Il Douché and His Discontents: The 2016 Primary Voting Thread, Part 4

i think the media is still dominated by the voices of those who don't worry that the worst resentments were fueled by by trump will come back on them in any real way.. um.. the short version here is that if you're already on guard against being the target of a hate crime what trump is stirring up is not a joke and never was

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/donald-trump-rally-protester-crack-down-220407

Donald Trump’s rally here began with the candidate asking all attendees to raise their hands and take an oath to vote for him, while extended barriers cordoned off the press and plainclothes private intelligence officers scoured the crowd for protestors. (..) On Friday, two members of Trump’s private security team wore street clothes to a rally in New Orleans. One of them, Eddie Deck, explained to reporters that his duties were now weighted towards intelligence work researching potential protesters and assisting uniformed security personnel under the direction of Trump’s head of security.

I have a hard time with schoolyard bullying of this magnitude being a staple of a guy who wants to be fucking President. I mean obviously "being a dick" has to be every candidates' M.O. at some point, but there's a difference between conventional mudslinging and actively being a snickering, frat-ish alpha-dog that enjoys intimidation tactics.

The thing about these Trump rallies, as scary as they might seem or be, I'm not sure they're terribly different from what we've seen at past GOP rallies in recent memory, especially since the rise of the Tea Party. The biggest difference is the degree of coverage, thanks to the high profile candidate, and also the way the candidate is flat-out saying the same looney shit as his supporters (versus merely exploiting it for votes). But this stuff has been out there for several cycles now. As the Remnick piece I posted pointed out:

The socioeconomic forces are real, but Trump is also the beneficiary of a long process of Republican intellectual decadence. Paul Ryan denounces Trump but not the Tea Party rhetoric that propelled his own political ascent. John McCain holds Trump in contempt, but selected as his running mate Sarah Palin, the Know-Nothing of Wasilla, one of Trump’s most vivid forerunners and supporters. Mitt Romney last week righteously slammed Trump as a “phony” and a misogynist, and yet in 2012 he embraced Trump’s endorsement and praised his “extraordinary” understanding of economics.

Yeah in some ways this is about the progress of a (bowel) movement from syndicated radio to prime-time TV.

But yeah, the asshole "what, me?" deflection of this CNN interview:

ACOSTA: Rallies, don't you have some responsibility to keep the peace at these rallies?

TRUMP: Well, I have nothing to do with it. When you have 25,000 people in a building -- you know, today we had to send away so many thousands of people, we couldn't get them in. If you have that many people, if you have four or five people or ten people stand up out of 22,000 that are in this building that I'm speaking to, a very great entertainer said, Donald, you're the biggest draw in the world without a guitar, which is sort of an interesting --

ACOSTA: But sir, can I ask a follow-up?

TRUMP: I won't tell you that was great Elton John. I will not tell you that. But somebody did make that statement. When you have that many people -- you understand -- in a room, and you'll have a couple of, not skirmishes, just a couple of protests. Really not skirmishes. And we treat them very gently. You know, ten years ago, they would have been treated differently, not by me, but by -- that's the way life is. We treat them very, very gently. And yeah, we had a few protesters today, but very few. I mean, if a look at it as a percentage, we had what, 0.01% of the people in the room.

ACOSTA: You don't think it's something that continues to happen at your events?

TRUMP: No, look, I watched Bernie Sanders have a protest. He was up at the microphone and two young ladies came up and took the microphone away from him. That will never happen with me. He walked meekly to the back of the room. And I said, isn't that pathetic? Isn't that sad?

This guy is just the asshole of assholes. You're weak for standing up to him, you're weak for doing nothing, everyone else is doing it wrong because he is the only one doing it right, and the best, and the greatest. He's just such a huge shit.

"Progress"

xxxxpost idk tho - the Tea Party rallies were bad enough for being essentially just excuses to yell really loudly during townhalls and shout "nazi policy" every so often. it was a bunch of privileged white assholes on their worst behavior.

but there's a vileness to the Trump rallies that seems like an extra layer - mostly in that where most candidates would quickly (perhaps disingenuously so) distance themselves from their worst supporters, Trump is refusing to, and in many cases he's smirking at it.

even a Tea Party dude woulda quickly put as much distance between himself and the KKK - Trump didn't because he doesn't want to. he likes all of his support, even when it comes from hate groups. and he isn't being forced to walk it back because even after seeing KKK Grand Wizards championing his cause and his own reticence to tell them to fuck off, his fanbase just doesn't give a shit and still loves him.

http://nypost.com/2016/03/05/why-i-support-trump-and-resent-the-elites-trying-to-destroy-him/

thought this was interesting - a lot of truth + relatable sentiments along w/ obv myopia

But the Tea Party had an underbelly that, while concealed on the Hill and on the networks, was manifest elsewhere.

Xp

Late to the party, but it would be cool if people were also hammering Clinton on casting her apology about "super-predators" as a "poor choice of words" instead of a toxic ideology. Just because the democratic slate is less tone-deaf on issues of race than the lunatic repubs doesn't mean they aren't both crazy tone-deaf on issues of race.

For reference on why that usage needs to more than a cursory apology there's this:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/04/07/us/politics/killing-on-bus-recalls-superpredator-threat-of-90s.html?referer=&_r=0

"It certainly had consequences. It energized a movement, as one state after another enacted laws making it possible to try children as young as 13 or 14 as adults. (New York had such a law even earlier, and it is now being applied to Kahton Anderson.) Many hundreds of juveniles were sent to prison for life, though in the last few years the United States Supreme Court has ruled that such sentences must not be automatic, even in murder cases. Individual circumstances and possible mitigating factors should be weighed, the justices said.

Inescapably, superpredator dread had a racial component. What the doomsayers focused on, in the main, were young male African-Americans. For Steven A. Drizin, a law professor at Northwestern University writing for The Huffington Post last September, the deep-seated fear that any black teenager in a hoodie must be up to no good was essentially what got Trayvon Martin killed in Florida two years ago."

FYI last paragraph of that link is WILDLY IGNORABLE.

Yeah I was loathe to bring that up bc it was twenty years ago, but really the Clintons record on race is Not Good. They were not fighting against racial disparities in sentencing in the 90s. Sanders was though, even if he ultimately voted for that notorious crime bill. cf.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZJ7f-3XGB4&sns=em
I do think that he is a more compassionate and better person than Hillary fwiw, even though I understand DJP's concern that he seems to have a hard time discussing racism without subsuming it under his main concern, economic inequality

"More compassionate and better person" obv isn't the only meaningful criteria, and obv I don't know these candidates as individuals, but going off their records I trust Bernie more to listen to the concerns of people who are oppressed or marginalized

Bernie is an ideological politician looking for the support of a coalition party. It's on him to address the various components of that coalition in terms that matter to them. Bringing it all back to the organizing ideology is only appealing if you already believe that ideology will help you.

There's possibly a critique along these lines one could draw from the Sanders and Clinton campaigns' respective logos. HRC's arrow is visually uninspiring or even hackneyed on its own but its graphic simplicity allows its interior to be repurposed for any context, just give it Pride colors or put a photo of corn or children in that arrow. It's the logo of a campaign that knows it wins by being all things to all people. Bernie's first-name logotype isn't really much less embarassing than Jeb!'s. Bernie isn't running a personality campaign per se, but he's running on a singular message, trying to attract voters by staying on that message. This worked out well for my socialist city council member here in Seattle but even locally that sort of on-message consistency gets grating.

The best candidates are empty signifiers, the worst thing you could be in 2016 is too specific.

except it's by being really specific about that message that's gotten Bernie as far as he's gotten! And the whole point of the candidacy is to re-establish that those specific concerns have very large, unaddressed constituencies. I think his ethic could be rendered richer and more synthetic and ultimately more powerful by incorporating other issues of social justice at the core rather than as add-ons, but I don't think it would have been useful in any way for him to become a vague grab-bag candidate. His answer the other night on fracking, for example, is or at least appears to be general-election suicide as of right now, but seriously how great is it for someone just to be like, fuck, that, it's a bad idea, the answer's no. I want to hear the grab-bag wind-checking politicians adopting Bernie's arguments in order to win, not the other way around.

voters don't seem to agree that sanders' record is better

voters are not voting on records, they're voting who they want to nominate for president

many of them are making the understandable calculation that hillary is the better bet to beat whoever the republicans put up

Voters apparently didn't like clintons record the only other time she was voted about before so

Ha whoops I mean on a national stage obv, but I assume that's clear since sanders has been sent up by Vermont for like 700 years

Clinton came as close to getting the nomination as you can, kinda, the last time she tried, did a lot better than Sanders this year, actually. And now she is beating him decisively, 58%-42%, with a lot of his best states already done. She is way more popular among democratic voters than he is. And especially among minorities, and especially among black voters. Protesting that really, both candidates seem clueless about race is stupid (and perhaps almost offensive), because, y'know, a couple of 'races' are sending a pretty strong signal that one of the candidates gets it better than the other, y'know? Try listening to them.

Any hope of reclaiming new deal politics has to grapple with why the new deal coalition eventually failed. And you know why it did? Because the civil right laws of the 60'ies caused the white democrats in the south to change sides. That is, racism wasn't just something off to the side of the new deal, it's was a fundamental part of it's appeal in large parts of the country. It was vital; in the attempt to root it out, the coalition simply fell apart. As Bernie has shown, any new new deal that isn't specifically anti-racist and anti white-supremacy in design has no hope of making it, it has too little appeal to the people who were explicitly left out of the first new deal. And what is weird about that? Why should black people trust progressive democrats? Honestly, they've been screwed harder by new deal policies than by anything Clinton ever did to them.

I really want you guys to get free healthcare and free education and all that, but until american white liberalism starts to grapple with why it's correct to call it 'white liberalism', it won't happen. You will lose, and as demographics change you will lose worse and worse. And the joke is, nobody will care. Sanders will be your last gasp of relevance, and the coalition of minorities, single women and cultural/economic elites will continue to rule.

Sort of picturing u cackling like skeletor with that last bit.

Very good points about the legacy of the new deal tho, just think you lost the run of yourself towards the end.

Try listening to them.

Yes, cuz the dictatorship of voters is what democracy's all about. They're always right.

Honestly, they've been screwed harder by new deal policies than by anything Clinton ever did to them.

Get fucking fucked, Frederik.

Lol. Damn.

until american white liberalism starts to grapple with why it's correct to call it 'white liberalism' nobody will care.... Sanders will be your last gasp of relevance

IT DIED 30-40 YEARS AGO, AND WHAT A GREAT COUNTRY IT'S BEEN

It died pretty much precisely fifty years ago, is my point. And you need to realize why if you want to revive it.

I really want you guys to get free healthcare and free education and all that

You do? That's nice of you.

i bet Cory Booker and his hedge-fund buddies will get them for us.

And you need to realize why if you want to revive it.

https://authoritynutrition.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/young-woman-looking-thoughtful.jpg

https://swaggernotstyle.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/they-live.jpg

Are the Vikings one of the races we have to listen to you because I got beef

Bernsplaining, thats where I'm a viking

Did you know that until his retirement in December after a contract dispute, Minnesota Vikings mascot Ragnar was the only "human" (that is, non caricature or animal) mascot in all four major professional American sports?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cc9Z3TrUkAI_Rc4.jpg

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ocBO0fr1Ui4/hqdefault.jpg

Trump is bad enough but getting lectured by Frederick is an worse

Did you know that until his retirement in December after a contract dispute, Minnesota Vikings mascot Ragnar was the only "human" (that is, non caricature or animal) mascot in all four major professional American sports?

it is discriminatory against hellenic people that 'spartans' and 'trojans' and the like are only 'good enough' for the collegiate ranks

Trump is bad enough but getting lectured by Frederick is an worse

― robbie ca$hflo (upper mississippi sh@kedown), 8. marts 2016 14:56 (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Spoken like a true white liberal.

no MSM agenda here, just pure paranoia, right?

http://fair.org/home/washington-post-ran-16-negative-stories-on-bernie-sanders-in-16-hours/

Frederik B reaching new levels of crazy in the night I see.

Trump is bad enough but getting lectured by Frederick is an worse

― robbie ca$hflo (upper mississippi sh@kedown), 8. marts 2016 14:56 (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Spoken like a true white liberal.

― Frederik B, Tuesday, March 8, 2016 8:02 AM (13 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

here's the thing about you, is you are like Trump because ultimately you don't give a shit about any of us, about our country or about any of this, you talk about a coalition of minorities and single women, then when they post on this thread you talk right past them to make your next grandiose point about american democracy -- which you've never been a part of and which you have no stake in. you treat peope on here with condescension, you know all this shit you read in books and online but when shit goes down here, you'll be happily smug in your little fucking danish hobbit hole drinking mead and listening to spotify....i might bust on morbz for his stridency but i know goddamn well what he must have dealt with in terms of oppression for year and that he's had cancer and is the belly of the fuckin beast that is the american health care system.

i bet you like this a lot more than talking about the racism, anti-immigrant policies going on in your own country because that would involve you actually getting involved, having some fucking skin in the game.

your political ideals are one: hearing your own damn self talk. just like trump.

As Bernie has shown, any new new deal that isn't specifically anti-racist and anti white-supremacy in design has no hope of making it,

Bernie is anti-racist and anti-white supremacy. He's said, many times, that the danger of Trump is xenophobia, and the only way to counter right wing populism is with a robust left wing populism that emphasizes the common interests of the working class regardless of race. I think that's a good point. It doesn't address every minority concern, and he can do more, but these lacunae don't make his movement somehow racist. Bill Clinton's anti-crime, welfare busting program of the 90s was explicitly racist. It literally was designed to appeal to those white voters that didn't want black people to access the safety net. Hillary Clinton campaigned with her husband and was involved in his presidency, she never spoke out against any of this.

Black voters are sending a strong message that they prefer Hillary and there are a million reasons for that. Respecting their decision doesn't mean admitting that Bernie's campaign is somehow tinged with racism, or that minorities somehow wouldn't benefit from his plans like free public college and single payer healthcare.

*last words of first para should have been "at the time"

Also ums otm. As much as I think it's cool to get outside perspectives, it's weird to be lectured by a Scandinavian about how the only national campaign that has seriously gone after poverty in my lifetime is somehow problematic due to its supporters' white privilege. (And not just that, but that it's "doomed" by this, and we deserve it.) There's truth to this narrative -- it's not the whole truth as I explained -- but still, fuck you.

Frederik, I'm curious why you're so interested in US politics? Have you lived there, or studied there, or do you have some other personal connection to it? It makes sense that Europeans like us should have some interest in the results of US elections, because American economic and foreign policies obviously affect us too, but your level of interest seems to go way beyond of what your average politically informed EU citizen knows/cares about the subject. I don't want to judge you or anything, I'm just genuinely curious why you're fascinated by all the details of another country's elections?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/an-awkward-reality-for-bernie-sanders-a-strategy-focused-on-whiter-states/2016/03/07/311ad3e4-e412-11e5-b0fd-073d5930a7b7_story.html?tid=sm_tw

Yeah, I've lived and studied there.