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

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.

his dodge in re. the supreme court gives the lie to his high-minded talk of bipartisanship, though

I honestly think there is an example of 'long-term idealism' in US at the moment: #BlackLivesMatter. Which is thrice as worthwhile as #FeelTheBern, and instead of looking for #BernieWave you should all support #DerayForMayor. But what do I know.

If I ever visit Baltimore I'll put in a good word.

Send the next fiver to him instead of Bernie?

Also the Black lives matter movement (official group) is kinda mad at Deray, read your tweets

This is America,we don't call them fivers, we call em Lincoln logs

it's a little early to expect congressional candidates to be throwing the Clintons over the side. What percentage of Dem House incumbents are getting primaried? Senate?

and is Rubio dabbing? can Obama fit him in the luggage when he goes to Cuba next month?

have you seen his gut?

This string of tweets by Clay Shirky (who belongs on the abysmal real names thread btw) is well worth reading.

Highlights:

Each party has an unmentionable Issue X that divide its voters. Each overestimated their ability to keep X out of the campaign.

So here we are, with quasi-parlimentarianism. We now have four medium-sized and considerably more coherent voter blocs.

2 rump establishment parties, Trump representing 'racist welfare state' voters, and Sanders representing people who want a Nordic system.

Trump is RINO, Sanders not even a Dem. That either one could become their party's nominee is amazing. Both would mark the end of an era.

We will know by March 15th whether a major party's apparatus can be hijacked by mere voters. (Last time it was: McGovern.)

Over-large party coalitions require discipline to prevent people from taking an impassioned 30% of the base in order to win the primaries.

The old defense against this by the parties was "You and what army?" No third party has been anything other than a spoiler in a century.

The answer to that question this year, from both Trump and Sanders, is "Me and this army I can mobilize without your help."

some of that was interesting, but 'Instead of an essay, it turned into 50 tweets.' is one for the depressing phrases thread

Nah, most essays could be boiled down to a few tweets.

http://www.splicetoday.com/politics-and-media/cold-steel-in-the-hour-of-chaos

McGovern analogy a bit silly imo. Party insider, just a leftie who knew how the new party machinery worked cause he had designed it. Swept away by the voters, dunno about that at all. Carter fits the bill better, if anybody does.

AFL-CIO holding off on an endorsement; were expected to be in Clinton's pocket