Unwarrented Behaviour
I would have been fine with Elizabeth Warren as president. There are several others I would have been fine with, like Sanders, Amy K., and even Biden or trump, in some respects. (Most other candidates showed a serious absence of substance, whatever their race or gender).
I decided this even though I earlier came to the hunch that she was not presidential material. This earlier opinion came about the time of the whole 'Pocahontas' tussle. At that time, I saw in her a modicum of magical thinking. And, her whole response to the Trump accusation was sloppy. Basically, she just folded, and apologised to all the Native Americans she hurt. That's what i remember of it, but I think there was more.
Do not get me wrong. I liked Elizabeth Warren, for her ideas. Her work on the Consumer Financial Protection agency was great. She has always spoken out against the ravages of big corporations. But the power of the CFPA is not only not what it could have been, it has been watered down. For all she may criticise Sanders for, "not getting things done", (a Clinton/DNC talking point), the effectiveness of much of what Warren has done has legitimately been called into question by others.
I do believe in compromise - but not during Poker: When people saw that she was prepared to compromise on Health Care, etc., they saw weakness, which could be compared to her record. "Why go with her, when Bernie has a whole different, oppositional philosophy, and a bigger mouth?!" They also saw her as weak when she at first did not distinguish herself from Sanders, and then waffled towards doing so in the last week before Super-Tuesday. Where did she stand, then? With Bernie? Between Bernie and Biden? Where is she when Biden in fact stands between Sanders and Bloomberg? Too much for people to figure out - so what did they do? They went with the biggest mouths, Sanders and Biden.
People are now saying that Warren lost the race when, after she flattened Bloomberg in a debate, people, (though they rejected Bloomberg), rejected Warren, because she showed herself as unlikable - a bitch. Once again, blame sexism - the sexism of Democrats, may I remind you. In fact, It was during an earlier debate that Warren lost the race. Do you recall the debate which ended with a question that went something like this: "What would you like to say to the other candidates?" - or something like that? Well, the unique response from Warren was something like, "If I have hurt any of your feelings, I deeply apologise!" Right? Listen:
By now, we should know that that sort of display is NOT what voters are looking for. Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Michael Dukakis, all too a dive after they basically said, "I feel your pain," and made themselves a laughing stock with the GOP, to boot. If the idea of the Democrats is to kick Trump's ass, in a world of shooters and terrorists, then a display of sympathy, humility and niceness, (much as I and many others cherish such human traits), is going to lose you the race! If beatign trump is the game, and Democrats all know this, then what they are going to do is vote for the loudest, rudest, most egotistical candidate they can stomach. Am I wrong?
Don't you see? It isn't other people's misogyny which is to blame. It is the DNC's decision to run against Trump, who they see as a big Bully. A racist, misogynist, big-mouthed bully. When you assume the game of your enemy, you become your enemy. By deciding that the biggest mouth must win, you implicitly squeezed Warren, and the Cake Lady, and probably the ethnic minorities, OUT of the game. So, what do you end up with? Two "old white men" trying to take on old white man Trump. The Democrats did this to themselves. So, please don't trot out Pelosi, Hillary and others, complaining that America will not allow a woman to be president. It will and, believe me, the first female president will probably be a Republican. Why? Because she will not hang herself in gender identity politics, but will come off more as a Thatcher and, again, believe me, this is NOT what we want. But it will happen because of the default of the left.
I thought warren was in it for the ideas, but I'm no longer so sure of that. I was sorely disappointed to see her not hand Bernie her support PRIOR to Super-Tuesday, because she was too blind to see how poorly she would do. This was more urgent after three others handed their support to Biden, acting like Republicans. Instead, Warren squandered the chance to give Bernie a publicity boost, and continue NOT to hand Bernie her support or delegates. Why won't she support Bernie now? Wasn't she once almost indistinguishable from him. It's not about ideas. She is considering giving Biden her support, because the DNC is telling her Biden is destined to be the winner, and wouldn't Warren make a great VP for him? Well, I think that would be both a typical female move, and a typical jackass move.
Instead of really being about ideas, I feel that Warren had a tendency to fabricate themes to fit her personal agenda, as politicians are wont to do. First she was a Native American, then she was on her knees apologising to Native Americans, then she was pro-Bernie, now she is anti-Bernie... And, suddenly, now, it is all about the little girls! So... she was always running in order to be the first female president? What substance did her ideational presentations or attacks on other candidates have, if this was the case, or when she also fell on her knees and apologised to THEM? See what I mean? This conceptual wishy-washiness was all the more precarious because, once again, the DNC had made this a race about having the biggest, most decisive mouth. If now we are to blame everyone for beign misogynist, then let the blame begin with the DNC and the Clintons.
Just because Trump is a jerk does not mean the campaign has to select for MEN - white men at that - who can kick his ass, by being jerks of their own sort. This strategy only betrays fear and lack of ideas. After all, trump has done well on many fronts, most notably the economy. De we hear Bernie, or the others, talkign any more about TRADE? No, because Trump has stolen that issue. Do we hear Bernie talking the way he used to, backed by all trade unions, against immigrants, 'because they take jobs'? No, because Trump has stolen that issue - and the people in favour of limitting immigration. And so on.
Just as they have been doing for the past four years, Dems have been hoping to beat Trump by calling him a bad and nasty man. Unfortunately, many Americans have become convinced that this is the man to deal with the Taliban, Iran, China, Korea, the Washing DC SWAMP, and so on. Do we hear Bernie, anymore, talking about cleaning up the SWAMP? No - Trump has stolen that idea as well! And when a president seems to be kicking ass, in the eyes of so many Americans, there doesn't seem to be much point in joining in on Puritanical witch hunts, or getting all riled because the President merely upsets norms and not laws. The whole country is not made up of Democrats. The whole country is not agreed to removing Trump because he is bad. And, if the Dems run someone many voters see as a different sort of bad man, then they will tend to settle with the one they already voted for.
The way to beat Trump is with ideas. And Bernie is the one to do this, in my opinion. Unfortunately, he has not clarified, as well has he has on Thom Hartmann, what euro-Socialism is all about. How it really is just an innovation of FDR ideas, and has nothing to do with owning the means of production, or all that. And, as soon as Hillary won the nomination in 2016, Bernie also began painting trump as the evil enemy. Well, both Trump and Sanders emerged from the same populist soup that has been bubbling for decades. There are shades and degrees of progressivism and anger in it. To try to divide it up into Democrat vs. Republican is a BIG mistake. And I believe Trump is aware of this.
You know, on Super-Tuesday, NPR interviewed Hillary Clinton who, what-do-you-know, suddenly had a four-hour documentary - on herself - to peddle. They aired this early in the afternoon, which is morning in California. Dig it up, and you will hear her dropping all sorts of slurs against Sanders, proclaiming he is incapable of getting anything done, while she instead advocated for Biden. ON THE DAY OF THE PRIMARIES. There were 3-4 other Dems aired by NPR, during the night's coverage, all of whom did the same thing. Dropped divisive slurs, some like you can't imagine. Only later in the night was the Mayor of NYC interviewed re: his support of Bernie - when it was too late to be of any relevance.
These establishment, DNC Dems are forever decrying divisiveness, and yet they so meanly and deliberately continue to sow seeds of division! Sooooooo many Americans see through this crap, and this is one reason why Hillary Clinton is so disliked. But she, like others, just keeps going, blaming everything on sexism - and nothing is ever her fault.
Yes, Bernie is being pushed out by the DNC Establishment, once again. Early that same night, Perez and others were already talking about a brokered convention, (see my upcoming post about 'latest conspiracy theories'). Sanders is being fingered for being helped by Russians. And mainstream news reports that DNC 'Super-delegates' are all trying to find a way to keep Bernie from getting the nomination.
Anyway - here is a little something I discovered in someone's LJ, concerning Warren, written the day before Warren dropped out. (This LJ user is a decent liberal who claims she is a moderate and knows some of her opinions can irk others. I am not citing this example in order to blame anyone. I am using it to illustrate wider problems)...
I went into the Super Tuesday run-up really trying hard to figure out what to do with my MA vote: give it to Klobuchar because I wanted to vote for her, or give it to an Anti-Bernie vote. Then Klobuchar dropped out the night before. Now I'm looking at three seventy-something year old white men and Warren.
Biden isn't a PROBLEM, he's just not a solution. Bernie isn't a solution, either, AND he creates a whole host of OTHER problems. (Remember, I'm good at math.) But if he were 20 years younger and had the movement behind him, maybe? I dunno. But, here's the thing, he's about to turn 79 years old and he has SERIOUS heart disease and spends all his time yelling at people. This is a man who's going to drop dead before the convention.
So, yeah, I'm supporting Warren as the smart Hermione who can get our shit together, PLUS she will be ready to go when the curtain goes up. Right now she's the understudy when no one understands why there's a need for an understudy. But, sheesh. Have you SEEN these two old white men? The average life span of a white male in America is 78.9 years. Biden is turning 78 this Fall. They are campaigning for a demanding job that lasts at least four years, preferably eight.
Note the sexism and ageism in this (partial) post. It's quaint not to like Bernie because he yells so much. I somewhat agree. But look at the ideas behind the volume. Her mind has been made up to be anti-Bernie. Voting against males because they are males is called sexism. If one is OK with that, then one should also be fine when other people vote against females because they are females. Vote against the old? Then be fine when others vote your candidate out because of youth. Voting against whites? Then be fine when others vote against blacks. It just amazes me how so many Dems just do not see the divisiveness in their politics or opinions. Again, when Warren loses, they slip into the default of blaming OTHERS for THEIR sexism, and so on. When the Dems blame each other during the primary stage, then their own Balkanising cannibalism can end up losing them the presidency.
As far as being too old for the job.. That is a valid objection. However, in past USA politics, when a person is elected, it is his or her ideas which are thought to have won, and people continued to respect these ideas, and their goals. I still believe that, if a president dies, people will support continuity of the agenda which won the election. The great loss of a president also tends to reinforce that support. And so does the running mate, now VP. So, I personally do not see such a drastic problem with a candidate being old. I do have reservations over health and cognition. I think most people agree that heart surgery - stints - are very reliable these days. So, I do not see a problem with Bernie's health, although I do have concerns concerning Biden's cognitive capacities at times.
And here are a few things I found, re: Warren...
What's so great about Elizabeth Warren?
VIDEO: Elizabeth Warren scrambles when confronted about wealth, attacks on 1%
Elizabeth Warren’s identity politics - The Washington Post
Things keep getting worse for Elizabeth Warren
Interpreting non-answers from Donald Trump and Elizabeth Warren
Sanders shifts focus to Michigan as Warren drops out - live
Sincerely, I did support Warren, above Bloomberg, Biden, Mayor B., and others. And I want her, and anti-corporatism, to succeed. I have kept my mouth shut concerning my reservations, because, as I said, I would be fine if she were president. Now that she is out, I think it is OK to take a look at her - and ask why, maybe, she might have failed, other than, and in addition to, sexism. Every part of me wishes her the best of luck, and I look forward to the great job she will do in the Sanders Administration.
I decided this even though I earlier came to the hunch that she was not presidential material. This earlier opinion came about the time of the whole 'Pocahontas' tussle. At that time, I saw in her a modicum of magical thinking. And, her whole response to the Trump accusation was sloppy. Basically, she just folded, and apologised to all the Native Americans she hurt. That's what i remember of it, but I think there was more.
Do not get me wrong. I liked Elizabeth Warren, for her ideas. Her work on the Consumer Financial Protection agency was great. She has always spoken out against the ravages of big corporations. But the power of the CFPA is not only not what it could have been, it has been watered down. For all she may criticise Sanders for, "not getting things done", (a Clinton/DNC talking point), the effectiveness of much of what Warren has done has legitimately been called into question by others.
I do believe in compromise - but not during Poker: When people saw that she was prepared to compromise on Health Care, etc., they saw weakness, which could be compared to her record. "Why go with her, when Bernie has a whole different, oppositional philosophy, and a bigger mouth?!" They also saw her as weak when she at first did not distinguish herself from Sanders, and then waffled towards doing so in the last week before Super-Tuesday. Where did she stand, then? With Bernie? Between Bernie and Biden? Where is she when Biden in fact stands between Sanders and Bloomberg? Too much for people to figure out - so what did they do? They went with the biggest mouths, Sanders and Biden.
People are now saying that Warren lost the race when, after she flattened Bloomberg in a debate, people, (though they rejected Bloomberg), rejected Warren, because she showed herself as unlikable - a bitch. Once again, blame sexism - the sexism of Democrats, may I remind you. In fact, It was during an earlier debate that Warren lost the race. Do you recall the debate which ended with a question that went something like this: "What would you like to say to the other candidates?" - or something like that? Well, the unique response from Warren was something like, "If I have hurt any of your feelings, I deeply apologise!" Right? Listen:
By now, we should know that that sort of display is NOT what voters are looking for. Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Michael Dukakis, all too a dive after they basically said, "I feel your pain," and made themselves a laughing stock with the GOP, to boot. If the idea of the Democrats is to kick Trump's ass, in a world of shooters and terrorists, then a display of sympathy, humility and niceness, (much as I and many others cherish such human traits), is going to lose you the race! If beatign trump is the game, and Democrats all know this, then what they are going to do is vote for the loudest, rudest, most egotistical candidate they can stomach. Am I wrong?
Don't you see? It isn't other people's misogyny which is to blame. It is the DNC's decision to run against Trump, who they see as a big Bully. A racist, misogynist, big-mouthed bully. When you assume the game of your enemy, you become your enemy. By deciding that the biggest mouth must win, you implicitly squeezed Warren, and the Cake Lady, and probably the ethnic minorities, OUT of the game. So, what do you end up with? Two "old white men" trying to take on old white man Trump. The Democrats did this to themselves. So, please don't trot out Pelosi, Hillary and others, complaining that America will not allow a woman to be president. It will and, believe me, the first female president will probably be a Republican. Why? Because she will not hang herself in gender identity politics, but will come off more as a Thatcher and, again, believe me, this is NOT what we want. But it will happen because of the default of the left.
I thought warren was in it for the ideas, but I'm no longer so sure of that. I was sorely disappointed to see her not hand Bernie her support PRIOR to Super-Tuesday, because she was too blind to see how poorly she would do. This was more urgent after three others handed their support to Biden, acting like Republicans. Instead, Warren squandered the chance to give Bernie a publicity boost, and continue NOT to hand Bernie her support or delegates. Why won't she support Bernie now? Wasn't she once almost indistinguishable from him. It's not about ideas. She is considering giving Biden her support, because the DNC is telling her Biden is destined to be the winner, and wouldn't Warren make a great VP for him? Well, I think that would be both a typical female move, and a typical jackass move.
Instead of really being about ideas, I feel that Warren had a tendency to fabricate themes to fit her personal agenda, as politicians are wont to do. First she was a Native American, then she was on her knees apologising to Native Americans, then she was pro-Bernie, now she is anti-Bernie... And, suddenly, now, it is all about the little girls! So... she was always running in order to be the first female president? What substance did her ideational presentations or attacks on other candidates have, if this was the case, or when she also fell on her knees and apologised to THEM? See what I mean? This conceptual wishy-washiness was all the more precarious because, once again, the DNC had made this a race about having the biggest, most decisive mouth. If now we are to blame everyone for beign misogynist, then let the blame begin with the DNC and the Clintons.
Just because Trump is a jerk does not mean the campaign has to select for MEN - white men at that - who can kick his ass, by being jerks of their own sort. This strategy only betrays fear and lack of ideas. After all, trump has done well on many fronts, most notably the economy. De we hear Bernie, or the others, talkign any more about TRADE? No, because Trump has stolen that issue. Do we hear Bernie talking the way he used to, backed by all trade unions, against immigrants, 'because they take jobs'? No, because Trump has stolen that issue - and the people in favour of limitting immigration. And so on.
Just as they have been doing for the past four years, Dems have been hoping to beat Trump by calling him a bad and nasty man. Unfortunately, many Americans have become convinced that this is the man to deal with the Taliban, Iran, China, Korea, the Washing DC SWAMP, and so on. Do we hear Bernie, anymore, talking about cleaning up the SWAMP? No - Trump has stolen that idea as well! And when a president seems to be kicking ass, in the eyes of so many Americans, there doesn't seem to be much point in joining in on Puritanical witch hunts, or getting all riled because the President merely upsets norms and not laws. The whole country is not made up of Democrats. The whole country is not agreed to removing Trump because he is bad. And, if the Dems run someone many voters see as a different sort of bad man, then they will tend to settle with the one they already voted for.
The way to beat Trump is with ideas. And Bernie is the one to do this, in my opinion. Unfortunately, he has not clarified, as well has he has on Thom Hartmann, what euro-Socialism is all about. How it really is just an innovation of FDR ideas, and has nothing to do with owning the means of production, or all that. And, as soon as Hillary won the nomination in 2016, Bernie also began painting trump as the evil enemy. Well, both Trump and Sanders emerged from the same populist soup that has been bubbling for decades. There are shades and degrees of progressivism and anger in it. To try to divide it up into Democrat vs. Republican is a BIG mistake. And I believe Trump is aware of this.
You know, on Super-Tuesday, NPR interviewed Hillary Clinton who, what-do-you-know, suddenly had a four-hour documentary - on herself - to peddle. They aired this early in the afternoon, which is morning in California. Dig it up, and you will hear her dropping all sorts of slurs against Sanders, proclaiming he is incapable of getting anything done, while she instead advocated for Biden. ON THE DAY OF THE PRIMARIES. There were 3-4 other Dems aired by NPR, during the night's coverage, all of whom did the same thing. Dropped divisive slurs, some like you can't imagine. Only later in the night was the Mayor of NYC interviewed re: his support of Bernie - when it was too late to be of any relevance.
These establishment, DNC Dems are forever decrying divisiveness, and yet they so meanly and deliberately continue to sow seeds of division! Sooooooo many Americans see through this crap, and this is one reason why Hillary Clinton is so disliked. But she, like others, just keeps going, blaming everything on sexism - and nothing is ever her fault.
Yes, Bernie is being pushed out by the DNC Establishment, once again. Early that same night, Perez and others were already talking about a brokered convention, (see my upcoming post about 'latest conspiracy theories'). Sanders is being fingered for being helped by Russians. And mainstream news reports that DNC 'Super-delegates' are all trying to find a way to keep Bernie from getting the nomination.
Anyway - here is a little something I discovered in someone's LJ, concerning Warren, written the day before Warren dropped out. (This LJ user is a decent liberal who claims she is a moderate and knows some of her opinions can irk others. I am not citing this example in order to blame anyone. I am using it to illustrate wider problems)...
I went into the Super Tuesday run-up really trying hard to figure out what to do with my MA vote: give it to Klobuchar because I wanted to vote for her, or give it to an Anti-Bernie vote. Then Klobuchar dropped out the night before. Now I'm looking at three seventy-something year old white men and Warren.
Biden isn't a PROBLEM, he's just not a solution. Bernie isn't a solution, either, AND he creates a whole host of OTHER problems. (Remember, I'm good at math.) But if he were 20 years younger and had the movement behind him, maybe? I dunno. But, here's the thing, he's about to turn 79 years old and he has SERIOUS heart disease and spends all his time yelling at people. This is a man who's going to drop dead before the convention.
So, yeah, I'm supporting Warren as the smart Hermione who can get our shit together, PLUS she will be ready to go when the curtain goes up. Right now she's the understudy when no one understands why there's a need for an understudy. But, sheesh. Have you SEEN these two old white men? The average life span of a white male in America is 78.9 years. Biden is turning 78 this Fall. They are campaigning for a demanding job that lasts at least four years, preferably eight.
Note the sexism and ageism in this (partial) post. It's quaint not to like Bernie because he yells so much. I somewhat agree. But look at the ideas behind the volume. Her mind has been made up to be anti-Bernie. Voting against males because they are males is called sexism. If one is OK with that, then one should also be fine when other people vote against females because they are females. Vote against the old? Then be fine when others vote your candidate out because of youth. Voting against whites? Then be fine when others vote against blacks. It just amazes me how so many Dems just do not see the divisiveness in their politics or opinions. Again, when Warren loses, they slip into the default of blaming OTHERS for THEIR sexism, and so on. When the Dems blame each other during the primary stage, then their own Balkanising cannibalism can end up losing them the presidency.
As far as being too old for the job.. That is a valid objection. However, in past USA politics, when a person is elected, it is his or her ideas which are thought to have won, and people continued to respect these ideas, and their goals. I still believe that, if a president dies, people will support continuity of the agenda which won the election. The great loss of a president also tends to reinforce that support. And so does the running mate, now VP. So, I personally do not see such a drastic problem with a candidate being old. I do have reservations over health and cognition. I think most people agree that heart surgery - stints - are very reliable these days. So, I do not see a problem with Bernie's health, although I do have concerns concerning Biden's cognitive capacities at times.
And here are a few things I found, re: Warren...
What's so great about Elizabeth Warren?
VIDEO: Elizabeth Warren scrambles when confronted about wealth, attacks on 1%
Elizabeth Warren’s identity politics - The Washington Post
Things keep getting worse for Elizabeth Warren
Interpreting non-answers from Donald Trump and Elizabeth Warren
Sanders shifts focus to Michigan as Warren drops out - live
Sincerely, I did support Warren, above Bloomberg, Biden, Mayor B., and others. And I want her, and anti-corporatism, to succeed. I have kept my mouth shut concerning my reservations, because, as I said, I would be fine if she were president. Now that she is out, I think it is OK to take a look at her - and ask why, maybe, she might have failed, other than, and in addition to, sexism. Every part of me wishes her the best of luck, and I look forward to the great job she will do in the Sanders Administration.