EIGHT MORE YEARS. Case in point – people are aghast!!!!! that Trump wants to cut the payroll tax, while Obama – with Biden as his VP – tucked a payroll tax deduction into his stimulus package, and had smooth sailing. That’s the “return to normal” that Biden promises. Nassty things lubed right through Congress. No thank you.
I do appreciate that making the entire election merely about electability does divert attention away from “issues” and “records”.
April 9, 2020 at 9:00 PM #300593Ohio BarbarianModerator
- Total Posts: 16,271
Americans have a tendency to rally round an incumbent president during an ongoing crisis, even if that president is responsible for the crisis.
To wit, 2004. By then it was widely known that Bush lied us into the Iraq War, but the old adage against changing horses in midstream won out over a lackluster Vichy Dem elitist who many voters didn’t trust. Why vote for Mr. Heinz? He don’t care, neither.
Now the Dems run an even worse candidate against the Big Bad Republican Incumbent, whose moral character is just as corrupt as Trump’s and who has dementia at best and Alzheimer’s at worst. That is certainly not a recipe for winning an election.
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
April 9, 2020 at 9:19 PM #300601
April 10, 2020 at 12:11 AM #300715MaedhrosParticipant
- Total Posts: 683
Voters do what they’re told, rather than exercising their franchise.
His body recovered from his torment and became hale,
but the shadow of his pain was in his heart;
and he lived to wield his sword with left hand
more deadly than his right had been.
April 10, 2020 at 1:16 AM #300751
Trump is still vulnerable and his approval ratings keep slipping the longer this goes on but Biden is certainly someone that can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
April 9, 2020 at 9:05 PM #300596salemcourtParticipant
- Total Posts: 1,825
Fuck, if you think Biden will win, you probably have some of Joe’s dementia!
April 9, 2020 at 9:13 PM #300600
The old saw that Dems win when people turn out should still hold hold true. Obama inspired atypical voters to show up. Her inspired people to show up, but mostly against her.
There was no question that Bernie would draw more atypical voters (youth and indys). This is why it was so critical for the Dems and msm to undermine him at every turn. No question they prefer Trump over Bernie.
For the “socialism” thing, surely @stockholmer and others have the right take, that Bernie handled the Dems labeling horribly. Of course the Repub would too, but they already do that with every Dem candidate. The story here is all about the Dems bad faith. (Which is why we now need to do our best to kill them.)
Jesse #Ventura2020 volunteers needed
April 9, 2020 at 9:25 PM #300603FasttenseParticipant
- Total Posts: 1,047
So, here is the thing. Both parties have a controlled corporate media machine they manipulate for their own purposes.
But the GOP has both a right wing media And a rigged voting system on their side. Fox and Limpballs are right wing controlled media. Some of the vote rigging is perfectly legal like voter suppression and gerrymandering. Some of it is illegal like rigged voting machines and falsified counts. But 90% of the rigging in the general election is in favor of the GOP.
The Dems (not Democratic party since it has lost it’s liberal base) have a Dem leaning media like MSNBC and the New York Times. And they are able to rig votes, through the same means the GOP uses, in the primaries. BUT, and this is big, they can Not rig votes in the general. That is all controlled by the GOP.
The only thing that can overcome the rigged voting system is getting very enthusiastic voters out, the suppressed and disenfranchised must come out to vote in vast numbers.
The GOP gets it’s enthusiastic voters out by appealing to racists, religious idiots, greedy fearful white men and sexists. These are historically under-served groups, considered evil and not purposely courted as a voting block. Yeah, Reagan dog whistled to the racists and it worked but it turns out there are NOT enough racist to out-vote normal people. So, he hid his racists appeal. But Trump doesn’t hide it and he also picks up other normally shunned groups like the religiously insane, the bigots, the sexist abusers and the antisemitic voters. They are just so thrilled that anyone in power thinks like them that they come out in droves. They love Trump for his support of their evils because every normal person shuns them. Yeah they don’t think of it as evil but we all know it is.
But since the Dems let the GOP rig the general, the only way the Dems can win is to get the enthusiastic suppressed voter out. All the people the GOP actively suppresses and disenfranchises have to come out to vote to overturn the GOP control. They did it in the House in the last election.
But Biden is a sexual abuser, a liar, mentally incompetent and not in favor of normal liberal policies. He does NOT excite anyone. Even the moderates and the mildly conservative voters, who have so far come out for Biden, ain’t all that enthused by Biden. Yeah, they talk a good game with their media machine but the only enthusiasm Biden generates is with the NOT Bernie crowd, the “I’m afraid of socialism” voter, and the filthy rich. They are not enough to get him into the White House. Those same voters who are afraid of Bernie ALSO vote for Trump. So they would Never vote for Biden when the Bernie scare is gone and Trump is more to their liking? Without Bernie, no one really cares about Biden. They got Trump already.
So, Biden doesn’t have a chance in Hell. He really doesn’t. There is no enthusiasm for him no mater how hard Bernie campaigns for the idiot. Biden has already lost to Trump.
So, now we got to decide how to get the enthusiasm back into people to overthrow the filthy rich who control all this. The enthusiasm of people for change is what is going to overthrow the filthy rich. Until that happens, it’s the same thing just a different day and with coronavirus.
April 9, 2020 at 9:33 PM #300609EarthartistParticipant
- Total Posts: 885
The geniuses you so arrogantly refer to says a lot, mostly about you.
I agree with Djean that the democrats are more dangerous then trump, but have to say at this point the US is collapsing and either party will keep that process going.
The warmongers in the demorat party will start a war, and frankly our military is just like our infrastructure failing badly. When corporation feed the top tier before all else you have failure Boeing is the perfect example of this, do not kid yourself that every aspect of the US military has the same failures. While the Russians and Chinese spend much less on their militaries, they are producing equipment that works and troops that will remain loyal. After the navy debacle the Troops now know that they matter not to the oligarchs.
April 9, 2020 at 9:43 PM #300650Passionate ProgressiveParticipant
- Total Posts: 2,307
was voter turnout.
The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.....Martin Luther King '63
April 9, 2020 at 9:58 PM #300656game meatParticipant
- Total Posts: 1,274
Since the 22nd amendment went into effect, the two parties have gone back and forth, eight years in, eight years out, the only two exceptions being Carter losing to Reagan in 1980 and Bush extending Repub rule another four years. In that sense, 2020 is most comparable to 1980 since, like Carter, Trump came into power after eight years of the opposition party in power.
You can make a case that this is a bad omen for Trump because the situation Trump finds himself in is worse than Carter. But you’d have to ignore the immense popularity of, and the enthusiasm for, Reagan, something Biden is lacking in, and that’s the nicest way of putting it. Sanders could have been a transformative candidate in the inverse, a sort of Reagan for the left, but it didn’t work out. That’s the key difference.
Trump still has his base but Biden doesn’t even really have one. He’s only the nominee based on vague notions of electability. Electability is selecting a candidate based on what you think other people want. It’s all about being “safe.” It’s about picking someone who doesn’t offend. The catch is such a candidate is also not going to inspire as such criteria leads to banality over boldness. The result is you wind up with someone nobody wants.
How have the democrats done with such candidates in recent history? Moderates like Gore, Kerry, and HRC all lost. That’s zero for three. A perfect null streak. True, the pattern of eight years in and eight years out were also against those three, but that is also true of Biden.
2020 may very well end up more like 2004. Covid could easily be Trump’s 9/11, rather than Carter’s high unemployment/inflation. Not only do people tend to rally around the leader during a crisis, but the Democrats have overplayed their hand on Trump’s poor response to such a degree that it could help him. The hysteria around covid (some of it justified) has lowered the bar for Trump that if society doesn’t collapse by November it will look like Trump did a decent job. The bar is that low.
Ultimately, it will depend on what the covid crisis looks like come election time and how the general public perceive Trump’s handling of it. If things look worse in November than today, Biden might win despite himself. If things look better, or even somewhat stable, Trump will probably win.
April 10, 2020 at 1:13 AM #300747
At first I was like I bet no one wants to President with this going and I still feel that way but I cut him slack but the more I learn about this the more I learn he did a poor job.
Look at recently Republicans are obsessing over the WHO director and Trump is still at it with his conspiracy theories (mail in balloting fraud) in a middle of a crisis.
April 9, 2020 at 10:03 PM #300659ravensongParticipant
- Total Posts: 2,222
the same centrist shit has resulted in a nationwide lockdown due to a predicted pandemic with a bonus totally epic and unprecedented economic collapse, and a fascist in the White House.
The internet is full of centrist geniuses who continually advocate repeating the same behavior over and over and expecting a different while telling us they will get us a different result if we would only support their moderate RW candidate. These very same centrist geniuses told us we should vote to nominate Hillary Clinton because she was electable, after an 8 year term incumbent Democratic President, and Bernie wasn’t.
Brilliant!!! Although I concede that Trump is so infinitely awful that this time around he may be defeated by even an unnamed houseplant that has a possibility of defeating him. However, if Trump refuses to step down after being the loser of the electoral college vote, said houseplant or other must be willing to stand up and fight, rather than roll over submissively like some collaborating centrist milquetoast putz Republican wannabe.
Chuckles, the pragmatic, sensible centrist genius woodchuck….
“A lie doesn't become truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good, just because it's accepted by a majority.” ~ Booker T. Washington
The truth is, there’s no such thing as being “anti-Fascist.” Either you are a decent human being with a conscience, or you are a fascist.
April 9, 2020 at 10:17 PM #300662bazukhovParticipant
- Total Posts: 2,810
And the answer is…………………
Tell me, great captain, how do the angels sleep when the devil leaves his porch light on? Tom Waites
April 9, 2020 at 10:35 PM #300672@bernin4u and @passionateprogressive mention turnout. As Bernie himself has said, his path to victory in this nomination fight was to mobilize many people, especially the young and the discouraged, and get them to become first-time voters. As Bernie has also said, this largely didn’t happen. It’s very frustrating that the people who don’t vote are, disproportionately, those who would benefit from electing a progressive. Unfortunately, that hasn’t changed this year. The best we can hope for is that Bernie has planted seeds that will bear fruit in later cycles. (For example, AOC was an organizer for Bernie in 2016.)–What about the impact of COVID-19? As @ohiobarbarian and @gamemeat point out, its electoral impact will be significant. We just don’t know which way yet. After 9/11, Bush’s poll ratings shot up. He got additional rally-round-the-flag surges when he invaded Iraq and then upon Saddam’s capture. By contrast, Trump got only a small bump earlier this year. At this point he seems to have dropped back to roughly his pre-pandemic level. There’s a good chance that he’s already peaked, and that, by fall, he’ll be punished for the economy the way Carter and Bush41 were. Anyway, for purposes of electability, my point stands: The key will be the electorate’s assessment of Trump’s performance, not the identity of his opponent.
April 9, 2020 at 10:56 PM #300685Ohio BarbarianModerator
- Total Posts: 16,271
@jimlane You are saying that the opposition candidate to the incumbent doesn’t matter. It most certainly does. Reagan beat Carter because he did generate enthusiasm and high voter turnout. FDR beat Hoover because he generated high enthusiasm and turnout.
Clinton beat Bush I not because of enthusiasm and high turnout for Slick Willie, but because Ross Perot split the Republican vote in the right states warning us about NAFTA, a specific issue that the Democratic Party ignores to this day.
Jimmy Carter would have beaten a lackluster Republican, and Herbert Hoover would have beaten another Al Smith. Howard Dean may have beaten Dubya in 2004, according to Dubya’s own people, who were relieved when John Ketchup Fortune won the nomination.
This theory that measures a few select factors and then predicts the winner based on them alone, and says it doesn’t matter who and what the candidates are, is garbage. The guy pushing it is a pompous asshole, too. I can’t remember his name.
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
April 10, 2020 at 12:31 AM #300726–What I wrote: “When an incumbent seeks re-election, the single most important factor is the electorate’s judgment of that incumbent.”–Your paraphrase: “You are saying that the opposition candidate to the incumbent doesn’t matter.”–When I identify something as the single most important factor, that doesn’t mean that it’s the only important factor. When more than 100 million people vote in an election that spans a continent, many things matter.–As for the opposition candidate, I summarized in the OP how I think it matters this year. Biden and Bernie each appeal to some voters who reject the other. Nevertheless, I’m looking at the nomination battles of 2008 and 2016. In each year, somewhere around 90% of the supporters of the losing candidate (Clinton and Sanders, respectively) gave their general-election votes to the winner (Obama and Clinton, respectively). The same will probably be true this year.–The theory you criticize is probably The Keys to the White House, by Allan Lichtman. He joins me in rejecting the view that the opposition candidate to the incumbent doesn’t matter. One of the thirteen factors he identifies is whether the challenging party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. Also, he’s not a pompous asshole. I met him once, when he and his wife gave me a ride to a mutual friend’s wedding, and he’s a nice guy in person, whatever you think of his analysis.
April 10, 2020 at 1:10 AM #300745djean111Participant
- Total Posts: 4,465
why bother with Bernie’s supporters, then? That’s the part I find bizarre – the smug assumption that 90% will vote for the DNC’s Chosen One, even if that Chosen One is the polar opposite of Bernie and also sneers at Bernie’s supporters (Biden’s latest is bullshit, we all know that) – and then waste time trying to what, get the other 10%? If Biden is so electable, the Democratic Party should be fine! I do venture to say that not a single JPR member will change their mind on whatever they have decided to do, at this point. I admit that reading the vote for the blue stuff is a guilty pleasure, in a way. Because, well, nope.
Straw poll at my house – 100% will not vote for Biden. I will vote Green, my son will not vote, but would have voted for Bernie, grandson will either vote Green or Trump – because he knows Biden’s record, and knows Biden is contemptuous of his generation and feels four more years beats eight more years of the “evils”. That will not change if the DNC replaces Biden with another Vichy Dem, either. So – it seems odd to me to even bother with Bernie’s supporters, if it is such a sure thing that 90% will ignore the issues and vote for a racist corporate warmongering Vichy Dem.
Just some thoughts; I am not even angry, I am not surprised at this turn of events, and see no need to change my position on how I will vote at all. I don’t even see the need to pay attention to the Democrats any more. Just be a load of lying and pandering from them. Been there, heard that. Shrug.
April 10, 2020 at 2:07 AM #300778
Hi @jimlane, yes unfortnately Bernie may have agreed to this. However, the 3-hour lines, early and exit polling, delays in results, evidence of campaigns’ involvement in the election process, etc, etc certainly do not.
This primary election cycle was filthy, probably worse than 2016. If anything, Bernie did at least 10% better than claimed.
Jesse #Ventura2020 volunteers needed
April 10, 2020 at 2:31 AM #300784
Remember, the context here is the view that one candidate (be it Bernie or Biden) is sure to win and the other is sure to lose. This view is espoused by many people, although of course they differ as to which candidate is which.
Let’s assume, for the sake of the argument, that, as you speculate, “Bernie did at least 10% better than claimed.” As I interpret your argument on this “electability” question (and please correct me if I’m wrong), you’re saying that Bernie would and in fact did motivate many first-time voters, that his vote totals would have been higher in a completely fair process, and that he would therefore do significantly better than Biden in a completely fair general election.
Well, even on those assumptions, it seems reasonable to make a related assumption, namely that the process in November will be substantially similar to the process in the past few months. Do you expect a completely fair general election? If Bernie motivates new voters whose votes then aren’t counted, the effect is the same as if they hadn’t been motivated in the first place.
My own view is that the process concerns you cite are quite valid. In fact, you could have made your list longer (as I’m guessing you know). Nevertheless, most of the problems are Republicans versus Democrats. These issues don’t shed light on comparative electability because the Republicans will cheat as much as they can in November regardless of whom the Democrats nominate.
April 10, 2020 at 3:26 AM #300804
..then one must assume it’s only because the demsm was not 100% against it happening. So they’d have to be at worst, neutral, and not trying to undermine the Sanders campaign at every turn. (The equivalent of Lucy holding the football steady and actually allowing Charlie Brown to kick it. Yes, verrry hypothetical.)
In the case that they didn’t entirely hate Bernie and thus were not complicit in re-electing Trump, what would the Repubs do to cheat the GE?
Not saying it can’t happen. But considering 2016, seems the best the demsm could come up with was their flimsy (at best) Russia! allegations. If there were evidence of actual cheating against them, seems likely they’d have at least mentioned it? Or ?
Jesse #Ventura2020 volunteers needed
April 11, 2020 at 5:15 AM #301395
You write, with regard to 2016, “If there were evidence of actual cheating against [the Democrats], seems likely they’d have at least mentioned it?”
Of course it was mentioned. Without bothering to do any research, I most immediately recall the situation in Michigan. I think it was Trump’s narrowest win. There was voter suppression that depressed Democratic turnout, especially black turnout in Detroit. One would have expected some falloff from 2008 and 2012 anyway, with a ticket headed by a white candidate instead of a black one, but there was also a considerable effect from the cheating — probably enough to flip the state to Trump.
April 10, 2020 at 12:43 AM #300731The Red MenaceParticipant
- Total Posts: 1,080
The Internet is full of geniuses – several reside on JPR – who can already determine with absolute certainty what will happen in November. The striking thing is how many of these geniuses know the same thing: “If the Democrats nominate the candidate I like, that candidate will win easily, but if the Democrats nominate someone I don’t like, then Trump will cruise.”
And the internet is also full of armchair nags who insist that because they personally lack the capacity to follow and understand repeated patterns, that therefore NOBODY could possibly understand them; thus it’s impossible to know anything about anything, so why bother, hurf hurf hurf, I am very intelligent!
I don’t know exactly what will happen come November. I don’t know what states will swing, by what margins. I don’t know if Trump is going to pull some shit to cancel the election, I don’t know if Joe Biden is going to get hit by a speedboat in a freak accident.
But i do know that Joe Biden can’t win in November. I know this because Joe’s task is an impossible one. After running a campaign ENTIRELY CENTERED ON attacking and alienating and denigrating half of the party he’s running for, he has to then bring those very same people back in. Unlike other candidates who did the same tactic like Butting or Harris, for example, he then has the hurdle of fifty years of doing everything in his power to enable and empower the GOP and far-right reactionaries. he even is on record bragging about doing so. he used it as a selling point in one of his senate campaigns. While other centrist candidates vacillated on the keynote issues of the party today – medicare for all, student debt, the green new deal, forever war – Joe Biden has been vociferously opposed to addressing these issues; he’s promised to veto medicare for all, his response to student debt is ‘give me a break,” his climate change solution is more fracking, and his foreign policy sounds a lot like ‘bomb, bomb Iran.”
His opponent will be Donald Trump, whose party sees him as a messianic figure. There will be no fight to unite the Republicans behind Trump, they’re already there. Trump doesn’t have to do any of that work, he has his voting bloc ready to go, just waiting for November. And no, there are no “moderate Republicans” who are chomping at the bit to defect to a useless centrist democrat. There never have been, as election after election has proven.
Uniting a broken party and drawing in enough independents to make the difference would have been a herculean task even for candidates like Bernie sanders, Elizabeth Warren, or even Beto O’Rourke. But i think they could have pulled it off. I’m even on record saying that the more myopic centrists like Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigeig, and Tom Steyer could pull in enough to act least beat Trump. There are only three candidates I had zero confidence in to beat Trump; Marianne Williamson (she’s adorable, but no), Bob Delaney (…shut up, Bill) and Joe Biden.
Not because i’m a “genius” but because I can read the fucking room.
April 10, 2020 at 12:55 AM #300736
I thought Hillary Clinton could lose despite 2016 Demographics being in our favor and 2020 demographics are in our favor for 2020 with young and Latino voters and I think Biden is one of the only candidates that could lose. He also has a history of saying stupid stuff that could cost him in a general election.
Anyways the electable people voted for Biden.
Also Bernie or Bust is what makes Bernie Sanders electable and this is according to research rather than my opinion. It is why Warren didn’t do as well in head to head polls vs Trump.
Either way I don’t understand the arrogant certainty people have when it comes to elections (or sports).
April 11, 2020 at 5:08 AM #301384
My impression is that, in both last cycle and this one, there were some voters in the Democratic primaries who had Bernie as their first choice for being President, but who were convinced that he couldn’t win the general, so they made a more conservative candidate (Clinton or Biden) their first choice for being the nominee.
There were probably a few mirror images (voters who would have preferred the conservative but who voted for Bernie because they thought that only he could win in November). My guess is that they weren’t nearly so numerous, though. There was a media drumbeat about the dangers of going too far left (as in, we heard a lot more about McGovern 1972 than about all the times a more mainstream Democrat lost). That’s why the net effect of the concern about electability was to cost Bernie some votes.
For the reasons stated in my OP, I think all these “electability” people were making a mistake. They should’ve voted for the candidate they thought would make the best President.
April 10, 2020 at 1:05 AM #300741David the GnomeParticipant
- Total Posts: 2,663
I could not possibly give less of a shit whether Trump or Biden or some other wealthy elite shmuck wins. The beatings will continue either way. It isnt about not liking them Jim – it is about both of them being completely despicable, hopelessly corrupt and greedy.
If I had to wager, at this point, it would be on Trump winning.
Irrelevant. What concerns me is who the green candidate will be – and who if anyone might step in to take charge of the movement Bernie began. Perhaps no one. Whatever, I’m done voting for assholes.
April 10, 2020 at 1:22 AM #300753salemcourtParticipant
- Total Posts: 1,825
@Fastsense Actually both parties rig elections to their favor. It depends on which party is in power in that State at the time of the elections.
April 10, 2020 at 1:23 AM #300755JunkerParticipant
- Total Posts: 192
No change, no hope Biden is about as bad a candidate as the Democratic Party could find. I think they prefer to lose. Then they can continue their whine fest without actually having to commit to any policies.
April 10, 2020 at 5:46 AM #300904MistaPParticipant
- Total Posts: 2,717
you’re correct that all our predictions came false, that all our JPR mouse-sleuthing about Shadow and Data for Progress and keyboard-strategizing about Bloomberg and Harris vanished in a spray of pixels the eve before Super Tuesday
all February we AND the polls and 538 pundits were confident it was Sanders in a runaway: we FELT something, that he was building steam and changing the narrative, every day until Feb. 29 I just felt more and more relief for not just me but everyone I knew: then it was taken away with one conference call; and then COVID hit, and it was rubbed in all our faces just how helpless we are
Trump’s polls are weak and he is facing economic disaster, and Biden will make some soft-left noises (Medicare expansion, debt): but he’s a hologram candidate–he imploded all February and that 50-point surge was clearly faked to resurrect the guy who didn’t even qualify in some of the first three states, and make him “frontrunnerTM” on all the channels: nuh-uh; Dems were relieved when Biden dropped because of the Mondale-like odor
they can’t even have Biden debate Sanders again, after he did relatively well during their only one-on-one, now he’s facing lots of public appearances, his crackhead babydaddy son, Tara Reade (I search every day to track how it spreads, it’s hitting CBS Harford), and further microstroke-addled blathering
“normalcy” and “status quo” messages don’t really work when you’re the challenger, and the GOP is tailor-made for status-quo politics and running out the clock: it literally can’t help a conservadem (interestingly about 1920, “Although William Gibbs McAdoo … was the strongest candidate, Wilson blocked his nomination in hopes a deadlocked convention would demand that he run for a third term, even though he was seriously ill, physically immobile, and in seclusion at the time”): you can’t have less change than simply not changing the President
for Trump, he remade his party in his and Tucker Carlson’s image; Sanders was blocked, whereas Biden had to have the path cleared for him at every opportunity and they’re STILL talking about a swapout; they have the statehouses, they have the gerrymandering (Census year!), they have the voting-machine companies; Sanders managed to win over D and indie voters, and Trump stole most of his shtick, but Obama was still too strong–70% of Congress will still block what 70% of Americans want
Trump’s not doctrinaire like Cheney or the Pauls or Ryan, he’s an applause-hunting human shark isn’t going to turn down talking about the Australian-style system he mentioned in 2000 and 2016 (ironically he’s a cipher no less than Biden); he’s putting his name on the checks, ended the insurance mandate, and hasn’t started one war
and of course my safest bet that Biden wouldn’t make it: Kerry, McCain, Romney, Clinton, and Biden all voted for Iraq, which devastated Iraq and Syria, sowed terrorism from China to San Bernardino, showed the US was broken as an actual Power, and enabled Trump to seize the GOP in the first place
the Dems are a gerontocracy: Feinstein, Biden, Pelosi, Schumer, Clinton are all politically identical to where they were 1995 (back when Homer outed them as a disguised Kang and Kodos), i.e., “liberal enough”; and these figures have hung on WAY too long, freezing politics 90s, 00s, 10s, 20s, and that political generation/cohort had to make sure everyone born after 1970 would remain unrepresented for just one more electoral cycle
Obama wasn’t one of these gerontocrats but made everything go through him–there’s no party leadership, no “bench” of potential candidates (Klobuchar? Buttigieg?): there’s no Ted Kennedys or even Proxmires or Gores left–Markey? Durbin? only Merkley and Wyden don’t make me sick to my stoamach
April 10, 2020 at 8:25 AM #300991sadoldgirlParticipant
- Total Posts: 876
The ELITE is in charge, and insists on staying so. The only part
of myself as far as predictions go: Turnout will be miserable. The
financial “free market” – what a fake description for a gonzo-scheme –
is breaking down due to basic needs of the population. I don’t believe
for a moment that this COVID issue will disappear until November.
My only hope due to schadenfreude is that the Dems win and will
prove to be as much of a disaster as Trump and his Repugs. As beholden
as they are to the ELITE, they would have to obey their demands. All
of that does not matter for the common person though, who will suffer
even more from the devastating depression, and all the $-printing of
the Fed will be useless.
April 10, 2020 at 6:47 PM #301075RobertFromNCParticipant
- Total Posts: 96
but I tend to think that Biden is going to face a lot of questions about his mental health and sexual assault allegations that are going to make it very difficult to win, he was probably the worse serious candidate the democrats could possibly put up.
I also tend the think that the democratic party is in serious long-term trouble because it has lost the white working class in the rust belt, changing the electoral map by making the Midwest states red, and is also in danger of losing a big portion of the left(and rightfully so in my opinion. Personally, I am not with you this time in advocating reforming the Democratic Party and voting for the nominee. This just isn’t working, the status quo isn’t sustainable, and Trump is going to be a lame duck anyway). Adopting a more populist, progressive message and stance on the issues was the only way to change that, not continuing with another Clinton or Obama type.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.