I just keep thinking, imagine if Hillary Clinton in 2008 had pulled even a tenth of the crap Sanders is pulling now. She never would have, but the media were so eager for her to lose gracelessly that they made stuff up and imagined wild scenarios. Now someone else is actually doing it, and while there's some criticism, too many are treating it as politics as usual.
The whining about Barney Frank is hilarious in its pettiness. It's the political equivalent of complaining that Jim from Accounts is on the Party Planning Committee even though he ate your lunch that one time. A real revolution there.
Indeed. Conversely, if the allegedly Hillary-favoring DNC this cycle had pulled one tenth of the crap that the pro-Obama DNC pulled in 2008, we'd have blood in the streets.
The consistent pattern is not a hobgoblin -- though it certainly is foolish. Who needs turtles when you've got misogynistic CDS all the way down?
I’m still trying to hang on to the notion that, if the media will only cover horseraces and hostility, then Bernie Sanders will have served a purpose. Maybe. I don’t like him and worry he’s actually doing more harm to the success of progressive ideas than any good he’s doing, as you’ve already said. But I suspect there’s a sizable portion of the public — who aren’t going to rallies, but will go to the polls — that isn’t “angry” so much as “frustrated” at how childish the partisanship in Congress and these nomination battles have been. (And that isn’t a direct slam at Millennials; their attitudes are more the result of such childishness than any cause.) So for every primary voter Bernie gains, he might be delivering two more general election voters to Hillary, just by creating a contrast that Donald Trump can only ramp up to currently unimaginable levels.
That’s me trying to put as positive a spin on Sanders’s role in this election as I can. But I still don’t like him and he, his campaign, and his supporters have made it very easy not to. This time 8 years ago, I genuinely felt good about whichever Democratic candidate would get the nomination, internecine squabbles notwithstanding. This time, I don’t feel bad about feeling good that Bernie will lose. He's practically been begging Democrats to please hate him.
Well put. Like you, I allowed myself to believe (or hope) for the first several months that Bernie's run was salutary -- that it would primarily serve to give Hillary permission to move farther left. But as it began to become cult-like and vicious, that hope was dashed. And it's hard not to conclude, at this juncture, that it was pretty much always destined to be thus. I don't think this is what Bernie became; I think it's what he always was, and by Act III we can now see that.
Having said that, of course, it's entirely possible that his campaign will have beneficial effects. A lot will depend on his own behavior post-June 7.
4 comments:
I just keep thinking, imagine if Hillary Clinton in 2008 had pulled even a tenth of the crap Sanders is pulling now. She never would have, but the media were so eager for her to lose gracelessly that they made stuff up and imagined wild scenarios. Now someone else is actually doing it, and while there's some criticism, too many are treating it as politics as usual.
The whining about Barney Frank is hilarious in its pettiness. It's the political equivalent of complaining that Jim from Accounts is on the Party Planning Committee even though he ate your lunch that one time. A real revolution there.
Indeed. Conversely, if the allegedly Hillary-favoring DNC this cycle had pulled one tenth of the crap that the pro-Obama DNC pulled in 2008, we'd have blood in the streets.
The consistent pattern is not a hobgoblin -- though it certainly is foolish. Who needs turtles when you've got misogynistic CDS all the way down?
I’m still trying to hang on to the notion that, if the media will only cover horseraces and hostility, then Bernie Sanders will have served a purpose. Maybe. I don’t like him and worry he’s actually doing more harm to the success of progressive ideas than any good he’s doing, as you’ve already said. But I suspect there’s a sizable portion of the public — who aren’t going to rallies, but will go to the polls — that isn’t “angry” so much as “frustrated” at how childish the partisanship in Congress and these nomination battles have been. (And that isn’t a direct slam at Millennials; their attitudes are more the result of such childishness than any cause.) So for every primary voter Bernie gains, he might be delivering two more general election voters to Hillary, just by creating a contrast that Donald Trump can only ramp up to currently unimaginable levels.
That’s me trying to put as positive a spin on Sanders’s role in this election as I can. But I still don’t like him and he, his campaign, and his supporters have made it very easy not to. This time 8 years ago, I genuinely felt good about whichever Democratic candidate would get the nomination, internecine squabbles notwithstanding. This time, I don’t feel bad about feeling good that Bernie will lose. He's practically been begging Democrats to please hate him.
Well put. Like you, I allowed myself to believe (or hope) for the first several months that Bernie's run was salutary -- that it would primarily serve to give Hillary permission to move farther left. But as it began to become cult-like and vicious, that hope was dashed. And it's hard not to conclude, at this juncture, that it was pretty much always destined to be thus. I don't think this is what Bernie became; I think it's what he always was, and by Act III we can now see that.
Having said that, of course, it's entirely possible that his campaign will have beneficial effects. A lot will depend on his own behavior post-June 7.
Also, good for Jerry Brown!
Post a Comment