Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I'm all for taking advantage, but I don't like derp, period. And the most ardent Bernie supporters, at least those on my Facebook feed and elsewhere, have more than their fair share of derp in their rantings.

This. It's been simmering for months, but it's getting worse now that Bernie Bros are starting to realize it's less than six months to the convention, and he's not going to have the numbers. Lots of shrieking about the media ignoring Bernie after all of his wins - sounding uncannily like Freepers b*tching about the "librul MSM" being out to get them. When New York falls to the Clintonistas next week, and the rest of the Right Coast the week after next, be prepared for more caterwauling about repression and the violence inherent in the system.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

As long as I get paid.

Do like the public option being resurrected however. No Joe Leiberman to tank it anymore.

We'll put you in charge of the national razor.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I'm all for taking advantage, but I don't like derp, period. And the most ardent Bernie supporters, at least those on my Facebook feed and elsewhere, have more than their fair share of derp in their rantings. I've tended leftward as I age primarily because the left has been the adult in the room to the GOP's screaming toddlers, but I also see screaming tantrums coming from the left these days. They aren't nearly close to or equivalent to the GOP's yet, but I'm not liking even that slight/modest uptick

This pretty much describes me as well.

 

[LynahFan]

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. Having a liberal majority on the Supreme Court for the first time in two generations is reason enough in and of itself to support Hillary if/when she secures the nomination.

Well of course - if she gets the nomination. But good lord, the Dems are about to waste a once in a century trainwreck in the opposing party. If there were ever a time to run the perfect candidate instead of making the safe, pragmatic choice, this is it. Any D who mentions "electability" as an advantage should be laughed out of the room. The Rs took that topic off the table, detonated a thermonuclear device on it, and launched the remnants into the sun. The Ds could run a ticket of Guevara-Castro this year and still beat the fractionated, blubbering, slime ooze that will be departing the R convention.

 

[Spartanforlife4]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Hillary's going with the Marco Rubio strategy and mentioning Obama as much as possible.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Well of course - if she gets the nomination. But good lord, the Dems are about to waste a once in a century trainwreck in the opposing party. If there were ever a time to run the perfect candidate instead of making the safe, pragmatic choice, this is it. Any D who mentions "electability" as an advantage should be laughed out of the room. The Rs took that topic off the table, detonated a thermonuclear device on it, and launched the remnants into the sun. The Ds could run a ticket of Guevara-Castro this year and still beat the fractionated, blubbering, slime ooze that will be departing the R convention.

I said this months ago but as per usual the Ds are spineless.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Hillary's going with the Marco Rubio strategy and mentioning Obama as much as possible.

He's +15 favorable in the last Bloomberg tracking poll.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Well of course - if she gets the nomination. But good lord, the Dems are about to waste a once in a century trainwreck in the opposing party. If there were ever a time to run the perfect candidate instead of making the safe, pragmatic choice, this is it. Any D who mentions "electability" as an advantage should be laughed out of the room. The Rs took that topic off the table, detonated a thermonuclear device on it, and launched the remnants into the sun. The Ds could run a ticket of Guevara-Castro this year and still beat the fractionated, blubbering, slime ooze that will be departing the R convention.

The thing is, to the current Democratic party it may not be a wasted opportunity. They may be quite happy with the current economic structure. Their kids will be just fine.

We are more and more becoming a country of Haves vs Have Nots instead of conservatives vs liberals. The Democrats are still far, far better than the Republicans over all, but on fiscal policy our choices are center-right vs far right. There is no left side of the menu. And really once the 1% have accomplished that they have no fear of elections any more. They stopped the threat of an FDR by colonizing both parties.

This could not be done in a multiparty system, or at least it would be much harder, so maybe people who care about the wealth chasm and what that does to a democracy should work harder in that direction.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Lynah,

Who is the "perfect candidate"? I bring this up because its always easy to image a Republican or Democratic Jesus but in history there's not a lot of those people to be found (Reagan for Goopers and Kennedy for Dems are the historical models I suppose).

In other news, this needs to be the final Dem debate. Nothing new accept a lot more swiping at each other. CNN and other news outlets are desperate for ratings and want to turn everything into a brawl. Having said that it had no value. They were even arguing about things they agree on.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Who is the "perfect candidate"? I bring this up because its always easy to image a Republican or Democratic Jesus but in history there's not a lot of those people to be found (Reagan for Goopers and Kennedy for Dems are the historical models I suppose).

For Republicans, Reagan, I guess, since Robert A. Taft could never make the nut.

For Democrats most certainly not John F. Kennedy. Martyrdom effaces that he was a Cold War radical who almost got us into war with China. Bobby Kennedy I guess would win for idealism, but again, never held office, so the award has to go to FDR. I like him in particular because he was supremely pragmatic, though he should never have pulled back on the New Deal in the mid-30s. A little more Keynsianism would have gotten us out of the Depression 5 years earlier.

If you want to go to Rushmore, then it's easy: Lincoln for the GOP and Jefferson for the Democrats. Ironically, each could more plausibly be claimed by the other side now that the parties have switched.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

For Republicans, Reagan, I guess, since Robert A. Taft could never make the nut.

For Democrats most certainly not John F. Kennedy. Martyrdom effaces that he was a Cold War radical who almost got us into war with China. Bobby Kennedy I guess would win for idealism, but again, never held office, so the award has to go to FDR. I like him in particular because he was supremely pragmatic, though he should never have pulled back on the New Deal in the mid-30s. A little more Keynsianism would have gotten us out of the Depression 5 years earlier.

If you want to go to Rushmore, then it's easy: Lincoln for the GOP and Jefferson for the Democrats. Ironically, each could more plausibly be claimed by the other side now that the parties have switched.

I'm talking about for the public in general. Most people don't have your sense of history. Kennedy captures the image of the young ambitious Dem President while Republicans prefer grandfatherly types (Ike, Reagan, etc).

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I'm talking about for the public in general. Most people don't have your sense of history. Kennedy captures the image of the young ambitious Dem President while Republicans prefer grandfatherly types (Ike, Reagan, etc).

Yes, then I agree with you completely. Though honestly Bill Clinton is a great memory for most Democrats. You have to be in your 70s now to have actually been politically aware during JFK, but his canonization has kept him alive in liberal hearts (albeit mistakenly).

 

[joecct]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I thought the Dems had repudiated Jefferson because he owned slaves?

On the GOP side, don't forget Ike. And only Nixon could go to China.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I thought the Dems had repudiated Jefferson because he owned slaves?

Even better, he was pro-states rights, even going so far as to suggest support for nullification in his dotage.

i.e., a perfect Republican.

Lincoln OTOH is the South's one-eyebrowed baby, he freed the slaves, he saved the union, and he could think and speak in complete sentences. The perfect Democrat.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

This is a genuinely interesting proposal for a rules change at the RNC. On first reading it does appear to be well-intentioned and non-partisan, which means it will probably be ignored.

The proposal, which will top the agenda during a meeting of the Rules panel at the RNC’s annual spring meeting in Hollywood Beach, Fla., would fundamentally alter how the convention is conducted, further empowering the delegates to determine the course of the proceedings.

It amounts to not just a changing of the rules but of the rulebook itself, with far-reaching implications, potentially impacting whether party insiders will be able to draft a so-called “white knight” — someone currently not running who would play the role of savior at a deadlocked convention.

The proposal is the brainchild of Solomon Yue, an RNC officer and Rules Committee member from Oregon. It would replace the system used at Republican national conventions for decades, which mimic those used by the U.S. House of Representatives, with Robert’s Rules of Order, a design that’s often used to oversee civic and organizational meetings.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

There are precious few moments when I am proud to be a New Yorker.

This is one of them.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I want to ask objective people (sorry, Rover) what they think of this argument. I also heard Markos make it on Make It Plain yesterday, and it really ticked me off, and kinda depressed me because I typically respect him.

I'll state it in brief: Bernie says Hillary's southern state delegate leads distort the Democratic primary race. Because those votes come primarily from black and Hispanic voters, Bernie is being racist.

I call B.S. To me, Bernie's argument was simply that building up delegates in states that aren't important to a November win is the distortion. If you think the Deep South is on the table, then we've already won the election and are looking to expand it into a landslide. From the POV of the presidential election, Bernie's point is exactly right. Math is not racist.

Kos did go on to talk about the downticket effects and that if Hillary brings out more southern Democrats perhaps we pick up more House seats. OK, I can see that.

But the whole idea that it's racist to state the obvious is IMO not just ridiculous but cynical. It's playing the race card where it's entirely unwarranted. I understand why one would do that if they were a partisan looking for an angle -- politics is not an Oxford debate. But if people are using that argument sincerely, and think they're actually making a point with validity outside of the sharp elbows of an election... I just don't see it.

So, convince me otherwise.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Too late, I'm responding anyway!

Sanders isn't being racist. He's trying to cover up for his campaign's incompetence and doing it in a way that's making him look bad.

So, Sanders claims he didn't compete in Southern states because they're more conservative and not going to vote Dem for President. This is a bad assumption on several levels. First it assumes the Dem voters in these states are conservatives, and since they're mostly African Americans participating in the Dem primaries down there, he's just labeled all the AA's as conservadems. They might be somewhat surprised to know that.

Next, the last time I checked, Obama won Florida twice, Virginia twice, and North Carolina once. Its inexcusable the Sanders campaign didn't make a play in any of these places. That's dumb, but not due to any racial animosity.

Finally, the goal of the contest is to amass delegates. Guam and Puerto Rico also don't help elect the President but if Sanders wins their delegates I don't think he's going to refuse them.

Sanders is a person who has a lot of trouble admitting his campaign did something stupid. Its his fault, and his fault alone, that he didn't compete in delegate rich areas under rules that have been in place since 1988. His CYA attempt looks bad but again that's all it is, not a desire to insult black voters.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Too late, I'm responding anyway!

Sanders isn't being racist. {some nonsense}

Good. Thank you.

IINM the GOP (maybe the Dems too) had a proposal on the table for years to weight their delegates not by electoral votes but by party votes in the prior election.

There are some political problems with this that I think are insurmountable, but it would wash out the problem in part.

The real solution is to junk the Electoral College and go to popular vote. It was an explicitly anti-Democratic measure put in place by the Founders and it has no business in the 21st century.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Good. Thank you.

No problem! Now can you admit the guy's a screw up for blowing off Dem leaning states in a Presidential election.

Don't like popular vote idea. Trick would be to maximize votes in 10 biggest states and screw everybody else. I live in the...I don't know 14th or 15th biggest state so we'd get some love but the rest of New England would be a total afterthought. As well as about 30 other states.