Printable View
UH OH. Jude
With Establishment Knives Out for Bernie, Iowa Fiasco Just a Taste of What's Coming
Published on Friday, February 07, 2020 by Common Dreams
The glaring subtext of what's now occurring is the frantic effort to find some candidate who can prevent Sanders from becoming the party's nominee at the national convention in July. Progressives must fight back—not succumb to fatalism.
by Norman Solomon
See article here
Does anyone else notice the Sanders supporters use the exact same language as Trump supporters. "Fake news", conspiracies, witch hunts, the establishment is out to get them, the list goes on...
The big irony in all this conspiracy theory BS is that for weeks (months) Sanders supporters have been railing that Biden was the favored son of the Dems. And yet, even with this (intentional?) screw-up in Iowa - Biden placed a distant fourth....
just unethical, apparently not illegal... Jude
Fact Check: Did the DNC Illegally Steal the 2016 Primary from Bernie Sanders?
by Holmes Lybrand | November 06, 2017 04:10 AM
After a startling revelation from former Democratic National Committee interim chair Donna Brazile that the DNC had engineered the party’s primary election system in favor of then-candidate Hillary Clinton, President Donald Trump suggested that the primary was illegally stolen from Bernie Sanders.
On Thursday, Brazile released a excerpt from her new book on Politico’s website. The excerpt explained how the Hillary Victory Fund, Hillary for America, and the Democratic National Committee signed a Joint Fund-Raising Agreement, which gave a significant advantage to Clinton’s campaign.
“Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised,” Brazile wrote. “Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.”
After this revelation, President Donald Trump tweeted out, "Donna Brazile just stated the DNC RIGGED the system to illegally steal the Primary from Bernie Sanders. Bought and paid for by Crooked H…."
This is not the first time the DNC has been accused of illegally rigging the primary race between Sanders and Clinton.
Continues here
well, given last time's outcome, maybe it's an indication he's gonna win.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
In my opinion the reason they use the same language is because both are correct, the "Main Street Media", aka "Corporate Media", support the Liberal Center and are "out to get" both the Right and the farther-left-than-liberal Left. "Does anyone else notice..." is a soft way of implying that there is some political "meeting of the minds from both extremes", devilishly clever because it takes an expert eye to "notice" it, but showing that both ends are working toward the same goal: to destroy the virtuous Center Left, where all truth resides.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
By the way, does anyone else notice that the "innocent errors" in reporting and calculations by the MSM almost 100% of the time work against Bernie or other farther-left-than-liberal candidates and never seem to work against the Centrists? It has happened so often that it seems unlikely to result from randomness. Just as an individual hurricane cannot be blamed on climate change, any particular "screw-up" can't always be shown to be intentional; but the "errors" form a pattern that is highly suspect.
They seem to have given up on Biden, favoring Buttigieg, with several backups in case he doesn't pan out.
Fascinating, Jude, although not really surprising. It always seemed obvious that the DNC was really promoting Hilary, to Bernie's disadvantage. Given that, it was all the more amazing that Bernie did so well!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Jude Iam:
There's that word "THEM" again. And this is our problem. We need a boogeyman. We need to think that there is some evil force working against us. That only we know, understand what is going on...and how to fix it. There is no longer an "us" in the US....Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by phredo:
Now... I really wonder just what people think Sanders can actually do? He has no support in congress. And even if he actually wins.. it's NOT going to be the deep blue map of the country that Trump painted red. We are not going to see Democrats- especially those throughout the southern and midwestern portion of the country capitulate their beliefs like we did with Republicans under Trump.
And I'd say we've seen at least a decade (I'd argue 2x++ ) of highly partisan politics. Where a president has to rule by executive orders. EO's that get tied up in court, and ultimately overturned within a number of years when their party looses power. This is no way forward.
There is actually widespread public support for any of our most pressing issues- from climate change to healthcare. But it's going to take all of us in the US to move forward. It just blows my mind how little people here seem to understand the views and concerns of people on the other side of the Sierras, or in N Cal...the "State of Jefferson"... never mind the people in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Alabama, Idaho. We are all in this together folks... and I had once hoped that people here would actually be more able to relate to people not liking others telling them what to do. But of course, CA moved up it's primary to have even more influence...in total denial of how these years of Dem control have resulted in the worst housing crisis, the worst homeless crisis, the worst roads, the highest permitting fees for homes or business, the most unpleasant environment for business....
I give up....
it's a problem, but I don't remember a time when it was a lot better. Remember "don't trust anyone over 30"? Not much "us" then either. Roosevelt was bitterly attacked, Kennedy was shot, Nixon was hated, and Reagan's crew was as ugly as these new guys. It was less perfectly partisan, but there are plenty of articles analyzing why. A lot of it seems to have to do with 'the great sorting' and modern communication technology, not really a change in attitudes. Remember, Trump and Cheney are singularly awful, and Obama is black, and Hillary Clinton is a woman. That turns up the heat on all of them. Bush and Carter were less visibly vilified.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
I'd say it's wishful thinking to imagine that you can have a government that works together to come up with clear workable solutions to big problems. Instead, you'll get a health care system evolving from Clinton's failed initiative by way of Obamacare by way of surviving Republican attacks to ??? Remember the fights over all the parts of the new deal and civil rights laws. Things like the interstate highway system and space program maybe could serve as an example of working together, but I kinda doubt that too. I suspect we'll look back in a couple of decades and find equivalents to those that we're not noticing now. (Internet is a likely candidate) So yeah, it sucks to live through this, but people have always had to meander toward the future as far as I can tell.
The "they" I wrote refers to the Corporate Media and Centrist Liberals. Since I don't belong to either group, I said "they".
Many studies show that Bernie is more likely than any other candidate to defeat Trump and there are good reasons why that's so. I agree with you that "there is actually widespread public support for any of our most pressing issues- from climate change to healthcare." Who do you think is most likely to address those issues? Who would you trust the most to have a genuine interest in solving those issues? Biden? Buttegieg? Trump has widespread support now from "blue collar" workers. Which Democrat is the most likely to support working people? Do you not think it likely that "blue collar" workers will come to the same conclusion unless they still believe Trump is their best bet? Don't you think part of the reason Trump received and continues to receive large support is because many people don't trust Democrats of the Clinton stripe to really help them in any way or even have any sympathy for their interests? Which Democrat has that genuine interest?
Do you think any Democrat would have much chance in gaining the Senate's favor? Sure, they'll vote for more money for weaponry and they'll vote for austerity, but would you consider that a victory? What measures would a Biden or Buttegieg successfully steer through the Senate that you are hoping for?
If Bernie is the most likely to be able to defeat Trump, why not do that and then use his popularity with the electorate to try to elect congresspeople who will support him?
Excuse me if I seem to be loading you down with a dozen pointed questions, but I'm using your comments to make some points of my own and I don't mean it personally. I think your attitudes are shared by many and I just want to meet them head on. When I say "you", SPC, I mean "all the people that share that opinion." Every time I hear "Bernie can't win", I think, "well, with that attitude he won't!"
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
Yes, YES, a million times yes!!!
And NOW is the moment to make it so.
Berniesanders.com volunteer events -
the OPPOSITE of trump and his supporters
"Many studies show that Bernie is more likely than any other candidate to defeat Trump"
Would you be kind enough to spend a few minutes and list several of these studies? Thanks in advance.
A quick search gave me:
http://www.commondreams.org/news/202...tional-general
http://www.nationalmemo.com/every-ma...?cn-reloaded=1
One's Reuters, the other Quinnipiac.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by luke32:
My Q was knee jerk reaction; I should have looked first. Real Clear Politics shows average Sanders vs. Trump +4.3, Biden vs. Trump +5.6. But the Sanders numbers are pre- "Socialist", Medicare for All, etc., tarring. Bernie will spend half his time defining what he meant and too little attacking
That's the part I don't know, and I submit no-one else does either. Also, simply attacking isn't enough - attack ads hurt, ask John Kerry, but we haven't seen a contest where one of the attackers has such a wealth of targets himself. So Trump will be attacked. Sure, people call him 'teflon don' for a reason but Sanders has built-in immunity of his own. I have no idea what independents (those few that are out there) will feel about him, even when his honeymoon in Moscow is made abundantly clear to them. In the primaries, we're seeing Medicare for All pitted against other forms of universal health care, NOT against Medicare for None. I think that's quite a weapon for the socialists to use in the general election.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by luke32:
Here is, in my mind, a good analysis of where we are.
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...2_12-50-18.png
“We’re losing our damn minds”: James Carville unloads on the Democratic Party
Why the longtime Democratic strategist is “scared to death” of the 2020 election.
By Sean [email protected]@vox.com Feb 7, 2020, 9:50am EST
James Carville is “scared to death” of the November 2020 election.
In a rant on MSNBC that went viral on Tuesday evening, the longtime Democratic strategist vented his concerns about the party’s prospects for beating Donald Trump, taking particular aim at the party’s leftward lurch.
“Eighteen percent of the population controls 52 Senate seats,” Carville said. “We’ve got to be a majoritarian party. The urban core is not gonna get it done. What we need is power! Do you understand? That’s what this is about.”
His diatribe took place against the backdrop of an Iowa caucus that had fallen into chaos and amid a rancorous ongoing debate among Democrats over the party’s direction. He took particular aim at Sen. Bernie Sanders, who he fears could lead the party to defeat in November.
Bernie Sanders leads Donald Trump in polls, even when you remind people he’s a socialist
Carville’s lament distills a concern among the Democratic Party’s establishment: Will ideological purity and playing to the base cost the Democrats victory in November? For Carville, at least, “We have one moral imperative, and that’s to beat Donald Trump.” That his comments went viral speaks to the sense of urgency among Democrats, even as it only fuels the debate over the direction of the party.
I spoke with Carville this week by phone. We discussed where he thinks the Democrats went wrong, what it will take to build a majoritarian party in this climate, and why he doesn’t have a lot of confidence in the current field of candidates.
A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows.
Continues here
I take your point...and I don't wholly disagree. BUT... and it's a big but... even during much of this even a bipartisan congress could work to get important things done. That's been over for about a decade. Pretty much since Obama- with bi-partisan support pulled off what neither party thought could be done- halt and start to turn around the economic collapse.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
We are, and have... moved to an authoritarian government- where the president not congress makes policy. Is that the direction we want to go?
you're right about the current situation. I'm still shocked that a president that no-one respects is able to ignore congress, so much so that they've devolved to pandering completely. I don't think the senators who encouraged the Gingrich/TeaParty revolutions in the Republican party realized that they would become so chained by the great unwashed who vote in their primaries. Trump can evict any of them from office with a tweet, and they all know it. This does seem like an aberration, though; like in Asimov's Foundation Trilogy, you can't plan for the Mule. But when he's gone, more normal forces come back into play. Except the Mule was sterile, and it's not beyond the realm of possibility that DJr inherits the mob. I don't know if they can control elections enough to win repeatedly with the minority they have. I think not, and we will get a couple of stronger politicians to push some productive initiatives again.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
I found these articles helpful and thought-provoking:
Shadow Coding: the Iowa Caucus and Carl Jung
https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/02...and-carl-jung/
Iowa Caucuses: Only Buttigieg and Klobuchar Seem to Know the ResultsQuote:
Jung believed that the shadow had a crucial purpose. “It is a therapeutic necessity, indeed, the first requisite of any thorough psychological method, for consciousness to confront its shadow,” he wrote. He warned that this confrontation could at first produce “a dead balance, a standstill that hampers decisions and makes convictions ineffective or even impossible.”
A dead balance. A standstill. Hampered decisions. Ineffective convictions. As Shadow, Inc. managed to do in Iowa.
Just as the shadow challenges the whole ego-personality, the collective shadow can and will challenge an entire nation. The polarized state of our politics unleashes shadow projections everywhere, both between and within party lines. .... Bound and blinded by prejudice, righteousness, hate and fear, one becomes unable to see their own shortcomings. The dark side of their own motives and ideals. Their own selves as imperfect wholes.
This is exactly how the shadow operates.
https://wallstreetonparade.com/2020/...w-the-results/
Is Pete Buttigieg the Israel lobby's choice for US President?
https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/is-pete...-lobby-choice/
Sanders’ Win in New Hampshire Is More Significant than Vote Tally Suggests
https://wallstreetonparade.com/2020/...ally-suggests/
10,599 Corporate Lawyers Have Donated to Buttigieg’s Campaign: Here Are the Dirty Little Secrets
https://wallstreetonparade.com/2020/...ittle-secrets/
Clearly biased, but reporter has done fact-finding homework:
Inside track: National security mandarins groomed Pete Buttigieg, managed his future
https://thegrayzone.com/2019/12/17/n...ete-buttigieg/
With Establishment Knives Out for Bernie, Iowa Fiasco Just a Taste of What's Coming
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2...e-whats-coming
Election Politics: From Chaos to an Emerging Political Consciousness? https://www.globalresearch.ca/emergi...usness/5702987 The disintegration of Iowa’s Democratic caucus before the nation’s disbelieving eyes could not be a better metaphor for what some are calling the Evolutionary Shift of the Ages.
Mega-Billionaire Bloomberg's $350 Million Ad Spending Blitz Is 'What Plutocracy Looks Like'
https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...utocracy-looks
Will Trump Ride Pentagon Spending to Reelection? https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/02...to-reelection/