Curb Your Authoritarianism? The 2016 Conventional Wisdom Thread (Elections, Part 6)

try try again

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/clinton-hires-sanders-top-student-organizer/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link

romney says he might vote for gary johnson:
https://twitter.com/betsy_klein/status/741393223172657152

^things that are good to know, for about five seconds

I still can't figure out what Romney's after. Maybe personal pique explains it--he's been a favourite target of Trump the past year. I can't believe it's something approaching a conscience at work.

i think he sees himself as a good man and the idea of supporting a vulgarian like trump repulses him

and yes probably too much self respect to bend to someone who insulted him constantly - something a lot of republicans could learn from

another republican (susan collins) is going for hills?

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/republican-senator-susan-collins-says-she-might-support-hillary-clinton

(xpost) I like that explanation. Even though he was an absolutely inept candidate, I think he probably would have been an okay manager/CEO-type president.

trump is beyond the pale for most mormons from what I can tell

"I love the Mormons! Where is he?...Over there, my Mormon--what a guy!"

https://twitter.com/markhammer1987/status/741447775766884352:

"The genius of the Trump Clinton Twitter war of 2016 is that it consumes Trump's every waking minute & Clinton doesn't know it's happening."

^ otm

romney is a craven capitalist but he doesn't have a heart of evil and he's also not a fucking idiot. i'm not surprised at all that he's not capitulation to trump. look how fucking spineless and awful mcconnell, ryan and rubio all look now.

he's not running for anything. only thing he's mad about is the "vulgarity".

Well, at least it's that. Some of the most prominent #NeverTrump'ers seem almost mostly annoyed that he's too soft on abortion, won't bomb enough countries, etc.

So strange to me that after so much "textbook racism" from Trump, the judge thing is the one that gets so many GOP jerks upset. I guess they've just been so busy working to make America better that they weren't paying attention to Trump for the last several years? Or maybe their aging constituents only complain via postal mail, and it took this long for the letters to get there, get sorted, get read, etc.

Its the first racist thing he said post-nomination, thats why. Now the GOP leadership owns him, their fates bound w his.

Has nothing to do w actual nature of comments

And Romney can bitch/hold out because, as noted, he's not holding office or running for election.

The hits just keep on coming.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/06/12/nyregion/donald-trump-atlantic-city.html

i'll see your trump scandal and raise you hillary's latest ~

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/06/10/how_clinton_donor_rajiv_fernando_got_a_job_as_a_nuclear_expert_he_wasn_t.html?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link

Yeah we covered that "scandal"

It's weird that Trump's "Pocahontas" thing isn't a bigger deal. It's the kind of straightforward, stereotypical racism everyone is supposed to be able to recognize by now. He's explicitly using a racist slur.

Conspiracy theory: major media outlets (nyt, wapo, usa today etc) held back their most damaging trump stories until after he had won the nomination in order to maximize their damage to the republican party as a whole

as a native I can tell you 75% of america doesn't give a fuck about slurs against natives

Where does Trump stand on Washington's football team name?

idk if we discussed the recent poll that showed that most native americans did not care about the washington football team's name but the 538 guys seemed to think the poll was pretty well done and reliable. idk if that means anything - you can obv still think it's racist as heck and refuse to use the name.

That Fernando thing seems like most Hillary scandals -- sorta sleazy, raises questions, no obvious crime committed, no obvious harm done.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/06/2016-bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-democrats-race-racial-divide-213948#ixzz4BD9qQkXN

People of color, like their white Democratic counterparts, may also want a revolution and more rapid progress than the halting kind that comes with pragmatism, but they’ve time and again seen incremental change improve their lives. That’s why they embrace Martin Luther King Jr. without question while revering Malcolm X from a distance. That’s why they are much more enthusiastic about the Affordable Care Act—which has helped minority Americans the most— than white progressives who have either been lukewarm or, in some cases, even hostile to health reform because they don’t believe it was radical enough.

Minority voters are more likely than white Democratic voters to giddily give Obama credit for an economic recovery that has shaved the unemployment rate in half, produced the lowest level of jobless claims since the ‘70s, and an unprecedented monthly job creation streak that has lasted more than six years, all coming on the heels of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. And he got Osama bin Laden, saved the domestic auto industry, ushered through the largest economic stimulus in history—one derisively dismissed as too small by many liberals—and the first significant Wall Street reform in a generation, while advancing gay rights like no president before him despite the initial reluctance by his numerous religious black voters to embrace same sex marriage.

Why? Because many white Democratic voters missed the sentiment shared among black Obama voters in 2008 that, once again, the “first black” was being handed a seemingly impossible task—two ground wars, a collapsing economy, a record deficit—and if he wasn’t able to perform a miracle, it would not only be his failure, but that of black people in general. To downplay what he has been able to achieve despite the obstacles, which also included an unprecedented level of obstruction from the GOP, confirms a fear shared by many people of color—Democratic or otherwise—that no matter what they achieve, it will never be enough. Sanders and Susan Sarandon may sincerely believe things are so awful only a revolution can heal the country’s ills. But their overwrought rhetoric, and no more than lukewarm support of Obama’s accomplishments, taps into that deeply-held frustration among minorities.

I think some of us were saying the same thing six years ago, and you didn't seem to want to hear it.

are you talking to me?

I want to quote Taxi Driver here, but yes. It's also more of a general comment. If I say it, especially in 2010, 2011, I'm a starry-eyed Obama acolyte. If Charles Pierce or Ta-Nehisi Coates or some other ILX-approved columnist says it, let's link to it.

I've written many times here and elsewhere that Obama, caveats noted many times, has been the most successful lib president of my lifetime, and my family and I have benefited from his presidency.

I may have benefitted indirectly, not personally, but I agree. Is it fair to say you weren't quite so high on him around 2009/10 (at least as reflected in your posts here)?

Nope. I didn't vote for him in 2008 (I voted in local races though) and adopted a wait-and-see attitude. The nadir for me was summer '11 during the Grand Bargain Era. But enough had happened for me to vote for him in 2012 -- and Florida was very much a swing state.

Okay. It'd be an undertaking to check, but my recollection is that you were very quick to jump on me when I posted positively about Obama roundabout 2010. (And I'm not sure your previous post is incompatible with that if you're talking about a nadir in 2011 and not voting for him until 2012.)

Oh, I did jump on you -- I clearly remember it. At the time I didn't understand anyone's instinct to defend him.

take it to the pauline kael thread or something, you guys are putting me to sleep

Not that I want start relitigating such stuff in 2016, but I think the instinct was for some of the exact seem reasons spelled out in what you quoted at length just above, beginning with the seemingly impossible task he'd been handed. I think that was as clear as could be by 2010.

"same reasons"

take it to the pauline kael thread or something, you guys are putting me to sleep

― riverine (map),

curb your authoritarianism

Damn hillary campaign interns back at it again
https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/741409978376957952

Hillary interns for President!

why did I read the replies

"idk if we discussed the recent poll that showed that most native americans did not care about the washington football team's name but the 538 guys seemed to think the poll was pretty well done and reliable. idk if that means anything - you can obv still think it's racist as heck and refuse to use the name."

where was that analysis on that poll? it didn't jibe with any natives' feelings that I know; like, not a single one.

I read that the sample skewed older, while young people are the largest demographic among Indians, and that Indians are a challenging group to poll accurately. Anyhow, even if eg "only" 33% of Indians are bothered by racist team names and 66% don't care, that doesn't make it a non-issue.

when a poll gives entirely unexpected results that cannot be explained by any known factors (just how often does racism 'not bother' the group being denigrated?) I think you have to question its methodology in depth.

xxp it was on their podcast a few weeks ago I don't remember which one

First Trump commercial.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swyFqRB3dxY

Why are both the candidates this year over a million years old?

aging population, also old is in right now

When the CW consensus 'next Obama' is Marco Rubio, then it makes good sense to look at 'oldster Obama' instead.

CoS answered a question I had:

http://consequenceofsound.net/2016/07/donald-trump-ends-his-rnc-speech-by-playing-rolling-stones-a-band-who-once-pulled-a-knife-on-him/

David Brooks just said "next week Hillary Clinton is going to drive a truck through this"

Too soon.

there's no such thing as bad taste at the end of the world

did no one involved think to have g.e. smith play the SNL closing theme over trump's speech?

it's like nobody has any imagination anymore

the music has been like twilight zone shit

watching the ivanka into now. i wonder if she/anyone actually believes that trump would be a competent president

Give her a break--She used to live in his nuts!

it's more a general point. like, ppl cheering for him or voting for him... they know this is a joke, right?

i understand voting for him as an expression of disdain for "the establishment" or as a kind of profane gesture but i don't understand thinking he will improve anything

"thinking"

Why are both the candidates this year over a million years old?

Scooping up a billion dollars takes time.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/donald-trump-threatens-the-ghostwriter-of-the-art-of-the-deal

In which our thin-skinned hero, Donald Trump, takes time out of the middle of the RNC convention to have his lawyers threaten the trash-talking ghostwriter of his book.

@ByronTau
Final tally of RNC arrests: 24, per the police.

For context:
St. Paul in 2008 saw 700+ arrests
NYC in 2004 saw 1,800+

that's a good thing

he thanked the police last night!

proof Bloomberg was a great fascist

the best!

the kind liberals cheerfully voted for -- some 3x

but I thought things were worse than they've ever been???

per capita

1 arrest per 4750 NYCers

1 arrest per 4303 Minneapolitan/St. Paulites

1 arrest per 16534 Clevelanders

yes, all things, my god yr intellec powers astound me frogbs you just keep winning

xp

glad the clown show stayed inside the arena.

if anyone has an hour to kill, go rewatch W's acceptance speech in 2000. compare to any portion of what we got last night.

morbs pretty sure frogs was referencing the apocalyptic tone from trump's speech there. geez

Remember when we all thought W was so bad; simpler times

And after Donald Trump’s somewhat more polished performance Thursday night, even Democrats who had been pushing for a flashier choice like Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren or New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker were sobered by the challenging four months ahead. “After last night, she needs to make the safest choice possible,” said a former senior White House aide.

good Christ

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/clinton-vp-pick-tim-kaine-226013#ixzz4F9Ahnigg

yeah, carne, i got it. no harm no foul

Remember when we all thought W was so bad; simpler times

now that dems are voting for his policies again the cognitive dissonance must be terrifying

Kaine sucks but I'm relieved it isn't Vilsack

I'll be surprised if Chuck Todd turns out to be right

now that dems are voting for his policies again the cognitive dissonance must be terrifying

― AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Friday, July 22, 2016 10:20 AM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lol this is... untrue

i guess if Trump had been "unpolished" it mighta been Franken!

but this is encouraging - Richmond Times-Dispatch, reposted by Reason (http://www.richmond.com/opinion/our-opinion/bart-hinkle/article_16adc43f-8fca-5ca5-b727-4c8dcadbd273.html)

But the public should not be seduced by efforts to put Kaine in the center of the political spectrum when he is so far from it. Think of it this way: Suppose Kaine had a mirror image in the GOP—a Republican former head of the RNC who repeatedly tried to cut taxes, who sought to restrict abortion, who got high marks from the NRA and low marks from environmentalists, who wanted to cut social programs, who supported privatizing Social Security, and who was, in all visible respects, a down-the-line soldier for the political right.

Would the press term such a politician—no matter how genial and friendly—a "cautious centrist" and a "pragmatist"? Or would he be labeled an "arch-conservative" and an "ideologue"?

Exactly.

i'm voting for clinton because i want harriet miers on the supreme court!

Remember when we all thought W was so bad; simpler times

Indeed, I remember when we thought his father was bad.

i still think theyre bad :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6Sos3q6ASo

mp’s somewhat more polished performance Thursday night, even Democrats who had been pushing for a flashier choice like Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren or New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker were sobered by the challenging four months ahead. “After last night, she needs to make the safest choice possible,” said a former senior White House aide.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/clinton-vp-pick-tim-kaine-226013#ixzz4F9ISD2m0
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

Richard M. Nixon ‏@dick_nixon 4h4 hours ago
'68 brought people in. Trump locked the door and threw away the key. If you can't see the difference, the hell with you.

Trump's speech was sort of not the worst -- ok -- but it was in the midst of a circuslike convention

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/07/manafort-fbi-crime-statistics-cant-be-trusted.html

Trump's speech was the worst because his was the only one promised to show the potential to pivot in time for the general. It didn't, he didn't, he can't.

only trump brand stats will give you the luxury info you crave

here's a thread

http://ilxor.com/ILX/NewAnswersControllerServlet?boardid=40

oh fuck lol

HIRALLY CLIMPS FOR PRESIDETN • US presidential elections part VII