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

Also Trumps' scalp flashing on screen for a second as the thread loads (for me). Cue next thread's 2nd post being a close up of his word hole...

xp

newsflash: the democratic party is a coalition party, not an ideological one. if you don't like who they run, get involved and promote your cause. otherwise someone else will and you won't like it. not that i think you will - the extent of your political participation appears to be half-assed self-aggrandizing comments on an internet message board. xp

it would be cool if the new thread had a title that didn't result in the word Douché at the top of my phone as i catch up on this thread on crowded trains

― Karl Malone, Wednesday, April 6, 2016 1:33 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Bern After Reading

Mor vs. Mor 7500 posts long

you even cited a greenwald post to demonstrate all his momentum and how the narrative that he can't win is bogus

Tbf that wasn't the point of the Greenwald citation (as I read it anyway) - Morbs explicitly was backing up KM, who was making what I thought was a pretty fair assessment of the value of Sanders staying in the race against the no-doubt totally sincere and well-intentioned advice from Clinton die-hards that he leave the race for the good of the progressive causes that their candidate does not champion:

he's helping to inspire a lot of young people to get involved in local/state elections. no, not many - most will just vote in the primary or in november, and then completely forget about everything until 2020, again. but some people nonetheless will get inspired and become active that would not have been otherwise. for example, most people here have known all about single payer healthcare for decades or more, but you should remember that there are tons of college kids who were either too young or too politically disengaged to really pay attention to that short-lived debate during its most recent turn in the spotlight in 2009/2010. so having a democratic socialist in the news everyday to popularize these ideas (and trounce hillary in some states, on top of that) is inherently valuable to the future of progressive politics.

in which context the list of recent trouncings really doesn't seem like it's being offered as proof that sanders can win the nomination. i dunno.

as to the midterms point i think morbs is being typically cantankerous but basically otm against the notion that there's some big disappointing mystery about progressives' failure to show the same love to tepid centrists in midterms (which they tend to spend running away from anything really exciting going on, see so many dems after obamacare passed!) that they do to a big bold socialist yelling himself hoarse about income inequality and taxing the rich to pay for social services. there are certainly arguments offered, often, why they "should" get out and vote for those people anyway, and i'm sympathetic to some of them, but if the question is why they're not inspired to do so, i do think morbs may offer a piece of the puzzle.

xpost to marcos

yeah, what i'm talking about is the indictment side of it, and the affect it would have on the democratic primaries. i have no idea if an indictment is likely or not. it seems pretty clear that she knowingly set up a private server and unwittingly exposed classified material for at least a month because they didn't think to encrypt it properly. i don't think it was nefarious, it's just part and parcel with the disregard and lack of understanding of information security that's common throughout the government. but i don't know how the FBI would react to it - i don't know if it amounts to something that she MUST be indicted for. and i don't know what kind of influence the obama administration would play in that decision. the whole reason i raised it is just that it's an example of something unexpected that could happen in the next month or two that would significantly impact the race, as another reason that bernie shouldn't quit until it actually IS impossible for him to win.

With Wisconsin results the season is entering a new phase of Trump slippage

Do not want to vicualize Trump slippage, thanks.

it would be cool if the new thread had a title that didn't result in the word Douché at the top of my phone as i catch up on this thread on crowded trains

― Karl Malone, Wednesday, April 6, 2016 1:33 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Bern After Reading

― human life won't become a cat (man alive), Wednesday, April 6, 2016 1:36 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

No takers? Ok how about "J'accuse Ted Cruz"

the notion that there's some big disappointing mystery about progressives' failure to show the same love to tepid centrists in midterms

i think you've misread the glenn greenwald comment but i don't feel like scrolling up to revisit it. i think this is dumb as hell tho. besides the fact that political participation is strategic and not a demonstration of personal values, the system is set up so that you can run and vote for whomever you want. if there's a real leftist movement in this country, let them find candidates they love and support them and change the system. the whining that the democratic party is not appealing enough is dumbshit nonsense.

this idea that leftists don't show up to vote at midterms because they aren't inspired enough is just lazy leftists letting themselves off the hook.

Doctor Casino and Morbs otm re: midterms.

Mordy, that discontent with the part that you call "whining" is exactly what has propelled the most successful leftish presdiential candidate in modern memory, whereas what you're advocating is essentially Clinton's line throughout her career.

Whether the system is really "set up so that you can run and vote for whomever you want" is a whole other ball of wax.

yeah, really otm. "i won't vote until the democratic party spontaneously starts running candidates i like more" is definitely the way to change politics. it's a good thing the republican side feels the same way otherwise i might be worried that they'll capture legislative bodies and governorships throughout the country. xp

my political participation ended with OWS as i have slowly going broke from illness to deal with, but thx M.

and it's all over btw, nothing to be done

i am a Beckettian.

and yes, the 'sexiness' of presidential races certainly factors into it. as must voter suppression efforts and the comparative ease of voting for the affluent etc. like, all the factors that obtain in every election which favor republicans, which we hashed out with some charts and stuff a little while back, apply in midterm elections but without the enthusiasm push that comes from the sense of a major event, a manichean choice of direction, a contest between a couple of symbolic individuals. yeah that stuff is dumb but it probably HELPS progressive turnout in the presidential years more than it can be said to hurt it in the non-presidential years.

people are meeting at bernie rallies, they're adding each other on facebook. a minority are volunteering, forming groups, canvassing neighborhoods, exhorting friends to come to events. some number of those are likely to continue in those efforts after this election. they will form other groups, start other campaigns - or when they hear about other campaigns, they will have many more people at their fingertips that they can try to draw to come along with them. this will obviously not be most of the subset of sanders supporters who got 'involved' in the first place, but it will not be zero and this will matter. but this too is a non-sexy, low-level kind of process. so basically, sanders-as-presidential-candidate is enabling the boring low-level stuff that some complain the focus on sanders-as-presidential-candidate somehow prevents or blocks. so now who's putting too much emphasis on the symbolism of the quadrennial contest versus the "day to day" stuff? "boy, i sure wish sanders would do more to help the diffusion of progressivism! like for example, he could stop appearing on TV or at giant rallies promoting progressivism! if only they'd put me in charge!"

for whoever said that people aren't energized by downticket races b/c moderates: there are plenty of genuine progressives in downticket races! in wisconsin there are a whole bunch!

except no one said he should stop appearing on TV or promoting progressivism so you're just arguing with yourself xp

political participation is strategic and not a demonstration of personal values

too bad average ordinary folk who vote tend not to think so. Most ppl who do have stopped voting.

what we need is a sexy bernie sanders

I'm already planning to capitalize on the excitement with my Feel the BERN Xtreme Skate, Punk, Circus Sideshow and Midterm Voter Registration Festival Tour

yes correct - Americans have the lowest participation numbers of iirc pretty much every other Western democracy? probably bc we're so exceptionally infatuated with individualism that americans believe "well my vote doesn't make the difference" is a good reason not to go to the polls. xxp

i think you've misread the glenn greenwald comment but i don't feel like scrolling up to revisit it.

here's the relevant posts again since yeah it was almost two hours ago. i have many differences with morbz but i don't think his posts need to be totally mischaracterized in order to disagree with him every time.

i think b) is better. but there's an assumption built into it, which is that keeping his campaign alive helps to build support for progressive ideas. by inspiring a lot of people who weren't previously engaged in politics or aren't satisfied with going with someone like hillary clinton for president, he's helping to inspire a lot of young people to get involved in local/state elections. no, not many - most will just vote in the primary or in november, and then completely forget about everything until 2020, again. but some people nonetheless will get inspired and become active that would not have been otherwise. for example, most people here have known all about single payer healthcare for decades or more, but you should remember that there are tons of college kids who were either too young or too politically disengaged to really pay attention to that short-lived debate during its most recent turn in the spotlight in 2009/2010. so having a democratic socialist in the news everyday to popularize these ideas (and trounce hillary in some states, on top of that) is inherently valuable to the future of progressive politics.

― Karl Malone, Wednesday, April 6, 2016 1:09 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

KM otm

re trouncing (explain it's all a mirage, we've heard that-- the OPTICS are good)

‏@ggreenwald
Last 7 states:

ID- Sanders 78%
UT- Sanders 79.3%
AZ- HRC 56.5%
AK- Sanders 81.6%
HI- Sanders 68.8%
WA- Sanders 72.7%
WI- Sanders 56.5%

― we can be heroes just for about 3.6 seconds (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, April 6, 2016 1:17 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

what we need is a sexy bernie sanders

oh yeah....

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1586639544/Screen_Shot_2011-10-13_at_11.43.30_AM_400x400.png

oooooh yeaaah

Karl, make us a new thread, plz. ty.

DC - either way, he quoted approvingly of a post that showed that the left is resurgent + "trouncing" in the last batch of states only like an hour before asking what left. now he has clarified that what that means is the democratic party has not stirred his loins enough to make it worth the trouble voting during off-years.

These long paragraphs are breaking my monitors.

i vote, fucker, and ive always lived in ultrasafe Dem districts

also DC: "boy, i sure wish sanders would do more to help the diffusion of progressivism! like for example, he could stop appearing on TV or at giant rallies promoting progressivism! start endorsing down ticket candidates and making public calls for his supporters to get involved with their local politics." you don't need to strawman your opponents and doing so gives me the impression that you actually are sensitive to this critique.

yes correct - Americans have the lowest participation numbers of iirc pretty much every other Western democracy? probably bc we're so exceptionally infatuated with individualism that americans believe "well my vote doesn't make the difference" is a good reason not to go to the polls. xxp

― Mordy, Wednesday, April 6, 2016 2:49 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

it also seems super hard to vote. what with some state laws that make it difficult for some people to participate in the electoral process (Florida iirc). also i had friends waiting 2 hours at poll stations in pennsylvania, here in the second metropolis of Canada it rarely takes me more than 10 minutes. in France, the electoral day is a national holiday. Australia has a mandatory voting system, etc. I just think the problem happens to do more with infrastructure than the culture of the american people.

i think infrastructure is a problem too! but the only way to fix that is to vote!

man spoke for a lotta ppl

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

oh my god listen to what george carlin says. he doesn't complain about politicians. TAKE A NOTE.

(great carlin clip tho. if only you were even a tenth as insightful)

what value are you adding through repeatedly telling morbs your opinion of him, mordy?

i'm not sure venting is a value but it sure it fun

yes Americans are morons, i wonder if youve ever heard me echo that

no worries i def think you've echoed the idea that Americans are morons

Karl, make us a new thread, plz. ty.

i would like to, but cannot. my pun game is very, very weak.

mordy i have no idea what you're arguing really, unless you just want to repeat the canard that progressives like "whining" (and not "organizing" or whatever the fuck you want them to be doing while you're out supporting center-right democrats like clinton). "it's a free country, you should nominate some people you like" is a fine enough point, i guess, but the subject under discussion is narrower: is "the candidates on the ballot in november don't look much like leftists" possibly a factor? i also brought up the various economic and practical obstacles to voting but you don't seem very interested in that explanation either. it's all just whiny, lazy leftists to you.

all of this of course is argument about a future that hasn't happened yet. we can make some pretty good guesses about how the 2018 midterms might go, but in the context of arguing about what the effects of sanders's candidacy, the organizing it spawns, and his own future activity will be, it becomes a bit circular. i could say, perhaps sanders's campaign will lay groundwork for a better progressive performance in 2018 than we've seen in the past, as candidates see how well bernie did and model themselves on him, crowdfund themselves hardcore, press his message, get bernie to show up for the rallies, promise to throw the bums out and fight stridently for income equality etc. "oh no, progressives won't show up for midterms, because progressives don't show up for midterms."

re: people wanting sanders to drop out - it's not a strawman! that has been explicitly advocated in this thread by shakey, two days ago, and followed up with in his post today to the effect that, in aimless's gloss (endorsed by shakey) "his campaign for the presidency is foolishly prioritizing his campaign for the presidency." you're trying to substitute in a milder business of endorsing downticket candidates and so on (which we should acknowledge is at least something of a mine-field, assuming they even want the endorsement given the unsettled race) for the much stronger claim - sanders would do more good by either quitting or giving up the pretense of running to win - that actually provoked the discussion.

You guys do realize that it is exactly because Americans are morons that I have to danesplain everything?

(sorry)

the other day i thought of the thread name "Brokered Asshole Convention; National LOLfest" but it's kinda more for the period after the last primaries maybe, also people don't like swears in the thread titles and maybe dislike circa 2000 indie rock even more

Shakey/Mordy: Let's Gabbneb-leap to 2018

Could we just have Karl & Doc C co-anchor prez threads? they're among the few sane civil smart posters in 'em.

DC I understand your optimism. I even remember you saying that you anticipate Bernie in 2 years heading a kind of national movement (which I'm very skeptical about). And you're right - we have no idea what his campaign will augur until it does. I'm just saying that right here right now I see a lot of enthusiasm for Bernie and not a lot of enthusiasm for the movement at large and I am concerned that this will have real consequences this year and the idea that "oh, we don't know, maybe it'll be better 2 years from now," strikes me as a lot of wishful thinking. maybe you're right and bernie is running everything perfectly and it's all going to turn out great. or maybe there are things he could that he isn't that would be productive + valuable. but i don't think you're in a space to hear the latter, and it's telling that anyone who makes that case you write-off as a hillary supporter. like you have no fucking idea. it's just coasting on a good feeling.

maybe you're right and bernie is running everything perfectly

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the bern.

i guess it's pretty pertinent to point out (as i think karl did earlier) that obama failed miserably at organizing the kind of long-term progressive coalition that some of his biggest fans on this board are demanding bernie create

And Obama won the presidency.

You guys do realize that it is exactly because Americans are morons that I have to danesplain everything?

(sorry)

that's probably going to get lost in the thread, esp since a new one will show up in a minute anyway, but for the record stfu man

well it helps to have a leader who isn't risible when he claims to be progressive

xxp

It is the Dems' fault they never took Dean seriously as candidate and DC chair. The disappointment's even made him a Clinton supporter.