:eek:
Trump is a centrist, of a kind; and the kind that probably doesn’t care much for boycott-divestment-sanction when saber-rattlng will do, nor “race pimps.” If that’s what you want, that’s what it looks like. The Democrats are a “big tent” including quite a range, but a coalition with center-left and moderate left pretensions.
But since you think BDS is anti-semitic, well, you don’t need to be taken seriously.
Brainglutton: Sanders voters don’t support his policies. From the NYT via Kevin Drum: [INDENT]In a survey conducted for the American National Election Studies in late January, supporters of Mr. Sanders…were less likely than Mrs. Clinton’s supporters to favor concrete policies that Mr. Sanders has offered…including a higher minimum wage, increasing government spending on health care and an expansion of government services financed by higher taxes. [/INDENT] More. So the left still has its work cut out for it.
Qin:
While I certainly don’t agree with your interlocutor:
Given that the Jewish community trends progressive, I’m guessing age plays a role as well. Sanders does well among the young, as have other insurgent candidates in the past. The middle aged and elderly have seen this movie a bazillion times.
Side point, but I’m guessing that Jewish progressivism and middle/upper middle class economic interests don’t track that well. Though admittedly the professional class is trending Democratic and that arguably might tie in some ways to, well, professionalism.
Tendentious article, sponsored by a think-tank founded by the leading pro-Israel lobby. Yet even they don’t claim that the US/Israel relationship is balanced: The relationship may not be symmetrical; the United States has provided Israel with indispensable diplomatic, economic, and military support totaling more than $115 billion since 1949. But it is a two-way partnership whose benefits to the United States have been substantial. Incidentally, their economic argument is risible. For example they think Israel, the country, deserves credit for the research conducted by Intel’s office there. I say Intel has a presence in many countries and that furthermore Israel is simply too small to provide an outsized economic boost to the US.
I’m not going to accept arguments that 1) assume BDS is “anti-semitic” and 2) characterize Bernie as a “self-loather.”
You [DerekMichaels00] also called Cornel West a “race pimp.”
If you’re Jewish, you have some really entitled ethnic attitudes going on here. If you’re a Gentile, well, you know, there is a nice big political movement, about twice as large as the Democrats, that loathes “race pimps” of an African variety, will stand up for Israel even in the face of Palestinian exiles, and probably thinks BDS is a kind of underwear. I used to be a member, and I can tell you the GOP would love to have your vote. If you want to deal with Democrats, you have to accept that some of them are left of Sheldon Adelson.
Hillary thinks BDS is anti-Semitism and even got her church to flop on it. Democrats, like the rest of Americans, per Gallup, stand with Israel. Face it; BDS and anti-Zionism is the fringe of American politics, and real Americans reject those two things. You don’t need to be on Adelson’s right. I’m with Haim (Saban) and (likely) with Her. BDS is communist and Islamist toady crap.
On Cornel West, he called Obama a “ni***rized POTUS,” a “war criminal,” a “global George Zimmerman,” things I don’t even think about Obama, and I sympathize with Obama against West for those hateful remarks. West thinks every little thing can be boiled down to race, his “critical race” theory. If that isn’t race pimping, its definitely race wholesaling.
Wow, you really went for that “real American” crap? Are you kidding?
yes I did given the kind of anti-American forces that are for BDS, both Islamist and far-left types, as are alt-right types as well.
On most issues (environment, abortion, LGB rights, stem cells) I didn’t agree with Cruz, but he had a point when he said “Those who hate Jews hate Christians, those who hate Israel hate America.”
More sore loser shit from Bernie, requesting a recount in Kentucky.
Sore Loser Sanders or Self-Hating Sanders? Can’t figure out which is better.
Or Jews are winners, Palestinians, sadly, are losers.
All Gore must have been a sore loser too.
Ooh. Snap.
Let me explain something to you, so you’ll understand the difference.
The Kentucky primary allocated delegates proportionally. Both Sanders and Clinton won 27 delegates each. Sanders finding a few extra votes doesn’t change the delegate allotment.
The electoral college is winner take all by state. So, the 25 electoral votes of Florida would all go to Gore as long as he could find enough votes to win Florida by 1 vote.
I agree with this generality: I think it’s well documented.
Careful. I couldn’t find any place in your links where Clinton equates BDS with anti-Semitism. You are referring to a minority position. I wandered around wikipedia and found this PDF arguing for that equivalency. It said that BDS advocates the right of return and therefore is advocating hate. Sorry. That doesn’t follow at all. Those wishing peace in the middle east have to accept the need for tough negotiation: for one side to start from the position that refugees should have the right to go back and reclaim their property is not unreasonable and it’s not hate speech.
I consider myself a supporter of Israel, but ruling out a position like that at the beginning of the discussion simply isn’t reasonable. Nor, IMHO, is it especially helpful.
the wikipedia article speaks to the subterfuges of the marxist - trotskyite radicals in enter moderate left parties.
this does not seem to be any flattering example…
there does not seem to be any strong american examples there.
Here’s one: The transformation of the GOP after 1964 into, of all things, a party with Southern whites as its base. That might actually be regarded as more of an instance of “invitism” than entryism – Goldwater, Nixon and Reagan actually went after those votes through racial dog-whistling – but the practical effect was the same, liberal and moderate Pubs left the party in droves while conservative Democrats joined it, and the character of the Republican Party was thoroughly changed, to the point where it now resembles Eisenhower’s GOP hardly at all.
Again with the imaginary dog whistling. :rolleyes:
I have no problem with entryism as a strategy or with progressives doing it. But I think the most vocal of Sanders’ supporters either think getting down in the muck with Democrats is ethically beneath them, or are just too apathetic to actually work for the change they want, beyond advocating for a single high-level office.
In a nation firmly gripped by the Apathy Party, question becomes which is worse: not giving a rat’s, or giving a rat’s but doing it poorly. How many of the people who have recently stirred from their slumber will revert once they are disappointed by reality? Some, for sure. Some will not. Glad to have them.
what you describe is the opposite of the concept you cited. Also not very flattering.
Now the geriatric candidate wants a recount in Kentucky. Like it would make a difference, other than costing the taxpayers. I’m really disliking this guy more and more the longer this goes on.
The transformation of the GOP post-Goldwater was not merely a matter of racial dogwhistling and the Southern strategy. There was a concerted grassroots effort to mobilize evangelical voters into a coalition with fiscal conservatives; it was very much a bottom-up effort. We may object to the mission and the results of that project, but it is a worthwhile model for how the progressive left can claim more influence in the Democratic Party — if they want to put in the time and work it takes to achieve it. Jumping unprepared into a primary race and then complaining when you quite predictably get your clock cleaned is not going to launch a revolution; it’s going to prove to a lot of people that the system is as useless and corrupt as Sanders is telling them it is.
