That’s not what is annoying. Possibly you should read the OP before posting in a thread. Just a thought.
You would think that SNL send up of Bernie’s annoying supporters would have caused some introspection… but no.
Barring a third party run, the state of the economy and incumbency predicts the popular vote share that you receive. The electoral college tends to amplify such effects.
So you’re looking at the wrong metric. Mondale actually beat his point spread. Dukkakis, in contrast, legitimately got creamed after controlling for the economy etc.
So the answer is you retool depending upon how you perform relative to a scientific baseline.
Disclosure about bias. As it happens, I was pretty happy with Bill Clinton the so-called New Democrat. So I’m not especially unhappy with the outcome to that retooling. Nor do I have a problem with Dukkakis’ policies. I’m just saying that he performed terribly in the campaign, judged by the numbers.
You cannot and should not be able to run a country with the fierce support of a small demographic, those wide-eyed college freshman today might just as soon grow bitter to The Democratic Party in general and Sanders in particular when/if he can’t achieve his promises. I do appreciate the Liberal Agenda is on the offensive though. I get so sick of liberal politicians quibbling when something they propose ‘smells of socialism’ to a conservative pundit. Fuck that, they need to respond with, “Why do you hate firefighters? I think police officers do a fantastic job. The military needs our collective support for our collective protection. Do you like waiting in line at toll booths?”. Make the slur ‘socialist’ a land mine like ‘gay’ has become for the GOP.
I know Sanders won’t win anyway, I’m talking about a progressive movement growing in power over a time-scale of several election cycles and (already) encompassing a lot more than wide-eyed college freshmen – a movement, or least a base, that existed before but that Sanders aroused, and taught it to know its own strength.
There are two different points conflated here. First, Sanders isn’t just supported by a small minority. His supporters’ demographics are really interesting, and while they have problems, they’re nowhere near just “wide-eyed college freshmen.” That’s an ignorant dismissive insult.
Second, the folks he’s drawing into the process? Sure, they could be embittered when he can’t achieve his promises, no doubt. They could also be embittered by folks who’ve been involved for a long time acting like raging assholes toward them, calling them “wide-eyed college freshmen” and the like. If you’re actually concerned about their checking out again, encourage folks not to be assholes toward new voters.
The bad news for democratic socialists is that the Democratic Party might be the destination of an sudden influx of conservatives who are sick of the crazy. They will want a voice as well.
The good news for democratic socialists is that opposition to Citizens United is pretty broad. As is support for infrastructure spending. (In fact, an economist would advocate borrowing to pay for infrastructure, given how low interest rates are.) Turning the screws on big banks would also get a polite hearing. Overhauling student loans is a bit of a stretch though. Single payer won’t happen. Meh, that’s politics.
One big accomplishment is that it will be harder to falsely accuse Hillary of being a hippie socialist. She could say, “Hippie socialist? I defeated one in the primary. How many have you defeated Ted?” That’s the Overton Window in action - Hillary can accurately portray her center-leftism as …center leftism.
I’ll cut you some slack since you are only one ear; you obviously can’t see or hear well enough to know what’s going on.
I think much of your rant is more than slightly off base, but I wanted to address this in particular. I met Fetterman in Philly, and sent him some money. I like him, but he needs to raise a lot more money for ad buys asap or he hasn’t got much of a chance between Sestak (who has been running for 6 years now, since he lost the last one), and McGinty (with the party machine behind her). I hope you are doing something besides complaining on the internet; he needs all the help he can get. Truthfully, I’d be okay if Sestak gets the nom, and we can run Fetterman in the midterms. Think about the long game.
And don’t call us bitches, bitch!
One of the questions out there is how much of it if its a progressive base or if its something else. It could be an antiestablishment base - those people who don’t like presumptive nominees and don’t like Trump. It could be a “I don’t find Hillary likeable” base.
Really? In what ways are national politics more conservative today than they were 20 years ago? We’re much more liberal on sexual rights and the environment. We have Obamacare. SCOTUS is as liberal as it’s ever been and likely to get more so. The idea that a socialist has a shot at a major ticket nomination would have been unthinkable 20 years ago. The War on Drugs seems to be losing steam.
On the other hand, taxes are lower, which I suppose can be considered a conservative idea. Foreign policy has largely been dominated by GWB but I think that’s an accident of 9/11 and not an indication of a national shift.
In most ways the 1%% and Wall Street care about.
It’s fun to be on a team that blames everything on another team isn’t it?
I blame Rosicrucians, those bastards.
While pithy I’d like to hear some examples. Other than possibly taxes I can’t think of any major conservative movement that has taken over at the national level.
I continue to be blown away at the conspiracy theories and persecution complexes that avid Bernie supporters come up with.
This New York Times article is a pretty good look at the early part of the Sanders campaign and mistakes it made. It’s something you might expect to find in a Making of the President book.
The Facebook comments on the article are unbelievable. Bernie supporters whining about bias, or how the NYT backs Hillary, and comments about the ‘lame stream media.’ Anything not from the Bernie echo chamber of Daily Kos, usuncxut, or the Bernie subreddit is seen as a political hatchet job on beloved Bernie.
It’s not a team, it’s a class.
Nah, you’re on a team, the 1%ers are a team (they probably don’t know it), and the 1%ers are at fault when the policies your team favors are not compelling to the vast majority of the American people.
Health care. Even with a Dem president and a Dem Congress, all we could get was a plan originally devised by a Republican think-tank that benefits the health-insurance companies. Single-payer was never discussed, was completely outside the Overton Window from the start, and any kind of “public option” was tossed the moment Obama got the first bit of pushback. And that’s exactly how the corporate interests wanted it.
When they keep getting their way over and over even against the will of the majority, we can be sure something’s wrong.
What I read was that poorer people have a harder time organizing to influence policy changes over a short time period than wealthier people, but also there are lot of forces at work besides wealth and organization. The model didn’t seem to predict a lot of the variation in outcome.
I certainly wouldn’t take this and then make the broad generalizations you are making, but I wouldn’t say there is nothing to support your view either. And it’s 10%ers.