Re: Presidential Election 2016
Posted: February 13th, 2016, 4:34 pm
Architecture, Development, and Infrastructure of the Twin Cities
https://urbanmsp.com/
John Lewis isn't running against Bernie Sanders, Hillary is, though I suppose Hillary does enjoy deflecting criticism of herself onto others. Hillary is the one I accused of potential swiftboating, and who the brunt of my criticism is aimed at. I'm sure that's how others took it because John Lewis isn't involved with the Chicago picture thing. John Lewis also hasn't misrepresented the CBC PAC as the CBC in the media, said Nevada was 80% white (erasing Latinos, who don't count as minorities anymore because they won't be a "wall" for Hillary ), implied Bernie is racist or sexist, lied about Bernie's policies, etc etc etc. Those all fall on Hillary, the buck stops with her.To be clear, it is absolute fucking bullshit to accuse John Lewis of underhanded tactics and swiftboating in not liking your preferred candidate. Take your White Savior Complex bullshit and shove it.
oh be honest, you were never seriously considering him anyway. your remarks make that abundantly clear. All hail the status quo!I'm done considering Sanders. I'm done pretending that his campaign is not being run on the momentum of ill-informed, sexist, racially tonedeaf, delusional children with a shallow grasp of recent political history and no grasp of how government works in reality. Because I'm sorry. It is. And this thread has made that abundantly clear.
If the objective is merely to 'hold the line' against conservative trolls in congress, I trust him to do that over Clinton who will want to 'accomplish' something and leave a legacy behind because it's all about her ego. She's already so centrist-moderate-pragmatic-sellout-whatever that she barely has to budge to find common ground with the crazies on the right. And they will twist her arm to let her get anything done, so she can either do nothing and damage her image (nope) or cave in to terrible shit just to leave her mark on history, good or bad.scrutiny of Sanders unachievable proposals will not negatively affect his chances in the primary. Donald Trump idiotic ideas have made him the clear favorite on the gop side.
The issue is his agenda simply can not be enacted in 2016 America. There are too many powerful groups (physicians and seniors) who benefit immensely under the current health care system and are extremely fearful of change. the event of a Sanders general election victory don't expect any legislation as groundbreaking as ObamaCare. This is why going Bernie or bust is dumb.
On economic policy, contemporary establishment democrats have more in common with contemporary republicans than they do with the FDR/LBJ democrats. Carter and Clinton took the party away from economic progressives. The Democratic Party, which was once the party that saw economic inequality and poverty as the core causes of economic instability, now sees inequality and poverty as largely irrelevant.
Instead of eliminating inequality and poverty to fuel the capitalist system and produce strong economic growth, establishment democrats now largely agree with establishment republicans that the problem is a lack of support for business investment.
So Bernie Sanders is not merely running to attempt to implement a set of idealistic policies that a Republican-controlled Congress is likely to block. He is running to take the Democratic Party back from an establishment that ignores the fundamental systemic economic problems that lead to wage stagnation and economic crisis.
Hillary Clinton is a neoliberal building on the legacy of Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. She doesn't understand the pivotal role inequality plays in creating economic crisis and reducing economic growth. She has been taken in by a fundamentally right wing paradigm, and if she is elected she will continue to lead the Democratic Party down that path.
Bernie Sanders is a democratic socialist building on the legacy of Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson. He understands that inequality is the core structural factor in economic crisis and that growth in real wages and incomes is required for robust, sustainable economic growth.
It doesn't matter which one is more experienced, or which one's policies are more likely to pass congress, or which one is more likely to win a general election, or which one is a man and which one is a woman. This is not about just this election, or just the next four years.
This is about whether the Democratic Party is going to care about inequality for the next decade.
Now's a good time to remember how important it is to elected a Dem (any Dem).Yup it's all over the place. This is going to be a mess. I imagine they will stonewall any Obama nominee, though I don't know how this will play in November, particularly for some Senators.
Can I just say: don't do this. Don't decide which candidate to support based your perception of their supporters behavior. Pick the candidate, not the support base.I'm done considering Sanders. I'm done pretending that his campaign is not being run on the momentum of ill-informed, sexist, racially tonedeaf, delusional children with a shallow grasp of recent political history and no grasp of how government works in reality. Because I'm sorry. It is. And this thread has made that abundantly clear.
Clinton will be the nominee. After three contests favorable to Sanders she and Sanders have each won 51 delegates. South Carolina and a bunch of large Super Tuesday states favor her heavily. There is absolutely no path for Bernie to overcome her super delegate lead.