Pardon my crappy phone link, but I recommend opening this song in another tab while reading this, if possible.
https://youtu.be/QhOG42ADtGo
I don’t usually write here, but this is something I thought very much worth sharing.
The outpouring of energy, creativity and optimism the Bernie Sanders supporters are generating on my social media feed is kind of out of this world. There’s a Bernie Sanders Air Jordan silhouette. People are making a lot of their own really sweet fashion campaign art and t-shirts and buttons. They don’t seem to think they’re going to lose. It’s not that I think Sanders will get the nomination, but these are mostly people I know and not all of them are what I would call super political types. More than that, though, I think the aging Democratic party has no idea what’s going on in the younger third of the population.
A friend of mine tossed up the album art where this song is from that you are hopefully listening to on her Instagram. She said it fit her mood she was so pumped Bernie had carried Minnesota. This is a thirty something mom, and she’s not that unusual. If you’re in your 60s, this song might be hard to listen to. My friend might have been dancing with her toddler.
From what I can see, the vast majority of people under 45 are solidly with Bernie Sanders. It’s kind of shocking, really. I think it has to do with Elizabeth Warren. When she went on the Daily Show, she changed things. There is now such a fundamental critique of the status quo that is so common among Millennials (and quite a few Gen Xers, not that anyone seems to notice) that it is going to get Bernie Sanders elected Vice President. Because this is not a joke, or a fluke. A lot of people are very serious about this, if in a fun loving sort of way.
And another thing, in another 8 years, this country is going to be very, very different politically.
It’s obvious to this old lady that the phenomenon is real and the level of enthusiasm and energy is near the top of what we’ve seen in the past. It is more grassroots oriented than any other candidate focused effort seen in recent US history. However, grassroots campaigns are notoriously fragile and TPTB count on that feature. They are surely surprised to see the resilience of Sanders and his supporters in picking themselves up and continuing to march forward with each primary loss.
The numbers are there for Sanders to win. But to realize that the phenomenon has to go over the top. Having fallen a tad short in IA, NV, and MA means that a tad more won’t be enough in the remaining primaries and caucuses. Even NH wasn’t a monster win for Sanders because that only gave him an even split on NH delegates. Monster wins — 70% to 30% — aren’t required everywhere, but some are needed along with some impressive wins in large states. Must remember that Sanders doesn’t have a large state like IL in his back pocket as Obama did and it won’t require much of team Clinton to move IL into her pocket.
As she’s locked up the south, she doesn’t have to worry about having her winning margins reduced in states that she won in ’08 and can even afford to lose in a couple of them this time. The only thing she can’t afford are flips like NH and OK in more than a couple of large states and monster Sanders’ wins in several smaller states.
Re IL, as I mentioned in another post, the giant postcard with the sample ballot from the Cook County Democratic Organization has Hillary Clinton as the party’s pick for President. They have also had some embarrassing removals too. They had originally endorsed Anita Alvarez and un-endorsed her to endorse her challenger. I think they un-endorsed someone else, now under FBI indictment. A fitting company for HRC.
IMHO, the whole pack of them, from Rahm Emanuel on down should be indicted. But to get to the main point, IL is obviously fixed for Clinton, Maybe I shouldn’t even bother standing in line. I’m thinking Booman is right and it’s hopeless.
Yeah, Rahm and the AA community will have something to bring them together.
Don’t despair yet. There are still a lot of young people that may get it that this is the time to seize the power well within their grasp. And the Latino community isn’t a Clinton firewall.
The poor video quality aside, take this viral. Many great turns of phrase that are simple and direct that any Sanders’ supporter can use.
(The multiple attempts by the old guy to shut her down only adds to the debate.)
As if ideas mattered. Just money and connections.
If Bernie can keep his chin up; so too can you.
Reading the morning’s e-mail, I have one from NARAL that they have endorsed Hillary. As if Bernie was anti-abortion! I feel like resigning my membership.
NARAL is only nominally bipartisan and gender neutral. It’s become another institution that not so covertly rationalizes it’s endorsements as based strictly on one issue. Not true. It favors female candidates even on occasion wrt abortion when the record for the female candidate is inferior to the male. Personally, I think Clinton’s record is inferior to Sanders on abortion — but concede that others may see it as equal. It’s nuts to conclude that Clinton’s record is better. However, I would have been surprised if a) NARAL didn’t make an endorsement and b) didn’t endorse Clinton.
I also don’t think NARAL endorsements carry much weight because they are so predictable. More troubling to me was Planned Parenthood’s endorsement.
All these liberal institutions that have jumped on the Hillary bandwagon may, IMH, be risking their reputations by giving Sanders the finger. It really doesn’t get any better than Sanders regardless of gender or skin color and for them to say otherwise is insulting to anyone that’s informed. Women have no special claim advancing equal rights and never accomplished a damn thing without support from fair-minded men. To spit in the face of the fairest-minded of men, sure isn’t a way to attract other men to make any effort to follow Sanders’ lead.
I wouldn’t have minded if they had endorsed both or said that either was acceptable but then counted down all the republicans that were unacceptable. Or even also endorsed a Republican was is acceptable, if there is one, which I doubt.
As you say about institutions, I have no doubt the NRA will view both as unacceptable even though Bernie has a pretty clean record on gun control (from their viewpoint). I remember talking to an NRA member about Howard Dean whose position was that the situation in rural states and urban states was so different that most control should be at the state level. The NRA viewpoint, of course, being that there should be NO gun control whatsoever. Their 1960’s position was more like Howard Dean’s. I don’t even remember (much) fuss about banning mail order in the wake of the Kennedy assassination. These are not your father’s Republicans. I’m sure Obama was shocked, stunned actually, when he got to Washington. His job in the Illinois Senate was as go between between the Democratic caucus and the Republican caucus. I suppose he expected the same “you wash my back and I’ll wash yours” attitude.
Checking the stock market, I find this headline, Smith & Wesson sales soar. There’s going to be a wave election all right. A Republican wave.
I think it is interesting that Sanders campaign on one hand and the Citizens United clowncar on the other seems to have spelled the end of the knock-out primaries. It seems to me to be quite a change, where fund raising is less of the critical criteria it used to be.
Or at least it looks that way to me, correct me if I am wrong.
Not less critical; just different.
The paucity of DEM candidates was partially a matter of funding. When combined with the fact that Clinton had a lock on the DEM institutional/elite power base, aspirants rationally concluded that a campaign would be hopelessly outmatched. Sanders entered it as the message candidate, which isn’t so rare in presidential elections. They tend not to last long because it’s difficult to remain relevant when voters aren’t interested and federal matching funds require a certain level of voter support to continue through the primaries.
None of the 2012 candidates accepted federal matching funds. In 2008
So much for all those efforts in the 1970s to shift from private to public funding of elections.
However, it would be wrong to conclude that campaign fundraising has been irrelevant in ’16 race. Perry and Walker had plenty of big money in their PACs when they dropped out because their campaign coffers were empty. Going into NH, Christie and Fiorina were also broke. Jeb? had to cut campaign costs more than once during the season despite his massive $100 million-plus PAC.
An off-the-wall observation. US presidential campaigns have evolved the same way as the US celebration of Christmas. A lengthening of the anticipatory period and a shortening of the event period. Instead of twelve days of Christmas, by the time Dec. 25th rolls around, we’re so sick of it that we want the whole thing done with by the 26th. (No Boxing Day in the US.) Not so long ago, the NH primary was a quaint and irrelevant tradition. Except in ’76 (and in large part because of how the MSM misreported the results), the IA caucus didn’t figure much into the contest until 2004. Had Clinton tied in IA and won NH, ’16 would have been declared over for the DEM primary. And with each primary/caucus since NH Clinton DEMs have been declaring that it’s over. The GOP would like to make the same call except they hate Trump. So, we’re stuck with “jingle bells” for months to come.