I will keep doing, but not worth it! The 2016 Presidential Primary Voting Thread

"Mika" and Scarborough lead a Mornign Joe town hall on MSNBC. Trump just said Obamacare is a disaster because it's a terrible plan. Three tautologies he unleashed in a roll, frustrating even Scarborough. He sounds like an imbecile, and Mika, to her credit, is not hiding her contempt.

i bet nobody on that stage could explain why obamacare is terrible. answers will range from "socialism!" to "it's terrible!"

also "obama!"

Ben Carson says brain surgery is much, much tougher than politics. And yet, he's really successful at brain surgery, while--spoiler alert--he's terrible at politics.

It's kinda hard to even pretend to be surprised about any aspect of Trump's campaign but there is definitely a small moment in every debate, when he goes "Obamacare is a disaster, and we're gonna replace it with something that works way better," and I really have to work to believe that there are people to whom this is a super compelling line. Oh, okay, way better. That's what we need. The other Republicans are only promising something better, and I'm sure the Democrats want something way worse, so Trump's the only one out there talking sense!

I know comparisons to middle school class president get thrown around a lot, but there's like, no space at all between the one and the other. How do you fight someone who doesn't even concede that "works way better" leaves more to be explained? The guy doesn't even have a health care section on his website. "Something better" is the program.

yeah, it's like trump was sent to earth as a litmus test of just how credulous a big segment of the american people is.

I get the sense credulity doesn't even factor into their support. Trump represents more like a giant "fuck you" vote, results be damned.

for some people, sure. for a lot of others, there seems to be some conviction that he's a guy who "gets things done," who thinks on the fly, who doesn't need a ton of advisors whispering into his ear now, because once he's in office he'll be able to sort things out. in short, they trust his judgement. which is terrifying. and hilarious. but mostly terrifying.

I also think a lot of it is the sort of long-delayed, inevitable end point of talking about "the economy" and "business" as if they're basically the same thing, so that a guy who "knows how to make deals" can just fix "the economy" by, I guess, making a deal with it. I mean I know he talks about making a better deal with China, making a better deal with Mexico, but the real idea is that he'll get in there and, y'know, fix the economy. He'll fix it. He doesn't have to actually explain anything he's going to do, or how it will lead to the desired results. This is only one of many reasons why I find the "Trump and Sanders, it's the year of outsider frustration" stories to be wildly off base - whatever it is that gets people excited about Sanders, it seems to be aided by, and certainly not stifled by, a guy explaining over and over a specific set of economic conditions that aren't acceptable to him, and a set of policies to address them. Whatever is that excites people about Trump, it's not that.

I'm excited to find out how he plans to build that wall and make Mexico pay for it.

A good deal. He's gonna make a great deal and we're gonna win. We don't win anymore.

Need to put the wall around New Mexico too. Just to be on the safe side

btw re middle-aged "resignation": a labor organizer friend of mine (he describes his job as witnessing the death rattle of the field) has been phonebanking for Bernie. He has a Tennessesee Valley Authority logo tattoo on his wrist. He's 37. On NH primary night he FB'd that another world is possible and "I never thought I'd be an idealist!"

So you see, there is hope. (For some of you maybe. Not me.)

i worry that the problem w/ idealism is that it's a short-term rush but has trouble surviving longterm and the problem w/ our politics in the US is not getting ppl excited every 4 or 8 years. it's having ongoing engagement from a larger % of the population every year and at every level of governance. a lot of the bernie enthusiasm reminds me of the obama enthusiasm. idk if "pragmatism" or whatever the alternative on offer is better (as it may lead to resignment as well) but the strength of the bernie "revolution" is not going to be measured this election even if he pulls off the upset and wins the nomination (which i don't think is too unlikely), it's going to be whether he can continue to bring ppl out over and over again even in the face of slow, dissatisfying results + setbacks.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7dpxc81pT1rq645g.gif

well, the key is obviously impressing on citizens YOUR JOB IS NOT OVER WHEN YOU'VE VOTED. Not making much headway i can see there; we'll see.

ICYMI, Chomsky said that Sanders is "an honest New Dealer" (anyone have the Eisenhower quote he mentions?) and that he would urge a vote for Clinton in November in swing states.

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

If anything I'm shifting a bit back toward idealism, in a twice-born, pragmatic under the surface sort of way.

There is plenty of room for the two perspectives to coexist in one person. You can always strive for the ideal and then, when the ideal slips from your grasp, accept the pragmatic and move ahead to the next fight.

yeah i mean i would be a lot more interested in someone who has really clear ideals, but recognizes the need to compromise and get shit done, than someone who really loves compromising and getting shit done for their own sake, and recognizes the need to announce some ideals. not saying the former is sanders but the latter is how i feel about hillary on a bad day. and maybe gets back to this thing of, does it matter what she sincerely believes. i kinda think it does.

my increased sense of mortality just makes me really not want to completely let go of idealism, to find a way to fit it into my adult life framework

i worry that the problem w/ idealism is that it's a short-term rush but has trouble surviving longterm and the problem w/ our politics in the US is not getting ppl excited every 4 or 8 years. it's having ongoing engagement from a larger % of the population every year and at every level of governance. a lot of the bernie enthusiasm reminds me of the obama enthusiasm. idk if "pragmatism" or whatever the alternative on offer is better (as it may lead to resignment as well) but the strength of the bernie "revolution" is not going to be measured this election even if he pulls off the upset and wins the nomination (which i don't think is too unlikely), it's going to be whether he can continue to bring ppl out over and over again even in the face of slow, dissatisfying results + setbacks.

― Mordy, Wednesday, February 17, 2016 9:05 PM (22 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I think that's very true, it's just that the solution seems like it can't be "less idealism." It has to be more discipline, more long-term thinking, but not abandoning the ideals. Because otherwise "pragmatism" means we're just setting the bar lower and winding up in the same place or even worse.

otm

I tend to think conservatives are better than that, but I have an inferiority complex about a lot of things and I may just be imagining that.

*better AT that (better at the discipline and long-term thinking)

I don't think that's actually true

I hope it isn't!

I think we also have to be very careful about what we define as idealism. For example, for us oldsters, the notion of a socialist (democratic or otherwise) contending for the White House is outlandish. We've grown accustomed to the notion that "Amerika" is allergic to the very word. The kids, otoh, haven't been marinating in 20th century brine, so the very way in which they think about the feasibility of Bernie -as candidate or Prez- conforms to a different frame. They're less likely to think of a Sanders presidency as the stuff of dreams ....

(God I hate posting from my phone!)

he's not a socialist. he's closer to Ted Kennedy than Debs.

That's not the point. The point is he calls himself one. Yeah yeah "democratic" but the point is he uses the word. Hell for a while there nobody running for office wanted to even own the "liberal" adjective.

I always thought running away from it was a big mistake.

from "liberal" I mean. That was really a painful era in democratic party politics -- the cowardice was disturbing.

was it ever

whew glad the Clintons are retired

ha right

this is why "idealism" is such a fraught concept. yeah, some of Bernie's proposals are "idealistic" but only because we've drifting so far right over the past four decades.

drifted

So I have a related question though: is there any evidence at all, so far, of a "Bernie wave" of candidates, or is it too soon for that? Like is anyone running an "I'm like Bernie" campaign downticket? I have heard that Zephyr Teachout may be benefitting a bit from the Sanders movement, but anyone else?

Bernie's coattails, if he were elected, would be retrospective, as the newly elected or re-elected Congressional representatives read Bernie's vote totals in their districts and decided how much to cooperate with his budget and general policies based on his popularity back home in their district or state.

https://images.newrepublic.com/b4de383a1d4e5fb27a4c9bd574b5c9218dc23d13.gif?w=600&q=65&dpi=1&h=333

youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

*plays this on a loop while happy hardcore soundtrack blasts*
is this the man you want leading our military against ISIS?

So I have a related question though: is there any evidence at all, so far, of a "Bernie wave" of candidates, or is it too soon for that? Like is anyone running an "I'm like Bernie" campaign downticket? I have heard that Zephyr Teachout may be benefitting a bit from the Sanders movement, but anyone else?

Lucy Flores, running for 4th Congressional District in Nevada (currently held by Hardy of the GOP)
John Fetterman in PA (running for Sen. Toomey's seat)

I suppose we'll see more styling themselves that way in midterms if Sanders somehow pulls this off. Nevada is going to be a huge moment.

Oh and also Tim Canova, challenging DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schulz in FL's 23rd Congressional Dist.

wouldn't have expected even that many! my first thought was that there'd be very few "Bernie wave" people when it's so unclear how well he'll be doing. basically what aimless said, combined with, it's the same as there being so few endorsements for bernie - whatever his merits, nobody wants to be shut out in the cold by a future clinton administration. the advantages of being the heir-apparent coronation front runner, you lock all that stuff down from before there's even a race going, then if anybody starts running against you, people who help them are turncoats. anyway, that probably won't matter to some folks, like if they're not established in the party machinery anyway, and are running as an insurgent challenger in a primary, which is what fetterman and flores feel like to me but that's after like five minutes of googling and skimming.

yeah and i'm sure there's lots of DNC goodies and promo they're having to forsake by virtue of feeling (and touting) the Bern

Bernie wave looks like a chillwave so far imo

ooh bern

lol I thought the same thing xp

let's hope it doesn't turn into vaporwave after nevada

also

https://images.newrepublic.com/b4de383a1d4e5fb27a4c9bd574b5c9218dc23d13.gif?w=600&q=65&dpi=1&h=333

"so, marco, imagine you’re bruce banner doing a guest episode of glee, and in the middle of the meghan trainor medley you become THE HULK."

kasich is awful, and he's dodging colbert's question about the supreme court like a motherfucker, but i can see his appeal, insofar as he's basically a scott walker who doesn't come across like a total doofus.