JOE MALARKEY VS COL SANDERS
I didn’t watch the debate, no. As I’ve probably mentioned before, my state primary is over, so it’s no longer up to me which one gets the nomination, and I will be voting for the nominee regardless of who it turns out to be. (And this was true even when Marianne Williamson was still running.)
Still, I do have thoughts about the Biden vs Bernie battle. Would you like to hear them? Too bad, I’m posting this anyway.
1. One perennial question I’ve had is why the hardcore progressive wing seemed adamant on supporting Bernie over, say, Elizabeth Warren, who showed promise early on and policy-wise is as progressive as you would want. So why not her?
According to NPR (who interviewed several progressive orgs who support Bernie), it appears to be mainly about settling scores with the DNC. To paraphrase: Bernie performed great in 2016 and would be POTUS now if the DNC hadn't screwed him, so 2020 is the big chance for Bernie fans to prove they were right all along that Bernie was a more electable choice against Trump than HRC.
2. Speaking of the DNC, now that Biden is suddenly running away with this, the conspiracy tropes are back - the DNC and the Mainstream Media (this being the same MSM that Trump calls the Enemy Of The People) are actively conspiring to hand the nomination to Biden.
Yes. Well of course, I mean, what other explanation could there possibly BE that your preferred candidate is getting less votes? It can’t POSSIBLY be because most voters don’t like him as much as you do.
3. A lot of it comes down to this ideological debate about “the party decides” vs “the people decide” who the nominee should be, and that’s a fair question. That said, the last time the DNC left it to the people to decide that, we ended up with a second Nixon term.
So I find it odd that Bernie fans are furious that the DNC is trying to influence which candidate is going to represent it in the POTUS election. Of COURSE it is. Political parties are generally in the business of winning elections so they can drive the ship of state for as long as they can, which means they prefer the nominee be someone who can actually win. So of course they’re going to work the phones and call in favors to try and swing the endorsements to their preferred candidate. That’s how this works.
Whether you think it SHOULDN’T work that way is another matter. But that’s how this game is currently played.
More to the point, Sanders isn't even a Democrat. He’s a lifelong independent using the Demo Party to run because he knows third-party candidates have no chance. He slams the Establishment Demos every chance he gets, and his supporters talk at length about kicking the Establishment Demos out of power so REAL progressives can take over the party and turn it into the hardcore left-wing party they think it ought to be and needs to be to defeat the GOP.
And they have the nerve to complain that the Establishment DNC isn’t just letting them do that? You pick a fight with a bear, you can’t complain if the bear fights back.
4. A lot of this also comes down to a disagreement over electability. The DNC remains convinced that you can’t win by appealing only to the base - you have to be able to reach the mods, the fence-sitters, the casual voters who aren’t all that interested in politics, etc. The Bernie camp seems convinced the base is big enough, and the only thing holding back the undecideds or non-voters is the lack of a true progressive alternative to the GOP.
The problem is that electability is really, really hard to determine. Obviously, the candidate’s base will always think their candidate is the most electable because they have the best ideas, the best leadership qualities, the best ideological purity or whatever. The problem is that they think all of this should be blindingly obvious to any other voter with a lick of sense.
Only it doesn’t work that way. Lots of voters are not as politically engaged as the hardcore base, and they vote for the damnedest reasons. Often they’ll vote on a single issue that matters the most to them, even if the candidate’s other ideas are stupid or reprehensible. Sometimes they’ll vote for the most painfully superficial of reasons. My mom used to cast her vote based on who seemed the most pleasant. History proves repeatedly that being the smoothest smartest talker in the room with the best and boldest ideas doesn't guarantee a win.
That’s why I think the mod/swing vote still matters. As hard as it may be to believe, not everyone sees Trump as a corrupt megalomaniacal racist dingbat, or at least thinks that any old Democrat would do a better job.
Which is also why I think Biden has an edge here, and it’s why he’s winning. The weakness of the Bernie campaign is the often outspoken belief that they’re so obviously right about everything that anyone else who can’t see that is plainly a blithering idiot or a corporate stooge.
This Twitter thread explains why this is not a winning strategy, but the upshot is that if you want to appeal beyond the base, you need a message that brings them onside rather than insults them or treats them as part of the problem you're proposing to solve.
5. For progressives dismayed at a Biden Presidency, THIS Twitter thread offers a reminder that you do have a back-up plan: pressure Biden further to the left than he is. This is how it’s been done for a long time - when you don’t get the perfect ideological candidate (and it’s rare that you do), you pressure the one you do get to at least meet you halfway on as many issues as possible, because he/she needs your votes too.
Yes, that means compromise and hard work. Tough toenails.
6. For all that, though, as I’ve said before, I’m still not convinced either Biden or Sanders can beat Trump anyway.
Perhaps COVID-19 will change that. Trump’s response has been disastrous, and if enough people die as a result, even the GOP may be finally convinced he’s not worth the effort. Or, since the GOP insists that COVID-19 is a glorified head cold, maybe the coronavirus will thin their ranks out enough to give the Demos a numbers advantage.
Mind you, I don’t WANT that to happen. But I think it’s possible that the outcome of COVID-19 will have a direct impact on Trump’s chances if things get really bad. There’s only so much he can blame on Obama.
7. The other thing I can’t help thinking about (and I’m sure I’m not the only one) is the fact that all three of the remaining viable POTUS candidates are in the high-risk demographic for COVID-19. Just imagine the possible scenarios implicit in this.
Again, I don’t want that to happen. But if it does, the impact on the election will be absolute higgledy-piggledy.
Don’t let us get sick,
This is dF
This entry was originally posted at https://defrog.dreamwidth.org/1637510.html. Please comment there using OpenID.
Still, I do have thoughts about the Biden vs Bernie battle. Would you like to hear them? Too bad, I’m posting this anyway.
1. One perennial question I’ve had is why the hardcore progressive wing seemed adamant on supporting Bernie over, say, Elizabeth Warren, who showed promise early on and policy-wise is as progressive as you would want. So why not her?
According to NPR (who interviewed several progressive orgs who support Bernie), it appears to be mainly about settling scores with the DNC. To paraphrase: Bernie performed great in 2016 and would be POTUS now if the DNC hadn't screwed him, so 2020 is the big chance for Bernie fans to prove they were right all along that Bernie was a more electable choice against Trump than HRC.
2. Speaking of the DNC, now that Biden is suddenly running away with this, the conspiracy tropes are back - the DNC and the Mainstream Media (this being the same MSM that Trump calls the Enemy Of The People) are actively conspiring to hand the nomination to Biden.
Yes. Well of course, I mean, what other explanation could there possibly BE that your preferred candidate is getting less votes? It can’t POSSIBLY be because most voters don’t like him as much as you do.
3. A lot of it comes down to this ideological debate about “the party decides” vs “the people decide” who the nominee should be, and that’s a fair question. That said, the last time the DNC left it to the people to decide that, we ended up with a second Nixon term.
So I find it odd that Bernie fans are furious that the DNC is trying to influence which candidate is going to represent it in the POTUS election. Of COURSE it is. Political parties are generally in the business of winning elections so they can drive the ship of state for as long as they can, which means they prefer the nominee be someone who can actually win. So of course they’re going to work the phones and call in favors to try and swing the endorsements to their preferred candidate. That’s how this works.
Whether you think it SHOULDN’T work that way is another matter. But that’s how this game is currently played.
More to the point, Sanders isn't even a Democrat. He’s a lifelong independent using the Demo Party to run because he knows third-party candidates have no chance. He slams the Establishment Demos every chance he gets, and his supporters talk at length about kicking the Establishment Demos out of power so REAL progressives can take over the party and turn it into the hardcore left-wing party they think it ought to be and needs to be to defeat the GOP.
And they have the nerve to complain that the Establishment DNC isn’t just letting them do that? You pick a fight with a bear, you can’t complain if the bear fights back.
4. A lot of this also comes down to a disagreement over electability. The DNC remains convinced that you can’t win by appealing only to the base - you have to be able to reach the mods, the fence-sitters, the casual voters who aren’t all that interested in politics, etc. The Bernie camp seems convinced the base is big enough, and the only thing holding back the undecideds or non-voters is the lack of a true progressive alternative to the GOP.
The problem is that electability is really, really hard to determine. Obviously, the candidate’s base will always think their candidate is the most electable because they have the best ideas, the best leadership qualities, the best ideological purity or whatever. The problem is that they think all of this should be blindingly obvious to any other voter with a lick of sense.
Only it doesn’t work that way. Lots of voters are not as politically engaged as the hardcore base, and they vote for the damnedest reasons. Often they’ll vote on a single issue that matters the most to them, even if the candidate’s other ideas are stupid or reprehensible. Sometimes they’ll vote for the most painfully superficial of reasons. My mom used to cast her vote based on who seemed the most pleasant. History proves repeatedly that being the smoothest smartest talker in the room with the best and boldest ideas doesn't guarantee a win.
That’s why I think the mod/swing vote still matters. As hard as it may be to believe, not everyone sees Trump as a corrupt megalomaniacal racist dingbat, or at least thinks that any old Democrat would do a better job.
Which is also why I think Biden has an edge here, and it’s why he’s winning. The weakness of the Bernie campaign is the often outspoken belief that they’re so obviously right about everything that anyone else who can’t see that is plainly a blithering idiot or a corporate stooge.
This Twitter thread explains why this is not a winning strategy, but the upshot is that if you want to appeal beyond the base, you need a message that brings them onside rather than insults them or treats them as part of the problem you're proposing to solve.
5. For progressives dismayed at a Biden Presidency, THIS Twitter thread offers a reminder that you do have a back-up plan: pressure Biden further to the left than he is. This is how it’s been done for a long time - when you don’t get the perfect ideological candidate (and it’s rare that you do), you pressure the one you do get to at least meet you halfway on as many issues as possible, because he/she needs your votes too.
Yes, that means compromise and hard work. Tough toenails.
6. For all that, though, as I’ve said before, I’m still not convinced either Biden or Sanders can beat Trump anyway.
Perhaps COVID-19 will change that. Trump’s response has been disastrous, and if enough people die as a result, even the GOP may be finally convinced he’s not worth the effort. Or, since the GOP insists that COVID-19 is a glorified head cold, maybe the coronavirus will thin their ranks out enough to give the Demos a numbers advantage.
Mind you, I don’t WANT that to happen. But I think it’s possible that the outcome of COVID-19 will have a direct impact on Trump’s chances if things get really bad. There’s only so much he can blame on Obama.
7. The other thing I can’t help thinking about (and I’m sure I’m not the only one) is the fact that all three of the remaining viable POTUS candidates are in the high-risk demographic for COVID-19. Just imagine the possible scenarios implicit in this.
Again, I don’t want that to happen. But if it does, the impact on the election will be absolute higgledy-piggledy.
Don’t let us get sick,
This is dF
This entry was originally posted at https://defrog.dreamwidth.org/1637510.html. Please comment there using OpenID.