Democratic (Party) Direction

I love Charles Pierce, but I can't stand when he calls Warren the Senator Professor.

I'd vote for Tim Kaine's son.

milo, you yourself is part of the problem when you say stuff like:

re: Patrick, which critiques or questions focus on the fact that he has a business career rather than where he's worked? Is there no room for the idea that no one should be given a free pass for being an executive with Bain Capital, an entity which actively hurts more peoples' lives than it helps?

― louie mensch (milo z), 7. august 2017 03:07 (eight hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The answer to that is no. There should be no room for such a critique without an intersectional understanding of the way race and gender impact who wants and gets those jobs. Class and race and gender is intertwined, and just as centrist liberals might use identity politics for strategic reasons while overlooking class, a large proportion of the left insist on a focusing on class to the exclusion of identity, which is off-putting to a lot of would be allies. Simple as that. You can insist all you like that 'left voters are more progressive on everything identity politics is actually about', but you repeatedly demonstrate the exact opposite.

― Frederik B, Monday, August 7, 2017 5:25 AM (six hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

if this is the logical meeting place of intersectionality and politics, get me off the mailing list. it's one thing to reserve judgment for private citizens who may have different views from you based on how they grew up. it's another to not challenge politicians whose views and votes are going to harm the people of this country. people making policy for millions of other people don't get a pass based on their background. that's insanity

if the last election taught us anything it's that maybe we shouldn't be making hard-and-fast rules about what kind of candidates can and cannot get elected

important thought experiment: what if the 2020 election was moved up just a bit, say.... to next week. and you (a low-tier god who is still paying attention to U.S. politics even though you could be eternally fucking in the cosmic waves instead or whatever) are tasked with picking a candidate who can generate the most enthusiasm among democrats in this very short period of time. there's not really enough time to worry about all the normal factors - campaign donations, advertising strategies, how to prevent state attorney generals from trying to keep everyone who isn't an elderly white person from voting, etc. instead, it basically comes down to a televised rally at some big stadium, simulcast on all the news networks. so you probably need to pick someone who already has some name recognition but also has the ability to inspire people, and seems like they aren't a total tool.

who would you pick?

after the thrones style epilogue: this post is dumb because i don't even know what i would say in response. that covers most of my posts. good luck usa, i'm voting for zuckerberg

Can you really choose anyone but Bernie or Hillary in that scenario?

yeah

I mean it would have to be one of them, just on enthusiasm/name recognition

ok, 6th sense style twist ending: bernie and hillary were on the same flight to the conference of near-champions in a distant land, but their plane mysteriously disappeared. they are no longer possible candidates in this scenario.

I don't think anyone else in the party even has 50% name recognition... so Al Gore, I guess? A guy named Steve who mysteriously looks like Obama with a beard?

xp Bern and Hillz might also smell of loserdom at this point.

In this scenario, could we bend the rules to just get Obama back?

a large proportion of the left insist on a focusing on class to the exclusion of identity

I'm not sure that this proportion is really as large as people make it seem; nevertheless (sorry to keep going back to DSA but I was following convention stuff this weekend) to see DSA elect diverse slates and formally endorse reparations, as well as forming specific afro-socialist and disability caucuses is encouraging, and hopefully a sign that the incipient young left, by and large, takes these concerns seriously

xpost nope, term limits still apply. michelle obama would be eligible, though.

Mecha-Hillbern?

Jeff Merkley

To milo: I was talking about this paragraph, where I read you as saying that my husband's cynicism about the motives behind critiques of black politicians was distrust of the left. He would describe himself as on the left, fwiw. I am not endorsing his take on Cooper's critique, because he hasn't even read it. He's a little paranoid right now, because he's a black man in a country where white resentment of people like him just determined an election.

I wouldn't call that distrust within the left, that's distrust of the left - and something that can't be countered. It's an unfortunate narrative, we even see how it's spread here, because it leaves the left unable to defend itself - no matter how much evidence there is that left voters are more progressive on everything identity politics is actually about, you get accused of arguing in bad faith or that the only reason a centrist is getting criticized is racism/etc.. The people who rend their garments over the WWC aren't going to DSA meetings, they're asshole blue dogs like Jim Webb.

i follow Warren on social media and she seems to be respected across the left (incl by the bernie folks). she seems like a fighter and one who can think on her feet. but i guess i haven't actually watched her in action a whole lot. is she a charisma-free bore? are those "pocahantas" jabs really going to land after what we've seen this orange baby-brained birther idiot being prescedentshul over the last 6 months?

I know this is strictly anecdotal, but every American I know would volunteer and fight like hell to support Warren if she ran, even those with misgivings about her voting record.

xpost hmmm, maybe! i like merkley. i have no idea how he is as a campaigner, though. i missed his speech at the 2016 DNC but i will check it out right now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vprQGGytEzg

We can stop pursuing this, because it's personal, but I want to clarify, I don't expect you to approve of my husband's take on Cooper's critique. I'm just saying, I am nervous about the current impasse and I see my husband's reaction to the leftist critique of Patrick and Harris as emblematic.

whoa, holy shit! first impressions, but do you all see the same youtube freezeframe that i do before starting the video?

http://i.imgur.com/21iHSSM.png

guy on the left worships merkley as his personal lord and savior! he has at least one megafan! very promising start

It must be disheartening to give a speech when it sounds like 90% of the crowd isn't paying attention.

like i can kind of see how Hillary would rub people the wrong way. she's a terrible campaigner. whether it's fair or 'true' or whatever, she really does scan as phony to her very core. not so much that she's trying to trick anyone (though there's def elements of that); just that she's bereft of that personal touch easily evinced by Bill, W, and in his own distinct way - Obama

i don't get that sense from Warren.

i would vote Warren in a heartbeat. love her no-nonsense personality. she comes across very genuine. esp compared to the lizard bot that just ran (and lost).

she is, of course, bad on Israel-Palestine, like every 'national' Dem I can think of

the Wall Street/ Koch knives would certainly be out for her though in way we def did not see in '16 for HRC.

yeah i was kind of afraid of that
xpost

She'll probably be a strong presidential candidate. In 2016, though, I just wanted a strong lib bench in the Senate, and I have to admit that Senate Dems have made many lib noises this year.

I agree with those saying she's not a brilliant speaker or anything, but neither is/was Bernie, and she has a similar no-bullshit flavor that could pay off and get people out who stayed home last time. But again this is all pretty immaterial right now

"i'm the son of a millwright from a small town in southern oregon. i was the first in my family to go to college. i live in the same blue collar community i grew up in. and my children go to the same public schools i did." *faint cheering from crowd*
- i get that he has to establish his real person bona fides so that he has the standing to attack trump's continual fucking over of real people, but maaaaan do i hate this kind of shit. but it's ok, he knows that few people in the DNC know his background, so he just has to say it and move on.

"where i come from, people like donald trump are not the problem...they're not the solution...they are the problem!" *looks at tv camera*
- that was a bit of a goof

"bernie's leadership on progressive issues, his willingness to stand up to the powers that be, have galvanized a grassroots movement that is here tonight, and will continue long after november, and we need it to continue long after november!"
- sometimes moments like these snap me back to the summer of 2016 and it is jarring. what is this world. what happened to the old world. are they still living?

"and that is exactly what we are going to do when we follow the vision of bernie sanders and hillary clinton, and elect her, hillary clinton and tim kaine in november!"
- "elect the vision of bernie sanders and hillary clinton and tim kaine 2016" - brainstorming alternative campaign slogans

eh, i guess that wasn't a very good random jeff merkley speech to view for this purpose, since he was basically asked to make a 5-minute speech that would appeal to both bernie and clinton fans while offending no one except for trump supporters. i'm not sure how you do that without looking like a tool. he seems like someone who would connect well with people on a smaller stage or in the mysterious realms of IRL. but he falls victim to the same problem that afflicts 99.9% of politicians on huge stages, which is that he just seems fake. trump does not appear fake. that may be the biggest thing he has going for him. obama had a way of addressing large audiences that seemed remarkably natural. it seems to be a trait that just about everyone from reagan on has possessed.

i have changed my mind. ryan seacrest for president

Warren is a scold, she just happens to be one of the very few politicians principled enough to scold the people who badly deserve to be fucking scolded in this country. I just don't know if that distinction would get through to the average voter.

Sanders has precisely one note he's been hammering away at tirelessly for years and is still pretty popular so that sort of doggedness may not be a dealbreaker. (I realize that this quality is not necessarily rewarded in women / female politicians.)

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-congressional-map-is-historically-biased-toward-the-gop/

So far I've seen no evidence that she repulses average voters

I like Warren a lot but, in this environment of desperately seeking The Perfect Candidate, I feel like she would get eviscerated for her conservative past as soon as she became the front-runner.

Warren is a scold.

Are you using sexist language deliberately because you anticipate a sexist reaction to Warren as candidate?

So far I've seen no evidence that she repulses average voters

You should speak to some MA conservatives.

"this environment of desperately seeking The Perfect Candidate"

no, just less of an asshole than the Clintons

I would wager the closer we get to 2020 the less you're going to see Perfect Candidate type rhetoric/argumentation.

There is an entire groundswell of anti-Warren sentiment built around the idea that she manipulated Affirmative Action rules to get hired as a professor that is more persistent and pervasive than should be reasonable, PLUS the polling in the wake of the election showed her faring very weakly in a run for her MA Senate seat against any random Republican, including total jokes like Roger Clement.

I would want her to win if she was the candidate. I would not be surprised if she went down in flames the same way Clinton did.

I'm as wary of political dynasties as anyone but if Michelle Obama backs single payer, ending the expansion of the carceral state and/or taxing the fuck out of the rich, sign me up.

Of course, I looked at a much more recent (informal) poll and Warren is currently walloping the two reported Republicans who are going to run by more than 30 points, so I'm less fatalistic now.

Even if Michelle Obama didn't do all that, I'd vote for her just to watch the rights' faces melt like they opened the Ark of the Covenant.

I like Warren a lot but, in this environment of desperately seeking The Perfect Candidate, I feel like she would get eviscerated for her conservative past as soon as she became the front-runner.

Thanks to a friend of mine I see a lot of tweets from Twitter leftists (or "leftists" for the potentially salty) who are already gearing up to do exactly that.

again, if it were 2019, those same leftists would be volunteering for her campaign.

those same leftists

it's cool they're all the same

yes, all leftists are the same. that is clearly what I meant and said.

Pretty sure you can find some Twitter users to back up pretty much anything you want to say. Berniebros for Trump and Hillarystans who think Bernie's a Russian agent and gay progressives for Putin and etc.

A followup piece from Cooper: http://theweek.com/articles/716472/lets-talk-about-who-leftists-distrust--why

Still not a single mention of who WOULD be a good candidate.

leftist-approved candidates: an actual homeless person, an actual terrorist, a thinkpiece author, an anti-trump collage artist, a kindly old owl...