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

chomsky was born in 1928, i wouldn't put much stock in his 8yo analysis of political sentiment in the 30s

i mean The Grapes of Wrath reads like a "communist" tract these days

The two times it has come close to backfiring has been with Megyn Kelly and Carly Fiorina, right? When he does it to a woman 1) they're more unfazed, as they've dealt with this shit all their lives 2) it plays more badly to the general public. With Jeb it's sorta, kinda funny, you can base an SNL skit around how hapless he is in dealing with it. Misogynistic abuse won't be laughed at in the same way.

― Frederik B, Wednesday, February 24, 2016 10:47 PM (22 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this instantly leads me to darrel hammond on snl calling bush 'jebra'. like debra because hes a woman u see.

In 1947, Steinbeck made the first of many trips to the Soviet Union, this one with photographer Robert Capa. They visited Moscow, Kiev, Tbilisi, Batumi and Stalingrad, some of the first Americans to visit many parts of the USSR since the communist revolution. Steinbeck's 1948 book about their experiences, A Russian Journal, was illustrated with Capa's photos.

it could very well be that it read like a communist tract in 1939 too.

it's very possible to have things burned into your head at age 8 and be able to assess them from an adult perspective. I've had similar experiences re the Nixon era.

just what i know of the history it's very obvious that the oppressed/deprived had better, more impactful organizing options / group action available to them in the Depression.

https://web.archive.org/web/20061005171237/http://home.pacific.net.au/~greg.hub/banned.html

Yeah, In Dubious Battle was actually about Communists.
2xp

i just don't trust chomsky or anyone to tell me how the political environment today compares to when they were 8 years old. i don't care how precociously political they were

So he's saying labor became too militant in the 30's? I never thought of political organizations not being in the mainstream as having a negative effect on hope...probably because I never thought mainstream politics could be anything but alienating.

only among those 1939 readers who could foresee Steinbeck trips in the late '40s i guess

xxxxp

when i was 8 my public school class wrote letters to the soldiers in the gulf war thanking them for their service

morbz, look at the wayback link i posted - there was a huge uproar in 1939 too

Chomsky is not relying SOLELY on his childhood memories, so yes, we know you hate him

i knew there was controversy re GoW, but initiated largely by the fatcat class who also hated Roosevelt

also, dirty words and breastfeeding

i agree with chomsky insofar the only solution i can see to right wing populism is left wing populism, which is part of the reason i feel like sanders could be more viable than hillary in the general. trump's appealing to racists, sure, but a lot of the people who like him do so because they are "fed up" with the establishment, especially re. the idea that their interests have been "sold out," which, you know, is true -- over the past howevermany years economic growth has not led to a rise in median wages
'

the Democratic Party did not throw organized labor over the side until the Clinton '92 run-up

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kylesmith/2013/11/08/modern-democrats-would-view-john-f-kennedy-as-a-reaganite-extremist/#26fc9e1c79ab

just what i know of the history it's very obvious that the oppressed/deprived had better, more impactful organizing options / group action available to them in the Depression.

maybe for white males

those are the people propelling trump's rise though

ii think it would have been better if the labor movement expanded to include a more diverse array of people rather than evaporated the way it did

yes, of course, the world was different 70 years ago; the racial wall of the New Deal is well chronicled. And still the NAACP had more integrity than the Congressional Black Caucus PAC does. xxxp

gonna be kinda hard to "move center" when there's video of this

While speaking today with televangelist Pat Robertson at Robertson’s Regent University, Trump specifically praised Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, the two most conservative justices on the Supreme Court. “Justice Thomas doesn’t get enough credit,” Trump said. “He’s a wonderful man, he’s a wonderful guy.”

After criticizing Chief Justice John Roberts as not being conservative enough, and attacking Ted Cruz for promoting his nomination, Trump said he would appoint “pro-life” justices who are “very conservative” and “like Judge Scalia."

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/donald-trump-vows-appoint-far-right-supreme-court-justices-clarence-thomas

http://49.media.tumblr.com/227637977a10c41c8904ed1ff442100e/tumblr_o2b65qja4k1r3uv06o1_500.gif

If you need a giant-slayer, Romney's the guy.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/24/politics/mitt-romney-donald-trump-taxes/

(Romney's reemergence is disorienting enough; seeing his name bandied about alongside the word "bombshell," doubly so.)

Golden Gal is Avey. Panda: Natural Selection, Hocus Pocus, Lying in the Grass, Recycling

gonna be kinda hard to "move center" when there's video of this

/While speaking today with televangelist Pat Robertson at Robertson’s Regent University, Trump specifically praised Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, the two most conservative justices on the Supreme Court. “Justice Thomas doesn’t get enough credit,” Trump said. “He’s a wonderful man, he’s a wonderful guy.”

After criticizing Chief Justice John Roberts as not being conservative enough, and attacking Ted Cruz for promoting his nomination, Trump said he would appoint “pro-life” justices who are “very conservative” and “like Judge Scalia."/

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/donald-trump-vows-appoint-far-right-supreme-court-justices-clarence-thomas🔗

There's so much more damning video of him from the 90s espousing left wing positions. This is nothing.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kylesmith/2013/11/08/modern-democrats-would-view-john-f-kennedy-as-a-reaganite-extremist/#26fc9e1c79ab

― Mordy, Wednesday, February 24, 2016 11:28 PM (Yesterday)

this article is total dreck

Stoll lays out Grover Cleveland’s fierce anti-labor views, his advocacy for low deficits and a strong dollar, repealing silver coinage, his antagonism to strong executive action, and belief in free enterprise and individual responsibility. If JFK were here today, he would either have to renounce most of what he stood for or join the Republican party.

i don't worship at the shrine of camelot or anything but that "jfk conservative" thing was debunked over and over again pretty comprehensively when that book came out. kennedy's tax cuts were not similar to reagan's, and using his cold war era speeches to argue that his policies were equivalent to reagan's (let alone bush's) is ridiculous.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history_lesson/2004/01/tax_cuts_in_camelot.html
http://www.salon.com/2013/11/22/the_rights_jfk_myth_now_they_claim_he_was_conservative/

I didn't realize high deficits were a left-wing position...

http://i.imgur.com/7dcwNHA.jpg

The National Review is apparently realizing their little issue did jack shit. And they're a leetle desperate.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431858/donald-trump-2016-campaign-must-be-stopped

I mean, this bit alone:

In the meantime, conservatives who are not running for president must ensure that every spare dollar is spent attacking Trump. Melt down the fences if you have to; we need long-range bombers here. If Donald Trump can flood the airwaves with his nonsense, his opponents can counter it incessantly. And while they are at it, they can tie him up in court, just as he’s trying to do to Cruz. There are a good number of “just asking” questions ready to be put to them, among them “Trump’s mother was Scottish, can he really be president?” and “Trump ran a host of scams designed to rip off the poor; surely one of them would like to sue him?”

Or you could "kill him." Would that be wrong? It would be illegal. But would it be wrong? Who are we to say?

Not sure if this Hugh Hewitt (ugh) line was meant to be funny or not, but I laughed: "Ben Carson's playing a very, very long game..."

Exceptionally long game. I suspect he'll still be wandering around Nevada in 2024, trying to locate his campaign headquarters.

CNN's been pretty good with their Trump photo choices lately. apparently Donald's scanning the crowd for his future VP pick here:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v212/etienne_saint/Screen%20Shot%202016-02-24%20at%208.20.45%20PM_zpsi94wc8qx.png

I just watched the 30 For 30 documentary about the dissolution of the USFL, which seems like it should be required viewing for this election season vis a vis Trump and his motives and his likelihood to abandon the presidency after a failed attempt to sell us to ISIS or some shit.

He almost looks like Biden here.

There, not here. Definitely not here.

as much as Trump is beyond comedy -- he is his own act -- that photo suggests that Shatner should take a crack at playing him.

doesn't bode well for the NRO anti-Trump crusade that every anti-Trump post has comments flooded with stuff along these lines:

I just want someone to conserve my nation. Protect the borders, protect society, keep the historically massive invasion OUT. Keep my community safe and prosperous.

Trump says all the right things about those. He may or may not carry through, but the GOPe WILL NOT carry through. GOPe has abandoned me.

There's so much more damning video of him from the 90s espousing left wing positions. This is nothing.

i'm talking about November, and to the ppl who think he has a shot at non-Tea Party non-Clinton-is-a-demon blocs.

hey, here's deep NYT thoughts

ROOM FOR DEBATE
Does Money Really Matter in Politics?

If Jeb Bush's enormous campaign treasury could not even get him a single victory, is the role of electoral donations exaggerated?

Idiots.

I think a lot of people believe you can ad-buy your way into office and the person w/ more money always wins

this election is both a case of 'money not mattering' (the above is wrong) and 'money *really* mattering' - the guy who doesn't have to kowtow to the donor class gets to run on issues that aren't popular w/ them but are popular w/ actual voters. true to a certain extent w/ sanders too.

Dumb question, but I'm dumb: what happens to all of Trump's active businesses, the casinos and buildings and whatnot, if he's elected?

Bonus fascism points: his gaudy gold name all over everything already. If elected, he should promise to bring back gladiator battle.

It's perfectly possible to be a private citizen and hold elected office at the same time

There are a lot of part-time state senators whose other job is, like, head of a local carwash empire

Rick Scott being floated as a potential Trump running mate. Obvious move. Given that Trump's hair is a general-election liability, it makes sense that he'd go for a nearly hair-free VP.

http://histalk2.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/rickscott_thumb.png

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

She's got guts, can I vote for her?

what could Trump possibly gain with Skeletor as a running mate? He's already got the white mummy vote.