Election Update: John Adams Doesn't Have A Real Job Anyway
July 23, 2016 4:22 AM   Subscribe

Who is Tim Kaine? He's a senator from Virginia, and formerly served as mayor of Richmond and governor of Virginia. He's a Jesuit (like Pope Francis). He's highly-rated by the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. He speaks Spanish. And yesterday, it was announced he's Hillary Clinton's candidate for Vice President.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero (1610 comments total) 50 users marked this as a favorite
 
Because our greatest fear this cycle was that Hillary might lose the Hispanic vote.

Seriously, they're playing this so "safe" that it might cost them the election. Not to mention that Kaine's very public support of the TPP and lobbying against banking reforms signal an ugly lurch back to the right, which is only going to reinforce the stab-in-the-back narrative on the left. (See also: the drip-drip of revelations about DNC work against the Sanders campaign during the primary, courtesy of the "Guccifer 2.0" leaks.)
posted by fifthrider at 4:29 AM on July 23, 2016 [42 favorites]


He's also a union buster, with some in-office gift related problems. The latter will be red meat for the republicans.

Man, though, the Kaine-Pence debate(s) are going to be a real snoozefest, aren't they?
posted by dis_integration at 4:30 AM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


Thing is, you can find problems with any VP pick. Castro, Booker, Warren.... you name them, we can make a list of reasons they are not good picks.
posted by Justinian at 4:34 AM on July 23, 2016 [36 favorites]


we can make a list of reasons they are not good picks.

Who knows whether it will be good. But it should be clear that Clinton's politics haven't moved leftward.
posted by ennui.bz at 4:38 AM on July 23, 2016 [51 favorites]


you name them, we can make a list of reasons they are not good picks.

Yes, but I can't make a list of reasons why Kaine would be a good pick. He's a dull, male, WAS(C) machine politician with views that reinforce the narrative that Hillary is going to break all of her primary promises. He doesn't complement her at all, so picking him is just leaving votes on the table.
posted by fifthrider at 4:38 AM on July 23, 2016 [19 favorites]


Seriously, they're playing this so "safe" that it might cost them the election.

I don't think that's remotely true in this election. Safe projects confidence. It's the anti-Palin pick. It conveys, "Relax, I've got this."

The VP debates are going to be great. Pence is as dumb as a bag of rocks; can't think on his feet at all.
posted by leotrotsky at 4:38 AM on July 23, 2016 [81 favorites]


Seriously, they're playing this so "safe" that it might cost them the election. Not to mention that Kaine's very public support of the TPP and lobbying against banking reforms signal an ugly lurch back to the right, which is only going to reinforce the stab-in-the-back narrative on the left.

I think the point is that Kaine gives those Republicans who are sickened by the turn the GOP has made, and not at all comfortable with Trump being their standard-bearer (but feel like they have no other choice but to vote for him) an opening to justify voting for Hillary.

On the political side of the coin, putting him in as VP removes him from the Senate as a voting member, so his ability to vote with conservatives is nullified.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:38 AM on July 23, 2016 [52 favorites]


After the fascist celebrations of the last week, any progressive who looks at Tim Kaine and sees a reason to abstain from voting this Fall needs to question their self-description.

I understand how easy it is to be a revulsionist, to just want to burn it all to the ground. I've seen that mindset on both sides of the aisle. But that's exactly what you'd get with Trump. And the people it would harm the most are those that progressives are striving to support and protect.
posted by sutt at 4:45 AM on July 23, 2016 [185 favorites]


He's a Jesuit

No, he went to a high school run by Jesuits. "Jesuit" refers to a member of the Society of Jesus, which comprises priests (including bishops, etc.), scholastics, brothers, and novices.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 4:52 AM on July 23, 2016 [110 favorites]


Who knows whether it will be good. But it should be clear that Clinton's politics haven't moved leftward.

I think it's a mistake to read much about Clinton's politics from her VP pick. She's going to pick the VP who she thinks has the best chance of winning her swing voters, rather than consolidating her support among the liberals who are mostly concentrated in already safely blue states. I don't really think it says much about what her political beliefs one way or the other.
posted by peacheater at 4:53 AM on July 23, 2016 [50 favorites]


On the political side of the coin, putting him in as VP removes him from the Senate as a voting member, so his ability to vote with conservatives is nullified.

And opens up a potential seat for an actual Republican. In addition to signalling that Clinton doesn't have to appease liberals within the D party, it shows she's not planning on having the Ds control the Senate any time soon.

After the fascist celebrations of the last week, any progressive who looks at Tim Kaine and sees a reason to abstain from voting this Fall needs to question their self-description.

If Clinton is elected national politics in the US will have a Democratic party that has incorporated the classic Republican economic agenda at the pivot point and a white supremacist radical right-populist Republican rump party. Do you think Trump's politics are going to evaporate if he loses an election? Can you imagine a scenario where Clinton can't say to "the left": "support me or you are supporting Trump?"

Personally, I think trying to push Clinton to the left is a mistake for several reasons, but the only way the left could push Clinton is to have the the option of removing that support credible. With the selection of Kaine, Clinton has showed that she doesn't actually want to pay anything for the support of the left. That's not going to change after the election unless she actually has to work for the support of "the left."
posted by ennui.bz at 4:58 AM on July 23, 2016 [19 favorites]


Yes, but I can't make a list of reasons why Kaine would be a good pick. He's a dull, male, WAS(C) machine politician

He's a dull, male, WAS(C), multilingual Virginian politician who gets replaced by another Democrat in the Senate. Those are reasons he's a good pick. When it comes to a VP policy positions are almost incidental since he's nearly certainly never going to be President. VPs are all about not bringing any nasty surprises and grabbing 2% extra vote in an important state.

Or, uh, whatever Palin was about. Which seemed to work really well.
posted by Justinian at 5:01 AM on July 23, 2016 [46 favorites]


[Deleting the same old Sanders fights. Deleting quoting other members as saying stuff they didn't say. We'll be banning or temp banning people who are just here to instigate fights.]
posted by taz (staff) at 5:06 AM on July 23, 2016 [97 favorites]


red meat for the republicans.

There is nothing -- including literally nothing -- that the GOP is not willing to make into "red meat". Shying away from people because of the potential appearance of maybe vaguely scandal-ish looking stuff is pointless.
posted by Etrigan at 5:10 AM on July 23, 2016 [42 favorites]


My one concern about Kaine is I don't want him to be the heir presumptive in 2024
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:11 AM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


Also, can I just point out that the Left's unreliability when it comes to voting for the Democratic ticket is part of the reason the Dems have to try to appeal to the center. Imagine if the Left said, you know what, we've got your back, we're definitely voting Democrat. The Democrats would have the freedom to pick more left-wing candidates because they could be sure that they would get that solid block of votes. Instead the Left seems to think that threatening to vote for third-party candidates (or in the case of Nader, actually doing so) will get them what they want, when all it will do is get Democrats to nominate more centrist candidates in the hopes of appealing to so-called moderates.
posted by peacheater at 5:14 AM on July 23, 2016 [132 favorites]


Yes, but I can't make a list of reasons why Kaine would be a good pick.

I'm thrilled with this choice.

For the last 30 years the Far Right has been blasting the message that if you are religious you must vote Republican. They have painted the Left as the party of communists, socialists, Jews, and the Godless while painting the GOP as the only moral party that embraces family values. Meanwhile the GOP has turned its back on the true Christian values of helping those in need. It is no accident that Prosperity Gospel has become so popular-- it allows people to despise the poor but consider themselves Christian nonetheless.

Go watch the Daily Show segment where they interview Christians on the floor of the RNC to ask why they are voting for Trump. One woman answers,"How can you build that kind of an empire if you are not praying to God for good things everyday"

What we need on the Left is a counter argument to this nonsense. We need more openly devout people to proclaim that the Democratic Party is the party of Christianity. That Jesus wanted us to feed the poor and take care of the sick and clothe the homeless. That it is possible to hold Biblical beliefs and yet not to legislate morality.

Now like many of you I am an atheist. You may want to pretend that Religion is not an important factor in how people vote, but for a huge segment of our country their religious beliefs are their guiding principle. Tim Kaine is a great example of how the answer to WWJD is: Vote Democrat.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:14 AM on July 23, 2016 [273 favorites]


Kaine is extraordinarily well-regarded in Richmond. He's a genuine, honest guy who has done a lot of folks a good turn at some point. Plus, there's this.
posted by Vhanudux at 5:16 AM on July 23, 2016 [41 favorites]


Don't know why she went with Kaine instead of Undertaker when they're pretty much the same dude with a better gimmick. Sure, he lost to Brock Lesnar at Wrestlemania, but Trump isn't Brock Lesnar.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 5:17 AM on July 23, 2016 [68 favorites]


i think it's a serious tactical mistake to pull a senator from congress for a vp pick - it's not enough to get elected, one has to be able to govern, too
posted by pyramid termite at 5:18 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Maybe he is boring and predictable. But in the context of 2016 I think that qualifies him as exciting, fresh, and new. I mean, try to remember the last time something boring and predictable happened.
posted by Glibpaxman at 5:19 AM on July 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


I mean, try to remember the last time something boring and predictable happened.

Clinton winning the primary?
posted by fifthrider at 5:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [28 favorites]


100% from Planned Parenthood, 100% from Human Rights Campaign, 96% from NAACP. 0% from NRA. Yeah, you could do better than Kaine and he's not perfect but you can do a hell of a lot worse.
posted by windbox at 5:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [152 favorites]




Imagine if the Left said, you know what, we've got your back, we're definitely voting Democrat.

If the Left said that, wouldn't the Democrats be even more inclined to take them for granted and try to reach moderates?
posted by No-sword at 5:21 AM on July 23, 2016 [40 favorites]


Kaine has also attended an African-American Catholic church for the last 30 years, and sang in the choir (until he got too busy)! I'm as okay with this as I was going to be -- I don't think he's as boring as his appearance suggests.
posted by allthinky at 5:21 AM on July 23, 2016 [33 favorites]


seems like you guys aren't feeling the kainementum
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 5:23 AM on July 23, 2016 [23 favorites]


Imagine if the Left said, you know what, we've got your back, we're definitely voting Democrat.

imagine if the left said, this is it, 2016 is your last chance
posted by pyramid termite at 5:24 AM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


If the Left said that, wouldn't the Democrats be even more inclined to take them for granted and try to reach moderates?

The Right has been saying that for years, so the Republicans have been even more inclined to take them for granted and try to reach extremists.
posted by GhostintheMachine at 5:24 AM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


Anti-Abortion Tim Kaine has consistently voted to preserve abortion rights and cut off funding for abstinence-only education in Virginia, so six words into that headline I already know the article is worthless.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 5:24 AM on July 23, 2016 [189 favorites]


Yes, but I can't make a list of reasons why Kaine would be a good pick.

With the choice of Kaine, Virginia becomes a state that will likely vote Democratic. Really, job one with a veep pick is do no harm, followed by winning their home state, making him a solid choice. And since he is boring, he won't overshadow Clinton.

On the political side of the coin, putting him in as VP removes him from the Senate as a voting member, so his ability to vote with conservatives is nullified.

My guess is that in the grand tradition of Virginia governors becoming senators, McAuliffe will succeed Kaine in the Senate.

By Picking Anti-Abortion Tim Kaine, Hillary Is Testing Feminists’ Loyalty

I read that story last night and thought it was such weak sauce. He's Catholic. Sure, he's pro-life on a personal level. If it doesn't interfere with his day job, I don't care. Based on his rating as a senator from Planned Parenthood, it does not.
posted by kat518 at 5:27 AM on July 23, 2016 [71 favorites]


If the Left said that, wouldn't the Democrats be even more inclined to take them for granted and try to reach moderates?

Yeah as GhostintheMachine points out, think of what has happened with the Republicans. They tend to vote as one block, showing impressive party unity. This has not resulted in more moderate candidates being nominated - rather the party has felt free to go extremely right-wing, as they know even their more moderate members are not going to be tempted to the Democrats' side. The same would be true of the Democrats, but in reverse.
posted by peacheater at 5:27 AM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


Tim Kaine is anti-abortion in exactly the same way I'm anti-anchovy-pizza. I ain't gonna eat it and I might not particularly care to watch you eat it, but I'm not going to let anybody pass any laws making it harder for you to order your nasty anchovy pizza.
posted by Justinian at 5:27 AM on July 23, 2016 [171 favorites]


Anti-Abortion Tim Kaine...
100% from Planned Parenthood...


DOES NOT COMPUTE
posted by PenDevil at 5:27 AM on July 23, 2016 [20 favorites]


imagine if the left said, this is it, 2016 is your last chance

Well, you'd basically be guaranteeing the election of Republicans for the foreseeable future, so I wouldn't try this if I were you.
posted by peacheater at 5:28 AM on July 23, 2016 [21 favorites]


For all those in this thread excoriating liberals voting Green Party etc:

If you choose a pro-TPP, anti-banking-regulation candidate as your running mate, after you have already alienated liberal voters with your own neoliberal politics, you deserve the consequences.

And yes, I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive. There can be no progress in this country unless our standard for liberal politics is higher than 'not Trump', and Clinton's ilk needs to learn this.
posted by splitpeasoup at 5:30 AM on July 23, 2016 [27 favorites]


Seriously, the more I hear about Tim Kaine the more I like him. Maybe we should hold back on the circular firing squad for a while and see how he does.

Also, "My religion is against abortion but I'm not imposing my religion on others" computes just fine to me.
posted by mmoncur at 5:30 AM on July 23, 2016 [113 favorites]


Is there any room in this debate to point out that Tim Kaine is a tremendously decent human being who has done a lot of real, determinable good things in his life? Maybe that's the reason, or one of the many reasons, Clinton picked him.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 5:30 AM on July 23, 2016 [123 favorites]


With the choice of Kaine, Virginia becomes a state that will likely vote Democratic.

Virginian here: the folks I know who remember who Tim Kaine is are far from swayed by this pick. Anecdotal evidence, yes, but then again— does Trump have a shot at New York?
posted by fifthrider at 5:30 AM on July 23, 2016


My guess is that in the grand tradition of Virginia governors becoming senators, McAuliffe will succeed Kaine in the Senate.

Per Virginia law, McAuliffe will appoint someone who will seve until 2017, when a special election will be called.

And if McAuliffe subsequently runs, I won't be mad. He's personally signing 200,000 voter restoration grants this weekend after the VA Supreme Court threw out his executive order to do it all at once.
posted by Vhanudux at 5:30 AM on July 23, 2016 [38 favorites]


Yeah can we not shoot ourselves in the face with the BS claim that Kaine is anti-abortion? Come on now. I trust Planned Parenthood.
posted by lazaruslong at 5:30 AM on July 23, 2016 [28 favorites]




i think it's a serious tactical mistake to pull a senator from congress for a vp pick - it's not enough to get elected, one has to be able to govern, too

I may be misreading this, but Kaine has extensive executive experience - he was the mayor of Richmond and the Governor of Virginia before becoming Senator. He's never lost and election and left all these positions with high approval ratings. (I think this was a decisive difference between him and the also fabulous Tom Perez.) If something -- god forbid and I knocked on wood -- happened to Clinton, he would unquestionably be ready to lead on day 1. That seems to have been extremely important to her.

If you're talking about the balance of power in the Senate, Virginia currently has another Democratic Governor who gets to replace Kaine in the Senate, so that's not a concern.
posted by sallybrown at 5:31 AM on July 23, 2016 [18 favorites]


By Picking Anti-Abortion Tim Kaine, Hillary Is Testing Feminists’ Loyalty

I'm already seeing Kaine being attacked by the "abortion-only" voters as a pro-death advocate and that's after what he did as governor. It's fair to criticize and question him but he shouldn't be painted as a hawk of the anti-abortion movement. They don't like him.
posted by Stynxno at 5:32 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


And yes, I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive. There can be no progress in this country unless our standard for liberal politics is higher than 'not Trump', and Clinton's ilk needs to learn this.
What is your endgame here? Seriously, think about this like someone who really wants to advance their policies. A Trump Presidency would ensure a right-wing Supreme Court for the next several decades. No amount of teaching Democrats a lesson is worth this. And it's not even the lesson I think they are likely to learn.
posted by peacheater at 5:34 AM on July 23, 2016 [171 favorites]


Virginian here: the folks I know who remember who Tim Kaine is are far from swayed by this pick.

I know a big bunch of Virginians (late twenties to early forties, politically engaged, centrist to liberal) and they are uniformly very excited. Partly that tribal Virginia thing, they love to root for a Virginian, even if he's a transplant.
posted by sallybrown at 5:34 AM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


I don't know, peacheater, that seems to suppose that the two parties are structured exactly the same except on opposite sides of the centrist line, which I don't think is true. I don't think this is the thread to get into it but I can't see the DNC leaving potentially reachable moderates on the table in order to chase the Maoist vote. Still, I do understand what you're getting at, thanks for the explanation.
posted by No-sword at 5:36 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


For what it's worth, Kaine seems to be really, really popular with the progressive Virginians I'm hearing from.
posted by TreeRooster at 5:36 AM on July 23, 2016


And yes, I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive.
Define "we". My hunch is that some of us feel much more confident that we'll survive a Trump presidency than others do.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:36 AM on July 23, 2016 [220 favorites]


If you choose a pro-TPP, anti-banking-regulation candidate as your running mate, after you have already alienated liberal voters with your own neoliberal politics, you deserve the consequences.

Nobody "deserves" American fascism. A "fuck you if you don't give me exactly what I demand" mindset is antithetical to the compromise required in democracy.
posted by sallybrown at 5:36 AM on July 23, 2016 [195 favorites]


If you're talking about the balance of power in the Senate, Virginia currently has another Democratic Governor who gets to replace Kaine in the Senate, so that's not a concern.

well, then, i guess that wouldn't be too bad
posted by pyramid termite at 5:37 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


And yes, I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive.

Who's "we"?
posted by dirigibleman at 5:38 AM on July 23, 2016 [76 favorites]


again— does Trump have a shot at New York?

That's a false equivalence, and I wish we could not engage in them. Virginia is pretty likely to go Dem regardless of the VP, Kaine improving those chances even slightly makes something likely more likely. NY is nowhere near voting GOP for President.
posted by OmieWise at 5:39 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


My one concern about Kaine is I don't want him to be the heir presumptive in 2024

Like Biden was this year, you mean? The last sitting VP to win an election was GHWB.
posted by jackbishop at 5:40 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


Native Virginian here, and he's well liked and well respected by those I know.
posted by tavella at 5:41 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


> "And yes, I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive."

I respectfully disagree.

Not kidding.
posted by kyrademon at 5:42 AM on July 23, 2016 [92 favorites]


A "fuck you if you don't give me exactly what I demand" mindset is antithetical to the compromise required in democracy.

"do what we want you to or we'll have fascism" is not much of a compromise or the mechanics of a healthy system

in fact, the right seems to be determined that this country will be ungovernable if they don't win - we might end up with centrist fascism because right wing opponents will give the government no choice

i guess i'd rather have clinton for maximum leader than trump
posted by pyramid termite at 5:42 AM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


Whenever I hear that "Trump will be bad but we'll be fine" I am reminded of John Oliver's bit about online harassment. He said if online harassment doesn't seem like that big a problem to you, well, congratulations on your white penis.

So, yeah, that's what I am reminded of.
posted by Justinian at 5:43 AM on July 23, 2016 [247 favorites]


Like Biden was this year, you mean? The last sitting VP to win an election was GHWB.

Biden was such a hyped pick that people kept floating him until well after he'd made it clear that he actively didn't want the job, though. He was, more or less, the heir apparent.
posted by fifthrider at 5:44 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


And yes, I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive.

My minority immigrant family and friends and I may not survive.
posted by Karaage at 5:44 AM on July 23, 2016 [127 favorites]


One question about electoral strategy which I don't really have the resources to answer on my own: what's the geographic distribution of hard-line progressives of the sort who object to a moderate pick? Clinton has the luxury of not caring if her choice pisses off the ideologically fixed if they're mostly in places like Massachusetts where she's going to win anyways. If progressives are sitting on their hands in large numbers in Ohio, then there's a problem.
posted by jackbishop at 5:44 AM on July 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


"do what we want you to or we'll have fascism" is not much of a compromise or the mechanics of a healthy system

Sure, but this is what we have in this country, and I'm as sad about it as you are. It is not however the fault of the Democrats that the Republicans have become increasingly crazy. I can somewhat understand the mindset of a Nader voter when the alternative was Bush, at least he was spouting that Compassionate Conservatism stuff, but not today, not with today's Republican party, not with Trump as the alternative. We do not have the luxury of protest votes.
posted by peacheater at 5:45 AM on July 23, 2016 [57 favorites]


The problem with a Trump presidency isn't so much that we might not "survive" (whatever that means), but that such a lurch to the authoritarian right will make it that much more difficult to implement progressive platforms and reforms. Look at history. The idea that a crazy right wing madman will "wake people up" and convert a sizable majority of folks into progressives is a fiction. A dangerous, completely false fiction.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 5:45 AM on July 23, 2016 [122 favorites]


Labeling Kaine as "a pro-TPP, anti-banking-regulation candidate" — sources, please. Not toplines from Twitter; hard citations, down to the details of the bills in question. Because this is just name-calling and oversimplification to my eye.
posted by argybarg at 5:45 AM on July 23, 2016 [40 favorites]


My guess is that in the grand tradition of Virginia governors becoming senators, McAuliffe will succeed Kaine in the Senate.
Oh god, this is the first thing I've read that made me really regret the Kaine pick.

(I kid, I kid. No, seriously though, McAuliffe is a businessman-businessman-politician of the worst sort who has been a minor pox on Virginia for over a decade. He's the governor largely because he was the only D to file and the field of Rs was Trump-level stupid. Ken Cuccinelli stupid. I still don't know a single person who will admit voting for McAuliffe without a held nose.)
posted by introp at 5:47 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


Besides, welcome to democracy, especially on a large scale. You want to believe that Democrats are all secretly neo-Socialists, yearning for the party to move with them? Stop dreaming and take a hard look at Democratic votes around the country. You want to believe that the hard left is anything other than a mirror image of the Tea Party, numbers-wise? Stop dreaming.

The hard left is, at best, 15% of the population and will never be at the center of a governing coalition. Get over it.
posted by argybarg at 5:49 AM on July 23, 2016 [41 favorites]


Labeling Kaine as "a pro-TPP, anti-banking-regulation candidate" — sources, please.

Here's the TPP bit.
posted by fifthrider at 5:50 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Now like many of you I am an atheist. You may want to pretend that Religion is not an important factor in how people vote, but for a huge segment of our country their religious beliefs are their guiding principle. Tim Kaine is a great example of how the answer to WWJD is: Vote Democrat.

You'll be amazed at how even democrats and liberals inside the Christian church feel like they can't admit this. I often see conservatives proclaiming "being faithful" == "being republican" while sitting around a table during a church meeting or bible study. The liberals at the table feel like they cannot speak up or claim that their faith compels them to advicate for liberal policies. This is a mantra that even faith filled people have internalized. i believe faith communities can be places where even politically polarized individuals worship, work, study, and care for each other. But much of the rhetoric doesn't encourage that. Instead, we keep walling ourselves off, left and right.
posted by Stynxno at 5:51 AM on July 23, 2016 [41 favorites]


Nearly all of the male progressives I know are FAR more upset about the leaked DNC emails than they are about Kaine. These are people who were straight up Bernie Bros (calling Hillary a corporate whore and the like) to people who liked Bernie somewhat. Some have read the leaked emails themselves and others have just heard about them from other friends. But they feel ripped off and tricked, and the intensity of their anger is worrisome to me. (I do wonder if unconscious sexism is ratcheting up the intensity (tricked by GIRLS).)

I've tried pointing out that if "rigging" things worked, Trump would never have made it to the GOP nomination, but that's not really making a dent in things.
posted by sallybrown at 5:52 AM on July 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


He's a dull, male, WAS(C) machine politician
I mean, that's one way of looking at it. But here's another, which is how the Clinton folks will spin it:

He's a guy from a working-class, Catholic, Midwestern background, the son of a welder, who excelled at the University of Missouri and was admitted to Harvard Law School. He could have looked at those accomplishments and decided that he could pull himself up by his bootstraps and other people should be able to, too. Instead, fueled by sincere religious conviction, he did the opposite. He took a year off from Harvard Law School to go to Honduras and volunteer in a Jesuit-run school for the poorest of the poor. When he graduated from Harvard Law, he took that fancy degree and used it to set up a practice that fought housing discrimination and red-lining in the city that was literally the capital of the Confederacy, where racism was part of the place's DNA. He, a white Catholic dude from a totally different part of the country, became mayor of Richmond, a majority-black city that also has a growing Latino and Asian population. His rise to political power in Virginia is very much tied to changes in Virginia's political culture: at every step of the way, people claimed that he was too liberal, but he said that his politics were in step with a changing Virginia, and he went out there and proved that he was right. He's a deeply committed Christian who lives his faith every day by trying to create a more just world, but who also realizes that he can't impose his religious beliefs on others. He provides a real contrast to people like Mike Pence, who claim that Christians should express their faith by oppressing gay people and women. He says that you express your faith by lifting people up, not by pushing people down.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:53 AM on July 23, 2016 [372 favorites]


Now like many of you I am an atheist. You may want to pretend that Religion is not an important factor in how people vote, but for a huge segment of our country their religious beliefs are their guiding principle. Tim Kaine is a great example of how the answer to WWJD is: Vote Democrat.

A lot of the evangelical bloc doesn't consider us Catholics as anything but devil people. We're not as bad as Mormons but we're not going to merit respect from "real" Christians.
posted by sallybrown at 5:53 AM on July 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


A few of my Bernie supporting friends (all young moms) still plan on voting for Dr. Stein, for reasons that I don't understand.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:53 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


You want to believe that the hard left is anything other than a mirror image of the Tea Party, numbers-wise? Stop dreaming

God, if only the hard left could exert as much influence over the national political landscape as the Tea Party. The problem is that the Tea Party wins when they stall the government, which is pretty easy to accomplish in the American system; you can't really heckler's-veto your way to wealth redistribution.
posted by en forme de poire at 5:55 AM on July 23, 2016 [42 favorites]


A few of my Bernie supporting friends (all young moms) still plan on voting for Dr. Stein, for reasons that I don't understand.

The more exposure Dr. Stein gets, the better. She seems super interesting at first and then you do the deep dive into her policies and it's like...whoaaaaa bye.
posted by sallybrown at 5:56 AM on July 23, 2016 [50 favorites]


And yes, I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive.

If by "survive" you mean "still be alive in 4 years", then sure, most people will be. But I personally don't think ideological purity is ok when you consider the people who will be deported, harassed, arrested, and otherwise have their lives derailed, and then rationalize it by saying, "Well at least we will all be alive!"

Just because it probably won't happen to me as a white woman doesn't mean it won't happen or that this is an acceptable trade-off for holding the line on progressivism.

Note that I am a progressive and was hoping for a Latino VP. I still think a Trump presidency would take us to a place we won't be able to recover from.
posted by chainsofreedom at 5:59 AM on July 23, 2016 [44 favorites]


At first I was afraid, I was petrified. Of a Trump presidency. Still am. Probably more.
posted by box at 6:02 AM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


For those considering voting for Stein or have friends who are, I found this article to be a really good outline for why that might be okay or terrible, depending in what state you live in: An Eight Point Brief for Lesser Evil Voting
posted by lownote at 6:02 AM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


//The more exposure Dr. Stein gets, the better. She seems super interesting at first and then you do the deep dive into her policies and it's like...whoaaaaa bye.//

That's great if you deep dive into her policy ideas. How many people that vote for her know anything more than she's not Clinton or Trump? (Which admittedly is an appealing position this year...)

I live in VA - Kaine ran on an anti NRA, pro-choice, anti-coal platform and won, in Virginia. That's not boring.

Trump has made me much more enthusiastic about Clinton than I would have been otherwise.
posted by COD at 6:03 AM on July 23, 2016 [39 favorites]


I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive ...

That you're content to try to "survive" under a Trump presidency, but unwilling to make the best of what will be a considerably more left-friendly Clinton presidency demonstrates the the incoherence of your position.

Unless you admit that, like many people prepared to tolerate Trump, you just want a chance to rob from the wreckage.
posted by octobersurprise at 6:03 AM on July 23, 2016 [52 favorites]


Merrick Garland. Still no hearings. The Republicans are determined to block him in the hopes that Trump wins.

If Trump is elected, he's provided us with a list of the judges he'd select from instead . Take a long hard look at that list and ask yourself if 30 years of any of them is worth a Trump presidency. Then remember RBG is 83. So select two of those judges.

I know this is a cliche, but elections have consequences. One of the consequences of this election will be whether the supreme court leans progressive or moves even more to the right for decades.

Let's imagine we get organized enough to get progressives elected to every other branch of the government. How will reforms survive if- for a couple of decades -right wing litigants have a sympathetic supreme court on their side?

You might not think this is important, but the Republicans think this is so important that they're willing to risk control of the Senate and their own jobs and reputations over it. They want that supreme court majority to be theirs even as the nation's demographics slip away from them.

Vote your conscience in the primaries. Vote the supreme court in the general. Don't cut off your head to spite your nose.
posted by Joey Michaels at 6:04 AM on July 23, 2016 [112 favorites]


If the Democrats being insufficiently liberal is enough to get you to not vote when the alternative is straight up Latin@- and Muslim-deporting/murdering fascism then your leftism is privileged, shallow narcissism and nothing resembling concern for the oppressed.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:04 AM on July 23, 2016 [262 favorites]


Every person on the Dem ticket in the 2000s has been a Senator. In that time, one person on the Republican ticket has been a Senator. That's kinda weird.
posted by Etrigan at 6:05 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


And yes, I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive.

I was hoping that we could aim a little higher than just surviving.
posted by octothorpe at 6:12 AM on July 23, 2016 [28 favorites]


If the Democrats being insufficiently liberal is enough to get you to not vote when the alternative is straight up Latin@- and Muslim-deporting/murdering fascism then your leftism is privileged, shallow narcissism and nothing resembling concern for the oppressed.

Goddammit, THIS. And beyond that, the popular vote matters here. It matters if Trump loses narrowly and his burgeoning fascist movement has their ideas and their movement validated. It fucking matters.

This is the rise of white supremacist fascism in America. This is what it looks like. We need to crush it so thoroughly that it immediately becomes a joke. That most of the people who supported it, tacitly or not, distance themselves from the stench of loserdom. That we don't leave a festering fucking sore to turn gangrenous and eventually kill us all.

Tim Kaine, aside from being safe and a genuinely decent human being with the record to prove it, gets us Virginia. Trump has almost no paths to 270 without Virginia.

Saddle the fuck up, people.
posted by schadenfrau at 6:14 AM on July 23, 2016 [209 favorites]


Well, sure, but any plan to aim a little higher has to start with first surviving.

There is just no way in which a US with Trump as President is going to be more friendly to Progressive goals and ideals than one with Clinton as President. And that's before we even get to the Supreme Court.
posted by peacheater at 6:15 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Not sure how many Virginians it will take but put me and my friends on the really excited, love Kaine, thrilled if McAuliffe ends up in the Senate camp.

I'm in Richmond, work for the state, but my social circle is mostly metal heads and hippies.
posted by Tarumba at 6:19 AM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


@peacheater sez:
not today, not with today's Republican party, not with Trump as the alternative. We do not have the luxury of protest votes.
'Sensible' 'realists' have been saying that sort of thing for a long time. And -- y'know, now that I think about it, this is the funniest coincidence -- 'sensible' 'realists' keep winning high office. And things keep looking pretty goddamned bad.

And to be clear, the main reason for that isn't that centrist politicians are shit, though many of them are. It's that (1) voting every four years and (2) snarking at each other on message boards is the limit of most Internet-using Americans' participation in politics. If your advice here is 'we can't afford not to vote for the compromised machine pol' then let's be clear, you're part of that pol's business plan.
posted by waxbanks at 6:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [15 favorites]


The pro-choice voting block is going to be noticably smaller if you push people out who have real moral qualms about abortion but also believe it should remain a legal option. You'd be getting rid of me, for one. Or you could, you know, send a strong signal to folks in the middle that it is perfectly possible to be troubled by abortion but support pro-choice policies--just look at Tim Kaine! If you insist you aren't really pro-choice unless you also believe there's never anything morally troubling about any abortions, well, that's a great way to make sure there is never going to be a pro-choice majority in America.
posted by Pater Aletheias at 6:21 AM on July 23, 2016 [101 favorites]


If your advice here is 'we can't afford not to vote for the compromised machine pol' then let's be clear, you're part of that pol's business plan.

This does not change the reality that the alternative is fascism.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:25 AM on July 23, 2016 [80 favorites]


Every person on the Dem ticket in the 2000s has been a Senator. In that time, one person on the Republican ticket has been a Senator. That's kinda weird.

We're only talking about 8 people here. But Republicans seem to want to put their governor's forward more than they want to put their senators forward. I think it's their law-and-order executive-action-is-the-best-action anti-democratic shtick.
posted by dis_integration at 6:25 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


I think what all this coverage is missing is that Kaine is a skilled harmonica player. Just imagine him sitting on a porch playing that thing like nobody's business with Diamond Joe in the driveway waxing his Trans Am and maybe Obama is shooting hoops with Bill while our nation's first woman president is Getting Things Done. Vote Love, vote against a stupid wall, vote for competence and fact based reality, vote against unbridled all-consuming hot-white-orange fleshy ego, vote harmonica, vote Clinton-Kaine!
posted by localhuman at 6:26 AM on July 23, 2016 [88 favorites]


Pro Publica: The Best Reporting on Tim Kaine Through the Years: Through accountability stories and other in-depth reports, we took a look back at the career of the Virginia senator who Hillary Clinton has picked as her running mate.
posted by MonkeyToes at 6:30 AM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


The pro-choice voting block is going to be noticably smaller if you push people out who have real moral qualms about abortion but also believe it should remain a legal option. You'd be getting rid of me, for one. Or you could, you know, send a strong signal to folks in the middle that it is perfectly possible to be troubled by abortion but support pro-choice policies--just look at Tim Kaine! If you insist you aren't really pro-choice unless you also believe there's never anything morally troubling about any abortions, well, that's a great way to make sure there is never going to be a pro-choice majority in America.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

Ask yourself one question:

Who decides whether a given pregnancy is terminated by abortion? Who makes the final decision? Whose will prevails?

If you said "the mother", then you're pro-choice. It doesn't matter if you think she should make a particular decision, or if you approve or disapprove of her decision.

I hear people say things like "Oh, I'm personally pro-life but politically pro-choice", which is a pro-choice person who's unwittingly absorbed the anti-choice movement's rhetoric.

Tim Kaine doesn't like abortion. He'd rather women not have abortions. But when it comes down to what's important for a politician- whether he votes for or against restrictions on abortion? Let's hear from NARAL and Planned Parenthood:
"While Senator Kaine has been open about his personal reservations about abortion, he’s maintained a 100% pro-choice voting record in the U.S. Senate. He voted against dangerous abortion bans, he has fought against efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, and he voted to strengthen clinic security by establishing a federal fund for it," NARAL President Ilyse Hogue said in the statement.

She said that voting for abortion rights despite personal beliefs underlines the group's message.

"This is core part of what it means to be pro-choice – supporting everyone’s individual decision making," the statement read.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:33 AM on July 23, 2016 [116 favorites]


We have to let the crypto-fascists win because our VP candidate, who spent 17 years as a civil rights lawyer doing important work for minorities and the poor, has ambiguous votes on a couple of very narrow banking proposals.
posted by argybarg at 6:38 AM on July 23, 2016 [174 favorites]


I'm trying to swear off reading any news article comment sections or replies to tweets. They just make me feel terrible about the world. (Somehow, MetaFilter doesn't fall into this category.)

I like Tim Kaine from what I've read about him. His record is impressive overall. He seems like a solid, thoughtful, non-pandering choice. I think he and Hillary will make a good team.
posted by wondermouse at 6:42 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


We have to let the crypto-fascists win because our VP candidate, who spent 17 years as a civil rights lawyer doing important work for minorities and the poor, has ambiguous votes on a couple of very narrow banking proposals.


At this point crypto-fascists would be an improvement.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 6:44 AM on July 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


...congratulations on your white penis.

FWIW, TMI have a white penis and I'm afraid I won't survive but I still laughed at this because yeah, exactly, way to think only only about yourself, people who think a trump presidency won't be so awful.
posted by Annika Cicada at 6:45 AM on July 23, 2016 [28 favorites]


But I personally don't think ideological purity is ok when you consider the people who will be deported, harassed, arrested, and otherwise have their lives derailed

Don't forget the thousands of women who will die either in legally forced childbirth or from complications to now illegal abortions.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 6:46 AM on July 23, 2016 [25 favorites]


'Sensible' 'realists' have been saying that sort of thing for a long time. And -- y'know, now that I think about it, this is the funniest coincidence -- 'sensible' 'realists' keep winning high office. And things keep looking pretty goddamned bad.

Let's think about that for a second. For two elections, we've elected a 'sensible' 'realist' named Barack Obama. And over these 7 years, his Presidency has managed to shift the Overton window on so many issues, despite the fact that he makes no bones about the fact that he's a centrist.
Health care reform passed, and from the cries of socialism and Obamacare, we emerge to a reality where no one on either side of the aisle wants to touch it because it would be too unpopular and millions more people have healthcare.
GLBT rights have improved to the point where a gay man was on stage at the Republican convention.
A $15 dollar minimum wage would have been unthinkable 8 years ago, yet here we are, seriously talking about it.
Torture is no longer an acceptable tactic to be used by US military forces - two days after taking office Obama nullified rulings that allowed for interrogation techniques considered to be violating the Geneva Convention.
The Lily Ledbetter Act was passed allowing women to sue for equal pay, even after 180 days had passed (which was the previous statute of limitations) - and the conversation around these issues has come to the forefront of the public mind.

And all of this was with one of the most difficult political environments possible in terms of the Congress and the Senate.

Elect Democrats, and keep electing Democrats if you believe in progressive values. Imagine if every election for the next 16 years, the Republicans are shut out. Over time, things that were unimaginable to say in polite company, will become imaginable. Over time, we will enter an era where the Republicans are irrelevant and the Democrats are the center-right party and there emerges a credible left-wing alternative. I think this is what we all want, but the path to there lies through electing Democrats with large majorities, saying to the country, we are not right-wing. The path to there lies through convincingly rejecting the Republicans, not through trying to hold the Democrats hostage by threatening to vote in such a way that it makes it more likely that the Republicans will win.
posted by peacheater at 6:47 AM on July 23, 2016 [185 favorites]


Let me just say, I hate it when people deride a political candidate for being "boring." Why do you give a fuck about whether a candidate is boring or not? It's just another way about making an election all about *feelings*, instead of the factors that really matter: the candidate's legislative/career record and their policy positions. If Americans cared more about calm and reasonable discourse and less about the *feelings* that a candidate aroused, I doubt we would be dealing with Donald Trump today.
posted by Vic Morrow's Personal Vietnam at 6:49 AM on July 23, 2016 [99 favorites]


I saw a TV ad for the presidential general election for the first time last night. We normally don't get nearly as many of these in the Twin Cities market as other areas do, since Minnesota and Wisconsin are not swing states, and this one was on cable, not regular broadcast TV.

It was this one.
posted by gimonca at 6:52 AM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


From the RTD archives: When the state executed murderer Richard Lee Whitley in 1987, a bit of Tim Kaine died, too


Not progressive enough. Pull the other leg, that one's long enough already.
posted by phearlez at 6:52 AM on July 23, 2016 [17 favorites]


From the RTD archives: When the state executed murderer Richard Lee Whitley in 1987, a bit of Tim Kaine died, too


Not progressive enough. Pull the other leg, that one's long enough already.


So tell me - should he have disregarded the laws that he swore to faithfully uphold based on his personal beliefs? Because if you let that happen, then you open the door for Dominionist governors to run roughshod over civil rights thanks to their beliefs.
posted by NoxAeternum at 6:57 AM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


So Donald seems to be provoking a floor fight in Philadelphia, after shutting one down in Cleveland. Classy.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:59 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Wow phearlez I didn't expect that would have me crying.
posted by Annika Cicada at 6:59 AM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


You mis-pasted that link, roomthreeseventeen.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 7:00 AM on July 23, 2016


Fixed, thanks.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:01 AM on July 23, 2016


Tim Kaine is what a religious commitment to a secular society looks like. We desperately, desperately need more of that.
posted by schadenfrau at 7:01 AM on July 23, 2016 [108 favorites]


So tell me - should he have disregarded the laws that he swore to faithfully uphold based on his personal beliefs?

IMO, yes, but that is one of the thousands of reasons I would never be elected to office. It's hard for me to imagine a person of strong conscience overseeing an execution when nearly 100% of death penalty cases provide multiple bases -- both legal and moral -- to justify stopping it.

Of course, Trump would probably want to perform the execution himself, so it's not a hard call for me.
posted by sallybrown at 7:03 AM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


"People who turn out reliably to vote for your party" are called "your base" and political parties as a rule avoid doing things to piss off their base, even as they try to woo "swing" voters.

It's not clear to me why so many leftists think that being an unreliable "swing " voter is a position of more political power than being part of the base. Yes, the party may pander to you and pay flattering attention to you in some elections... as long as they don't risk pissing off their base. Because the base is necessary and the swing voters are just nice to have. GOTV among the base can often win elections all by itself, whereas you can bend over backwards to please swing voters and they still may not show, or more likely may show up for this election but not the next one.

So yeah, you can bend over backwards... until your base starts rolling their eyes at you for those contortions, and then you straighten up and so what the base wants. Because the base are necessary.
posted by OnceUponATime at 7:03 AM on July 23, 2016 [26 favorites]


If whiny little white boys with 'principles' stamp their feet so hard that Trump wins and I get tossed in a camp someplace, I sure hope those radical principles will extend to joining a guerrilla squad and busting me out
posted by showbiz_liz at 7:03 AM on July 23, 2016 [143 favorites]


If your advice here is 'we can't afford not to vote for the compromised machine pol' then let's be clear, you're part of that pol's business plan.

This does not change the reality that the alternative is fascism.


Sigh. Is it too early in the day to start drinking?
posted by ZenMasterThis at 7:04 AM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


I think what all this coverage is missing is that Kaine is a skilled harmonica player.

The Carpool clip would be so great!
posted by rtha at 7:05 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


A few of my Bernie supporting friends (all young moms) still plan on voting for Dr. Stein

Perhaps they are Anti Vax, as Stein is.
posted by anastasiav at 7:06 AM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


I really want a ride in biden's trans am. And uh. If he could just smile at me and make it feel like a date ride for a minute without upsetting his lovely wife I'd be cool with that too.

BRB I'm gonna go livejournal some political fanfic...
posted by Annika Cicada at 7:08 AM on July 23, 2016 [17 favorites]




Yes we Kaine!
posted by Small Dollar at 7:16 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


The more exposure Dr. Stein gets, the better. She seems super interesting at first and then you do the deep dive into her policies and it's like...whoaaaaa bye.

I'm voting for Hillary but if anyone has some good article links along these lines I'd appreciate them. I have a few friends thinking about voting for Stein (in NY so...not super important but still) that I would like to try to shift toward Hillary. (FWIW I did not find the claims that Stein is antivax particularly credible, though she is definitely pandering to the woo vote.)
posted by dysh at 7:21 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Seriously guys, it's totally obvious that the fix was in from the beginning for Clinton, no need to even look at any leaked emails, but if our already-assassinating-its-own-citizens-with-robots surveillance state goes explicitly fascist just as the second-order effects of climate change start to kick in, we are not coming back.

Trump may be rattling his toy saber at China now before he's actually captured the Presidency but he'll be licensing a copy of the Great Firewall in no time. Michele Bachmann will come out of "retirement" to help make this country more like the nation she admires so much because it doesn't have food stamps. Because the elites of capitalism-with-Chinese-characteristics China, and Putin's Russia, and a fascist U.S. will have even more in common than they do now and will cheerfully give each other housewarming gifts as they build neighboring villas on the balmy Arctic and Antarctic coasts in the ensuing decades.

(And yes, electing Clinton doesn't guarantee avoiding futures like that, but there isn't any path to avoiding them that leads through a Trump Presidency.)
posted by XMLicious at 7:22 AM on July 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


Here's been my pitch to friends considering a vote for Jill Stein: Because the Green Party platform includes an appeal to "support the teaching, funding, and practice" of homeopathic medicine, I say that there is no better way to mimic the amazing curative powers of this lifesaving medical technique than to NOT vote for Jill Stein. The fewer votes she gets, the more powerful and effective she will be.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 7:22 AM on July 23, 2016 [160 favorites]


I voted for Corbyn in last year's Labour leadership election, but I'm really disturbed by how many people who share my basic convictions are stamping their feet and proclaiming the rest of the Labour Party "Red Tories" right now, driving us towards a split. It feels like many leftwingers, at least in the US and UK, need to get a grip on the fundamental fact that our primary responsibility is protecting the vulnerable from people who will destroy their lives without a second thought. We have other responsibilities too, but that one comes first, because if we don't do that then what good are we?
posted by howfar at 7:22 AM on July 23, 2016 [33 favorites]


Also, can I just point out that the Left's unreliability when it comes to voting for the Democratic ticket is part of the reason the Dems have to try to appeal to the center. Imagine if the Left said, you know what, we've got your back, we're definitely voting Democrat.

What planet are you on? If there was ever an election where Dems are committed regardless, it's this one.
posted by odinsdream at 7:27 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


You guys realize there are maybe like six people who aren't going to vote Dem because of Kaine, right

I mean the ideology of the VP hardly matters

How are you arguing about this
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:28 AM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]




So, Hillary shouldn't pick a Senate Progressive Firebrand like Warren because we need her in the Senate, but she shouldn't pick a Centrist Senate Boring Guy because he's not progressive enough. OK.
posted by Cookiebastard at 7:31 AM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


How are you arguing about this

You haven't been here long have you?
posted by Annika Cicada at 7:32 AM on July 23, 2016 [30 favorites]


proclaiming the rest of the Labour Party "Red Tories"

Was this before or after bits of the Labour Party tried (succeeded?) in throwing Corbyn under a bus?
posted by Slackermagee at 7:32 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Maybe the frothingly anti-Clinton liberal camp is just really loud and won't actually matter, but they exist, and they literally refuse to engage with any argument that voting for Clinton won't tarnish their lily-white souls, and I am super terrified that they WILL make a difference and go to their graves thinking what a good job they did by keeping Clinton out of the White House.
posted by showbiz_liz at 7:33 AM on July 23, 2016 [24 favorites]


Listen, we need to send a message to those corrupt business-as-usual politicians in Weimar.

And yes, I've considered the specter of this Austrian fellow as chancellor. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive.
posted by leotrotsky at 7:34 AM on July 23, 2016 [84 favorites]


Was this before or after bits of the Labour Party tried (succeeded?) in throwing Corbyn under a bus?

Since before his election.
posted by howfar at 7:34 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


In the midst of black people being gunned down by the police almost daily and conservative whites openly rallying behind fascism, Clinton could not deem one of the ~80 million people of color in the US qualified enough for this almost entirely symbolic position. I'm not impressed.
posted by threeants at 7:35 AM on July 23, 2016 [18 favorites]


On that particular subject, what was the opposition like in Weimar at the time? Were the same sort of intra-party/coalition/etc fights happening on the not-Hitler side?
posted by Slackermagee at 7:36 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


You guys realize there are maybe like six people who aren't going to vote Dem because of Kaine, right

In the country that re-elected George W. Bush while in the midst of the two simultaneous land wars in Asia he had started, I am prepared to believe those six peoples' votes could matter.
posted by XMLicious at 7:36 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]



On that particular subject, what was the opposition like in Weimar at the time? Were the same sort of intra-party/coalition/etc fights happening on the not-Hitler side?


Let me laugh hollowly. Meet the KPD and the SPD.
posted by Frowner at 7:38 AM on July 23, 2016 [23 favorites]


Does anyone have a link to a deeper analysis of these DNC emails supposedly showing corruption/anti-Sanders bias? I was trying to slog through them on Reddit's megathread, but every email I actually read seemed to be a non-issue. I was especially baffled by those that were flagged as being "anti-Trump"... well, of course they're anti-Trump, it's the DNC.
posted by festivus at 7:39 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


And yes, I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive.

Yeah! Yeah! And also screw people like me who'll lose the hard-fought health insurance that we only waited decades for.

I know, I know, according to the Leftist Purity Pledge, because the ACA is imperfect (and not what that woman, oh what was her name, fought for 20+ years ago) I should've gone without healthcare in protest of it.

While a few other people (white straight male got-a-good-job-with-benefits, live in a very blue city/state, don't have to worry about whether to come out of the closet because of state-endorsed homophobia, or about finding an illegal abortion provider, or being deported for no reason at all or continuing to fear they/their children will be murdered by police for a routine traffic stop) can continue their college-dorm illusions about being a True Leftist.
posted by NorthernLite at 7:39 AM on July 23, 2016 [105 favorites]


And yes, I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive.


Listen, I'm a rich New Yorker. I won the startup lottery, and economically I'm as privileged as I need to be. But I'm also a refugee, and an immigrant, with a Jewish husband and mixed-race kids. And I'm terrified of a Trump presidency.
posted by snickerdoodle at 7:39 AM on July 23, 2016 [73 favorites]


If you don't think that institutional Democrats have moved to the left since the days of welfare reform and DOMA and Sister Souljah and other Bill Clinton-era triangulation, I'm guessing you weren't around for the 90s. Even Obama has been nudged away from "grand bargain" politics thanks to pressure from the party's left, and also thanks to elected Republicans becoming rejectionist loons happy to toss aside those willing to compromise.

Facts on the ground here: GOP governors in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Maryland, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Maine, Ohio, Florida. Some of them anodyne business types, some actually batshit. The Dems need to win some governors' races if they want to fill out their bench.

I am looking on at the UK Labour Party destroying itself because of a leadership buoyed by people who have literally said that given a choice between their ideological purity and winning elections, they will forego winning elections. That is bonkers talk.
posted by holgate at 7:39 AM on July 23, 2016 [21 favorites]


And yes, I've considered the specter of this Austrian fellow as chancellor. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive.

I was pretty surprised to see the first comment on this thread refer to a "stab-in-the-back" narrative, given the historical context of that phrase in getting fascist politicians into power.

Maybe people see it as just a neutral, descriptive phrase these days. I strongly tend to think it's not.
posted by howfar at 7:40 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


You're all right that there might be some Bernie-supporting folks who would have considered a vote for Clinton-Warren but won't vote for Clinton-Kaine. But I had an interesting visit with family last weekend, most of whom are moderate Indiana Republicans. Folks who either did vote or flirted with voting for Obama in 08, and then went back to voting Republican in 12 and pulled the lever for Romney. These folks are legitimately terrified of Trump and are softened up to possibly vote for Clinton, who they don't particularly like. And they made it clear that they were not fans of "angry, far-left" Warren, but they had "heard good things" about Kaine. Particularly my uncle, who himself takes annual trips to Honduras to work on mission assignments. He's been a hardcore Republican who knows of Kaine's mission work. So, sure, we all have folks in our Twitter timelines and even here at Metafilter that are probably disappointed by this pick and might think about not voting for Clinton. But I need two hands to count the people just in my family who are now more seriously consider actually voting for Clinton instead of staying home this election cycle. So, whatever. All that is just another anecdote to throw on the pile. But I do think the real world has a lot more shades of gray than online.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 7:41 AM on July 23, 2016 [62 favorites]


Listen, we need to send a message to those corrupt business-as-usual politicians in Weimar

When school administrators require trans children to wear green wristbands your sentiment is not exactly hyperbole.
posted by Annika Cicada at 7:41 AM on July 23, 2016 [38 favorites]


He won accolades for his response to the VA Tech massacre, so I'm guessing Dems will leverage that. Hokies are loyal.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 7:41 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]




Does anyone have a link to a deeper analysis of these DNC emails supposedly showing corruption/anti-Sanders bias?

Well, here's one from May where they discuss spreading FUD about his Judaism and/or secularism.
posted by fifthrider at 7:45 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Last night, Trump and Gingrich went onto Twitter to complain about how horrible Obama's been about those sneaky Mooslems and terrorism because of what happened in Munich, and how much it fit Trump's warnings from his acceptance speech. As it turns out, the shooter was an admirer of right-wing violence and may have been involved in the alt-right movement online, which is almost universally pro-Trump. He also was targeting immigrants, many from areas with large Muslim populations, in a city known as a liberal enclave within a conservative region.

So I guess they were right...in a way. But it's that the violence is starting to come from the people who he was speaking to against those he was vilifying. So, no, "we" will not all survive.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:46 AM on July 23, 2016 [27 favorites]


I mean, I'm basically on the KPD's side in most respects, and the SPD really did knife them on many occasions.

Of course, things were a lot more violent and scary - look what had happened to poor Rosa Luxemberg and Karl Liebknect in 1919 - by which I mean, look at them getting murdered by the Freikorps.

Actually, Weimar is a really useful example if you look at it in terms of larger historical forces, because you're struck by the way that there were good people in both the SPD and the KPD, and by how strong each side's arguments were. It's really scary. To KPDs, the SPD was pretty obviously full of terrible reformist social-fascists, but the SPD actually did knife people to their left and actually did make a series of foolish compromises; to the SPD, the KPD were idiot extremists who stanned for Russia and would never gain a popular following, and they kind of were. Each party had its characteristic flaws. It wasn't that one should have gone over to the other, it was that each one was a thing that didn't work very well to achieve its stated aims. That is what worries me.
posted by Frowner at 7:47 AM on July 23, 2016 [18 favorites]


Let me laugh hollowly. Meet the KPD and the SPD.

Basically the KPD voters were dissatisfied with the center-left coalition that was opposition to the rejectionist conservatives that wanted to end the Weimar system.

In the second round of the 1925 elections, the SPD coalitioned with the catholic centrist party (literally "Zentrum") but the communists were all 'f that' (the KPD was as rejectionist of the Weimar system as the nazis were).

The result in 1925 was Hindenburg won with 48.3%, the center-right Marx came in 2nd with 45.3%, and the purity vote on the left came in at 6.4%.

The purity voters of course ended up with pretty inverted red triangle patches on their Dachau uniforms as a result.

What really threw things off the rails between the 2nd Weimar presidential vote in 1925 and the 3rd in 1932 was the dislocation of the Great Depression, which hit Germany particularly hard.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 7:53 AM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


Indespensible guide to the Democratic convention by Daniel Dale who I started following because of the RNC threads. I found the whole thing interesting. One excerpt of note:

Real fact: die-hard Bernie Sanders supporters are planning to protest Hillary Clinton by feeding beans to Sanders delegates so they can fart in the convention hall.


I'll take this type of open carry over guns any day.
posted by like_neon at 7:58 AM on July 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


My Facebook feed is full of people mad that Clinton didn't pick Sanders. I just don't know what to say.
posted by snickerdoodle at 8:00 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


I voted for the most progressive major-party candidate in the primaries, which I judged to be Sanders.

Now I will vote for the most progressive major-party ticket in the general, which is unquestionably Clinton/Kaine.

This ... doesn't seem like a tricky question to me.
posted by kyrademon at 8:00 AM on July 23, 2016 [130 favorites]


It was always going to be Kaine:
People close to Clinton were telling me, as early as February, that there really wasn’t anyone else on their short list. The main reason Clinton chose Kaine is so simple as to be unbelievable: She thinks he could serve as president if she can’t, and didn’t think anyone else she talked to fit that criterion.
posted by kirkaracha at 8:02 AM on July 23, 2016 [68 favorites]


Kaine is used to strong women - his wife is Secretary of Education of Virginia. She's a lawyer and a former judge. In addition to serving as the state's first lady when her husband was Governor, her Dad was Governor too, one of the prime movers in integrating public schools. She attended public schools, as did all three of the Kaine kids. Shie is passionate about public schools - worth listening to her Ted talk A Love Letter. I give extra marks to men who have strong wives.
posted by madamjujujive at 8:02 AM on July 23, 2016 [69 favorites]


She thinks he could serve as president if she can’t, and didn’t think anyone else she talked to fit that criterion

My opinion of Sanders too, btw. Clinton got my vote last month even though my politics are to the left of Sanders.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 8:03 AM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


This ... doesn't seem like a tricky question to me.

You're not thinking about voting as an extension of your all-important personal moral purity. Recast the world as a moral drama in which you are the star and everything exists in light of you and your moral purity and you'd be amazed at what happens to your decisionmaking process.
posted by Pope Guilty at 8:03 AM on July 23, 2016 [103 favorites]


But reading political tea leaves is fun, kikaracha!
posted by Annika Cicada at 8:03 AM on July 23, 2016


Pope Guilty, you also have to remember that the presidency is the only elected office in America and therefore ensuring that your vote for president is pure is the MOST IMPORTANT THING you can do as a member of the electorate.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:08 AM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


>It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive.

Well, except for the people whose boots Trump can't wait to get on the ground. And the people who are already living on the ground he wants to get the boots on.

Cost of the Iraq war, maybe $6 trillion
counting interest over the next four decades. Dead civilians, maybe a half million.

Trump cannot wait, CANNOT WAIT to show the world how big his dick is. If the progressive response to that is, 'Eh, we'll be okay, and it's better than me having to vote for somebody who's not my favorite,' then we are all gonna burn.
posted by Sing Or Swim at 8:08 AM on July 23, 2016 [38 favorites]


Cost of the Iraq war, maybe $6 trillion counting interest over the next four decades. Dead civilians, maybe a half million.

Might want to pick another country given that Trump is outspoken in his opinion that Iraq was a giant mistake and Hillary well, y'know...
posted by todayandtomorrow at 8:11 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


i think it's a serious tactical mistake to pull a senator from congress for a vp pick - it's not enough to get elected, one has to be able to govern, too

Huh ? You realize he was elected governor of Virginia before he.became it's Senator, right ?
posted by y2karl at 8:12 AM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


I totally do not get Sanders not getting the nod. Had momentum, would have brought votes and the enthusiasm of the young. Was it petulance on her part or his? Not a good sign. I think I'd hard of Kane before, but what?
posted by sammyo at 8:12 AM on July 23, 2016


Might want to pick another country given that Trump is outspoken in his opinion that Iraq was a giant mistake and Hillary well, y'know...

Trump also wants to declare war on ISIS, which is set up in.....anyone? Bueller?

(Also, I'm pretty sure "able to govern" refers to getting a Democratic legislative majority so we don't end up with 4-8 more years of Republicans throwing a screaming tantrum every time they're asked to pass workable legislation.)
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:13 AM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


Sanders was never going to get the nomination. It's a non-starter. Too old, too ideologically different, not a cooperative person.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:14 AM on July 23, 2016 [22 favorites]


Re the specter of this Austrian guy becoming chancellor... at this time the question is will Norbert Hofer become Austrian president on 2 October. If he does, we might end up with HC Strache as chancellor. Writing from mobile so no links. Tbh if this scenario does happen, which sadly nolonger seems far fetched, Austria will be in deep shit. And indeed for many a chancellor strache would in fact be an existential threat if not a qustion of survival as he and his party stand for racicsm and deportation of refugees amongsany other things.
posted by 15L06 at 8:14 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm just a simple country bumpkin, so I have little to add to this thread – but thanks for this great discussion. Civil, full of reasoned arguments, backed up with citations, and still with room for jokes. MeFi has become my #1 election resource.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 8:14 AM on July 23, 2016 [46 favorites]


Seriously, throughout the Democratic primary, the Left made a big deal about Clinton losing the white guy vote. That it showed that Clinton was going to lose against Trump, because these blue collar white guys were now a bellwether apparently for everything economically wrong with America. Them and the youths, of course.

And now Clinton chooses the exact kind of person that these white guys might listen to, and all of sudden, "IT'S TOTALLY WRONG! Can't she doing anything right? Get ready for TRUMP!!"
posted by FJT at 8:14 AM on July 23, 2016 [46 favorites]


I totally do not get Sanders not getting the nod. Had momentum, would have brought votes and the enthusiasm of the young. Was it petulance on her part or his? Not a good sign. I think I'd hard of Kane before, but what?

He is too old and will have (or at least could have) much more power in the Senate than as VP.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 8:15 AM on July 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


Also, I'm pretty sure "able to govern" refers to getting a Democratic legislative majority

yes, that's exactly what i meant by it - but people are going to interpret things as badly as they can, aren't they?
posted by pyramid termite at 8:15 AM on July 23, 2016


I get the political expediency stuff here, but also doing the expedient thing doesn't mean refusing to critique it.

But people who abstain from voting—and I get all of the reasons why this is a prospect to which we're all very opposed—are also exercising their right. The right to vote is not the right to cast a ballot in favor of your preferred candidate. It's to do that if you want to & to not do it if you don't. To be free to do it. That's what makes it a right. You don't have to earn it or be entitled to it or use it properly, and honestly, I think a lot of folks who are saying they won't are probably going to behave differently in the voting booth. (I also don't think browbeating people works.) And some of the people I admire most, organizers and activists, largely Black radicals, who aren't voting because they wouldn't anyway & this isn't going to compel them to. I respect that. And they're not the folks who are hysterical about a Trump presidency anyway—and it certainly isn't because they don't know the stakes. Pouring some of that hand-wringing into seeing what you can do to support your local Black Lives Matter chapter might actually be more useful—because that work still needs to be done, whoever becomes president.

And yes, I've considered the specter of this Austrian fellow as chancellor. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive.

The Austrian fellow was not elected to his post. That is not how he seized power. This is not Weimar Germany. Whatever the similarities, it is not the same, and I don't care what Ken Burns says about it. History doesn't actually repeat itself. Sometimes moments resemble each other, but they are not and will never be reenactments.
Lay out some elements of fascism and identify them in the current moment, sure. But let's stop Godwinning the election.
posted by listen, lady at 8:15 AM on July 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


I'm sure Kaine is qualified and and would be a perfectly acceptable president if it came to that but really let's put on a show, no two shows, one glitter and exciting and the other as dull and boring as possible. Who's going to show up to buy a ticket (vote).
posted by sammyo at 8:16 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


> Ask yourself one question: Who decides whether a given pregnancy is terminated by abortion? Who makes the final decision? Whose will prevails? If you said "the mother", then you're pro-choice

I said "the pregnant woman," because many of the women who get abortions are not mothers and do not wish to be them yet (if ever).
posted by The corpse in the library at 8:17 AM on July 23, 2016 [37 favorites]


BREAKING NEWS: Get Off My Lawn chooses Autocorrect as running mate.
posted by y2karl at 8:17 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


And now Clinton chooses the exact kind of person that these white guys might listen to, and all of sudden, "IT'S TOTALLY WRONG! Can't she doing anything right? Get ready for TRUMP!!"

A corporatist, pro-TPP establishment Democrat is precisely the opposite of the person those guys might break rank for, gender and skin color aside.
posted by fifthrider at 8:17 AM on July 23, 2016


Autocorrect, grr, grr, I hate that fucker.
posted by y2karl at 8:18 AM on July 23, 2016



(Sanders) He is too old and will have (or at least could have) much more power in the Senate than as VP.

I did not get the impression that he was at all power hungry, but he would have had a great "bully pulpit" which does seem like a role he enjoyed. (perhaps she was concerned at being overshadowed?)
posted by sammyo at 8:19 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm firmly on side with the idea that the Left should be voting Democratic.

But....

As part of that deal, I think it is long past time for other Democrats to stop demanding that the Left do nothing but vote Democrat and should STFU the rest of the time.

Remember back when Obama was elected and he was all you hired me to do this, now make me do it? Remember when the Left took him at his word and started strongly agitating for him to move Leftward and do Leftist things? Remember how this resulted in Obama hating on the Left and the more centrist Democrats online telling the Left to STFU because we were "undermining" him?

Yeah, that shit won't float.

Either the Left votes Democratic **AND** gets to strongly advocate for their position and be critical of elected Democrats who are too right or center for their taste, or you're basically asking for the Left to be good little lapdogs who give their votes to the Democrats in exchange for nothing.

This goes double for critics of the Left primary challenging center or right leaning elected Democrats. We get to do that. That's an important aspect of being part of the Party.

If you want (demand) the Left's votes then you have to take the Left's positions and advocacy for their positions as well. You don't get to just say "look Left, it's either the Democrats or actual Fascists, so vote Democratic and then fuck off and die until next election when we need your votes and money again". Or, I guess you do, but then you shouldn't be surprised when the Left starts acting like the Democrats aren't really on their side and starts wondering if maybe their interests would be better served by withholding their votes as a punishment for taking them for granted.

Democratic institutions need to be a lot more neutral. It is very not OK for the DNC to have even weakly favored Clinton, the fact that the DNC was basically just another branch of Clinton's campaign apparatus is appalling.

If you want the votes and money of the Left, well, they don't exist in isolation. Those votes and that money comes with Leftists attached. If that's intolerable, if the existence of the Left is an affront to the Democratic party and their lobbying for Leftist policy and attempts to elect Leftist candidates in primaries is unacceptable to the Democrats then I think the problem is with the Democrats not the Left.

And so far, unfortunately, as Obama's sneering at the "professional Left" shows, the Democrats think exactly that. They want our votes, they very much want our money, but they'd rather not have us.

So pick: do you want the Left as part of the Democratic party or do you want them gone?

If we're part of the Party than we must be treated like part of the Party, not like unwelcome and embarrassing intruders.

I'm still furious about the way the Democratic establishment backed Lieberman over Lamont. And the swipes Obama kept taking at us. And the newly revealed fact that the DNC was actively working against Sanders. I'm hardly alone in that.

So yes, the Left needs to deal with the Democrats. But the Democrats also need to deal with the Left.
posted by sotonohito at 8:19 AM on July 23, 2016 [49 favorites]


Should our country ever get where I'd like it to be, Obama and Clinton-types would be the conservatives and actual socialism-adjacent liberals would be the liberals, and the arguments would not be whether we had social supports but how we constructed and funded them.

And Tea Party/fascist types would have no major political party at all.

And hey, we're not there. That sucks! I would like to be having those conversations, not talking about why walls are stupid and you don't fuck up decades of foreign policy because your underwear is pinching you that day.

But we won't get there by sinking the Clinton/Obama Dems in a fit of pique and letting the Tea Party smash our country up like Godzilla in a teabag-adorned tricorne hat. We might create a new country out of that mess, but more likely things would fall apart so badly that it's hard to even imagine it. Even if I didn't care about myself or other adults, I'm not gonna do that to my kid, and to everyone's else's kids.
posted by emjaybee at 8:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [33 favorites]


The Austrian fellow was not elected to his post. That is not how he seized power.

the corporate powers of the time pressured their political allies to let him into power, thinking they could control him

the corporate powers of our country are playing things much differently - but that doesn't mean that down the road they couldn't support a coup - and it might not be a rightest coup, either
posted by pyramid termite at 8:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Change We Can Despair Of™
posted by BinGregory at 8:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


The people who won't vote for Hillary because of Kaine were never going to vote for her in the first place.
posted by madamjujujive at 8:21 AM on July 23, 2016 [51 favorites]


this almost entirely symbolic position.

Oh, FFS. They don't lock the VP in a closet and feed them through a hole once the election's over. They have actual work to do, they can be a crucial part of the President's team (cf. Joe Biden), and THEY VERY WELL MIGHT WIND UP ACTUAL FOR REAL PRESIDENT SHOULD (ALLAH FORBID) SOMETHING BAD HAPPEN.

There's a lot more than "symbolism" going on here.
posted by soundguy99 at 8:22 AM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


I held my nose a bit when voting for McAuliffe, but as Governor he's done important things.
posted by idb at 8:23 AM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


Let me laugh hollowly. Meet the KPD and the SPD.

This history is very interesting and complicated. Briefly, the SPD was the first modern political party, and a socialist party. They betrayed their internationalist principles in 1914 by backing the German war effort. The Bolsheviks seized power in Russia 1917 on the assumption that a European-wide socialist revolution was possible and immanent, with the main focus being Germany. The KPD formed out of a series of splits in the German socialists, believing it their duty to consummate the German socialist revolution. The SPD, being offered power by the German establishment near the end of WWI on the premise that they were the only party who could keep the revolution from happening, immediately killed the leadership of the KPD (Karl and Rosa, mentioned above) upon taking power. This only exacerbated the bad blood between the SPD and KPD. The KPD ventured upon several ill-conceived attempts (or non-attempts) at revolution that ended in failure and disappointment (many largely due to the SPD's non-cooperation). The Comintern, run out of Russia, assumed more control over the KPD after these debacles. The Comintern in the late 20s embarked on the "Third Period" which dictated a policy of total hostility to the SPD. Since the KPD and SPD were divided, they were unable to mount an effective opposition to the Nazis. After Hitler assumed power, the Comintern did a 180, inaugurating a "Popular Front" policy that encouraged collaboration between KPD and SPD, but by then (at least in Germany), it was too late.

(For the early history of this period, I recommend Broué.)
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 8:24 AM on July 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


Clinton Continues To Take Voters of Color For Granted (NYT "room for debate")
posted by TwoStride at 8:24 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Clinton Continues To Take Voters of Color For Granted

....Clinton takes for granted that voters of color really don't want Trump to be president.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:27 AM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


The thing about Sanders is that you'd basically be saying "Yes, the system is broken, but vote for our angry white guy instead. Don't blame immigrants and Muslims, blame rich people and banks!"

Clinton/Kaine says "Calm down, everyone. We are on a long journey, but we are making progress, and will continue to do so as long as we all work together."
posted by snickerdoodle at 8:28 AM on July 23, 2016 [38 favorites]


> "So yes, the Left needs to deal with the Democrats. But the Democrats also need to deal with the Left."

And Clinton has responded to the Left by moving in their direction on the Keystone XL pipeline, on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, on the minimum wage, on taxation, on healthcare, on social security, and on arctic oil drilling.
posted by kyrademon at 8:29 AM on July 23, 2016 [68 favorites]


Meanwhile trump continues to bring fascism to America. I mean this is a tactical problem at the moment, folks. Whatever problems exist at this point are baked in to the election and trying solve strategic problems NOW is IMO ignoring the tactical efforts.
posted by Annika Cicada at 8:29 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Also, it should be noted that while Obama hasn't governed as a balls-to-the-wall leftist, he has consistently pushed for policies far too liberal to have a prayer of moving through the current Congress. If you want to shift the window farther Hillary isn't your problem.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:31 AM on July 23, 2016 [27 favorites]


Sanders is 1.5 terms older than Clinton.

Could we please dispense with the "too old" talk? Thanks.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 8:32 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Might want to pick another country given that Trump is outspoken in his opinion that Iraq was a giant mistake

A position that he has changed his mind on several times.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:32 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Could we please dispense with the "too old" talk? Thanks.

1. Men have shorter average lifespans than women.

2. (And more importantly) The importance of the VP pick is someone who will be ready in a literal heartbeat to lead the country, and then potentially run for president 8 years later. Sanders isn't running for president in 8 years.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:34 AM on July 23, 2016 [20 favorites]


Might want to pick another country given that Trump is outspoken in his opinion that Iraq was a giant mistake and Hillary well, y'know...

Trump initially supported the invasion of Iraq and has been lying about it. Clinton called her vote a mistake. 5 Myths (And One Big Truth) About Hillary’s 2002 Iraq War Vote
posted by kirkaracha at 8:35 AM on July 23, 2016 [21 favorites]


Sanders is 1.5 terms older than Clinton.

Sanders is 102 years old?
posted by fifthrider at 8:38 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


only if Clinton is 96?
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:38 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


1.5 terms older, not 1.5 times her age.
posted by a mirror and an encyclopedia at 8:39 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


It was my understanding that there would be no math.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:40 AM on July 23, 2016 [103 favorites]


Oops; I read "times." Disregard that.
posted by fifthrider at 8:40 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


I think a lot of disappointment about Kaine is the same disappointment with Clinton. They are both amazing and awesome on social issues. They are both pretty awesome people. But for as long as my millennial brain can remember, the liberals have been "winning" the social justice battle.

I feel a very large part of the 13 million voters who voted for Sanders did so because of his liberal views on financial policy. We don't feel secure in our financial system. It's become common place and expected to get ravaged by corporations. Fees take all of our money. We're leveraged to the hilt on the bills for our education that were supposed help us achieve the American dream, not work in a call center and be treated like cattle.

It's the same reasons that so many people are excited by Trump: Corporations and banks have been wrecking the middle-class and we're losing our privilege and getting angry

So trying to persuade your fellow liberals who feel disenfranchised and are upset Clinton didn't throw them a bone with the VP pick with "Look how good he is on social issues!" isn't going to work.

Any VP pick would have been good on social issues. That's not their issue. A majority of these voters probably aren't even particularly far to the left - they just want some hope the financial stranglehold is going to get taken off of them soon or some slim hope they have a retirement future that isn't bleak. While they might not straight up vote for Trump, the instability and chance to stick to the establishment is worth it to them, because they still have enough privilege to insulate themselves.

How do you reason with them? I don't know. I feel the same way, but I'm voting Hilary, I've donated to her campaign, and I will probably even do some volunteering this election for the first time.

I'm probably going to crib some lines from Pope Guilty's and Joey Michaels comments to use on some of my friends. Call them on their shit. Make them admit it's about money and remind them the very real consequences of having two supreme court nominees appointed by Trump. Hell, it could be upwards of 4, we have 4 sitting judges at or above their average expected life spans. Remind them of all the people less privileged then them that not only will be hurt worse, but may actually lose their lives. Ask them if they think police violence will go down under Trump.

And remind them that there's other places to fight. The presidential race isn't the only place they get to vote and there's actually more third party candidates running down ticket. Vote those.
posted by mayonnaises at 8:41 AM on July 23, 2016 [31 favorites]


I totally do not get Sanders not getting the nod.

Sanders would be a terrible choice. I do not get people not getting this.
posted by dersins at 8:42 AM on July 23, 2016 [39 favorites]


1. Men have shorter average lifespans than women.

Yeah. Sanders is 74. He will (I very much hope) exceed his life expectancy in the next 8 years. Even accounting for the socioeconomic factors that improve his life expectancy, and no current serious health conditions, there is a fairly small, but still significant, chance that he will die in less than 8 years. I know that there is a significant chance (given the significance of being dead) that any of us might die in the next 8 years, but even so, his age is a much more relevant factor than Clinton's.
posted by howfar at 8:44 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


The Iraq vote will be a non-issue. Pretty much anyone that votes remembers that period and the intense craziness passions and whatever one's opinion then or now "gets" why that vote went the way it did. There may be noise but it will not change or affect votes.
posted by sammyo at 8:44 AM on July 23, 2016


snickerdoodle blame rich people and banks

What's wrong with that? They are they ones taking all the money. Even the generally not too friendly to Leftists Politifact agrees.

People are poorer, "the economy" is doing great but that isn't showing up as improved standards of living for anyone but the very rich. This is because the very rich are the ones taking almost all of the economic gains.

We're not all on a journey together, there's a bunch of people stealing all the money. And they don't even need the money they're stealing, they've already got so much money that even living a life wallowing in excess and luxury won't spend it all. And yet they keep stealing my money.

So what is the problem with blaming the problems on them? They created the problems.
posted by sotonohito at 8:44 AM on July 23, 2016 [33 favorites]


I will say, guys - the pick of Kaine is going to let a lot of #NeverTrumpers like me make sly comments from the inside about "Can you believe Hillary's VP pick is more comfortable with God than the Republican nominee?"
posted by corb at 8:45 AM on July 23, 2016 [113 favorites]


I'm progressive left and I totally support Clinton and Kaine.

I'm a secular humanist and I totally support Clinton and Kaine.

I want universal health care, I want strong state regulations of industry, I deeply believe that government can be a part of the solution.

I also understand that we exist in a Democracy and that no politicians are going to give me 100% of what I want. The name if the game is coalition building.

That means building electoral majorities, that means giving stuff away to centrist, etc.

Because metaphorically I want to be in the room where it happens. Ideological purity is nice but it almost always results in being out of the room where it happens.

Yes progressives have some rights to be leery but it's a lot easier to have a say when you are in the room when Hamilton and Jefferson and Madison are forging the grand compromise
posted by vuron at 8:45 AM on July 23, 2016 [47 favorites]


Charlie Pierce: It's a Good Pick (emphasis in original)
It's a solid pick. It's the kind of pick that Bill Clinton made in 1992 and Barack Obama made in 2008. It's nowhere near as risky a pick as John F. Kennedy made in 1960. It's not the kind of weird pick that Richard Nixon made in 1968, or the kind of misguided pick that Al Gore made in 2000. It's not the kind of process-of-elimination, who-will-hold-my-straitjacket pick that the opposing party made this week. In fact, I'm more concerned that my judgment on such matters has been so warped by the political wild kingdom I experienced in here that HRC could have chosen to run with a cup of warm cocoa and I might have applauded until my palms bled.

The most intriguing part of the pick to me is not that Kaine speaks Spanish. (Geez, TV people, enough with that noise. It's not like he learned differential calculus on the back of a coal shovel.) What's intriguing is that he learned it as a Jesuit missionary in Honduras, taking a year off from Harvard Law School to work with the Jesuit Volunteer Corps. This shows a commitment more to the Catholicism of Papa Francesco than to that of the retro Papist opposition. And, seriously, does anyone doubt the presidential candidate's dedication to the constitutional right of choice? I seriously doubt that Tim Kaine is going to go rogue on this issue. And, besides, the party itself has left the whole personally-opposed-but-OK dodge far behind. The Supreme Court is one vote away from a solid pro-choice majority and, even skating one justice down, it's pushing back hard against the SLAPP suit strategy employed by several states. Nothing Tim Kaine can possibly do will reverse that.

Trade is more problematic. He did vote to fast-track the awful TPP deal, and the optics on that are not good, but they only appear seriously bad if you take He, Trump's blathering about trade deals seriously and, therefore, think enough progressives believe that bushwah to make a dent in the Democratic base in November. I don't. We'll see. Otherwise, he may be boring, but he's not timid. He fought tobacco in a tobacco state, and coal in a mining state and, in the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre, he fought for gun-control in a state that has more than its share of NRA members. As Ari Berman pointed out on the electric Twitter machine after Kaine's announcement on Friday night, Kaine was fighting for open housing in Richmond freaking Virginia when He, Trump was refusing to rent to African Americans in NYC. The fact remains that if, on the basis of his record, Tim Kaine is considered a centrist, then the center of the Democratic party has moved considerably to the left since HRC's husband first ran for president.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:46 AM on July 23, 2016 [53 favorites]


Yep Kaine is a goodwill gesture to Republicans that don't believe in Cheetoh Jesus but also have decades of Hillary is the devil propaganda keeping them from voting for a Dem.
posted by vuron at 8:50 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


I love Kaine's history on social issues. I am not happy with his history on labor and banking.

I am hopeful that someone (or a lot of someones) can politely explain to him how the TPP, bank deregulation, and union-busting is bad for individuals, especially those who already face a lot of oppression. His support of them may come from the simple fact that, with a 17-year history of helping people sue for housing discrimination, none of them ever said "if only my bank weren't playing fast and loose with the credit industry, I wouldn't be in this situation." No, they said, "if only that landlord weren't a racist bigot, I'd have a place to live right now." And he listened, and helped them.

Our mission, if that's a reasonable way to put it, is to humanize the problems of big business deregulation, and to do so in a way that makes sense to someone with serious law training: here's the situation; here's the harm it's doing; here's how it's in conflict with the Constitution; and here's how to fix it with minimal disruption. Keep it sharply accurate and succinct, and we have a chance of reaching him.

I doubt he'd flip overnight, but I bet -- I will be betting at the ballot-box -- that he actively wants to help people more than he wants to help businesses, and that he hasn't yet seen a conflict between that and his support of Wall Street values.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 8:50 AM on July 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


All that said, I'm fully in agreement that giving Sanders the VP slot would have been a bad idea. I think she would have been better off with a more economically liberal pick, but not Sanders. If nothing else, Sanders has proven himself to be temperamentally unsuited for high office. I'm not sure he's even really a good fit for the Senate after seeing him in his late period campaign, and I say that as a person who voted for him in the primaries.

I also think mayonnaises hits it on the head. We on the Left are used to seeing a steady stream of social victories. Some of the less thoughtful on the Left might even take it as a sort of given that those will continue no matter what.

But we are deeply bothered by the economic issues, and on those issues the Democrats are a lot closer to the Republicans than they should be. Not identical, but closer than they ought to be.

Still, Sanders for VP would have been an awful idea.

Barbara Lee was my fantasy.
posted by sotonohito at 8:50 AM on July 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


Brad Marshall, CFO of the DNC appears to be an anti-Semitic jerk but did the DNC actually convince the media to smear Sanders' religion in West Virginia (which Sanders won by a large margin as predicted)? I was following the campaign pretty close in early May and I don't recall that happening, but I could have missed it. Or were the CFO and CEO of the DNC blowing off steam against a candidate who was dragging out a lawsuit, openly smearing them in the press, and accusing them of favoritism even though they could have just killed Sanders campaign at the start by not letting him run. Since, you know, he was not a Democrat.

This leak reminds me a bit of when right-wing activists leaked a filtered set of emails from climate scientists to prove that they were bad people and bad scientists because they used words like "trick."
posted by muddgirl at 8:51 AM on July 23, 2016 [15 favorites]


Sanders would never have accepted the VP nomination, even in the unlikely (and that's the understatement of the century) event that it had been offered. He prides himself on his independence. It's his total political identity. There's no way that he would want to be a cog in someone else's administration. It just completely goes against everything he is and wants to be.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 8:54 AM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


And yes, I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive. There can be no progress in this country unless our standard for liberal politics is higher than 'not Trump', and Clinton's ilk needs to learn this.

There can be no progress in this country unless accelerationists stop selling out every fucking minority every chance they get for some promised rapture liberal utopia.
posted by qcubed at 8:56 AM on July 23, 2016 [55 favorites]


I rather enjoyed this tweet from a Republican senator...
posted by jim in austin at 8:56 AM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


This is what I wrote when Obama picked Biden and everyone was rending their garments over it. I think I called it pretty well. Obama picked Biden because she needed an attack dog; Clinton is the opposite. She picked Kaine because she needs an adorable puppy for people to look at.

Perceived "moderate" (or at least by this cycle's standards) Republican senators like Jeff Flake are already praising Kaine becuase he's a legitimately praise-worthy person. I'm amazed that after a year of Trump's entire angle being savagely attacking people like the Twitter troll he is, people are surprised Clinton went with a person incredibly hard to attack because he's simply a decent and respected person who seems to enjoy his job as a legislator and actually does it well. Kaine is Al Franken without the disqualifying Hollywood backstory.

People are absolutely right that Kaine is a "safe choice" but what confuses me is how they're all saying that like it's a bad thing. Thanks to Trump, Clinton hasn't been framed as a revolutionary, history-making candidate, which is infuriating to me (and I imagine millions of women) but there it is. So Clinton is instead being forced to re-frame herself and control the narrative of the Final Fantasy VII-like meteor summoning animation of shit hurled at her. Do we really want more drama right now? She's Hillary fucking Clinton. If she could run with a sentient bottle of Liquid Paper she should fucking do it.

God, if only we had the perfect pick we wanted who totally existed in reality, like that last Democrat we picked who totally didn't end up bombing three separate countries with robots anyway. "Oh god, Kaine is just a normal, boring dude who appears to mean what he says, displays level headed conviction and gets along with lots of people in D.C. What an unmitigated disaster for the Democratic Party!" scream the folks who have no idea what winning looks like.

Jesus McBalls, everyone. We just watched the Annoying Orange address the Reichstag on Thursday. Give me the guy whose biggest controversy is his eyebrows any goddamn day of the week.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 8:56 AM on July 23, 2016 [123 favorites]


It's the same reasons that so many people are excited by Trump: Corporations and banks have been wrecking the middle-class and we're losing our privilege and getting angry

I think the simpler and more direct hypothesis is that people are excited about Trump because lots and lots of anglos are still horrible racist bigots who barely knew enough not to say that shit in public and Trump is making it okay to do again.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:58 AM on July 23, 2016 [27 favorites]


Ethicists say voting with your heart, without a care about the consequences, is actually immoral

“The purpose of voting is not to express your fidelity to a worldview. It’s not to wave a flag or paint your face in team colors; it’s to produce outcomes,” says Jason Brennan, a philosopher at Georgetown University and author of The Ethics of Voting. “If they’re smart, they’ll vote for the candidate likely to best produce the outcome they want. That might very well be compromising, but if voting for a far-left or far-right candidate means that you’re just going to lose the election, then you’ve brought the world further away from justice rather than closer to it.”
posted by triggerfinger at 9:01 AM on July 23, 2016 [55 favorites]


Kaine is a November pick. He is very useful for locking in 270.

Kaine is also a useful January pick if the Senate ends up split 50-50. He has executive and Senate experience.

For the most part Clinton doesn't need a governance partner though. Clinton already has a fabulously experienced staff and will be inheriting everything she wants from Obama.
posted by vuron at 9:02 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


For the last 30 years the Far Right has been blasting the message that if you are religious you must vote Republican.

This is an important point. The idea that to be Christian means you have to vote Republican is ludicrous. Jesus's preaching in the Gospel aligns more closely with the liberal agenda; it's not even close. Remember, it was FDR who used Christian values to advocate for the New Deal. The reason we have "In God We Trust" on our currency, and "Under God" in the pledge, is because the right wing business community wanted to use Christianity to push their selfish, capitalistic agenda.
posted by blairsyprofane at 9:02 AM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


For the most part Clinton doesn't need a governance partner though

Need or not, everything that has come from the Clinton camp in the past 24 hours has been people saying "she deeply wanted and only wanted a governing partner."
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:03 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Partner, or understudy?
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:04 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


DailyKos: Hill aint playing it safe… she’s going for a landslide people.

From that article:
I do not worry that my son will vote for Gary Johnson this November if there is a snowballs chance Donnie Darko could win. Ohio is going to be a wasteland for Trump thanks to John Kasich. Pennsylvania will not be close. Sanders (my very moderate wife pick) or Warren (mine) might gin up the base an iota but Hillary is pushing this campaign deeper into rebel territory than General Sherman.
Speculative analysis / prognostication to be sure (as is all the Kaine chatter at the moment) but I hope it is accurate, both in terms of what the campaign intends with this pick and what the outcomes are.

Right after the Civil War, we had multiracial progressive governments across the South. Then white terrorists intimidated the voters while their political allies fought for the quick re-enfranchisement of the rebels and finally the Republicans sold the freedmen down the river for a measly four years of power and called it peace.

We've got to finish the job.
posted by tivalasvegas at 9:05 AM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


I believe partner, from everything the Clinton surrogates have said.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:05 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Brad Marshall, CFO of the DNC appears to be an anti-Semitic jerk but did the DNC actually convince the media to smear Sanders' religion in West Virginia (which Sanders won by a large margin as predicted)? I was following the campaign pretty close in early May and I don't recall that happening, but I could have missed it. Or were the CFO and CEO of the DNC blowing off steam against a candidate who was dragging out a lawsuit, openly smearing them in the press, and accusing them of favoritism even though they could have just killed Sanders campaign at the start by not letting him run.

Confusingly, Marshall is now claiming that it wasn't Sanders at all but a surrogate that they were attempting to smear. If that's true, it would explain why no one outside of West Virginia noticed or cared at the time. It's also neither an excuse nor an explanation. That mess, what I've read about the leaks including high-level DNC staffers going 10 rounds about individual articles in the Alaska Dispatch (a paper with a circulation of about 50,000), and a couple of people I know who have had very negative employment experiences with the DNC paint a picture of a pretty dysfunctional organization, just not in ways that have much of anything to do with politics.
posted by Copronymus at 9:08 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


We're not all on a journey together, there's a bunch of people stealing all the money. And they don't even need the money they're stealing, they've already got so much money that even living a life wallowing in excess and luxury won't spend it all. And yet they keep stealing my money.

I can understand this, and I basically agree with it. But what I can't understand is someone thinking this, being unsatisfied with Clinton/Kaine, and choosing to vote for the richest, biggest thief instead. If you wanted to imagine someone who has spent their entire life wallowing in excess and luxury they'd never live long enough to spend it all, Trump is the perfect example.
posted by GhostintheMachine at 9:14 AM on July 23, 2016 [19 favorites]


Might want to pick another country given that Trump is outspoken in his opinion that Iraq was a giant mistake and Hillary well, y'know...

Trump supported the war before the war happened. That he now says he opposed it early and strongly is meaningless; it's just another case of him being a liar.

Next time there's an issue, who's more likely to send ground troops to someplace foreign if they are annoyed at having US will or prestige thwarted? It's not the boring, safe, cautious candidate.

I did not get the impression that he was at all power hungry, but he would have had a great "bully pulpit" which does seem like a role he enjoyed. (perhaps she was concerned at being overshadowed?)

That is not the role for the VP in the US system. The VP can speak out on issues with which they agree with the president, but they can't speak freely about issues that concern them.

I mean, legally they can but for various reasons they really can't serve as a foil to the president on key issues. Someone willing to make the case within the halls of power might be the"conscience" of an administration but if you want to do it publicly the senate is a better place.
posted by mark k at 9:15 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


TBF, Trump has proved exceptionally capable at spending his fortune.

I haven't read the email links closely, but especially at this election democratic supporters cannot afford the luxury of pretending our shit don't stink.
posted by The Gaffer at 9:17 AM on July 23, 2016


I mean, trump to me is what the worst result of neoliberal (and neoconservative) policies create so from where I see things, moving off neoliberal/globalist trade policies is a very very long term strategy that has be voted in from the county level up. A president today is not going to go against monetary policy. Maybe in 8 years, if we start really working on that now.
posted by Annika Cicada at 9:19 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


The Case for Tim Kaine
posted by kirkaracha at 9:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


A corporatist, pro-TPP establishment Democrat is precisely the opposite of the person those guys might break rank for, gender and skin color aside.

That's sort of empty sloganeering. If the ACA's repealed, Amy Goodman isn't going to pay your medical bills.

Like I said in the other thread, Virginia is Fairfax County and it's Richmond and it's also the Appalachia of trailers and meth and opioids and getting up at 5am for a one-day-a-year healthcare [WaPo]. And this is a base election. The people getting screwed over most of all are not middle-aged white men with moustaches and Harley t-shirts, even though they are considered symbolic of something to certain people in the media; they are working mothers who barely break even on the cost of daycare as long as their kids don't get sick, or people who have to change their restaurant uniform on the bus going from one minimum wage shift to another. Oh, and it's people who run paint shops who have to sue Trump properties because they got stiffed by "paid enough already" line we now know is typical of Trumpism.

Bernie Sanders is going to set the table next week by talking about economic inequality and insecurity. I hope that he's willing to stump in places where he and the Clinton campaign thinks he'd be useful. Elizabeth Warren do something similar, and will make clear that the power for those at the top of the ticket to make changes is granted down the ticket.
posted by holgate at 9:28 AM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


I think she's going with Kaine because she wants to pick up some of those people who are kinda leaning towards Trump. Not the ones who will vote him hell or high water, but the ones who can be moved over. The word is that Trump has next to zero GOTV infrastructure and is relying on the party to take care of that for him. If that is indeed the case, and if Clinton's GOTV is anywhere close to as successful as Obama's '08/'12 (biggest reason he won '12 was because he got his voters to the polls, that operation was unbelievably effective), then this pick could help Hillary pick off a couple of states that no one would have expected. Hell, the talk is that Arizona, Texas, and Utah may be in play, states where the GOP usually doesn't have to expend significant resources to defend.
posted by azpenguin at 9:32 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


ahhhh please come out and speak you two, I can't deal with any more talking heads rn
posted by tivalasvegas at 9:34 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Grrrrr. Let it burn and rebuild it right DOES NOT WORK IN AMERICAN POLITICS AS WE KNOW IT. We are like several holocausts away from the wholesale destruction of Washington corruption and I dare say, most of us who have the ability to rebuild will be long gone or long dead before that happens.

You work and work and work to push the pendulum as far as you can. A Trump administration means in four years, best case scenario is we might be able to get someone a little to the right of Clinton in office.

On the other hand, there is a nonzero chance of Clinton delivering a deathblow to the republican shit show this time. If reasonable people see Clinton not as a dangerous socialist but a "stay the course" non crazy person, tons of southern religious voters will abandon the good ship SS Fascist and the Democrats become the new right. I like that scenario much better than maybe surviving Trump and then working my ass off next time to get someone who is also not the Great Liberal Savior.
posted by Slarty Bartfast at 9:34 AM on July 23, 2016 [32 favorites]


This is an election year to try to win back the senate, get traction in the house, and hopefully by 2018 we can get the more progressive policies in.

And hopefully in the interim get some Supreme Court Justices and a cabinet that reflect a more progressive agenda.

Kaine is going to be big for those down ticket, centrist seats, to flip them blue.
posted by mrzarquon at 9:35 AM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


Might want to pick another country given that Trump is outspoken in his opinion that Iraq was a giant mistake and Hillary well, y'know...

oh fucking spare me, please. trump is outspoken in his opinion that mexicans are murderers and rapists and that women should go to prison if they don't want a baby and that muslims should be deported or fucking tattooed on their wrists but yeah, let's pat him on the head for telling this one incredibly obvious lie
posted by poffin boffin at 9:36 AM on July 23, 2016 [80 favorites]


I'm trying to swear off reading any news article comment sections or replies to tweets. They just make me feel terrible about the world. (Somehow, MetaFilter doesn't fall into this category.)

My mileage has varied. I can't read this crap any more.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 9:41 AM on July 23, 2016


It is indeed a lie. Trump said NOTHING about the Iraq war being a mistake back when that decision was made. Hillary has straight up apologized for her vote.

Trump is not only a fascist who longs to be dictator and a fraud but a nonstop liar. Hillary is a pretty good person and Kaine is a very, very good person.

If we are going to vote based solely on character this is again, the world's easiest choice.
posted by bearwife at 9:42 AM on July 23, 2016 [25 favorites]


Health care reform passed, and from the cries of socialism and Obamacare, we emerge to a reality where no one on either side of the aisle wants to touch it because it would be too unpopular and millions more people have healthcare.

This is news to me. Have I been negligent? Am I completely misunderstanding this statement? I was under the impression that all the Republican candidates want to end ACA and have been crazily attempting to do so for quite some time. Or is this aisle some other aisle I'm not familiar with?

but people are going to interpret things as badly as they can, aren't they?

Part of MeFi culture it seems.
posted by juiceCake at 9:42 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


FYI, folks, apropos of Trump's nomination, here is "GOP Lifer" Chris Ladd's resignation letter in full.
posted by bearwife at 9:46 AM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


So, my parents used to be pretty religious. They aren't really anymore, but when I was a kid, we didn't just go to church every Sunday - my dad regularly led readings during the service, my mom regularly taught the Sunday school classes, and they both volunteered a huge chunk of their time to help teach English to the Vietnamese refugees sponsored by our church. They walked the fucking walk, is what I'm saying. They really believed, and their views on other things were informed by that.

I remember, when I was younger, talking with my mom about abortion. I was surprised - because she had always, to my knowledge, been liberal - to hear her say that she thought an abortion was a tragic thing. Honestly I was a little shocked. You don't want to hear that from your mom, right? But when I asked her more about it, she told me that the tragedy, to her, was that it was necessary. That because of a lack of education, or a lack of available birth control, or a simple technical failure of birth control, or a rape, or the death or departure of a supporting partner, or the lack of a safety net, or whatever, that a person would be left with only one choice, to terminate a pregnancy which she personally felt did count as a life. Not a life on the same level as a newborn child or an adult woman, but still a life. She said that her preferred policy would include ways to make the question of whether to have an abortion moot, by preventing those pregnancies before they occurred. She also said that she never, ever wavered in her support of the right to have an abortion, for whatever reason or no reason at all, because ultimately it was the woman's choice.

I have a hell of a lot more respect for that position than I do for people who would rather kick religious people with those views out of the party than make common cause with them.
posted by showbiz_liz at 9:47 AM on July 23, 2016 [72 favorites]


Yeah. Sanders is 74. He will (I very much hope) exceed his life expectancy in the next 8 years.

Not to nitpick the semi-irrelevant detail, but Sanders, a white man who has already lived to 74, has a life expectancy of a further 11.5 years. On the other hand, he has a 3.5% chance of dying in the next 12 months.

Trump, a white man of 70, has a life expectancy of another 14.1 years, and a chance of dying in the next 12 months of 2.4%

Clinton, a white woman of 68, has a life expectancy of another 17.8 years, and a chance of dying in the next 12 months of 2.1%

TL;DR - life expectancy at any given age differs from life expectancy at birth.
posted by Rumple at 9:49 AM on July 23, 2016 [22 favorites]


I was under the impression that all the Republican candidates want to end ACA and have been crazily attempting to do so for quite some time.

every single potential repub candidate made repealing the ACA a main part of their platform this year, yes. hilarious fantasies that upon election they would not go through with it because it would badly harm millions of people are just that, hilarious fantasies. the trump true believers of the current party, the ones full of frothing rage-filled terrified hate, would love nothing more than to badly harm millions of people, even at possible cost to themselves.
posted by poffin boffin at 9:51 AM on July 23, 2016 [17 favorites]


I was under the impression that all the Republican candidates want to end ACA and have been crazily attempting to do so for quite some time.
I actually think that's a bit of an open question. They certainly *say* they want to end Obamacare, and they're doing all sorts of symbolic things to make it look like they're trying to end Obamacare. But I don't think they actually want to end Obamacare, because that would be an epic disaster for them. People have gotten used to being able to get insurance despite having pre-existing conditions. They now take for granted that if their 20-year-old kid gets cancer in the middle of her second year of college, she can take the semester off and go home for chemo without losing her insurance. (When I first started my current job, part of what I did was figure out ways for desperately sick kids to remain in classes, because most policies said that young adults could only be covered by their parents' insurance if they were full-time college students. If you were too sick to go to classes, you'd better hope that your state had a good high-risk program and your parents had the money to pay for it.) There are a lot of provisions of Obamacare that people take for granted and probably don't even realize are part of the ACA, but which they would miss quite a bit if they went away. So the Republicans will continue to rail against it, but I don't know that they relish the thought of actually overturning it.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 9:52 AM on July 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


Clinton/Kaine now running an hour late in Miami.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:52 AM on July 23, 2016


I'm pretty much expecting a lot of pro-business Republicans to basically suck it up and vote for Clinton-Kaine.

They might not feel comfortable about Democrats on a whole host of social and economic policies but more than anything else business people want safe and predictable. They want economic growth and while they typically don't love taxes, predictable taxation, regulation, etc are all super useful for most businesses.

Trump on the other hand could result in all sorts of disruptions because even though he's a "great businessman" actual analysis of his financial record would lead people to think that he's really not that solid.
posted by vuron at 9:52 AM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


> "So the Republicans will continue to rail against it, but I don't know that they relish the thought of actually overturning it."

Have you met the Tea Party caucus?
posted by kyrademon at 10:04 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


but I don't know that they relish the thought of actually overturning it.

They hates-hates-hates the 3.8% investment tax that pays for it tho.

That's what the 'repeal & replace' BS has really been about, for the Inner Party peeps.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 10:05 AM on July 23, 2016


Have you met the Tea Party caucus?

No, thank god. They seem like dicks.
posted by dersins at 10:05 AM on July 23, 2016 [15 favorites]


There’s a lot of discussion about the electoral politics of Clinton’s VP choice, but I can’t help thinking that in her many years in and around the White House she must have been given her fair share of scary briefings about direct threats to the President’s life. And to her life.

I bet she takes it pretty seriously that the VP has to be ready to be president at short notice.
posted by Bloxworth Snout at 10:07 AM on July 23, 2016 [44 favorites]


echoing anecdata above from various Indiana and Virginia affiliated folks:

on FB, my Indiana peeps, including some pretty mainstream center-right folks who voted for Mike Pence, fell all over themselves chanting "good riddance" and waving metaphorical online pitchforks and torches when Trump announced him for veep.

Likewise, on FB, my Virginia peeps spent all afternoon yesterday excitedly sharing anecdotes about how much they appreciate Kaine, Kaine's ties to the Holtons, and Governor Holton's direct, personal resistance to anti-integrationism in Virginia in the early 1970s. Then they spent time trying to figure out if and to what degree they are related to Kaine by marriage. They are clearly excited and proud, and feel that Kaine is on the right side of history.
posted by mwhybark at 10:08 AM on July 23, 2016 [25 favorites]


That's sort of empty sloganeering. If the ACA's repealed, Amy Goodman isn't going to pay your medical bills.

That's, uh, quite the non sequitur you got there.
posted by fifthrider at 10:10 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


But I don't think they actually want to end Obamacare, because that would be an epic disaster for them.

There are two perspectives on this: one is to look at Matt Bevin, who won in Kentucky on explicit repeal Medicaid expansion -- an expansion pushed by Dems that mainly helped people who either didn't vote for Dems or just didn't vote. Bevin is now trying to come up with a shittier version of Medicaid expansion as a replacement that he can call a repeal.

The other is to look at Sam Brownback, who drove his state's economy into the shitter and got re-elected. The consequences for governing with ideological blinkers and getting terrible results are not evenly distributed. Given the power of "vote them all out" in American politics -- the unifying slogan of the pig ignorant -- you're more likely to be voted out for pragmatic attempts to govern that get sabotaged by people who don't believe in government.

And the Freedom Caucus in the House is made up of sociopaths true believers who seem happy for the ACA to die the death of a thousand cuts even without the chance for outright repeal.
posted by holgate at 10:12 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


juiceCake: I was under the impression that all the Republican candidates want to end ACA and have been crazily attempting to do so for quite some time.

ArbitraryAndCapricious: I don't think they actually want to end Obamacare, because that would be an epic disaster for them. People have gotten used to being able to get insurance despite having pre-existing conditions.... There are a lot of provisions of Obamacare that people... would miss quite a bit if they went away. So the Republicans will continue to rail against it, but I don't know that they relish the thought of actually overturning it.

I think most of the Republican House Caucus genuinely wants to repeal the ACA at this point, as do many if not most Republican Senators. HOWEVER. I am not at all concerned about it being repealed.

Partly this is because of the point ArbitraryAndCapricious makes about the people who are beneficiaries of ACA provisions. There would be some juicy ads from liberal PACs featuring sick kids, etc. On their own, though, this ACA constituency wouldn't be enough to stop GOP legislators doing what they want, c.f., the overwhelmingly popular gun control measures which are constantly sent to their grave by the House.

The ACA is backstopped rather by the health care industry. It makes up nearly a fifth of the whole US economy by GDP; it is drug manufacturers, hospitals and medical providers, insurance companies and DME companies. They may not all love everything in the ACA but they have spent six years reworking the whole industry to fit the new landscape and they are not going to let Washington plunge them back into another chaotic multi-year political battle followed by another half-decade of rejiggering things.

Any attempt at repeal that has any hope of getting through will be slapped down but hard by those combined forces. Not happening.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:13 AM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


They certainly *say* they want to end Obamacare, and they're doing all sorts of symbolic things to make it look like they're trying to end Obamacare. But I don't think they actually want to end Obamacare, because that would be an epic disaster for them.

Trump is a perfect example of this. With his trademark lack of realism, he's continued to insist that he will repeal Obamacare because it's a disaster while continuing to cover everyone. Obamacare is imperfect, but mostly it's the "Obama" part that makes repealing it such effective Republican catnip. The individual mandate is genuinely unpopular, but it enables all sorts of popular provisions. Trump says that he will get rid of the mandate and convince insurance companies to keep all the good things, just like his deal-making skills will fix relations with Russia and China, of course.
posted by vathek at 10:15 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


I have a hell of a lot more respect for that position than I do for people who would rather kick religious people with those views out of the party than make common cause with them.

Thank you, showbiz_liz ! Raised Catholic and with a family heavily involved in the pro-life movement pre- Roe v. Wade. I came to similar conclusions. It is a life and it is being terminated for good reason. Pro-life/pro-choice people can't have it both ways.

Honestly I think that is why I am very pleased with Clinton's choice of Kaine. I know that decision making process. It's a very personal choice to make. And it shows a thoughtfulness I rarely see.

Which is one reason why I want to scream at others today who say this is a "meh" or "boring" pick
posted by goalyeehah at 10:15 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


"[Tim Kaine] is ready for the job on Day One...."

tl;dr: shut up donny the grownups are talking now
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:17 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


"While Tim was taking on housing discrimination and homelessness, Donald Trump was denying apartments to people who were African-American."
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:18 AM on July 23, 2016 [51 favorites]


Then they spent time trying to figure out if and to what degree they are related to Kaine by marriage.

Could only be more Virginia if it came with a side of country ham.

(But seriously I had no idea Governor Holton was still alive! Wow.)
posted by sallybrown at 10:19 AM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


Clinton essentially picked Detective Murdoch for VP, and I'm ok with that.
posted by damo at 10:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


I really like how Kaine has a face I don't immediately want to punch.

He's looking around now like he's thinking "oh this is neat!"
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 10:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [31 favorites]


Kaine's obvious joy and enthusiasm for being on this stage with Hillary could not contrast more with Pence's oh-shit-deer-in-the-headlights stare in his rare appearances behind Trump.
posted by the turtle's teeth at 10:29 AM on July 23, 2016 [24 favorites]


"bienvenidos a todos...." oh snap

"compañeros de alma"
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:29 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


someone mentioned in the last thread that Clinton Kaine sounds like a DC comics villain and i can't stop cackling about it

i hope they build a machine to control the earth's weather
posted by poffin boffin at 10:30 AM on July 23, 2016 [24 favorites]


Wait.... Are they gonna go "cool uncle" with this?

Please tell me they're going "he's the cool uncle" with this.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 10:31 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


a machine to control the earth's weather

I don't know what I would do first, fix global warming or make it so that a small angry rain cloud followed Donald Trump around everywhere he went
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:32 AM on July 23, 2016 [21 favorites]


"When Donald Trump says he has your back, you better watch out"

quality line
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:33 AM on July 23, 2016 [21 favorites]


I don't know what I would do first, fix global warming or make it so that a small angry rain cloud followed Donald Trump around everywhere he went

Por qué no los dos?
posted by chainsofreedom at 10:33 AM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


"Hillary Clinton listens to people. What a novel concept."

I'm in. He's good.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:33 AM on July 23, 2016 [24 favorites]


If this was a movie, they would say it was unrealistic. Donald calls for violating NATO and Kaine's son, the Marine, is shipping out to Europe to serve duty under NATO next week.
posted by sallybrown at 10:34 AM on July 23, 2016 [31 favorites]


He said if online harassment doesn't seem like that big a problem to you, well, congratulations on your white penis.

Transphobia is everywhere!
posted by Dysk at 10:34 AM on July 23, 2016


Like... can Tim Kaine be my dad?
posted by the turtle's teeth at 10:35 AM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


Por qué no los dos?

Claro pero the rain cloud wouldn't take that long to whip up
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:35 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


There are Catholics out there that are more in line with the "do good" tenets of Christianity than the legislate morality stuff. My parents are among them, and had a Catholics for Kerry bumper sticker in 2004. My mom volunteered for a candidate running against Tom DeLay. I don't know how many of them are out there, and my parents probably would have voted for Clinton anyway, but a guy like Kaine really does help. (Then again, they are in Texas so not sure how much their particular votes matter.)

I recently got a real punch to the gut when I found out a conservative person I always really respected and admired (the recently-retired CFO of the company I work for) is voting Trump. He is exactly the person I would have thought could see through Trump's bluster about being a good business man. Hell, our company is in the commercial real estate industry! I heard of his voting intentions second-hand, so I didn't hear his reasoning if there was any. But it just makes me so sad every time I think of it. How, how could this kind, generous with his time and talents, smart and financially/business-savvy guy want to vote for Donald Fucking Trump? I just can't wrap my head around it.

And while I have lots of friends posting screenshots of their Hillary donations on Facebook, my cousin also posted in support of Gary Johnson and I have at least one Bernie Bro still talking revolution or write-in votes or whatever. I just don't really know what to think. I know my anecdotal experience is limited in size and scope, but the variety of things I've seen are making it hard for me to get a read on this election. I'm friends with Arun Chaudhary, who was Obama's white house videographer and Bernie Sanders' campaign creative director and photographer, and his posts are scared [paraphrased]"Trump could win, you guys, don't let up on the gas. We can't let that happen."
posted by misskaz at 10:36 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Kaine's son, the Marine, is shipping out to Europe to serve duty under NATO next week.

Lol forever. This guy really does have some great optics going for him.
posted by showbiz_liz at 10:36 AM on July 23, 2016 [26 favorites]


That's, uh, quite the non sequitur you got there.

Only in America can you run a national radio show for 20 years that's somewhere on the dial anywhere in the country and still proclaim that you're not part of the establishment. There's a particular media strand of the American left that promotes an exquisite disappointment with corporatist neo-liberal sellouts who make people's lives better, but not quite as better as they imagine could happen by wishing hard enough.
posted by holgate at 10:37 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Please tell me they're going "he's the cool uncle" with this.
According to Twitter, Tim Kaine's favorite album is the Replacements' Let It Be, so I think he's definitely the cool uncle type, for a certain kind of cool uncle. Maybe he can help with the cool uncle demographic.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 10:37 AM on July 23, 2016 [15 favorites]


> FYI, folks, apropos of Trump's nomination, here is "GOP Lifer" Chris Ladd's resignation letter in full.

That is a hell of a thing.
The Iraq War, the financial meltdown, the utter failure of supply-side theory, climate denial, and our strange pursuit of theocratic legislation have all been troubling. Yet it seemed that America’s party of commerce, trade, and pragmatism might still have time to sober up. Remaining engaged in the party implied a contribution to that renaissance, an investment in hope. Donald Trump has put an end to that hope.

From his fairy-tale wall to his schoolyard bullying and his flirtation with violent racists, Donald Trump offers America a singular narrative – a tale of cowards. Fearful people, convinced of our inadequacy, trembling before a world alight with imaginary threats, crave a demagogue. Neither party has ever elevated to this level a more toxic figure, one that calls forth the darkest elements of our national character.

With three decades invested in the Republican Party, there is a powerful temptation to shrug and soldier on. Despite the bold rhetoric, we all know Trump will lose. Why throw away a great personal investment over one bad nominee? Trump is not merely a poor candidate, but an indictment of our character. Preserving a party is not a morally defensible goal if that party has lost its legitimacy.
posted by rtha at 10:38 AM on July 23, 2016 [37 favorites]


My uncles are Trump supporters :-( So maybe a way different uncle than I am used to.
posted by chainsofreedom at 10:38 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


He's really good.
posted by you're a kitty! at 10:39 AM on July 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


Kaine's son, the Marine, is shipping out to Europe to serve duty under NATO next week.

Lol forever. This guy really does have some great optics going for him.


This will definitely come up in the VP debates....
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:40 AM on July 23, 2016


And reader, I married her.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:41 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Cheerful Kaine
Kind Kaine
Conscientious Kaine
Kairos Kaine
Killin' It Kaine
posted by sallybrown at 10:42 AM on July 23, 2016


I just popped the live stream of the Clinton/Kaine event on. He seems like a pretty good choice, especially when contrasted with the madness of Trump/Pence.
posted by knapah at 10:42 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


This will definitely come up in the VP debates....

Pence's son is also a Marine. There will be tough but very tricky to negotiate questions about "do you support Trump's ideas that could put your sons in danger?" etc.
posted by sallybrown at 10:43 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


He is just SO comfortable in his own skin. It reminds me of interviewing people, when someone walks in who is just calm, confident, in command of the subject, and genuine.
posted by sallybrown at 10:45 AM on July 23, 2016 [17 favorites]


I was googling St. Elizabeth Catholic Church earlier this morning. It's legit multiracial, which is still sadly difficult to find at 11:00 on Sunday mornings:
During 1978, under the pastorship of Fr. Michael Schmied, the sanctuary and the church hall were renovated according to the liturgical restoration called for by Vatican II and new parish ministries began to flourish. The result expressed the needs of a racially and economically diverse Catholic community in an urban neighborhood. Our parish motto of “Unity/Umoja,” which we adopted during this period, expresses our conviction that a multiracial parish family can work together to build God’s Kingdom.
This is a guy with deep and abiding commitment to living out progressive values.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:46 AM on July 23, 2016 [21 favorites]




Tim Kaine's favorite album is the Replacements' Let It Be

I will dare say this is my favorite thing about the election so far.
posted by notyou at 10:47 AM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


I'm interrupting this Tim Kaine Love Fest to bring you news from the dark side. Ivanka. The more you know, the less you like her. Remember how the day after her speech she was hawking the dress she wore? Although it is her line of clothing, it is not her design and it isn't made in America.
Her arrangement with G-iii is also a licensing agreement; the company sells clothes under the Ivanka Trump name, and in return she gets a cut of the profits. (According to Forbes, she has similar deals with Diamond Dynamics LLC for a fine jewelry line; Marc Fisher for a line of shoes; Mondani for a handbag collection; and B. Robinson for a line of eyewear.)

Thanks to her arrangement with G-iii, most of Ivanka's clothing line is manufactured outside the U.S. In March, an economist found that, "Of the 838 Ivanka products advertised through the site, none appear to be made exclusively in the U.S.; 628 are said to be imported and 354 made specifically in China."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 10:47 AM on July 23, 2016 [20 favorites]


"Do all the good you can" is a pretty good slogan. Put it on a shirt.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:49 AM on July 23, 2016 [18 favorites]


My uncles are Trump supporters :-( So maybe a way different uncle than I am used to.

under the clinton/kaine reuncling act you can apply for new cooler uncles
posted by poffin boffin at 10:50 AM on July 23, 2016 [68 favorites]


[A few comments deleted. As above, please don't bring the conspiracy stuff or the people-say-Hillary-has-a-virtue-therefore-it's-a-vice stuff; it just makes conversation about anything else impossible.]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 10:50 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Cheerful Kaine
Kind Kaine
Conscientious Kaine
Kairos Kaine
Killin' It Kaine


Might I suggest:

"Insane in the membrane/
Insane in the Kaine"?

...if the demographic you're really worried about appealing to is people who were stoned teenagers in the early 90s.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 10:50 AM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


Can't speak for anybody else, but I'm already in the tank.
posted by box at 10:53 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Comprehensive immigration reform in first 100 days. (Y en español tambien.) Excellent.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:55 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


"Any of you here naturalized citizens, raise your hand"
(cheering)
"Thanks for choosing us."

THIS is a leader!
posted by yesster at 10:55 AM on July 23, 2016 [66 favorites]


"Who here is a naturalized citizen! yeah! thanks for choosing us!"
posted by you're a kitty! at 10:55 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


THIS IS SO GOOD
posted by you're a kitty! at 10:56 AM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


*raises hand*
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:57 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Very glad he mentioned the first responders at VT. Those people are heroes.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:57 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


This campaign season has so desperately needed someone who looks like he wants to be here, looks like he wants to be talking to people and doesn't see it as a nuisance roadblock to get past before taking office.

While Hillary's good on stage - on target, on message, enthusiastic - the ridiculous overwhelming misogyny means she has to be careful; she can't be relaxed and open no matter how much that would be part of her persona (and after several decades in politics in the deep south, I don't imagine "open and relaxed" is a natural part of her public-facing reality). She needed a VP who can be friendly with the public in ways that she (1) isn't particularly inclined for and (2) would get castigated if she tried.

I don't think we should underestimate how much value there is in the fact that he smiles when he's on stage.

I keep expecting Johnny Depp in a weird hat to step out of the wings and say, "well, you're just happy to be here, aren't you?"
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 11:00 AM on July 23, 2016 [29 favorites]


"Do you want a you're fired president, or a you're hired president?"

Low hanging fruit, but it sounds great.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:00 AM on July 23, 2016 [34 favorites]


Really impressed. Strong pick. Going to play well to my moderate to Republican-lite parents in Indiana demographic.
posted by Sreiny at 11:04 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


I know at least some of this is internalized sexism, but I kind of wish this guy was running for President and not VP.
posted by sallybrown at 11:04 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Wow I was happy with this choice but listening to him speak I am THRILLED.
posted by WordCannon at 11:05 AM on July 23, 2016 [20 favorites]


People. Holy crap. That was good...
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:05 AM on July 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


I was sort of meh on Kaine upthread but this speech is just fantastic. This is a guy I am thrilled to have in our corner.
posted by everybody had matching towels at 11:05 AM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


Sanders is 74. He will (I very much hope) exceed his life expectancy in the next 8 years. Even accounting for the socioeconomic factors that improve his life expectancy, and no current serious health conditions, there is a fairly small, but still significant, chance that he will die in less than 8 years.

Fwiw, 76 years ago the GOP ticket was a businessman with no prior electoral experience (and also a long-term Democrat) paired up with a senator who differed with him on many issues; they were going into an election after two terms of Democratic administration by a popular but divisive president who was well-respected globally. The Republican ticket was Wendell Wilkie and Charles McNary, and it is the last time where both halves of a ticket died before their first term would have been up (McNary following surgery for a brain tumour in early 1944, and Wilkie after a series of heart attacks in October of the same year).
posted by ricochet biscuit at 11:05 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


The always-irascible Jim Wright discusses the VP picks over at Stonekettle Station.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 11:06 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Hillary in the background is all like, "Yeah, this is good..."
posted by Windopaene at 11:06 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


That was great.

She knows what she's doing, y'all
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:07 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


Also someone knows how to pick campaign music.
posted by you're a kitty! at 11:07 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


and THAT donald trump is how you roll out a VP pick
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:07 AM on July 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


Very glad he mentioned the first responders at VT. Those people are heroes.

The Tragedy that Shaped Tim Kaine:
He had just left for a trade mission to Asia. When staff woke him in the middle of the night, just five hours after he landed in Tokyo, he immediately decided to get back to Virginia. ...

Kaine and his staff stayed in Blacksburg for a few days after the shooting, meeting with parents and visiting hospitalized survivors. That’s when he spoke with Goddard, who had been hit by four bullets.

“Gov. Kaine was in Japan and he was actually the first official to make it to my bedside—sooner than anybody from Virginia Tech or anywhere else in the state of Virginia, and he was across the globe,” Goddard said.
This is why I'm hopeful about his stance on business and trade policies - he will set business deals aside to take care of people.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 11:08 AM on July 23, 2016 [29 favorites]


Also please let this be a sign they're changing the post-speech song to "Ain't No Mountain High Enough" and we'll finally hear the end of "Brave."
posted by sallybrown at 11:08 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Wow that was so uplifting and wonderful, it was basically the complete inverse of Trump's doom and gloom horror of a speech. I've felt like shit all week from the RNC and that was seriously the most wonderful palate cleanser. I feel so, so much better.
posted by gatorae at 11:08 AM on July 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


Hillary looks absolutely delighted listening to him speak. They are going to be a great team.
posted by current resident at 11:09 AM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


"What's intriguing is that [Kaine] learned it as a Jesuit missionary in Honduras, taking a year off from Harvard Law School to work with the Jesuit Volunteer Corps ..."
My grandparents, on whose mantel rested portraits of Jack and Bobby along with the ones of Mary and Joseph (and who regarded FDR as only a little lower in the hierarchy), would have shit their pants with glee over this, probably. Then my grandfather would have poured himself a drink and my grandmother would have said a prayer of thanksgiving, then had a drink.
posted by octobersurprise at 11:10 AM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


I mean can you imagine if that lady held up her "No Racism, No Hate" sign during Kaine's speech? He'd be like, "Hi there, I like your sign! What a nice message!" and continue talking because of course a normal person would do that.
posted by gatorae at 11:14 AM on July 23, 2016 [49 favorites]


Remember how the day after her speech she was hawking the dress she wore? Although it is her line of clothing, it is not her design and it isn't made in America.

Just like her dear papa.
posted by qcubed at 11:14 AM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


"Any of you here naturalized citizens, raise your hand"
(cheering)
"Thanks for choosing us."


For anyone who watched the GOP convention in or near its frightening entirety, this is one hell of a palate cleanser.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 11:15 AM on July 23, 2016 [38 favorites]


Amy goodman I like you but come on...
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:15 AM on July 23, 2016


Terry mcauliffe: "there is an assault on LGBT people in this country"

THANK YOU
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:18 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


@HillaryClinton: cover photo of her and Tim Kaine facing a cheering crowd
@timkaine: same pic

@realDonaldTrump: horrible photoshopped nonsense
@mike_pence: some other horrible photoshopped nonsense

(bonus: @mikepence: heh)
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm progressive left and I totally support Clinton and Kaine. I'm a secular humanist and I totally support Clinton and Kaine. I want universal health care, I want strong state regulations of industry, I deeply believe that government can be a part of the solution. I also understand that we exist in a Democracy and that no politicians are going to give me 100% of what I want. The name if the game is coalition building.

Apparently I am Vuron.
posted by Superplin at 11:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


I wonder where he'll do his first campaign events after the convention: back to Virginia first, but perhaps Kansas City, where he's from, just to show that Missouri is considered winnable? North Carolina? I can see him playing very well in purple states that have had to deal with shitty governors and especially shitty legislatures over recent years, just because he projects a basic decency.

And I also think we got a preview of the convention: it's going to be seasoned with Trump-bashing -- very much focused on who Trump has bashed over his life, not the vulgarian himself -- but the grand theme will be "hate and distrust are choices you don't have to make".
posted by holgate at 11:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Tim Kaine is awesome. He's been a driving force behind making Virginia into a purple state, from its former red status.
The claim that he is anti-Union is bullshit. He has a 94% rating from the AFLCIO.
posted by humanfont at 11:20 AM on July 23, 2016 [19 favorites]


I consider it a good sign that after watching Kaine speak and seeing him with Clinton I feel somewhere between very and completely reassured that everything is somehow going to be ok.
posted by an animate objects at 11:23 AM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


If only this decade could be a final tour for the Traditional White Parental Figures in Charge Of Everything before they hand it off to their gender bent hyper woke mixed race kids.
posted by an animate objects at 11:25 AM on July 23, 2016 [18 favorites]


@HillaryClinton: cover photo of her and Tim Kaine facing a cheering crowd
@timkaine: same pic

@realDonaldTrump: horrible photoshopped nonsense
@mike_pence: some other horrible photoshopped nonsense


Also: Clinton and Kaine's pic shows them in the distance, from behind; what you see is the crowd. The only reason you can spot them at all, is that there's a space cleared around them.

Trump's and Pence's pics show the two of them in front of a flag (or rather, waving-flag-based art; wouldn't want an actual flag to distract from their glorious selves) - no other people.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 11:25 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


The claim that he is anti-Union is bullshit. He has a 94% rating from the AFLCIO.

He supported right to work laws. I don't need an AFLCIO score sheet to tell me where that means he stands on unions.
posted by dis_integration at 11:30 AM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


the drop shadows on Trump's cover photo though

someone get meredith off the social media team
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:30 AM on July 23, 2016 [17 favorites]


Kaine needs to get up here to Western PA, stat. Heavily Catholic and, outside of Pittsburgh, economically depressed and favorable towards Trump. I'd love to see him come to Pittsburgh to preach to us already in the choir then make the rounds of Mon and Ohio Valley steel towns for town halls.
posted by soren_lorensen at 11:31 AM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


Trump can't even figure out how to hire a competent photographer, graphic designer or social media specialist while he's running specifically on the plank of having a singular talent for surrounding himself with competent people to process his decisions for him.

Even if you're a middle class white supremacist dominionist with a toupee fetish I can't see how you could be ok with this.
posted by an animate objects at 11:32 AM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


After watching that speech, I don't think he's boring at all. I think Kaine is going to energize the heck out of a lot of stalwart Democrats whose enthusiasm has been dampened by the personality politics and left vs. center politics of the day. It does not surprise me that he's never lost an election. He seems like he came out of the womb with a (D) next to his name.
posted by billyfleetwood at 11:34 AM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


Sorry to ask but does anybody have a link to the speech? I unfortunately missed it live.
posted by birdheist at 11:35 AM on July 23, 2016


The lower classes really don't care as much about graphic design, or care in orthogonal ways, compared to the aspirational upper-middle class. Remember when it was still MySpace for the lower class, Facebook for the upper class, and most MySpaces were blinged out as fuck?
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 11:36 AM on July 23, 2016


Trump can't even spell Wikileaks
posted by an animate objects at 11:37 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


My politics are complicated, but I'm pretty left and have met up with and investigated Socialist groups over the years. All of my research reached a dead end when I asked "what are they doing?". The answer (from Leftie's) was "they mostly fight each other about who's less wrong". One party has on their site that they're not really interested in winning elections, their role is theoretical and educational. I admired their honesty.

This is the question I have for those that argue against Clinton; How do you propose to have a party that has a purity test so strict that Clinton or Kaine cannot pass it, yet convince a majority of the people in the country to vote for it, and then govern effectively? HOW, exactly is this going to happen?

If you can't answer that then admit that you're not interested in actual governance and your role is simply theoretical and educational. Be honest.

I'm not proposing that there is no place for the far Left discussion. I still subscribe to newsletters and am still interested. I will work for Left issues. But elections are the real world and I'll be happily voting for Clinton. When the waiter asks "Chicken or steak?" and you proudly and defiantly yell "I wanted fish!" the rest of the room is not thinking "What a principled person".
posted by bongo_x at 11:39 AM on July 23, 2016 [61 favorites]


Kaine's support of right to work laws consisted of saying he did not oppose the law already in place in VA, which would not have been in his power to change anyway. Here's a relevant politifact article and quote from a labor leader on why they consider him an ally:

"The political climate and large support in the state for right-to-work probably account for Kaine's occasional pro-right to work statements," Semmens told us in an e-mail. "Recognizing the reality that Virginia's right to work is too popular to repeal is not the same as real support. After he got in office, I don’t think he gave us that much trouble, but I expect that was because [Virginia]’s political climate didn’t allow him to do so."
posted by Potomac Avenue at 11:40 AM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


Apparently I am Vuron.

╔═════════════════════╗
║        vuron        ║
║           4         ║
║         mefi        ║
║       prez          ║
╚═════════════════════╝

posted by Talez at 11:40 AM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]




I have to say, I am awfully tired of having any possible complaint about a politician like Kaine be met with snide jokes about ideological purity, and statements about how the alternative is literal fascism. Ok, yeah, but imagine for a moment that I'm going to vote D no matter what. I still deserve to have reservations about the party I'm voting for. I still get to say that I'm frustrated with Kaine's support of TPP. It's not an argument against voting for him, but what, does that mean there's nothing at all to say about it? Almost no one in this thread isn't voting for Clinton. Why are we acting like the only reason to have any complaint or reservation is if you think she's the wrong choice?
posted by teponaztli at 11:40 AM on July 23, 2016 [27 favorites]


The lower classes really don't care as much about graphic design, or care in orthogonal ways, compared to the aspirational upper-middle class. Remember when it was still MySpace for the lower class, Facebook for the upper class, and most MySpaces were blinged out as fuck?

Moreover I see a deeply ingrained fetishization for the harsh and grotesque in life that for various reasons (not all their fault) the class of people who gravitate to Trump have come to deeply identify with.

It's actually kind of a bitch to be deeply "uncool" in a culture full of beautiful, talented people. I would imagine that Good Design™ represents a sort of antipathy towards rural Americans who lack the cultural and infrastructural capital to keep up with it.
posted by an animate objects at 11:41 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


I'm watching the video now and god I feel so much better. It's been a looooonnnnngggg week.
posted by dness2 at 11:42 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Could only be more Virginia if it came with a side of country ham.

Heck, they'd be inclined to defend their honor as Virginians at the scurrilous suggestion they could be more Virginian.
posted by mwhybark at 11:43 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trump can't even spell Wikileaks

He spells it "Wikileakes" for anyone who doesn't want to click on his twitter feed. He also accuses her of killing jobs in three tweets in a row, subtle nod to the conspiracy theorists. And he does good grammar, the best: "Funny that the Democrats would have their convention in Pennsylvania where her husband and her killed so many jobs".
posted by peeedro at 11:46 AM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


CSPAN 1 is replaying the speech now.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 11:52 AM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


I don't fault Trump and Pence for having poorly-photoshopped pictures on their twitter pages. I am willing to accept "cutting-edge social media presentation is not an important part of our platform" as a reasonable stance.

However, it is meaningful that they don't have pictures of the two of them together - that they don't look like a team, don't have any history of working together or supporting each other in the past. And it is meaningful that they've chosen solo, Hollywood-esque Lone Hero shots (or: Lone Hero + Sidekick shots), rather than anything that places them in a community.

If they had a poorly-photoshopped pic of the two of them smiling and waving at the RNC, that'd be better. If they showed them meeting and shaking hands, photoshopped onto a background of, I dunno, maybe a staged city hall setting, showing how they're going to fix business in America, that'd at least somewhat convey the message that they actually give a damn about the people they want to vote for them.

What they've chosen to put in the pictures is a lot more important than the editing quality.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 11:52 AM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


GhostintheMachine I can understand this, and I basically agree with it. But what I can't understand is someone thinking this, being unsatisfied with Clinton/Kaine, and choosing to vote for the richest, biggest thief instead. If you wanted to imagine someone who has spent their entire life wallowing in excess and luxury they'd never live long enough to spend it all, Trump is the perfect example.

I'm in full agreement.

But I'm baffled and annoyed by the people who insist that we're all on a lovely journey together and that what we really need is to just be nice and friendly.

The money hoarding sociopaths are the enemy. Saying that apparently causes some of my fellow Democrats a great deal of discomfort. They seem to believe that correctly and accurately identifying the people who are really doing economic harm to me and mine is the basically the same sort of thing as the rabble rousing racist demagoguery Trump indulges in.

I find this to be a false equivilance of the highest order and I'm deeply disturbed that apparently a whole lot of people in "my" party are essentially opposed to actually solving the problem of economic injustice.

Because we aren't all in this together. The rich people are stealing from everyone else, that's why they're rich. I'm not in this with them, I'm their victim. And I don't like being told that if I can't or won't just put aside the harm they have done to me and mine that somehow I'm the bad guy.

Which is why Tim Kaine and Hillary Clinton don't really get me fired up. When it comes to economic issues they're not just on the side of the bad guys they **ARE** the bad guys. They're from the nicer, not quite so sociopathic and greedy subgrouping of rich scumbags, but at heart they can't avoid identifying with the very rich because they are the very rich.

As noted, I'll vote for them, I'll volunteer for them, and I want them to win because they're so vastly better than Trump that their superiority to him can't be overstated.

And because on social issues we're mostly on the same side.

But as part of the deal that makes me a member of the Democratic party, I reserve the right to talk about their shortcomings in other areas. I reserve the right to protest, agitate, run primary challenges against the economic bad actors in the Democratic party, and to be sharply critical of President Clinton and Vice President Kaine when they're elected.

That's what comes along with my vote, my money, and my labor.
posted by sotonohito at 11:56 AM on July 23, 2016 [44 favorites]


And all that said, **DAMN** did Clinton just show America how it's done.

It was an excellent speech and event even taken in isolation. When compared to Trump's godawful ego fest and visibly reluctant VP it makes Clinton and Kaine look like unto gods.
posted by sotonohito at 11:57 AM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


Jesuits invented Social Justice and coined the phrase Knowledge is Power. They also have the best schools!
posted by plexi at 11:58 AM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]




Which is why Tim Kaine and Hillary Clinton don't really get me fired up. When it comes to economic issues they're not just on the side of the bad guys they **ARE** the bad guys.

I think those of us in the rest of the world looking on from the sidelines really really disagree with this sentiment. We're all counting on you to not help vote Trump in in November. We're talking World War III, here. This is the most important American election of my lifetime, save for 2004, when you guys voted that charlatan Bush back in again.

The worst possible outcome happened then, don't let it happen again.
posted by My Dad at 12:05 PM on July 23, 2016 [21 favorites]


The rich people are stealing from everyone else, that's why they're rich.
And Dishonest Donald Trump is America's Poster Boy for "stealing from everyone else". Only his general incompetence has prevented him from benefiting more from the currently unfair system. He's not fighting against the System, he's fighting to make the System more Trump-friendly.

For you poor deluded souls who feel that Trump's "Anti-Big-Bank" rhetoric actually means some kind of "economic populism", let me inform you that the Big Bad U.S. Banks have not wanted to do business with him for years after he provided several of the bad debts that pushed them into 'needing bailouts' status. (ALL his banking is currently dome with DeutcheBank, yep, a German Bank... he's certainly not following Brexit out of the EU) Trump's Economic Policies are "Whatever is good for ME and my friends and BAD for my enemies". (And I'll give you a tip, "the Average Americans" are not among his friends) The Big Bad U.S. Banks are his personal enemies and one of his BFFs is PayPal's Peter Thiel. Personally, I have two credit cards with Big Bad Banks, Chase and Bank of America, with APRs of 18.24% and 16.24% ...surprisingly not bad, considering my not-quite-credit-worthiness, especially not bad compared with my credit line with PayPal: 26.99%. And PP just sent me a plastic card, obviously in preparation for when Friend Donald screws over the Big Bad Banks and they have to sell off their card business to Thiel&Co. Not something anybody complaining about an 18% APR should look forward to. If he were minimally honest (which he isn't), Trumps banking policy is "Break up the Biggest Banks and let a thousand Payday Lenders Bloom".

If you're saving/investing for retirement, you'll have the two months between his victory and coronation to move all your assets to "Trump-friendly" entities, otherwise, yes, you'll survive his rule, but you'll have to postpone your retirement for as long as he's in charge.
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:05 PM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


I am actually looking forward to the DNC now, rather than just cowering after the dystopian bleakness of last week. If this was an amuse-bouche, it's going to be a delicious menu and I'm ready to gorge myself on cooperation and optimism.
posted by Superplin at 12:05 PM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


When it comes to economic issues they're not just on the side of the bad guys they **ARE** the bad guys. They're from the nicer, not quite so sociopathic and greedy subgrouping of rich scumbags, but at heart they can't avoid identifying with the very rich because they are the very rich.

Clinton and Kaine both have negatives on economic issues, but the platform is full of language about making banks and businesses and the rich pay more taxes, Wall Street reform, labor rights, and campaign finance reform. I'm just not convinced it's all a big load of bullshit that they have no intention of following through on.

I'm legit interested to see what Warren and Sanders say at the DNC.
posted by showbiz_liz at 12:06 PM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


> Jesuits invented Social Justice and coined the phrase Knowledge is Power. They also have the best schools!

The Jesuits created the Wharton School of Business?
posted by Spathe Cadet at 12:06 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Watching Kaine's speech now. He's definitely very charismatic. He's so at ease and comes off as natural, and seems to know how to work a crowd.

While I'm certainly not in 100% agreement with every single one of his views, I think his record is solid. I think he's a good pick.

And the fact that he loves The Replacements is pretty fucking rad. Heh.
posted by defenestration at 12:09 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


I get the feeling that Clinton genuinely admires and respects him, too. I think that's cool.
posted by defenestration at 12:10 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


The GOP Is a Dying Party. That’s Why I’m Running Against Trump. (Gary Johnson on Politico, July 19, 2016)
Subtitle/tagline: My Libertarian Party running mate, Bill Weld, is also a vastly better choice than Mike Pence.
...
This is a decisive moment in the history of party politics in America. In the period leading up to the Civil War, American politics was dominated by a Democratic Party and the Whig Party. The controversy over slavery split the Whigs, and the party embraced nativism, opposing immigration and members of certain religious faiths.

The Republican Party is on its way to becoming like the Whigs. The Whigs died, then a new party came forward with an inspiring and positive vision for America.

We in the Libertarian Party hope to do the same. We start out from a fundamental premise: As Americans, we believe in freedom. Every individual has dignity and is worthy of civility and respect. The core of our character is one of generous and enlightened self-interest: Every man and woman has the right to choose what to do with their time, their talents and their lives.
...
The bit about the GOP becoming the next Whigs was interesting, but it's not a new idea by any means (Town Hall article from 2012).
posted by filthy light thief at 12:11 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Every time someone raises class-wise criticisms of the status quo a bunch of people jump in to raise hell about Trump and ignore "I'll vote for them, I'll volunteer for them, and I want them to win because they're so vastly better than Trump" part.

Why is this?
posted by an animate objects at 12:11 PM on July 23, 2016 [17 favorites]


As a Cuban-American, let me tell you what hearing Tim Kaine speak today meant for me.

Wait, let me take a few steps back. I was always raised to believe that Cubans were the model Hispanic minority. We had higher rates of education, higher rates of homeownership and were less likely to need public assistance than other Hispanic groups. (As an aside, I will say that I think most of the better numbers are due to the much, much easier path to citizenship.) Most all of the Cubans around me owned businesses or had some sort of lucrative side hustle. Some of my father’s high school friends became highly placed executives at major US companies and we were taught to admire that (with mixed results). I was told constantly that Cubans are resourceful. Cubans are creative. Cubans are great dancers and make the best music...and so on. I bonded with my Afghan friends about how much we hated communism. Essentially, I thought of the Cuban-American community as fully melted into the US melting pot.

So with this election I was pretty excited to see a Cuban and a half-Cuban run, though I had no intention of voting for either. Most people don’t seem to know too much about Cuban people so I expected news pieces about the community and maybe the off chance that Cuban crackers would find their true place at the American breakfast table.

Instead, white supremacist groups said that Marco Rubio was unfit to lead because of his ethnic background, plus ethnic slurs that I hadn’t heard in years. The Republican nominee is questioning Ted Cruz’s Cuban Dad’s connection to the Kennedy assassination, which is just…wtf. I was listening to NPR about a focus group of undecideds and one of the panelists spoke about wanting “to get Mexicans out of America”. Which as a person who identifies as Hispanic is completely chilling to hear on the drive to work.

I love this country and I would not leave unless I expected real danger. However, after watching the RNC this past week I keep thinking about Elie Wiesel’s book Night, especially the part about how the leaders in Wiesel’s Hungarian town didn’t encourage people to leave until it was too late to escape. Cubans in America know about packing up all of your possessions and getting the hell out of a bad situation. There is a large part of me that thinks that this is a huge hyperbole, but there is another part that is thinking that I shouldn’t replace my car this year and save as much as I can because you never know.

So, it’s been a dark few days for me. I listened to Tim Kaine’s speech while driving home from grocery shopping today with with my daughter. Hearing him address the crowd in Spanish to say that Latin values are American values, it just broke something down emotionally inside of me, and I do not consider myself to be an emotional person. I’ve been genuinely scared about what is coming, and this is the first time in a while that I’ve felt like there are other people ready to fight this, who won’t stand for this crap. I feel ready to fight, too.

So, please, if you are in a swing state please understand how much your vote means to me, my family and so many other people who cannot afford to "ride out" a Trump administration. I will be knocking on doors and yelling in the streets because I can’t let the bad guys win.
posted by Alison at 12:12 PM on July 23, 2016 [211 favorites]


i supported Bernie in the primaries because I believe economic injustice is a grave threat. I do not believe it is the gravest threat that shall supersede all threats. I believe it is intersectional to race and gender. I knew Bernie was going to lose the primary when he began trying to roll up all evils under economic injustice. The world is a hell of a lot more complicated than that and require explicit solutions besides "if we solve economic injustice then we will automatically solve for all" because that is a reductive view of the world that erases people who are explicitly oppressed by gender and race outside the structural oppression of economic injustice.

So I understand there are leftists who have hurt feelings over this but it is not a problem with politics it is a refusal to incorporate a more intersectional view of the world. At this point that's on you to figure out.

I'm ready to work on economic injustice but y'all on the more activist side of that discussion need to be willing to make all other oppressions explicit and relative to the effort of fighting economic injustice as opposed to placing other structural oppressions hierarchically beneath economic injustice before any real progress is going to get made on this front.
posted by Annika Cicada at 12:13 PM on July 23, 2016 [52 favorites]


And related: Bill Weld's Libertarian Conversion (New Yorker, June 4, 2016)
...
During his long career, Weld has often projected a sense that he acts on principle, without regard for the consequences. In the early nineteen-seventies, as a counsel with the House Judiciary Committee, he worked on the impeachment of his own party’s President. A few years later, as a U.S. Attorney, he tried to take down the mayor of Boston. In 1988, he resigned from a position in the Justice Department in protest against Ed Meese, who was then the Attorney General. At the 1996 Republican National Convention, he fought a losing battle to remove pro-life language from the Party platform. In 2008, he endorsed Barack Obama for President. And now, at age seventy, he’s joined the Presidential ticket of a party to which he’s never belonged.

Weld is hardly a perfect fit for the Libertarian Party....
posted by filthy light thief at 12:13 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Why is this?

Putin / RT black ops online comment troll army? Closet Blairites? Other forces of reactionary darkness?

Or is this a trick question?
posted by My Dad at 12:13 PM on July 23, 2016


i supported Bernie in the primaries because I believe economic injustice is a grave threat. I do not believe it is the gravest threat that shall supersede all threats. I believe it is intersectional to race and gender.

Thank you. Thank you, thank you. Can I quote you?
posted by chainsofreedom at 12:15 PM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


So, it’s been a dark few days for me. I listened to Tim Kaine’s speech while driving home from grocery shopping today with with my daughter. Hearing him address the crowd in Spanish to say that Latin values are American values, it just broke something down emotionally inside of me, and I do not consider myself to be an emotional person. I’ve been genuinely scared about what is coming, and this is the first time in a while that I’ve felt like there are other people ready to fight this, who won’t stand for this crap. I feel ready to fight, too.

Damn. I've heard a couple (white) people ask whether picking a Spanish-speaking VP won't just be seen as lame pandering by Hispanics. I'm going to send them all a link to this post if you don't mind.
posted by showbiz_liz at 12:19 PM on July 23, 2016 [18 favorites]


Like Kaine, I attended a Jesuit high school, but as a 'non-Cath' (the 10% of its student body not totally Catholic). It was where this White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Straight Male experienced discrimination for the first time in his life (although not as bad as it could have been). And it was where I made my first Jewish friends and learned why Non-Whites tend to stick together. We also had Religion classes as part of the required curriculum, and in my second year, I was in a class taught by a ('70s version of) a very Social Justice-minded Jesuit Brother, he was heckled from a large part of the class. I've never seen a teacher less respected by students. I learned a lot in a Jesuit High School; not necessarily what they were TRYING to teach.
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:19 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Every time someone raises class-wise criticisms of the status quo a bunch of people jump in to raise hell about Trump and ignore "I'll vote for them, I'll volunteer for them, and I want them to win because they're so vastly better than Trump" part.
Why is this?


Because some people ASSUME that they all are saying "I want them to win because they're so vastly better than Trump" but a scary number of them are NOT.

And "Trump is bad but we'll survive" is delusional. THOSE people will help Dishonest Donald get elected.
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:23 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


I have to say, I am awfully tired of having any possible complaint about a politician like Kaine be met with snide jokes about ideological purity,

That seems to suggest that only you are entitled to express yourself. as if your criticism is the only legitimate point of view and those pushing back against your criticism are just snide, snarky, jackassss. As a Hillary supporter this seems to reflect a pattern among her critics. I hope you didn't mean it that way.
posted by humanfont at 12:23 PM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


From This Month's BEST Convention in San Diego, BEST. COSPLAY. EVER.
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:28 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


So, please, if you are in a swing state please understand how much your vote means to me, my family and so many other people who cannot afford to "ride out" a Trump administration.

Alison, that was really beautiful. I wish there was an easy way to share this great comment with everyone I know!
posted by sallybrown at 12:35 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


Why is it when people chant "USA" at the Clinton/Kaine rally it doesn't sound hateful or like a threat?
posted by bongo_x at 12:36 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


BEST. COSPLAY. EVER.

Nope. /derail

posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 12:37 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Why is it when people chant "USA" at the Clinton/Kaine rally it doesn't sound hateful or like a threat?
it doesn't?
posted by andrewcooke at 12:43 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


i guess because you think the people chanting are on your side.
posted by andrewcooke at 12:44 PM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


"Insane in the membrane/
Insane in the Kaine"?
by Cypress Hillary of course (not my joke, I saw it on twitter somewhere)
posted by idiopath at 12:45 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


As a Sanders supporter, I'm so tired of "get over it" and "grow up" coming from the Hillary faithful. I've started unfriending those people on Facebook. Every time someone parrots this message, another Sanders progressive somewhere digs down a little further in their conviction to spite-vote for Trump. It's counter-productive.

There are better ways to bring Sanders progressives back into Democratic fold. Focus on the consequences of a Trump presidency. Focus on the supreme court. Make the case that yes, even though Sanders isn't going to be president, the beautiful movement he's built can and will continue to push for progress at a grass-roots level under a Clinton presidency. Focus on the fact that voting for "burn it to the ground" will obliterate hard-won progressive achievements going all the way back to FDR. Be patient and respectful, as one should always be when attempting to persuade someone who doesn't share your viewpoint.

I don't know much about Kaine beyond what I've read in this thread, but I like him already. He seems like a solid choice to bring on board some of the moderate Republicans who can't stomach Trump; I'm thinking specifically of the Mormons on my Facebook feed, who lately have switched over to Gary Johnson because Trump is so abhorrent to them.
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 12:45 PM on July 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


Why is it when people chant "USA" at the Clinton/Kaine rally it doesn't sound hateful or like a threat?

Probably because they were smiling and laughing while chanting, instead of foaming at the mouth with fear and rage?
posted by the turtle's teeth at 12:46 PM on July 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


Alison, that was really beautiful. I wish there was an easy way to share this great comment with everyone I know!
posted by sallybrown


You could post it on twitter and face, I would love her comment on my newsfeed instead of... everything else?
posted by plexi at 12:47 PM on July 23, 2016


i guess because you think the people chanting are on your side.

I guess because I think it sounds inclusive and not exclusive. Could just be me.
posted by bongo_x at 12:47 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


Every time someone parrots this message, another Sanders progressive somewhere digs down a little further in their conviction to spite-vote for Trump

posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 2:45 PM on July 23


that's 100% on you and has nothing to do with anyone else
posted by plexi at 12:49 PM on July 23, 2016 [27 favorites]


I have learned the hard lesson that engaging with people who still think voting for Clinton means you're a sellout with no real progressive values is a recipe for nothing but personal frustration. If I thought for a second that these people didn't already know the consequences of a Trump presidency, I might bother, but they have made it very clear to me that they already know and think their personal convictions are more important.
posted by showbiz_liz at 12:52 PM on July 23, 2016 [36 favorites]


Every time someone raises class-wise criticisms of the status quo a bunch of people jump in to raise hell about Trump... Why is this?

Because American class politics has always been subsumed in American racial and cultural politics. This isn't simply the Thomas Frank Kansas argument: it's structural.

Housing discrimination is a big reason why white American families have net monetary worth acquired in many instances through inherited multi-generational government subsidy, when black and Hispanic families do not. Housing discrimination is why cities like St Louis and St Paul are surrounded by little municipalities that pay their bills on stopping and fining black people for trivial shit.

Picking a VP candidate who can talk of personal experience getting justice against shitty landlords who either wouldn't rent to African-Americans or stuck them in segregated housing is probably useful against a presidential candidate who wouldn't rent to African-Americans or stuck them in segregated housing.
posted by holgate at 12:54 PM on July 23, 2016 [30 favorites]


I guess because I think it sounds inclusive and not exclusive. Could just be me.

There's a very clear difference between patriotism and nationalism, pride in yourself and those around you versus seeing yourself as superior to others. The GOP just spent four days vilifying not just the rest of the world, but even many of their own countrymen and -women. Clinton and Kaine didn't.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:54 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Best Trump cosplay.
posted by stet at 12:55 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


I've been feeling kind of down after following along with the RNC and Trump's terrifying speech. That Tim Kaine speech just improved my mood so much! So inclusive and positive, it's just what America needed to hear I think.
posted by SarahElizaP at 12:56 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


I have learned the hard lesson that engaging with people who still think voting for Clinton means you're a sellout with no real progressive values is a recipe for nothing but personal frustration. If I thought for a second that these people didn't already know the consequences of a Trump presidency, I might bother, but they have made it very clear to me that they already know and think their personal convictions are more important.

They're almost always white. Usually in liberal city enclaves if they even live in a conservative state. There is no consequence for a Trump presidency for a lot of them and even if they are in the backwoods they can still fake the shibboleth.
posted by Talez at 12:56 PM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


Yeah, I think qxntpqbbbqxl does have a point, made well. I've seen Clinton supporters on Facebook saying "grow up" and "get over it" and even though I'm pretty sure they're talking to their millenial kids' friends, I feel a bit insulted myself. What qxntpqbbbqxl suggests IS more productive. I really do hope the Bernie supporters do start a new progressive movement.

And yes, I am going to canvas for Hillary.

(And it turns out I partied with Tim Kaine on election night 2008 in Richmond, Va! I had gone down with friends to GOTV for Obama, so I wasn't too familar with Virginia politics. We were invited to Kaine's election party and that's where we were when we found out Obama won.)
posted by maggiemaggie at 12:56 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


When I hear Amy Goodman on NPR after Tim Kaine's speech focusing on the particulars of the TPP but can't be arsed enough to say "but hey, whatever we've got to do to save a generation of trans children from being eliminated by the right wing, Let's do it" I feel like, okay anti-capitalists, I'm here actively listening to you but are you actively listening to me?
posted by Annika Cicada at 12:58 PM on July 23, 2016 [44 favorites]


I've seen Clinton supporters on Facebook saying "grow up" and "get over it" and even though I'm pretty sure they're talking to their millenial kids' friends, I feel a bit insulted myself.

I think I've spotted the problem. I agree and sympathize, which is why I'm not on Facebook.
posted by bongo_x at 1:00 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


> it doesn't sound hateful or like a threat

I think it doesn't sound that way because the people doing it don't believe hateful and threatening things.
posted by a mirror and an encyclopedia at 1:00 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Every time someone parrots this message, another Sanders progressive somewhere digs down a little further in their conviction to spite-vote for Trump

posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 2:45 PM on July 23

plexi: that's 100% on you and has nothing to do with anyone else


See, that's what I'm talking about. Just to clarify, I'm not spite-voting for Trump, although I understand the impulse to do so. I'll be out in the streets for Hillary even though she's not who I would have chosen, for all of the reasons I mentioned.
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 1:04 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


even though Sanders isn't going to be president, the beautiful movement he's built can and will continue to push for progress

Here's the difference between real progressives and Sanders-dead-enders.

We don't think he built this beautiful movement. It was here before he threw his hat into the ring last fall, and it will be here long after he has left public service.

Follow the movement, not the man.
posted by tivalasvegas at 1:04 PM on July 23, 2016 [58 favorites]


Every time someone parrots this message, another Sanders progressive somewhere digs down a little further in their conviction to spite-vote for Trump. It's counter-productive.

I hear you, but the Democratic platform includes a lot of Sanders' positions. It does not include every single one of them, and that's okay. That's compromise. It's incredibly frustrating to continually hear Sanders' supporters freak out over every move that isn't 100% in line with what he was advocating for. Personally, I haven't heard any Clinton supporters expressing anything like "get over it" and "grow up," just frustration that the platform includes a lot of Sanders positions and Warren and Sanders have both endorsed Clinton, yet some Sanders supporters still threaten to not only withhold support but vote for Trump because she isn't 100% perfect. It's exhausting.
posted by everybody had matching towels at 1:05 PM on July 23, 2016 [30 favorites]


My Mom has been super doom and gloom since Thursday after watching parts of the RNC Convention. Like depressed and scared doom and gloom because after watching Trump she was all omg he's going to win and it's all going to be bad. I did my best talking to her about how it's too soon and how American elections work etc etc. I also had a long talk about self care and trying to not get so invested in an election that we have absolutely no control over. (We're Canadian). I'm losing that battle unfortunately.

Anyways it pains me to see her so upset and worried. So after watching Kaine's speech and wandered downstairs and got her linked to the video.

Regardless of whatever else is going on and disagreements about his and Hillary's politics, I think this guy has something that this election needs. Trump has made it clear that he is playing his campaign entirely on negative emotion and fear, policy and platforms be dammed. Part of stopping him is countering his emotional appeal. Countering all the negative fear and crap that's come and will come.

I've never really heard about this guy or ever watched him before today. He made me 'feel' better and less worried. And even better he made my Mom feel so much better and more optimistic. He came off really well in this regard.

I think this aspect of him is going to play a really important and necessary role in the coming months.
posted by Jalliah at 1:07 PM on July 23, 2016 [32 favorites]


The money hoarding sociopaths are the enemy. Saying that apparently causes some of my fellow Democrats a great deal of discomfort. They seem to believe that correctly and accurately identifying the people who are really doing economic harm to me and mine is the basically the same sort of thing as the rabble rousing racist demagoguery Trump indulges in.

I just realize that what, 98.5% of the country isn't on the same page as I am, and when elections come around, the masses aren't going to be picking the best choice available.

But at the presidential level, the way our elections are structured either Clinton or Trump is taking office next year.

Complaining about Clinton and/or Kaine is missing the forest fire for the trees.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 1:07 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Annika Cicada: i supported Bernie in the primaries because I believe economic injustice is a grave threat. I do not believe it is the gravest threat that shall supersede all threats. I believe it is intersectional to race and gender.

Exactly why I switched my support from Sanders to Clinton, unexpectedly and at first very grudgingly. The more I learned, the more I realized she shared most of my core priorities, and felt she could be persuaded to shift her stance on those that I find problematic, with the right pressure.

I'm ready to get to work on downballot races and midterm elections to exercise that pressure.
posted by Superplin at 1:07 PM on July 23, 2016 [17 favorites]


Several Sanders supporters have explicitly said in this thread that they are definitely going to vote for Clinton and most likely canvas for her, and people are still taking jabs.
posted by maggiemaggie at 1:08 PM on July 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


*torn between wanting future election thread titles to continue with the Hamilton theme or for them to be related to Replacements songs*
posted by Joey Michaels at 1:09 PM on July 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


I see people taking jabs at the people who have said they are NOT going to do those things. Who in this thread is telling Clinton-voting Sanders supporters to go to hell? I just don't see it.
posted by showbiz_liz at 1:11 PM on July 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


And to add the specific answer: "I'll vote for them, I'll volunteer for them" is fantastic and important, but there's a reason why a class-based analysis that's semi-detached from racial and cultural baggage doesn't get the traction that its advocates might hope for and expect. There really are white people on $9/hr who've been persuaded to oppose a $10/hr minimum wage based on how it would redefine their relationship with non-white people currently on $8/hr.
posted by holgate at 1:14 PM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


It's incredibly frustrating to continually hear Sanders' supporters freak out over every move that isn't 100% in line with what he was advocating for.

That's the confusing part to me; Sanders did not support 100% of my positions, or even 99%, he was a compromise, yet I voted for him. That's how it works. Sanders was not the be-all and end-all of Left politics.
posted by bongo_x at 1:15 PM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


...people are still taking jabs.

I honestly haven't seen anyone taking jabs at people here, people openly talking about their understandably complicated feelings about having a candidate they have reservations about. The jabs are all directed at the smug inconvincible burn-it-all-down people we've all seen on social media.
posted by neroli at 1:16 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


That seems to suggest that only you are entitled to express yourself. as if your criticism is the only legitimate point of view and those pushing back against your criticism are just snide, snarky, jackassss. As a Hillary supporter this seems to reflect a pattern among her critics. I hope you didn't mean it that way.

What? No, that's not at all what I meant. I'm frustrated because I would like to be able to talk about issues within the party without having it be treated as stumping for Trump. I'm frustrated with snarky jokes because I'm tired of the snarky jokes, not because I think that's what all responses are like. I just... I can't even.
posted by teponaztli at 1:16 PM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


*torn between wanting future election thread titles to continue with the Hamilton theme or for them to be related to Replacements songs*
  • I Will Dare
  • We're Comin' Out
  • Left of the Dial
  • Can't Hardly Wait
  • Talent Show
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 1:19 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


There are better ways to bring Sanders progressives back into Democratic fold. Focus on the consequences of a Trump presidency. Focus on the supreme court.

I guess my question is why haven't these generally smart and well-educated progressives been able to do that for themselves already? Plenty of people in this very thread, and in every past election thread, have told us just what a Trump presidency would mean personally to them. They've told us this in ways that make me profoundly embarrassed that the people I share a country and an online community with have to deal such things.

It's not that hard to listen to these people and understand that accelerationist and/or left purity arguments come from an incredibly privileged place. Obviously you've listened qxntpqbbbqxl and internalized that, but why aren't more people able to do that?
posted by zachlipton at 1:19 PM on July 23, 2016 [18 favorites]


I'm frustrated because I would like to be able to talk about issues within the party without having it be treated as stumping for Trump.

Maybe it would be helpful to think of the snarky jokes as being more of 'just too soon, man, too soon'. It's been an awful week to cap off a hard month. I don't believe in resorting to snark, but I think it would be lovely to have at least a short period of unity before we resume being self-analytical like a party of grown-ups should be.
posted by dness2 at 1:21 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


[I know that it's hard to cleanly separate out from any given current discussion all the accumulated weight of months of argument and frustration and exceptional cases out on the internet and in the world of bad behavior by the worst actors in each campaign.

But it'd be good to make that collective effort, and recognize that having some understandable frustration about all that stuff doesn't mean it's gonna make this thread better to treat it as a metonym for those other discussions or situations. If every time we talk about the election it has to become a referendum on everything that seemed unkind or unfair in the past several months, it's going to be very tedious for all involved and get in the way of discussing stuff that's happening now.]

posted by cortex (staff) at 1:24 PM on July 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


Every time someone parrots this message, another Sanders progressive somewhere digs down a little further in their conviction to spite-vote for Trump.

While I agree with you that "get over it" can absolutely come across as condescending and dismissive, any self-styled "progressives" who would legit cast a spite-vote for Trump are not even remotely progressive and, frankly, can go fuck themselves.
posted by dersins at 1:25 PM on July 23, 2016 [35 favorites]


Without really thinking I made travel plans for Nov 8 and now I'm really thinking about changing them so I can be there at the victory parties. I was an expat in 2008 and I don't know if I want to miss another one. Though it might be good if it isn't a victory...
posted by everybody had matching towels at 1:25 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


I guess my question is why haven't these generally smart and well-educated progressives been able to do that for themselves already?

Because they need time to cool off. They feel cheated by Clinton and betrayed by the DNC, and it's tough to muster enthusiasm for a candidate who has engendered those feelings, even if you know it's the rational thing to do.

We're already seeing in this thread a lot of smart and well-educated progressives who have done that for themselves. There will be a plenty more before November rolls around, provided they aren't further alienated. That's where the patience and respect comes in.
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 1:29 PM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


You could check with Democrats Abroad to see if they have information about any election parties in the place where you're going to be.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 1:30 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


*torn between wanting future election thread titles to continue with the Hamilton theme or for them to be related to Replacements songs*
  • Watching it Bern
  • Nobody needs to know (maybe a little too on the nose for Bill Clinton night?)
  • It must be nice to have Obama on your side
  • I've got to be in the room where it happens Click-boom!
Turns out I wasn't torn on this one.
posted by zachlipton at 1:31 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


I try to make my political views known as informatively, fairly and compassionately as possible.

I'm pulling in a lot of baggage into this thread, I was mostly riled up over the accelerationist comment way back up at the top where someone said a "we" would would survive a trump presidency.

I get a lot of smug talk from a lot of white people online and offline (but here hardly at all, y'all are pretty fookin' ace). I'm tired of people pejoratively calling me a neoliberal on Twitter when I try to engage. I'm tired of jackass white dudes at work telling me after every mass shooting that trump is gonna win and they'll never vote for Hillary, even after I've brought the critical need for gender protections up. These are people who know I am trans and who still can't give a fuck about the threats I personally face. And people in this thread are saying "oh you need to try to reach them better". As if I haven't already? I been through this. I go through this everyday. It ain't me that's proven myself unwilling to try here...

I apologize for bringing my feelings from other places and communities into this thread without specifying that. Y'all deserve better.
posted by Annika Cicada at 1:32 PM on July 23, 2016 [36 favorites]


I guess my question is why haven't these generally smart and well-educated progressives been able to do that for themselves already?

Because they need time to cool off. They feel cheated by Clinton and betrayed by the DNC, and it's tough to muster enthusiasm for a candidate who has engendered those feelings, even if you know it's the rational thing to do.

We're already seeing in this thread a lot of smart and well-educated progressives who have done that for themselves already. There will be a plenty more before November rolls around


I'd settle for not being harassed by them before November rolls around. That'd be swell.
posted by chainsofreedom at 1:32 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


*Listening to Let It Be* and feeling hopeful.
posted by maggiemaggie at 1:36 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


God damn. I can't believe we're on Day 6 of the fucking RNC. When will it end?? Yesterday was kind of a blur after passing out from having to drink so much watching that scary orange motherfucker Thursday night. I guess the news of Hillary's VP pick kind of overshadowed Day 5, but now it's on again. Gonna power through this one though. Got a bottle of Wild Turkey and a case of PBR. Let's roll.
posted by Cookiebastard at 1:36 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Ezra Klein:
Clinton is perhaps Kaine’s most surprising admirer. Kaine was one of the first statewide elected officials outside Illinois to endorse Obama in the 2008 race. The endorsement was an early blow to Clinton’s hopes — the backing of a popular, southern governor showed Obama’s appeal extended beyond the liberal base.

But Kaine managed to go from opposing Hillary Clinton when she needed him most to persuading her — and her husband — that he’s the person who should be president in the event of her death.

There is something about Kaine that his colleagues don’t find boring. There is something that makes him stand out, inspire confidence, win their trust, get tapped for key jobs. And that’s probably the more important rationale behind Clinton’s pick. She needed someone who will help her win the election, but she also needed someone she trusted with the job. She came to trust Kaine. And she’s hoping the country will, too.
posted by tivalasvegas at 1:36 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


people are still taking jabs

"Socialism" in this country needs to re-gain traction at lower levels. You just can't parachute in at the top like the Greens tried in 2000 and Sanders this year.

The right has spent many decades inculcating their pro-inequality/corporate messaging and corrupting this country to get where they are today (and bring us along for the ride).

Upton Sinclair's 1934 run for governor is an interesting example of this dynamic, too.

Whenever I look at rightwing watch etc. on the right's messaging machine I am stunned at how powerful it is -- the Kochs, Pete Peterson, AEI, Heritage Foundation, Manhattan Institute, Hoover Institution.

The money in our system is very biased towards tilting everything their way. And per JS Mill's observation ' . . . that stupid persons are generally Conservative', they have a large % of the population gaslighted and befuddled.

FDR got in in '32 both due to being an excellent political leader and also the laissez-faire GOP having had completely fucked things up domestically in the 20s (much like they did in the previous decade). Truman got stopped by the GOP, and LBJ only won more major reforms by also being an excellent political leader, plus the aftermath of Dallas.

The average person isn't going to have the education or intelligence to be able to correctly identify how and why our system is so corrupt (and that it is so corrupt precisely because the average person is so befuddled by rightwing BS).

I fully expect that Clinton understands how . . . uncentered . . . our democracy really is, what a joke of unseriousness it is compared to what it could be if we were all on the same page.

I could be wrong, but Obama seems to only have come to this realization ca. 2012.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 1:37 PM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


Clinton/Kaine is an awesome ticket! And makes such an obviously lopsided race against Trump!/Pence that it makes me giddy with joy.

But I'm going to continue to stump for Clinton/Kaine, I don't want complacency to ruin this election (arguably complacency tanked '00 and '04).

I absolutely predict Clinton/Kaine will win. But I want them to absolutely CRUSH the Trump/Pence horror show. I want to see 48, 49, 50 states go against Trump/Pence.

That thrills me. That motivates me.

I want White Nationalism and Fascism and the shameless profiteering to be slapped down HARD.
posted by yesster at 1:38 PM on July 23, 2016 [46 favorites]


I definitely didn't hate Hillary before she sealed the nomination, but I certainly didn't like her. Bernie is much more in line with my personal politics, and to a certain extent I uncritically bought the majority of law-breaking accusations against her. Partially what turned me around to supporting her (instead of holding my nose and voting D) was the enthusiasm that people here have shown for her as the first legitimate female candidate for president. That enthusiasm lead me to re-examine the claims made about her lawbreaking, and I realized that they were fairly weak, and that she's mostly a skilled mainline politician with the attendant number of questionable moves in her past that come with a lifetime in the political field.

I then read about her policies, and while I dislike some aspects (e.g. her attitude towards some foreign policy), I realized that she was further left that I had previously thought. Through that process I came to understand that while she isn't my ideal candidate, she is better than "not trump". She's a strong Democrat stalwart with experience, and her inclusion of a number of Bernie's platform positions have shown me that she's open to compromise. Similarly, what I've seen of Kaine has given me the same impression.

That is to say that I still consider myself further left than the Democratic mainstream, but the Clinton / Kaine ticket gives me hope for a coalition that will work with my side of the party - especially if we manage to pick up more Ds in down-ticket races, and have legislative leverage. Clinton's ticket is a rational step towards what I want, and I admire her as a politician, even if she isn't a 100% fit with my ideology, or 100% without flaw in her past.
posted by codacorolla at 1:41 PM on July 23, 2016 [72 favorites]


Maybe it would be helpful to think of the snarky jokes as being more of 'just too soon, man, too soon'.

Agreed. There is a time and a place. Not watching a movie and pointing out the flaws. Eating dinner and telling everyone about the evils of factory farming. I hear you and I'd love to have that discussion later, not now.

How is anyone or anything in this country helped by pointing out the flaws of the good but imperfect chosen candidates leading into an election that might save or destroy the country? Is there a chance we're going to change candidates? Are the majority of Americans going to see the light in the next couple of months and vote for someone not on the ticket? What's supposed to happen here?

I'd love to have those discussion about how to move forward later, after we win. "Hey, you know who be even better than President Clinton in the next election...?"
posted by bongo_x at 1:44 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


hey look Donald has finally tweeted:

Just saw Crooked Hillary and Tim Kaine together. ISIS and our other enemies are drooling. They don't look presidential to me!

guess he hasn't come up with a suitable epithet for Tim Kaine yet.
posted by tivalasvegas at 1:48 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


I don't think it's unreasonable to respond to the news about Kaine by discussing what it means for the election and for the state of politics in the country. I should wait until after the election? I don't know, I'll leave you all alone.
posted by teponaztli at 1:48 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Because they need time to cool off. They feel cheated by Clinton and betrayed by the DNC, and it's tough to muster enthusiasm for a candidate who has engendered those feelings, even if you know it's the rational thing to do.

To me it comes around to listening. That's something Clinton made a cornerstone of her campaign, and while I basically treated it as BS at first, I have come around to the view that she was serious. What others see as her spineless pivoting on some issues is realistically a product of her taking a long hard listen to a diverse range of voices, including those of Sanders and his supporters.

So I hope they do come around. The disturbing part for me there is the "cheated by Clinton" part, because to conclude that, they have to ignore the majority coalition of Democrats that supported Clinton, a coalition that involved a significant proportion of people of color. And that's not to say that white people needed to shut up and listen to people of color and not vote for Sanders in the primary--that's not at all how primaries work--, but it does mean that the average Bernie-or-Buster didn't listen back then, and they continue not to listen now by both believing the primary was stolen and that a Trump presidency wouldn't be so bad (because they haven't listened to the people telling them how bad it would be for them). And given that failure to listen for so long, it's hard to appreciate that they'll suddenly start listening soon.
posted by zachlipton at 1:49 PM on July 23, 2016 [29 favorites]


Ok, yeah, but imagine for a moment that I'm going to vote D no matter what. I still deserve to have reservations about the party I'm voting for. I still get to say that I'm frustrated with Kaine's support of TPP. It's not an argument against voting for him, but what, does that mean there's nothing at all to say about it? Almost no one in this thread isn't voting for Clinton. Why are we acting like the only reason to have any complaint or reservation is if you think she's the wrong choice?

There's that point in a long hike, and it's hot, and your feet hurt, and you're thirsty and the mosquitos are biting and you're getting blisters and the whole endeavor just kinda sucks. You have the right to be the person complaining about how hot and tired and sore you are. But guess what? Everyone else's feet hurt too. Everyone else is thirsty too. If your goal is getting everyone to the end of the trail, reminding them of how much their feet hurt is just as likely to get them to turn around go home.

I have plenty of criticisms and reservations about the candidate and the party. But in this election, the choice has been narrowed down and exists in very stark contrast. If I'm going to work for the political outcome that I want, it's going to come in the form of getting excited about the good things my candidate offers and trying to get people around me excited as well. For me, that means constructive criticism instead of destructive criticism. It means pushing back against any false equivalency with the other side, and attempting to find some nuance and silver linings on the issues that might be seen as problematic.

My biggest political fear right now is a Trump presidency. My second biggest fear is a political landscape with a Tea Party on the right and a Tea Party on the left, both willing to "burn it all down" in the name of ideological purity. This scares me because I know that the flames are gonna start on my porch and not theirs.
posted by billyfleetwood at 1:52 PM on July 23, 2016 [62 favorites]


guess he hasn't come up with a suitable epithet for Tim Kaine yet.

He'd floated "corrupt Kaine", but I guess that didn't stick.
posted by codacorolla at 1:52 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


This is a really great political pick. Because she knows liberals hate Trump so much so of course a bunch of us are going to vote for her. What she needs are as many middle of the road voters as she can get. But I think she has sacrificed the Democratic Party for a chance to be president. Because progressives might feel like they have to vote for her but I doubt they will stay in the party.
posted by gt2 at 1:57 PM on July 23, 2016


I don't think it's unreasonable to respond to the news about Kaine by discussing what it means for the election and for the state of politics in the country.

I'm sorry, I don't mean to sound like I'm trying to shout down opinion.

But it's done and she didn't pick Palin. I don't think she's changing her mind. I'm thinking more like "OK, pretty good choice, let's go". I don't want to help tear them down.
posted by bongo_x at 1:57 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


He'd floated "corrupt Kaine", but I guess that didn't stick.

Also because, especially as politicians go, "corrupt" seems like the absolute wrong adjective to describe Kaine.
I'm sure Trump has another one somewhere in his 200-word vocabulary that will work better and gain more traction. I have unwavering faith in his ability to craft a lame insult.
posted by Superplin at 1:58 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


If we bounce some ideas around and come up with the best possible Kaine insult, can we sue Trump for copyright infringement if he tries to use it?
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 1:59 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Which is why Tim Kaine and Hillary Clinton don't really get me fired up. When it comes to economic issues they're not just on the side of the bad guys they **ARE** the bad guys.

There's folks at Nationwide Mutual Insurance who probably agree that Kaine is the bad guy. I, on the other hand, am looking a little askance at anyone who wants to call Kaine pro-bank.
posted by phearlez at 1:59 PM on July 23, 2016 [11 favorites]




I don't need an AFLCIO score sheet to tell me where that means he stands on unions.

Yeah, the experts with a personal and professional stake in knowing what they're talking about, what do they know compared to my general impressions, right?
posted by ctmf at 2:05 PM on July 23, 2016 [35 favorites]


You have the right to be the person complaining about how hot and tired and sore you are.

Well, evoking the image of the annoying whiner who has nothing useful to add definitely sends a message. Sorry for spoiling everyone's hike, I guess.
posted by teponaztli at 2:06 PM on July 23, 2016


The answer is Candy Kaine (hat tip to Jeet Heer). "Candy Kaine is scared of guns, that's why he wants to take yours away!" "Candy Kaine speaks Spanish because he's afraid of the PC police!"
posted by sallybrown at 2:07 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Sorry for spoiling everyone's hike, I guess.

No, you're good. We're all tired.
posted by bongo_x at 2:08 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


I should wait until after the election?

I don't think you need to wait that long -- one of the strong points that's emerging about the race is that Hillary is truly open to compromise. But I think it might be decent to wait just a little bit.. until after the convention maybe? And then try to be constructively critical? The Trump engine is going to be so nasty, I would welcome any critical voices that can manage to dampen that vibe.

Just my 2 cents.
posted by dness2 at 2:08 PM on July 23, 2016


Caught some of Kaine's speech on the radio in the car this morning. I actually thought at one point, wow. He's good at this.
posted by ctmf at 2:08 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Commentator on CNN was trying to talk about how the choice of Kaine wasn't a sign that Clinton was bringing the Left in. Huge thunder strike and sudden downpour caused them to cut off and go inside.
posted by bongo_x at 2:12 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


I actually thought at one point, wow. He's good at this.

He is a really good campaigner. In his gubernatorial run, he showed that he can win with a positive campaign when the other side has nothing to offer by way of policy and only runs a negative campaign against him. That experience will come in over the next few months.
posted by peeedro at 2:15 PM on July 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


Well, evoking the image of the annoying whiner who has nothing useful to add definitely sends a message

I don't think this was quite the message intended, or if it was I don't agree. What I have seen that gives me so much hope for the future is that the Democratic campaign is really TRYING to build bridges around some of these issues. Even if I too don't agree with everything perfectly - I believe they are trying and listening. And saying they are the party of grown-ups in this election is saying that you are allowed to disagree with them and voice your opinions and not be slammed for it. But because the other side is just so damn nasty, it would be really nice to have people who want to work with the system to improve it to think about framing those opinions in a way that elevates the process.

I am happy to hear what you would like Clinton/Kaine to say about TPP or the other issues. Um, but not today. Today I'm in recovery mode. Tomorrow maybe?
posted by dness2 at 2:19 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


After reviewing some videos from schroedinger's excellent playlist, I'm pretty sure the Onion will be just fine with Tim Kaine as VP. It's going to be a jug band thing isn't it?
posted by zachlipton at 2:19 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


TRUMP: Just saw Crooked Hillary and Tim Kaine together. ISIS and our other enemies are drooling. They don't look presidential to me!

guess he hasn't come up with a suitable epithet for Tim Kaine yet.


Maybe he's settled on "Tim."

Seems worth noting as well that, with the exception of the super-lame "Low-energy Jeb Bush," his nicknames largely seem to be aimed at demeaning women or people of color (Crooked Hillary, Goofy Elizabeth Warren, Lyin' Ted Cruz, Little Marco Rubio).
posted by dersins at 2:21 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


So the harmonica playing is several steps down the Cool Scale from Bill Clinton playing saxophone on Arsenio Hall, but it will help bring in the dorky dad vote.
posted by kirkaracha at 2:22 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Just seen the Kaine speech. Very impressed. What a thoroughly likeable and cogent man. I think there's a gap available for that in the market. As a neutral from foreign parts It gives me heart.

Something else that gives me heart is the complete inability of the people feeling inspired by the story he told to chant "USA" in unison.
posted by vbfg at 2:23 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]




I'm not a huge fan of Kaine. There. I said it.

But I am a more huge fan of not letting Trump win the presidency because if he does, it seals the fact that the country of my birth is down with saying, "Whew, thank god I can be openly gross and racist! And even more, let people from other countries know that we are Open for Openly Racist Business!" (Well, like we have already, but Trump presidency makes that treble super fucking obvious and gross.)

This is my least favourite election season ever. But at least my absentee ballot is coming in the mail. I am doing my part. I am not sitting this shit out.
posted by Kitteh at 2:27 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


So the harmonica playing is several steps down the Cool Scale from Bill Clinton playing saxophone on Arsenio Hall, but it will help bring in the dorky dad vote.

I love it. When I watch these videos I am strongly reminded of what happens when my parents host a party and my dad gets a few beers in. Then it's down to the basement with anyone who can play music, 'cause it's time to jam the fuck out in his pleated-front khakis and polo shirts.
posted by schroedinger at 2:29 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


My least favorite election ever was Kerry v. Bush

This one has the potential of the first woman U.S. president and a GOP candidate an even worse threat than Bush 2004. So that's got me a little more engaged and paying attention.
posted by Annika Cicada at 2:30 PM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


Listen To Tim Kaine’s “I’m Conservative” Radio Ads From 2005

And then look at his actual actions as governor and Senator, and read/listen all the words he's said since then.
posted by zombieflanders at 2:31 PM on July 23, 2016 [28 favorites]


Some call me..... Tim?
posted by sotonohito at 2:32 PM on July 23, 2016 [19 favorites]


It would be a fucking blessing if "conservative" came to mean "people like Tim Kaine" instead of "people like Mike Pence."
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:33 PM on July 23, 2016 [109 favorites]


damn. I can't believe we're on Day 6 of the fucking RNC. When will it end??

It's over. We're home. That is the worst Groundhog Day loop ever. Back away from the television...
posted by corb at 2:36 PM on July 23, 2016 [36 favorites]


Kaine's lack of Trump epithet reminds me of Politico's quote, “Tim Kaine is so boring his Secret Service code name is ‘Tim Kaine.’”
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 2:41 PM on July 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


Who do I contact to make sure Tim Kaine has a harmonic jam at some point during the DNC? I really, really need to have C-SPAN streaming Tim Kaine dadrocking. What other Democrats play music? They could set up a convention house band. This needs to happen.
posted by schroedinger at 2:45 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Kaine's lack of Trump epithet reminds me of Politico's quote, “Tim Kaine is so boring his Secret Service code name is ‘Tim Kaine.’”

That joke is so old Al Gore told it about himself and the speechwriter told the story about stealing the joke to The Moth.
posted by zachlipton at 2:46 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


Who do I contact to make sure Tim Kaine has a harmonic jam at some point during the DNC? I really, really need to have C-SPAN streaming Tim Kaine dadrocking. What other Democrats play music?

There's this guy...I hear he plays a mean sax...
posted by sallybrown at 2:47 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


What other Democrats play music? They could set up a convention house band. This needs to happen.

Samantha Power (UN ambassador) sang with other international diplomats, and then there's John Kerry.
posted by zachlipton at 2:50 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


There should be some traction to pointing out who would benefit from, or be happy with, a Trump! presidency:

ISIS wants him
Putin wants him
China wants him

I'm not personally into "othering." I think globalization (with or without neoliberalism, some points are up for debate) is the inevitable and desirable future.

But to undermine Trump's base, I think there is a definite strategy in showing how cozy he really is with the "enemy."
posted by yesster at 2:51 PM on July 23, 2016


In other election news:
An effort to fully eliminate superdelegates in future elections has failed at a meeting of the Democratic National Convention rules committee.

At the Saturday gathering in Philadelphia, a delegate for Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders offered an amendment to get rid of superdelegates — party insiders who can vote for the candidate of their choice at the convention. Sanders supporters claim superdelegates gave Hillary Clinton too much of an advantage in their battle for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The amendment was defeated, though it earned enough support to force a floor vote at the convention. More amendments on superdelegates were expected at the meeting.
posted by zachlipton at 2:52 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Who do I contact to make sure Tim Kaine has a harmonic jam at some point during the DNC? I really, really need to have C-SPAN streaming Tim Kaine dadrocking. What other Democrats play music?

Martin O'Malley on guitar!
posted by Maecenas at 2:52 PM on July 23, 2016


There's this guy...I hear he plays a mean sax...

Touche, though I don't know if Bill is dorky enough for what I'm thinking of.
posted by schroedinger at 2:54 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


well put, showbiz_liz. I'm a social democrat who voted for Clinton in the primary. For all sorts of reasons. Another is Paul Krugman.

When I heard what Kaine said in Spanish I got a whiff of some onion. What a great country the US is (as are many other places!) We have to make sure the bad guys lose badly this fall.
posted by persona au gratin at 2:58 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Except the superdelegates didn't give Hillary the win. She got a ton more votes in the Democratic primary. After which there was talk/insinuation that Bernie should use the same superdelegates to get the nomination.

That said, they shouldn't be able to say whom they're supporting until after their state votes. And there should be fewer of them.
posted by persona au gratin at 3:03 PM on July 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


After watching some of Kaine's speeches, I have a few thoughts.

1. Tim Kaine seems like a genuinely nice, happy guy.
2. Tim Kaine is the good Catholic boy my mother wishes I was.
3. In 8 years we'll be looking at Kaine as fondly as Biden now (or more so).
4. Tim Kaine looks way too much like a thinner Garry Gergich. I'm going to have endless amusement imagining Parks and Rec with Hillary and Tim.
posted by Gaz Errant at 3:08 PM on July 23, 2016 [19 favorites]


This is going back to the Sanders campaign's original beef with superdelegates, which was that they make it appear that the establishment candidate has an overwhelming lead, giving her (or him) an aura of inevitability and momentum.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 3:08 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


Wait are we still fighting the nomination process?

Get on the bus, get off the bus, whatever but the bus is moving out.
posted by vuron at 3:11 PM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


At the Saturday gathering in Philadelphia, a delegate for Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders offered an amendment to get rid of superdelegates

I guess this guy didn't hear that, at the end, the Sanders campaign was trying to lure superdelegates to their side in order to contest the convention/take away the will of the voters?
posted by Sara C. at 3:15 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


I may have been sympathetic to the superdelegate argument before, but after Trump I am not persuaded.
posted by bongo_x at 3:16 PM on July 23, 2016 [18 favorites]


Tim Kaine looks way too much like a thinner Garry Gergich.

Fuck, can't unsee this now.
posted by skewed at 3:16 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


It's about future elections, not this one, and I don't think it's remotely unreasonable to address the process. That said, if you can look at the Trump experience and still want to entirely eliminate superdelegates there's something seriously fucking wrong with you.

I think the idea of having them keep their mouth shut till the citizenry's vote is done is a nice one, though it does come up against the issue of potentially having people go out for a vote that will be upended. Less - numerically - certainly seems like a good idea; a safety valve is superb, but there should be some point at which you're just stuck with the choice of your membership.
posted by phearlez at 3:17 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


$100 says the Republicans will have a strong superdelegate system in the next election after Trump loses.
posted by bongo_x at 3:19 PM on July 23, 2016 [24 favorites]


Looking at the alternative, I'm very happy we have superdelegates and would not be surprised to see them added to the Republican primary system after Trump loses.

For what it's worth, though, I see nothing wrong with going however many rounds about it during the DNC, since that's what the conventions are supposed to be for, and yeah, we should have the best possible process for choosing the nominee. I just think it's ignorant/disingenuous for the Sanders delegates to act so ideologically pure about it.
posted by Sara C. at 3:20 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


$100 says the Republicans will have a strong superdelegate system in the next election after Trump loses.

Regret/Hindsight 2020
posted by peeedro at 3:21 PM on July 23, 2016 [61 favorites]


$100 says the Republicans will have a strong superdelegate system in the next election after Trump loses.

Expecting the GOP to learn the right lessons from its experiences is lousy bet.
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 3:24 PM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


Superdelegates serve an important purpose by A) providing one last check on the apparent nominee (which the Republicans soooooooo badly wish they had) and B) making space for non-professional politicians to have a say and serve as delegates (perhaps a dubious point, but one I've heard expressed).

But of course they should be the emergency brake, not the throttle. The problem is that so many of them pipe up, and that the system so easily lends itself to being portrayed as a shadowy cabal of Establishment types looking to thwart the will of the people. If they're gonna stay (and it looks like they will), streamline and simplify the state-by-state nomination process. Standardize it nationally, even, although Iowa will stamp its feet about it's folksy, historic tradition of disenfranchisement and non-secret voting. Furthermore, standardize the allocation system for each state, so it is abundantly clear in every primary election that Candidate X receives A delegates because she got this many votes, and Candidate Y receives B delegates, etc.

I suppose that all this would have to be done on a state party level, but surely the national apparatus could pressure the state parties to adopt some popular and pro-transparency measures.
posted by Bromius at 3:24 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


If the Sanders delegates were fighting hard for an end to caucuses as part of the nomination process I'd be very interested in that. But they won't. I wonder why.
posted by Sara C. at 3:27 PM on July 23, 2016 [29 favorites]


if you can look at the Trump experience and still want to entirely eliminate superdelegates there's something seriously fucking wrong with you.

There surely is a middle ground that addresses the bias complaints of the Dem superdelegate system while still maintaining its "break glass in case of emergency" failsafe capabilities.
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 3:28 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


There should be some traction to pointing out who would benefit from, or be happy with, a Trump! presidency:

ISIS wants him
Putin wants him
China wants him


Huh? Where's this idea come from?
posted by skewed at 3:28 PM on July 23, 2016


phearlez I think the problem with that is that your safety valve is basically the destruction of the party.

Sure, back in the old days the Party Elders decided everything in smoke filled back rooms and the plebes had no say.

But I don't think that'll really work these days.

And the idea of using super delegates to overturn the will of the majority if they make the "wrong" decision, I can't think of anything that'd destroy a Party faster. And if that's the plan, to recognize that the Party has totally and utterly failed and pull the plug, I can think of ways to do that which don't have such a potential for violence.

You could make the argument that if the Republican Party is so lost in racism, bigotry, and xenophobia that it nominated Trump it should be abolished. I can get behind that.

What I have a harder time getting behind is the idea that the Republican Party should have some aristocrats who get a veto over a bad candidate, and even if I could agree that it's acceptable, I doubt most of the rank and file voters would.

If Sanders had somehow succeeded in getting the super delegates to back him, overturn the will of the majority and cheat Clinton out of her victory I don't think many Clinton supporters would be saying "thank you super delegates for saving us from our clearly bad and wrong decision, I'll be sure to support Sanders in the general election."

It would have destroyed the Democrats, just as if the Republicans had super delegates who had stolen it for Cruz it would have destroyed the Republicans.

In today's world you just can't expect the rank and file voters to put up with a bunch of aristocrats dictating the candidates. I can totally see the appeal behind having something to stop a future Trump. But I can see the appeal behind both Communism and competency tests for voting too, and they also turn out to be really awful ideas in practice. I think overturning the will of the Party membership is one of those things that sounds good in theory when facing a Trump but will, like Communism, never actually work.
posted by sotonohito at 3:30 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


There surely is a middle ground that addresses the bias complaints of the Dem superdelegate system

Uh, when it comes to superdelegates what's the difference between "bias" and "picking the candidate the superdelegate prefers"?
posted by Justinian at 3:30 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


I really don't have a problem with Democratic elected officials making endorsements during the primary. We elected them, some of them have opinions, and they are free to say them out loud. Voters are free to listen to whoever they want. The superdelegates aren't bound to their endorsements; they can and will change their mind, as happened in 2008.

There are a number of things I would change about the Democratic nominating process (starting with getting rid of caucuses, which serve to disenfranchise voters), but telling elected officials that they can't endorse candidates until their state votes is not one of them.
posted by zachlipton at 3:30 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


$100 says the Republicans will have a strong superdelegate system in the next election after Trump loses.

Expecting the GOP to learn the right lessons from its experiences is lousy bet.


Well, after the 2012 debacle in which Romney had trouble breaking out from the dozen or so clown candidates, Republicans changed the rules to make most state primaries winner-takes-all -- which arguably led to Donald Trump's victory. Always trying to fight the last war.
posted by JackFlash at 3:30 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Latest General Election poll by Gravis taken 7/21-7/22: 3462 RV MOE 1.7 Clinton 49 Trump 51 (Trump +2)
posted by Justinian at 3:31 PM on July 23, 2016


Caucuses, to me, are some sort of bizarro world system comparable to throwing the candidates in the lake to see which one floats. Until they're talking about getting rid of that I'm not taking any reform talk seriously.
posted by bongo_x at 3:31 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


Expecting the GOP to learn the right lessons from its experiences is lousy bet.

I mean they learned a lot of the right lessons after 2012; they just utterly failed to put them into practice this year.
posted by zachlipton at 3:33 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


If politicians can't endorse a candidate publicly, they're still going to do so only in private, which seems like a terrible idea given all the jockeying for position and influence in a potential new administration. If anything, it would just engender more corruption.
posted by Bromius at 3:34 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


bongo_x Damn skippy. And yes, I know that's where Sanders got most of his wins. I still think we should abolish caucuses and simplify the whole process. One vote, that decides the delegates, no state convention weirdness.

I'd be perfectly willing to abandon the argument over super delegates if it'd unite the Democratic Party behind abolishing caucuses and setting up very simple, straightforward, delegate appointment rules.
posted by sotonohito at 3:35 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Tim Kaine on the harmonica!

why does this not have all the favorites
posted by Going To Maine at 3:35 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Latest General Election poll by Gravis taken 7/21-7/22: 3462 RV MOE 1.7 Clinton 49 Trump 51 (Trump +2)
posted by Justinian at 6:31 PM on July 23 [+] [!]


Am I misremembering, or aren't you always going on about not looking at individual polls?
posted by skewed at 3:35 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Latest General Election poll by Gravis taken 7/21-7/22: 3462 RV MOE 1.7 Clinton 49 Trump 51 (Trump +2)

Gravis's ranking on 538 is a B-, which is neither awesome nor terrible. Also of course looking at individual polls rather than polls in the aggregate is a recipe for emotional whiplash.

Also, caucuses make total sense in a time before phones and cars and internet and when the total population of the country was about the same as the current population of the NYC metro area. But yeah it might just be time for an update there.
posted by showbiz_liz at 3:36 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


I would support that totally. Dump caucuses, apportion pledged delegates directly in line with the popular vote in the state primary. Done.
posted by Justinian at 3:36 PM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


I'm sorry, but I feel it necessary to point out, based upon reviewing schroedinger's posts above, that Tim Kaine isn't a "harmonica" player, but a harp player, or blues harp player, and not a half-bad one either. cf: Bobby McGee, "I pulled my harpoon out of my dirty red bandanna I was playin' soft while Bobby sang the blues, yeah"
posted by Chitownfats at 3:37 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Am I misremembering, or aren't you always going on about not looking at individual polls?

I don't think so? I'm going on about freaking about about polls and drinking heavily.

More seriously, I didn't post it because we should freak out, I posted it because it's the first post-Trump-speech general poll and thus is a useful datapoint to compare to their next poll after the DNC. If it had shown Clinton + 12 I woulda posted it too. That the aggregate polling is more important than individual polls doesn't mean we should never so much as mention individual polls...
posted by Justinian at 3:38 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Yeah, I don't mean to say you shouldn't post the poll, just thought I remember you saying the opposite earlier, but I don't have that great a memory.

McCain/Palin had a few polls showing them up post convention. I will be in a low-grade freak out until the election is called for Clinton in November, but the polls don't bother/reassure me until at least a week or two after the DNC.
posted by skewed at 3:42 PM on July 23, 2016


You'd expect to see a post-convention bounce, although I'd like to think that there wouldn't be any bounce for that epic shit-show of a convention. But yeah, I'm not going to freak out about a poll that came post-Republican and pre-Democratic convention. Give it a couple of weeks and we'll see where things stand. I imagine the Democrats will get a pretty big convention bounce, too, unless the Bernie or Bust folks really screw things up, which is, of course, always possible.

Actually, I take that back. I'm a little freaked out now.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 3:43 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Yeah, I don't mean to say you shouldn't post the poll, just thought I remember you saying the opposite earlier, but I don't have that great a memory.

Oh, I'm sure I posted something like "Yeah, you shouldn't freak out about individual polling, BUT..." and then went on to freak out about individual polling. Because what the head believes and the heart believes are two different things.
posted by Justinian at 3:44 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


"Trying to count the ways I hate @timkaine. Drawing a blank. Congrats to a good man and a good friend."

".@HillaryClinton now belongs in prison? C'mon. We can make the case that she shouldn't be elected without jumping the shark."

Jeff Flake is someone I disagree with on, like 75 different fronts, (though he's been a supporter of immigration reform for years, yet even Arizona keeps reelecting him, which ought to tell you something about how many voters really want to deport 11 million people) but he's been downright decent and deserves some credit for that. It's like he's part of the same planet and generally interested in governing, while disagreeing on particulars.
posted by zachlipton at 3:45 PM on July 23, 2016 [29 favorites]


Actually, I take that back. I'm a little freaked out now.

Exactly, I understand and believe all the rational reasons why we won't get a good picture of where things stand for roughly two weeks. Simultaneously, I am kind of scared. I contain multitudes!
posted by Justinian at 3:46 PM on July 23, 2016


At this point it's Donations, Phone Banking and GOTV. Whoever has the most of those three wins.
posted by Annika Cicada at 3:48 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


posted by windbox 0% from NRA.

This is a badge of honor, like being on Nixon's list of enemies.
posted by mattdidthat at 3:49 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


Jeff Flake is someone I disagree with on, like 75 different fronts, ...but he's been downright decent and deserves some credit for that.

I remember writing my left leaning AZ relative a couple of years ago saying something about him without knowing what I was talking about and getting the response "there are plenty of AZ Republicans to hate on, he's not one of them".
posted by bongo_x at 3:49 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


As a Sanders supporter in Colorado, I would have gladly had a primary instead of caucuses in our state even if that would have meant a Sanders loss. Sadly, the momentum to replace our caucuses petered out at the end of our legislative session. There's a ballot measure that could appear in November, and either way it's still a priority that I'm going to continue raising with my state elected officials and Party leaders.
posted by audi alteram partem at 3:51 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Latest General Election poll by Gravis taken 7/21-7/22: 3462 RV MOE 1.7 Clinton 49 Trump 51 (Trump +2)
Yep. everything has changed. After a decade of "democratic" voting for American Idol, the nation is treating the election like a bad 'Reality' show. (Are there 'good' Reality shows?) And after a couple decades of Mr. Popiel's "Infomercials", the professionalism of the RNC looks pretty good. And after three-plus decades of being ridiculed by MAD Magazine, Donald Trump is getting history's biggest benefit of a doubt, likely because "hey, MAD made fun of that Superhero movie I loved, so they must be wrong about this too". American culture is so sour on "politicians" they'd vote for Steve Carell based on his character on "The Office".
posted by oneswellfoop at 3:52 PM on July 23, 2016


yesster: There should be some traction to pointing out who would benefit from, or be happy with, a Trump! presidency:
ISIS wants him
Putin wants him
China wants him


Let's be perfectly clear here: Russia is actively working towards a Trump Presidency. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is real and it's happening in front of our eyes.

* The DNC breach, including stealng Trump opposition research, was the work of Russsian hackers

* The Clinton Foundation was also breached by Russian hackers

* Putin's propaganda network has chosen sides

* Trump is reportedly reliant on Russian money to fund his debt

“Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.”-- Donald Trump Jr.

* Trump's campaign manager spent most of the last decade as a top communications advisor for Viktor Yanukovych, the Pro-Russian Ukrainian Prime Minister and then President whose removal in 2014 led to the on-going crisis and proxy war in Ukraine. Yanukovych remains a close Putin ally.

* Result: Trump actively changed the party platform to remove assistance to Ukraine against Russian military operations in eastern Ukraine.

Personally, I think restarting the cold war helps no one, but a Russian dictator's fingerprints on our election is a very real and very scary prospect, and I'd argue the most underreported story of the RNC.
posted by bluecore at 3:53 PM on July 23, 2016 [111 favorites]


Just watched the Kaine speech. Absolutely terrific! Great pick by Clinton.
posted by haiku warrior at 3:54 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


When it comes to economic issues they're not just on the side of the bad guys they ARE the bad guys. They're from the nicer, not quite so sociopathic and greedy subgrouping of rich scumbags, but at heart they can't avoid identifying with the very rich because they are the very rich

I think people (e.g. me) get uncomfortable with this rhetoric at least partly because saying “I want you to vote for this terrible person.” doesn’t jibe with saying that you’re “supporting” someone. There’s an over-simplification here, but I think it’s a helpful one. If someone is supporting a candidate because they are the “least worst” (even as opposed to “better than”) it suggests that they are happy to jump out of the tent at a moment’s notice.

Also, there are all sorts of classes present on MetaFilter. Praising a certain class of “not quite super” rich folk as “not quite so sociopathic” can make people wonder just where they, personally, would rank on in a calculus of sociopathy. The 20%? The 10%? The 5%? The exponential curve of wealth, unfortunately, makes this calculus hard.
posted by Going To Maine at 3:55 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


Kaine managed to go from opposing Hillary Clinton when she needed him most to persuading her — and her husband — that he’s the person who should be president in the event of her death.

So this is the second time (counting Obama) that Clinton has shown the ability to enthusiastically partner with someone who opposed her in a hard-fought campaign. That says a lot about her character and ability to govern.
posted by kirkaracha at 3:56 PM on July 23, 2016 [71 favorites]


I've frankly been in a constant low-grade panic for months, periodically peaking into a high-grade one. It's been a problem.
posted by kyrademon at 4:01 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


Is this DNC email thing really a thing? I've glanced through it and watched the hyperventilating reporting and they reported that Schultz said Sander's manager was an ass for wanting to take the fight to the campaign floor, someone said the Sanders campaign was run badly, and being an atheist maybe wouldn't play well in the South.

I said those things and I was a supporter! Maybe they're just excited because the word "email" is in the story.
posted by bongo_x at 4:03 PM on July 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


It's still a conspiracy until proven otherwise. perhaps wikileaks will release the Dumpsters internal communications. One can hope.
posted by futz at 4:03 PM on July 23, 2016




"When it comes to economic issues they're not just on the side of the bad guys they ARE the bad guys."

I really don't know how to engage this other than to ask you to stop being so absolutist about a single facet of social justice.
posted by Annika Cicada at 4:05 PM on July 23, 2016 [15 favorites]


And after three-plus decades of being ridiculed by MAD Magazine, Donald Trump is getting history's biggest benefit of a doubt, likely because "hey, MAD made fun of that Superhero movie I loved, so they must be wrong about this too."

Trump is the nominee because readers of Mad magazine are upset at action movie parodies. Ooookay.
posted by one_bean at 4:05 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


I’ve frankly been in a constant low-grade panic for months, periodically peaking into a high-grade one. It's been a problem.

Stay out of these threads. Stay away from political news. Your actual power is limited to voting and volunteering, and if you’re getting stricken with panic attacks you might want to avoid the latter. Replace political podcasts with music, or news of the weird, or people BSing about movies. Read books instead of watching TV, or catch up on TV shows. Stay away from it.
posted by Going To Maine at 4:05 PM on July 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


538 has their post-convention poll summary up:
In another sense, however, the story isn’t so complicated. Whereas June’s polls suggested a potential blowout for Clinton, July’s polls have shown a highly competitive race. We’ll see what August’s polls bring, after the Democrats have held their convention and the bounces have died down.
posted by gladly at 4:08 PM on July 23, 2016


Yep. everything has changed.

Huh? Several polls taken after the RNC in 2012 had Romney up by several points. In 2008 polls had McCain up by as much as 10 after his convention. What, exactly, has changed?
posted by zombieflanders at 4:08 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Huh? Several polls taken after the RNC in 2012 had Romney up by several points. In 2008 polls had McCain up by as much as 10 after his convention. What, exactly, has changed?

The above two weren't crypto fascists.
posted by Talez at 4:12 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Politicians rely on 2 forms of power.

Donor power because Citizens United has made running for anything more advanced than town dog catcher challenging. Represent a substantial source of funding and you get attention.

People power because we still live in a Democracy and cash doesn't get to vote (yet). Represent a substantial block of volunteers or more importantly make a substantial block of voters and you are important.

Thus the influence evangelical churches have on Republicans and the power that Black churches have on the Democrats. They are reliable sources of votes.

The Catholic vote has been split for decades but increasingly Pope Francis has been promoting a world view that is much more progressive and at least with some of the Catholics I know that is changing some opinions.

Progressives need to figure out how to not just dominate the discourse but also drive people to the polls. We need social organizations that replace the bowling leagues of yesteryear. Social capital is the name of the game and that means engagement all the time not just once every 4 years.
posted by vuron at 4:18 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


The above two weren't crypto fascists.


Hmm, I thought Palin was and Trump isn't.
posted by skewed at 4:21 PM on July 23, 2016


perhaps wikileaks will release the Dumpsters internal communications.
Russian "hackers" are probably currently WRITING fake emails that make the Trumpster Fire look GOOD for Wikileaks to release. Or maybe we'll be lucky and Rabid Doggies and Gamergators will write the fake emails that make him look good only to Rabid Doggies and Gamergators.

Trump is the nominee because readers of Mad magazine are upset at action movie parodies. Ooookay.
It's as good an explanation as any for the number of Americans who think Donald Trump is not a reprehensible human being.

"When it comes to economic issues they're not just on the side of the bad guys they ARE the bad guys."
They hate Donald Trump, the embodiment of Modern Evil, so they can't be THAT bad. NOBODY is a worse Bad Guy than Donald Trump. And the Enemy of My Enemy is not My Friend, but a valuable ally in the short run.

...crypto fascists.
Not an adequate description. Klepto-fascist is better.
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:21 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Meanwhile Trump is still complaining about Cruz.
posted by kirkaracha at 4:22 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm not going to link it, but Wikikleaks tweeted and then deleted an extremely anti semitic post about how "most of [their] critics have three parentheses around their name," which is something the alt-right has used to single out Jewish users on Twitter, and has to be a thing that the tech savvy wikileaks people know about. It's an organization that did some good and is now past the pale. They also haven't leaked anything of real relevance for years, and this DNC leak (apart from being misunderstood by Bernie dead enders and trump supporters) is no different.
posted by codacorolla at 4:27 PM on July 23, 2016 [18 favorites]


Since when is Trump hiding his fascist tendencies?

He literally bragged about being able to kill in public with impunity.

He's surrounding himself with followers that wouldn't even have the decency of putting their opponents into concentration camps, no these are the guys that would be willing to curbstomp people for being transgender, or lynch someone for having black skin, or burn crosses in front of mosques and temples.

Fuck that and fuck Trump and the Republicans for enabling them.
posted by vuron at 4:28 PM on July 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


Meanwhile Trump is still complaining about Cruz.

Please continue Mr. Trump.
posted by bongo_x at 4:28 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


"Donald Trump, post-truth politician" (a good read)
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:29 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]




FTFY: Please continue engaging in the act of intercourse with that domesticated fowl, Mr. Trump.
posted by Annika Cicada at 4:34 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trump correctly says that Putin respects strength. But of course Putin prefers weakness, which is what Trump offers. As Putin understands perfectly well, the president of the United States has standing in Russia, and enjoys far superior power to the president of Russia, only insofar as he or she mobilizes the moral and political resources of a rule-of-law state. It is precisely Trump’s pose of strength that reveals his crucial vulnerability. As anyone familiar with Russian politics understands, an American president who shuns alliances with fellow democracies, praises dictators, and prefers “deals” to the rule of law would be a very easy mark in Moscow. It is unclear how much money Trump has, but it is not enough to matter in Russia. If he keeps up his pose as the tough billionaire, he will be flattered by the Russian media, scorned by those who matter in Russia, and then easily crushed by men far richer and smarter than he.
Trump’s Putin Fantasy
posted by y2karl at 4:37 PM on July 23, 2016 [15 favorites]


why does this not have all the favorites
posted by Going To Maine at 18:35 on July 23 [+] [!]


the general population has no appreciation for artistic excellence
posted by schroedinger at 4:37 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


I guess this guy didn't hear that, at the end, the Sanders campaign was trying to lure superdelegates to their side in order to contest the convention/take away the will of the voters?

If I oppose the DH rule, that doesn't mean I'm going to make my pitcher bat.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 4:39 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


The "Anti-Sanders" article linked in the article was more of an "anti-disunity".
With Hillary Clinton planning a replay of Harry Reid 2010 – I’m manifestly unpopular, people really don’t like me and I have so many negatives that it’s all about YOU...
That "not-anti-Sanders" quote from the article explains to me why the DNC didn't want attribution.
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:39 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Why is it that every bombshell email about the DNC and Sanders that people keep toting out is from roughly May, roughly a month after the actual nomination fight was over? If the whole thing was rigged from the start, shouldn't there be lots of emails from 2015 about stacking the deck against Sanders?
posted by zachlipton at 4:40 PM on July 23, 2016 [30 favorites]


A friend of mine on Facebook insists that there are incriminating emails going back to January, but can't actually produce them. And none of the media outlets reporting on this -- even the disreputable Sanders proxy blogs whipping up blatant hysteria -- are citing any of them. So.

The whole controversy seems largely based on collective short attention spans and people who are ignorant of how the political process works.
posted by Sara C. at 4:43 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


I was excited to support Sanders in the primary, even though he's somewhere to my right.

Now I'm excited to support Clinton in the fall, even though she's way to my right.

She's not a perfect candidate, she's not going to run a perfect campaign, and Lord knows if she's elected she's going to do a lot of things that I don't approve of.

But not only do I think she's better than Donald Trump, I also think she'll end up pushing the status quo a little bit in my direction. She'll unfuck things a bit, and I'm happy about that.

I'm fully aware that I can't get what I actually want right now.

I'm excited and optimistic about the potential for the center and the left to work together.
posted by a mirror and an encyclopedia at 4:45 PM on July 23, 2016 [45 favorites]


Wikikleaks tweeted and then deleted an extremely anti semitic post

Their history of anti-Semitism goes back at least half a decade, so this isn't really a surprise. And recently, they've signed on 100% with gamergaters, neo-facists, and other hate groups. They'll support you if you're Jewish or Muslim or a PoC or LGBT, but usually only on the condition that you believe that the real problem is that SJWs are an global existential menace. Everything else is secondary to them at this point.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:52 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Whatever the DNC did, it wasn't enough to throw the primaries. Clinton won handily. At least not enough short of hacking the voting machines. But I take it there is no evidence of that.
posted by persona au gratin at 4:52 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Be patient and respectful, as one should always be when attempting to persuade someone who doesn't share your viewpoint.

The problem is that the vast majority of Bernie supporters saying this stuff are NOT being respectful to anyone who disagrees with them. Today I was called "racist against whites" for pointing out that POC would be harmed a lot more than whites in a Trump presidency (which this man was arguing would be better than a Clinton presidency.) I mean there's so much hatred and delusion coming from that side that it's ridiculous. (And for the record, I voted for Bernie. But I just can't tolerate his vocal supporters at this point.)
posted by threeturtles at 4:55 PM on July 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


But is there more to the story? Is there some specific channel of influence?...

And there are reasons to wonder about Mr. Trump’s own financial interests. Remember, we know nothing about the true state of his business empire, and he has refused to release his taxes, which might tell us more. We do know that he has substantial if murky involvement with wealthy Russians and Russian businesses. You might say that these are private actors, not the government — but in Mr. Putin’s crony-capitalist paradise, this is a meaningless distinction.

At some level, Mr. Trump’s motives shouldn’t matter. We should be horrified at the spectacle of a major-party candidate casually suggesting that he might abandon American allies — just as we should be horrified when that same candidate suggests that he might welsh on American financial obligations. But there’s something very strange and disturbing going on here, and it should not be ignored.
Donald Trump, the Siberian Candidate
posted by y2karl at 4:58 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm giving his use of "welsh" in this context a side eye.
posted by Justinian at 5:04 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


re China: it's pretty clear that the ruling elite in Beijing consider the Trump campaign a way to say "really, you're missing out on democracy?" I don't think they necessarily want him elected. Perhaps Chinese hackers will get hold of the Trump Org email db (or those tax returns).

One thought: there's an unwritten rule that the other party lets a convention go by without counter-programming. Shall we assume that this won't apply next week, and that Trump will be trying to get the networks pointing cameras his way?
posted by holgate at 5:08 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


If I oppose the DH rule, that doesn't mean I'm going to make my pitcher bat.

Now do this for Clinton's use of Super PACs
posted by one_bean at 5:09 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


The problem is that the vast majority of Bernie supporters saying this stuff are NOT being respectful to anyone who disagrees with them.


Part of the problem is that "Sanders supporter" is starting to mean "obnoxious people who want to burn things down". By far most Sanders supporters were reasonable people and there are lots right here supporting Clinton. But they are starting to become "sellouts" and "not really Sanders supporters", never mind that it's over he's not in the race any more.

There was a bit of playing with fire in the Sanders campaign, it worked to an extent but there is a price to be paid (ask the Republicans). There are also a lot of new voters who don't understand how elections work.
posted by bongo_x at 5:09 PM on July 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


I do find the DNC stuff super frustrating though. I have only seen a few of the purported emails but honestly what I've seen did look pretty bad.

And that's just so dumb. Hillary was always going to win. I voted for Sanders, I even donated to his campaign, and I knew Hillary was going to win.

There was absolutely no reason for the DNC to dirty their hands whatsoever; Clinton did not need their assistance. The majority of Democrats align with her views. Plus the thirty whatever years of hard work and building alliances within the Democratic party.

But they did show favoritism. And now we're having this stupid conversation about it, today of all days, when we should be celebrating the fact that we have this amazing candidate and she picked an incredible VP and our team is awesome.

And that's dumb.
posted by the turtle's teeth at 5:09 PM on July 23, 2016 [21 favorites]


re China: it's pretty clear that the ruling elite in Beijing consider the Trump campaign a way to say "really, you're missing out on democracy?" I don't think they necessarily want him elected. Perhaps Chinese hackers will get hold of the Trump Org email db (or those tax returns).

I suspect America's antagonists in geopolitics look upon a Trump win with both dread and hopeful anticipation. Dread because he'll be utterly unpredictable, hopeful anticipation because there will be nobody easier to con than Trump. I mean he let Cruz speak at his convention before getting assurances of his loyalty. The guy is a stooge, all you have to do is tell him you think he's great and promise to do what he wants and then go and do the other thing. Moscow and Beijing will play him like a fiddle, if he doesn't blow us all up before they get the chance.
posted by dis_integration at 5:13 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


I just looked at the forecast for next week in Philly, and I would like to echo poffin boffin's request that the DNC thread be titled It's Hot As Hell In Philadelphia
posted by showbiz_liz at 5:16 PM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


I just looked at the forecast for next week in Philly, and I would like to echo poffin boffin's request that the DNC thread be titled It's Hot As Hell In Philadelphia

I would prefer it as "The Gang Rigs an Election"
posted by Talez at 5:18 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


I love me some leaks and I been perusing so I'll sum up what I saw:
  • The bulk of the e-mails are probably real.
    • The volume of messages and attachments itself testifies.
    • Some credit card info is apparently there - didn't see/look for any myself. @Wikileaks says the lack of redaction was intentional, and I think that's because detractors then can't simultaneously say "ASSHOLE YOU RELEASED THESE REAL CREDIT CARD NUMBERS" and "ITS ALL A FAKE".
    • There has been no denial from the DNC, including when Brad Marshall was asked and responded about the "atheist Jew" e-mail.
  • The concern should then be that with the bulk of the e-mails real, the leaker inserted individual fake e-mails. So far though no single Hillary-destroying bombshell e-mail/chain has surfaced, so I don't think this happened. The worst single e-mail chain IMO was the "atheist Jew" one and that one went unrefuted by Marshall, and certainly isn't going to ruin anyone's career anyway.
  • For me mostly it was a confirmation of things I rather strongly suspected:
    • The Party does not like Bernie at all.
    • Nothing at all like rigging the primaries, but a little bit of the thumb indirectly on the scale in Hillary's favor, almost certainly not even necessary for her victory.
    • Inappropriate collusion with journalists. DWS says jump to MSNBC, Chuck Todd asks how high...
  • What I did not expect was the level of unprofessionalism that abounds throughout. They're getting in cussing matches over scheduling mixups, other fights, this, and this, and I ain't know where the legal sexual harassment / hostile environment line starts but I kinda feel consistency with Progressive morality requires some DNCBro heads to roll on that last.
  • Regarding dates, it's heavily weighted towards April and May 2016, though there is a smattering of earlier messages.
  • Regarding Putin, if he is indeed behind it, it is as if the proverbial Tyrannosaur took a little amusing nibble out of my enemy. Basically the DNC comes off as a bunch of greasy chucklefucks, but there's not much to crucify them with.
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 5:18 PM on July 23, 2016 [20 favorites]


I suspect America's antagonists in geopolitics look upon a Trump win with both dread and hopeful anticipation. Dread because he'll be utterly unpredictable, hopeful anticipation because there will be nobody easier to con than Trump.

y2karl's link discusses this wrt to Putin and Trump.
posted by Foci for Analysis at 5:22 PM on July 23, 2016


What I did not expect was the level of unprofessionalism that abounds throughout

That's another thing. I'm just some lowly freelancer no one gives a shit about, but I write all professional emails with the knowledge that they could be forwarded anywhere, anytime. I never talk shit over email. It's too dangerous and too dumb. Plus, I've lived in the South for enough years that I know how to lay down sick burns while maintaining the cover of courtesy. So why don't these people who know they're under national scrutiny comport themselves with similar caution?
posted by the turtle's teeth at 5:24 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


The DNC pisses me off and HAS pissed me off for...at least 15 years now. One of the things on my long term checklist of activist work is to reform the DNC. That work can start with electing a better chairperson after the elections.
posted by Annika Cicada at 5:25 PM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


Now do this for Clinton's use of Super PACs

See, this is part of the problem. I never said jack about Super PACs. But some Bernie supporter did at some point so this makes sense to you.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:26 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


We have to let the crypto-fascists win because our VP candidate, who spent 17 years as a civil rights lawyer doing important work for minorities and the poor, has ambiguous votes on a couple of very narrow banking proposals.

You'd be surprised at the number of people I talk to who actually think along these lines. Hardline single issue voters are among the worst out there.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 5:29 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


ChurchHatesTucker, if you want to voice an opinion I don't like, first you must justify the worst opinions of the worst person I know on facebook. I don't know what the second trial is; I think it's walking across an invisible bridge before you choose the correct grail.
posted by The Gaffer at 5:34 PM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


What I did not expect was the level of unprofessionalism that abounds throughout

My impression is that political operatives are a specific type of person, and that most people cannot operate in that environment. I don't know how to say that nicely. When you call Victor the Cleaner you get Victor the Cleaner.
posted by bongo_x at 5:35 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


I know how to lay down sick burns while maintaining the cover of courtesy

Here's this then.
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 5:35 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


On a side note, I have rediscovered C-SPAN and am amazed that it's been around since 1979 and is still not been shut down. What a weird throwback to old PBS and community access television.

Right now showing the 1976 Dem convention with Barbara Jordan, the Black, Lesbian, Texas Senator speaking.
posted by bongo_x at 5:38 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


The email hack and release is a ploy by the Russian government to disrupt the US election. In my opinion that is much more outrageous than anything in the emails.
posted by humanfont at 5:38 PM on July 23, 2016 [27 favorites]


the turtle's teeth, I can answer that!

Calling people out for their mistakes is a big no-no in much of the corporate world. Directly saying, "this is a problem, and it happened before and I mentioned that, and it's still happening," can be a firing offense. This means the people at the top of the chain never hear from anyone who disagrees... and they come to believe that (1) everyone mostly agrees with them and (2) if there were any topics that should not be discussed in email, obviously someone would've told them.

And they don't notice that the "someones" are below them on the hierarchy and therefore have a strong incentive to never give them unpleasant news, like "that thing you said, it is offensive" or "that thing you said, um, it is supposed to be a proprietary corporate secret" or "that thing you said does not mesh well with federal trade law."

So unless they're actively thinking of topic X as being on shaky legal/moral ground, they won't notice it - and they'll continue to not notice as the topic discussion grows, and as the email chains collect fwds and replies, until the whole set has been handed off to someone who was not in on the "gentleman's agreement" that kept anyone from consciously noting the bigotry or illegality of what's being discussed.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 5:39 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


I'm taking a twitter break so someone @ Snowden, tag Assange and tell him "Come get your mans"
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:41 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Still not clear why the big news is LOOK HOW EBIL THE DEMOCRATS ARE and not "Russians are hacking American political parties now, WTF". Not to mention, are NONE of these journalists considering the source or asking why this is happening and what their role in it is?
posted by Sara C. at 5:46 PM on July 23, 2016 [35 favorites]


@JamesGleick "Curious. Do we think the Russians hacked the D’s but not the R’s? Because why? The RNC has better cybersecurity?"
posted by gwint at 5:51 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Because the media needs a horse race and these emails are good fodder for trump to even it up, otherwise Hillary and Kaine would have won the election on that speech and television ad rates in the fall would have plummeted.

There's a lot of mouths to feed, a lot of good people to take care of. God this is the part of politics that I start to hate hahahahahaha
posted by Annika Cicada at 5:52 PM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


See, this is part of the problem. I never said jack about Super PACs. But some Bernie supporter did at some point so this makes sense to you

The part that didn't make sense to me was you trying to equate beer league softball strategy with a candidate - whose whole premise was returning power to the people - ending his campaign by begging the political elite to overturn the will of the voters.
posted by one_bean at 5:52 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


I certainly think there are a lot of problems with the DNC. DWS's term is up on inauguration day, and pushing for someone better can and should be an important progressive plank. I also think that continuing to push a narrative that the primary was rigged is to discount the franchise of millions of voters, many of them women and people of color, and absent someone finding an authenticated email about tampering with a few thousand voting machines, that's what this boils down to.

So now people are suddenly surprised that the folks in the heart of the political machine talk like the operatives they are? There's a reason Mandy Hampton got sent off to Mandyland early in The West Wing: her realpolitik clashed with the show's idealism. I don't know who previously thought the DNC was a bastion of lefty love anyway.

Short emails out of context can also be weird. I had a friend where we regularly greeted each other with some version of "your face is ugly!" Other people around us thought this was a real problem; it was an old joke. I have no doubt the DNC is filled with a bunch of hardcore political operatives who are terrible to each other, and I don't really think a nationwide exercise in tone policing them is a particularly useful exercise compared to focusing on the actual actions people took, and I've yet to see any actions that amount to rigging.

Some credit card info is apparently there - didn't see/look for any myself. @Wikileaks says the lack of redaction was intentional, and I think that's because detractors then can't simultaneously say "ASSHOLE YOU RELEASED THESE REAL CREDIT CARD NUMBERS" and "ITS ALL A FAKE".

Or it's because the Wikileaks people are assholes who don't care about collateral damage of their actions, whether it involves spreading around credit card numbers or putting thousands of people in Afghanistan at risk of assassination by not redacting their names.
posted by zachlipton at 5:53 PM on July 23, 2016 [24 favorites]



Conservatives always say the Democrats can't do anything, but they managed to stop an outsider from hijacking their party.


Oh lord this is it, the hottest take. Congrats to this person I follow.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:54 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]




Josh Marshall today: Trump & Putin. Yes, It's Really a Thing:
There are many other things people are alleging about hacking and all manner of other mysteries. But those points are highly speculative, some verging on conspiratorial in their thinking. I ignore them here because I've wanted to focus on unimpeachable, undisputed and publicly known facts. These alone paint a stark and highly troubling picture.

To put this all into perspective, if Vladimir Putin were simply the CEO of a major American corporation and there was this much money flowing in Trump's direction, combined with this much solicitousness of Putin's policy agenda, it would set off alarm bells galore. That is not hyperbole or exaggeration. And yet Putin is not the CEO of an American corporation. He's the autocrat who rules a foreign state, with an increasingly hostile posture towards the United States and a substantial stockpile of nuclear weapons. The stakes involved in finding out 'what's going on' as Trump might put it are quite a bit higher.
posted by zachlipton at 5:57 PM on July 23, 2016 [22 favorites]


Now do this for Clinton's use of Super PACs
Kaine personally opposes abortion but supports the laws keeping it legal.
Clinton personally opposed CitizensUnited (the CU organization was an Anti-Hillary SuperPac) but decided if it's now a rule of the game, she has to play the game (and does very well). Even so, she's now committed to overturning it (while warning that it may take a Constitutional Amendment to do so).
Not totally parallel, but both consistent with a philosophy of NOT turning Politics into a game of Calvinball.

Or Donaldball.
posted by oneswellfoop at 6:02 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Trump and Putin,
Sittin' in a tree...
posted by y2karl at 6:04 PM on July 23, 2016


The part that didn't make sense to me was you trying to equate beer league softball strategy with a candidate - whose whole premise was returning power to the people - ending his campaign by begging the political elite to overturn the will of the voters.

That's MLB strategy, TYVM, and if thumbs on the scale aren't part of the plan, why are they there?

I actually don't have a problem with the idea of Superdelegates, but they should be people who have to live with it. So, maybe just national officeholders.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 6:09 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Now watching Geraldine Ferraro accepting the nomination at the 1984 DNC giving the 2016 DNC speech for what we want for the future. Really depressing.

You know, when Alex Keaton was a Young Republican on Family Ties it was supposed to be HA HA Hilarious because, yeah right, the next generation will be Conservative.
posted by bongo_x at 6:10 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Trump and Putin,
Sittin' in a tree...


F-A-S-C-I-S-T
posted by Sys Rq at 6:12 PM on July 23, 2016 [65 favorites]


Josh Marshall today: Trump & Putin. Yes, It's Really a Thing

I don't even know what to do with this information (which I've been seeing in other places too, in recent weeks). Like, half my brain says "this is the plot of a shitty late-career Tom Clancy novel, of course it isn't true" and the other half is just like... well if it IS true then how in the shit and what and how and what can we actually DO about this?
posted by showbiz_liz at 6:14 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Looks like Trump has a sad about his serial harasser/rapist pals and their enablers:
Trump also applauded Roger Ailes, the former chief executive officer of Fox News, who parted ways with the network this week after former anchor Gretchen Carlson filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against him. Ailes denies the allegations.

"I think it’s so sad. He’s such a great guy. Roger is – I mean, what he’s done on television, is in the history of television, he’s gotta be placed in the top three, or four or five," Trump said. "And that includes the founding of the major networks. So, it’s too bad. I’m sure it was friendly. I know Rupert [Murdoch]. He’s a great guy."

"Rupert has great respect for Roger and everything Roger’s done. But when you think about Roger Ailes, in the history of television, there’s really been almost no instances where something like this has been done," he said.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:14 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]




I would support that totally. Dump caucuses, apportion pledged delegates directly in line with the popular vote in the state primary. Done.

That gives you Trump. He did pretty badly in caucuses.
posted by corb at 6:17 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]



Kaine's crime-busting past may hurt Clinton's outreach to blacks


Ok now that one is pretty bad gotta admit. Fucking Willie Horton ad made democrats such idiotic law and order racists in the 90s bleh. I'm sure he still has the ability to do outreach to black folks, and better than Hillary in some ways, but that's not going to make him any friends in the BLM community.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:26 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Not that BLM speak for most black voters though on the other hand.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:27 PM on July 23, 2016


> Hey, remember this comment I made a month ago about Trump being a Russian plant which was unequivocally meant as a joke and is now kind of freaking me out?

The funny thing is, he's such a narcissist, he doesn't even have to be aware of being a plant. The people around him just have to nudge him in the right direction and give him great feedback on how amazing that last speech did. The man outsources so much of his own thinking, you don't need to control him, just all the people around him. You know, something a person like Paul Manafort is fully capable of doing.
posted by mrzarquon at 6:28 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


But Trump's relationship with Putin will finally fix the obvious alliance there always should have been between Washington and Moscow after World War II, but was ruined by the wimpiness of FDR under the influence of British Bastard Churchill. I mean, if we'd sided with the USSR instead of the UK, we could have avoided that stupid wall inside the City of Berlin and built a decent one on the German/French border, geeez...
posted by oneswellfoop at 6:28 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm sure he still has the ability to do outreach to black folks, and better than Hillary in some ways, but that's not going to make him any friends in the BLM community.

BLM needs to talk to their parents, because a lot of them were behind the crack panic.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 6:30 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


I would support that totally. Dump caucuses, apportion pledged delegates directly in line with the popular vote in the state primary. Done.

That gives you Trump. He did pretty badly in caucuses.


Nope. Proportional delegates didn't give you Trump. It was winner-takes-all primaries in a divided field of candidates. Without winner takes all, Trump would not have had a majority and you would have a legitimately contested open convention
posted by JackFlash at 6:30 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Tim Kaine is highly respected in the black community. James Oliphant is spewing nonsense.
posted by humanfont at 6:31 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


Without winner takes all, Trump would not have had a majority and you would have a legitimately contested open convention

Which the party would do almost anything to avoid. And Trump might just as well have emerged victorious in such a system anyway. A self-financed populist would almost always be in the mix in that kind of system.
posted by skewed at 6:34 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


I've been really down about the election this week but I keep reminding myself that everyone involved in this unnecessary drama - including the villains and heroes and the rest of us small folk - will all one day be dead. Even Peter Thiel. And that brings me some comfort.

Why, yes, I did see The Cure in concert again recently. Why do you ask?
posted by Joey Michaels at 6:41 PM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


Which the party would do almost anything to avoid.

Which is precisely why they put the winner-takes-all rule in place after almost ending up with a contested convention instead of Romney in 2012. They just didn't foresee Trump taking advantage of the new rule.
posted by JackFlash at 6:41 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Those concerned about Russian influence on presidential candidates might also be interested in:

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal (from 2015)

This line of attack on Trump seems bound to backfire. And with Clinton, it's not just Russia.
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 6:42 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


BLM needs to talk to their parents, because a lot of them were behind the crack panic.

Please clarify this if I am not reading your comment correctly.

Older people in the black community were "behind the crack panic". I am not following you at all.
posted by futz at 6:43 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Whoa, that TPM article by Josh Marshall (linked above).

To put this all into perspective, if Vladimir Putin were simply the CEO of a major American corporation and there was this much money flowing in Trump's direction, combined with this much solicitousness of Putin's policy agenda, it would set off alarm bells galore. That is not hyperbole or exaggeration. And yet Putin is not the CEO of an American corporation. He's the autocrat who rules a foreign state, with an increasingly hostile posture towards the United States and a substantial stockpile of nuclear weapons. The stakes involved in finding out 'what's going on' as Trump might put it are quite a bit higher.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:47 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


I'm not a huge fan of Kaine. There. I said it.

Whoa, whoa whoa

Slow down the Trump train there, trumpy
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:48 PM on July 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


aaaah he’s saying things I like and he’s saying them in Spanish too and he’s endearingly fumbling some lines I love it. But then I also liked when Mitt Romney said the trees in Michigan are the right height so…
posted by Going To Maine at 6:50 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


And news of Wikileaks' antisemitism has broke on Twitter. What a shit show.
posted by Yowser at 6:50 PM on July 23, 2016


And news of Wikileaks' antisemitism has broke on Twitter.

I don't see anything there. At least it isn't trending.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:53 PM on July 23, 2016


I’m sure he still has the ability to do outreach to black folks, and better than Hillary in some ways, but that's not going to make him any friends in the BLM community.

Kelly McEvers interviews Jim Aresenault, Tim Kaine’s pastor, on NPR: “Tim Kaine's Pastor Describes The Veep Pick's Life As A Devout Catholic”
Tim Kaine has worn many hats in Virginia politics: Richmond mayor, governor, senator. He's also a recognizable face at a majority-black Catholic church in Richmond — and has been for 30 years.
posted by Going To Maine at 6:55 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


That is to say, Kaine is active in his black community. I don’t know that any of the other veep candidates could make the same claim.
posted by Going To Maine at 6:57 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


https://twitter.com/ClaraJeffery/status/757010899643150336
posted by Yowser at 6:57 PM on July 23, 2016


I don't see anything there. At least it isn't trending.

This, I think.
posted by tonycpsu at 6:57 PM on July 23, 2016


There it is!
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 6:59 PM on July 23, 2016


This line of attack on Trump seems bound to backfire.

Sure, but Clinton isn't running on Kremlin talking points, changing the Democratic Party platform in favor of Russian foreign policy interests, being propagandized in the Russian press, or hiring campaign managers with ties to Viktor Yanukovych.
posted by Sara C. at 7:03 PM on July 23, 2016 [17 favorites]


All the foreign policy analyses I've read are pretty clear that Putin would far rather have President Trump than President Clinton. He thinks Trump would weaken the USA's political power compared to Clinton, and apparently he finds having to deal with female heads-of-state distasteful.
posted by schroedinger at 7:05 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Kelly McEvers interviews Jim Aresenault, Tim Kaine’s pastor, on NPR: “Tim Kaine's Pastor Describes The Veep Pick's Life As A Devout Catholic”

This is something else Clinton and Kaine have in common - they both seem to be actually pretty damn religious, in a way that seems in contrast to the majority of other high-level politicians, who may be religious but don't give the impression that they spend a lot of time actively thinking about it.
posted by showbiz_liz at 7:06 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


I have no problem with an FEC investigation into Trump's alleged campaign and business financing by foreign nationals or agents. If proven, such wrongful conduct should make it easy to pierce the corporate veil in a civil trial and recoup individual contributions and domestic investments. Extra-national entities would likely be out of luck initially, but I imagine the Clinton administration would allow these foreign investment groups to sue for control of those assets in American courts. Clinton's DOJ might even place the company's former directors into protective custody to assure their safety--we have seen what can happen to corporate officers who displease Russian sovereign investors.

tl;dr: lie down with Siberian huskies, wake up with your throat between their teeth
posted by infinitewindow at 7:08 PM on July 23, 2016


Clinton's DOJ might even place the company's former directors into protective custody to assure their safety--we have seen what can happen to corporate officers who displease Russian sovereign investors.

This is getting way too much into "lock them up" territory and isn't ok.
posted by zachlipton at 7:10 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


There it is!

I don't see anything in that link that verifies or supports what you were saying but I am happy to take it to memail to keep from derailing the thread.
posted by futz at 7:11 PM on July 23, 2016


Classic projection: Trump is pushing the "#HillaryForPrison" narrative because getting into the White House may be the only way HE can stay outta jail. But then, I have been disappointed since before he started running that he is NOT sharing a cell with Bernie Madoff, so what do I know?
posted by oneswellfoop at 7:13 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


What I don't really understand is, how does what Trump is doing not violate a zillion laws? I get that Russian oligarchs aren't donating directly to his campaign, but to Trump himself/his businesses, but still, since Trump's campaign has been largely self-funded until recently, isn't that a kind of money laundering? And how does this not make his international fundraising outreach "gaffe" highly suspicious? If nothing else, why is Trump still being allowed not to disclose his tax returns?

I feel like there's all this election law, and a deeper sense of Best Practices for running a campaign, but nobody seems to be applying it to Trump at all? Or is the idea that we let him get away with this stuff now and then slap him on the wrist about it if he loses?
posted by Sara C. at 7:13 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


I’ve seen commentary on the problem, but all from journalistic institutions. I think that it’s a hard problem, and it’d be great to hear the FEC comment…
posted by Going To Maine at 7:16 PM on July 23, 2016




zachlipton, you're right. It's too far and not okay. Mea culpa.
posted by infinitewindow at 7:16 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


how does what Trump is doing not violate a zillion laws?

He's been violating a zillion laws ever since his father first let him manage one of his segregated properties. Some rich kids were "born on third base"; Dishonest Don seems to have been "born with a Get Out Of Jail Free card". That's part of what makes his coronation frighteningly possible. He IS the Biggest Winner, and the Law is a Loser.
posted by oneswellfoop at 7:22 PM on July 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Guys I'm not seeing the antisemitism in that Wikileaks tweet can someone yes yes no me?

My reading of it: "Whats up with these hipsters who hate me for my awesome work adopting the triple backets that antisemites use ? Is it some weird trend now?"

What am I missing?
posted by Potomac Avenue at 7:22 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Can someone make a Putin/Pence logo with Trump faded to the background?
posted by mrzarquon at 7:23 PM on July 23, 2016 [3 favorites]




Potomac Avenue, I don't see it or get it, either.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:24 PM on July 23, 2016


After the reveal that Trump had been soliciting funds from Scottish MPs last month I'd be absolutely shocked if he hasn't solicited funds from all sorts of other politicians and other foreign nationals.

Russian Oil Revenues are down significantly but Trump seems like he could be bought and sold for a pretty low price and Putin could easily act through all sorts of cronies as intermediaries.

Putin basically seems to be running Russia as a crime lord would so I could totally see it being advantageous to provide favors to a shady real estate type in return for future favors.

Low risk potential for massive upside. And can you imagine what sort of leverage that Putin would have if Trump somehow wins and Putin has evidence of bribes and that sort of thing?
posted by vuron at 7:25 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


I thought the thing was that anti-Semites put the triple-bracket thing around Jews' names/handles, not around their own, and that people who thought this was bullshit adopted the triple brackets for themselves, around their own handles. So those people with triple brackets that WikiLeaks is referring to are "Jews and their sympathizers".
posted by jackbishop at 7:29 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


I'm trying super hard to see things from the Bernie-supporter side of things, and I'm looking at this WikiLeaks emails business and just.. ???

Sure, I get that it's clear the DNC didn't like him much, carpetbagget and all. But that's not the same thing as evidence of collusion, right? Isn't there a common experience of working someplace where there were some customers you didn't like much, but you still did you job for them? What exactly is it the DNC was supposed to have DONE to "rig the election"?

This is an honest question. I cannot make sense of this and I probably need to be able to to continue to relate to my family.
posted by Andrhia at 7:31 PM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


My reading of it: "Whats up with these hipsters who hate me for my awesome work adopting the triple backets that antisemites use ? Is it some weird trend now?

Potomac Avenue, I don't see it or get it, either.

So this is limited to my part of Twitter, but the people who I’ve seen adopting the triple parens are actual Jewish people -mostly journalists- who I’ve assumed are trying to call attention to the harassing of Jews on Twitter. I can see the hipster reading of it, which imply that the triple brackets have gone from serious complaint by legit folks to ironic symbolism, but it’s quite insensitive to the reason why folks started adopting it in the first place. Imagine if they noted that all of their critics kept using #BlackLivesMatter because they wanted to be so on trend.
posted by Going To Maine at 7:33 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Similarly, “tribalist symbol for social climbers” could be treating hipsters/journos as a tribe, trying to get into a positions of power, or -grossly- it could suggesting that non-Jews are pretending to be Jews in order to get in good with those who are in power. Which is really classic anti-semitism, and completely gross.
posted by Going To Maine at 7:39 PM on July 23, 2016


Gotcha, well I'm happy to see it as further proof of Assanges anti semitism or at least insensitive douchey but I see a lot of irony jokesters with like {{{Jalepeno Griot}}} as their handle now so it's hard not to read his confusion as potentially genuine.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 7:41 PM on July 23, 2016


After the reveal that Trump had been soliciting funds from Scottish MPs last month I'd be absolutely shocked if he hasn't solicited funds from all sorts of other politicians and other foreign nationals.

Let's try to keep things straight. The email solicitations is a big nothing. The incompetent Trump organization, having no party apparatus, simply bought a random email list from some vendor off the internet. It had some foreign names on the list. It's sloppy but no big deal.

On the other hand, it is well known that Trump's reputation is trash in in the U.S. for investors so he is forced to go to shady Russian investors to keep his businesses solvent. That is a real issue.
posted by JackFlash at 7:41 PM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


Jalepeno Griot is free btw as my gift to you.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 7:42 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


The fundraising email thing seemed like a gaffe at the time, but now that I know that he gets most of his personal money from shady Russian banks, I'm not so sure. I'm sure he didn't expect to actually get funds from Scottish MPs and the like, but could Putin cronies have been on that list?
posted by Sara C. at 7:47 PM on July 23, 2016


Color me surprised that "The Russkies are trying to steal the election!" is Democrats' conspiracy theory this year.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 7:51 PM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


I can vouch that Potomac Avenue does good work gratis for us all.
posted by Annika Cicada at 7:51 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


There are a lot of Russian threads here, but as far as NATO is concerned, when did it become a sacrosanct institution? It's a Cold War relic. Encircling Russia by adding former Warsaw Pact states to NATO is probably not good for the US, Russia or the world. The risk of nuclear war over Estonian sovereignty doesn't sound like an attractive proposition to me. This applies regardless of who is president or running for president in any particular country. Questioning whether NATO should continue to exist isn't an illogical position. Granted, Trump is raising it in his own ham-fisted way, but there's a real issue there.
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 7:55 PM on July 23, 2016


I'd like to know what email platform they used. Is there any info on how the breach/disclosure happened?
posted by Annika Cicada at 7:55 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Assange's anti-semitism has been around for years. Back in 2011 he was claiming to be the target of a Jewish conspiracy.

There are a lot of Russian threads here, but as far as NATO is concerned, when did it become a sacrosanct institution? It's a Cold War relic.

Um, have you been paying attention to Russian politics since Putin was in power? He seems pretty intent on taking over areas that he feels should be Russian and basically reinstating the Cold War. Stoking fear against the West and its "loose morals" is a huge part of keeping people from noticing how their country is in the sinkhole.
posted by schroedinger at 7:59 PM on July 23, 2016 [19 favorites]


It's not a reach to note that the public voice of WikiLeaks -- which hasn't been Assange for a while -- has always reflected the prevailing chan culture, and in the wake of goobergonks and the rise of Trump, the prevailing chan culture is basically /pol/, which means weaponised edgelord shit for lulz. It's also not a reach to note that the blacker-hatted Anon side of chan culture has drawn assistance from Russian and (probably Russian-sympathetic) Ukrainian hackers for ages.
posted by holgate at 8:01 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


The fundraising email thing seemed like a gaffe at the time, but now that I know that he gets most of his personal money from shady Russian banks, I'm not so sure. I'm sure he didn't expect to actually get funds from Scottish MPs and the like, but could Putin cronies have been on that list?

You don't find Russian oligarchs to fund your failing New York real estate business by soliciting $2500 from a million random email addresses. You call them on the phone or send your son over to talk to them. The email solicitation is just a typical Trump campaign screw up.
posted by JackFlash at 8:02 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


My reading of it: "Whats up with these hipsters who hate me for my awesome work adopting the triple backets that antisemites use ? Is it some weird trend now?"

I mean that's sort of a reading, but... The echos symbol has been kicking around the alt-right for a couple of years as a signal for "look how the people saying stuff seem to conveniently be Jews all the time," pretty much a stock "Jews control the media" trope. It's a form of Jew counting, which is a thing that tends not to go over so well, not least for ancient biblical reasons, but more significantly because making up lists of Jews tended to proceed the killing of the same.

So this became a thing after people noticed a Chrome extension called "The Coincidence Detector," which automatically put ((( ))) around thousands of Jewish names on websites to highlight their Jewishness.

In response, there were calls to reclaim the symbol and many added the echos to their own Twitter usernames, including many non-Jews in solidarity (the fact that non-Jews have adopted it as well is great, but also complicates things with the Wikileaks tweet a touch). As a result, the people who tend to use it are, by in large, Jewish people and non-Jews who have adopted it in solidarity, who by definition, tend to be toward the social justice/anti-harassment side of the spectrum. I could also get into how the alt-right has mocked people for this effort to reclaim the symbol, but that involves linking to vile hate sites, so let's just not go there.

So @Wikileaks comes along with two tweets, later deleted. The first one is basically saying "most of our critics seem to be Jews. What up with that?" The second one, in response to criticism, tries to argue that the echos symbol has drifted yet again, starting as an anti-Semitic signal, transforming into an effort to reclaim the symbol and combat antisemitism, and allegedly ending up as a "triballist designator for establishment climbers," whatever the heck that is. So to me, the tweet looks an awful lot like Jew counting, or at least Jew and Jew-sympathizer counting, which is incredibly gross, but they essentially tried to spin it as more like "our critics are weird SJW-types who all identify themselves in this way."

Add to that a few more bits of background. First, "triballist [sic]" is a bit of a trigger, accidentally or not I cannot say, given the association of the phrase "member of the tribe" with being Jewish. Then we have Julian Assange, who in 2011 blamed journalists for being part of aJewish conspiracy against him (Assange's denial). There's also Israel Shamir, noted anti-Semite and Holocaust denier, and his association with Wikileaks. And then there's other nasty stuff coming from the @Wikileaks Twitter account, such as this tweet from 2015 blaming the "Jewish pro-censorship lobby" for legitimizing the attacks on Carlie Hebdo (citing a 2009 lawsuit and apparently conflating it with acts of murder). In short, Wikileaks, and their Twitter handlers in particular, don't have the benefit of the doubt here.

Anyway, I hope that provides some context for the Wikileaks tweets and why people find them problematic.
posted by zachlipton at 8:04 PM on July 23, 2016 [47 favorites]


If I was a Baltic Republic I would definitely not be thinking that NATO was a relic of the cold war because honestly it's about the only thing keeping those three states from becoming the new Ossetia within Putin's new Soviet Union.

Putin's adventures in Ukraine seem to indicate that he definitely doesn't believe in self-determination of former Warsaw Pact states.
posted by vuron at 8:05 PM on July 23, 2016 [15 favorites]


Questioning whether NATO should continue to exist isn't an illogical position.

"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land,"

Trump isn't really questioning whether NATO should continue to exist. He suggested he could shake down Baltic states before satisfying treaty obligations, which is prima fucking facie impeachable. If he wants rid of NATO, then he can start running on that right now.

Trump's also ham-fistedly raising the question of whether sexual harassment in the workplace can be offset by career advancement. Shall we have a serious discussion about that too?
posted by holgate at 8:08 PM on July 23, 2016 [33 favorites]


You don't find Russian oligarchs to fund your failing New York real estate business by soliciting $2500 from a million random email addresses. You call them on the phone or send your son over to talk to them.

I'm aware of that, but to me that doesn't mean it wasn't done for a reason. Maybe that reason wasn't the same reason the Clinton campaign sent me 5 emails today, but it just doesn't seem like an innocent mistake anymore.
posted by Sara C. at 8:11 PM on July 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


The risk of nuclear war over Estonian sovereignty doesn't sound like an attractive proposition to me.

Must be nice not to be Estonian, I guess.
posted by Etrigan at 8:11 PM on July 23, 2016 [21 favorites]


To make my point clear: the witless musings of someone who thinks treaty obligations are akin to a Netflix subscription are not the jumping-off point for a discussion on NATO's relevance in 2016.
posted by holgate at 8:15 PM on July 23, 2016 [15 favorites]


Granted, Trump is raising it in his own ham-fisted way, but there's a real issue there.

Nothing Trump says is an attempt to raise discussion of real issues: assuming so reads hidden depths into the shallow pool of his brain. Everything it produces is random numbers, not the beginnings of coherent arguments, and taking it as more than sound and fury is to miss the forest for the trees.
posted by Going To Maine at 8:37 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


That is to say: discussing NATO is fine, but Donald Trump’s opinions are a poor jumping off point.
posted by Going To Maine at 8:41 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


with the exception of the super-lame "Low-energy Jeb Bush,"

I agree with the overall point of your comment, but I actually think "low-energy" was the BEST of the nicknames.
posted by snofoam at 8:42 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


CNN: Democratic chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz no longer has major speaking role at convention, source says, in wake of email leak at DNC.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:44 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


CNN: Democratic chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz no longer has major speaking role at convention, source says, in wake of email leak at DNC.

The wheels on the bus go round and round until you are thrown under the bus I guess.
posted by futz at 8:47 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


I'm not going to be a person who says that suborning the internal politics of another country is only okay when Americans do it. But I do believe the United States, both its government and its people, have a right and an interest to stop it when it happens to the United States, and have a right and an interest in preventing it from happening again. Here's one way to deal with campaign money laundering over the last decade by foreign powers.

A regular Congress led by the GOP would at least loudly protest any action to seize and administer properties used in campaign money laundering by a McCain or a Romney, or any losing candidate who had longstanding Republican credentials and had released tax returns. I can't predict what GOP leaders of the 115th Congress might whip or offer as talking points after closed-door conversations with heads of select intelligence committees, though.

Russian investors and directors in corporate-veil-piercing cases should be able to defend themselves in civil and criminal cases just like any other domestic or foreign business investor. All they would need to do at trial is show a preponderance of evidence that they did not aim to suborn the political process of the United States by laundering money through certain business ventures. All the usual Constitutional rules of evidence and due process protections would apply.

The business ventures in question could be held in trust by the United States and managed by hired guns as for-profit entities until judgments are reached. The ventures might even make a profit with a slight makeover, which would accrue solely to non-foreign owners if a verdict against foreign investors was reached. Criminal charges against high-profile individuals or foreign officers would not be pursued due to higher evidentiary standards, difficulty in extraditing defendants, and political considerations. Low-profile domestic actors could be given conditional immunity from prosecution in exchange for sealed testimony and lifelong good behavior.

Foreign actors could be png'd, and other governments could be given access to evidence that might result in entry bars for those actors as well.

Best case scenario:
  • foreign bad actors lose their shirt on their "investment"
  • FEC gets some real funding and teeth as a part of the US national security apparatus
  • SCOTUS justices get an object lesson about how the Citizens United v. FEC decision is bad, dangerous law, setting the stage for a new case overturning or limiting that prior decision
  • GOP pols can avoid spurious accusations of giving aid and comfort to hostile nation-states
  • no one gets locked up for losing an election
I am positive that I'm oversimplifying things and neglecting second-order effects or foreign retaliation. No one should ever take high-stakes national security advice from me. Still, I had a lot more fun thinking this sequence of possible events through, even if I got a little carried away (again, thanks for the call-out, zachlipton).

I'm glad I built a couple of walls of text instead of a snarky parody of Boney M's "Rasputin" with Putin-oligarch-Trump lyrics, which is how my prior comment started.
posted by infinitewindow at 8:53 PM on July 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


I thought Kaine was an uninspired choice until the speech today. Now... I can see him being really useful in GOTV in NC and NV and AZ. And he's enough of a center-left white guy that he might draw some disaffected Republicans.

You know what's nice? Most of the Democrats will be in Philly this time out. That's in contrast to 2012, and in EXTREMELY stark contrast to this past week.
posted by dw at 8:56 PM on July 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


After watching him speak today, Kaine seems like a pretty good pick.

Does anyone else think his voice sounds a little like Saul Goodman?
posted by strange chain at 9:01 PM on July 23, 2016


Meanwhile Trump is still complaining about Cruz.

That was only like four days ago. Trump is still pissed off about "short-fingered vulgarian" and Spy Magazine folded in 1998. I wouldn't be surprised at a Rosebud moment where all this anger and posturing goes back to Mike Delancey stealing his lunch money in Grade 2.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 9:13 PM on July 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


(Clunky, yet original. Consider it.)
posted by snofoam at 9:20 PM on July 23, 2016


I really, really hope there is some slick way Clinton can slip mentions of Cruz into the debates. It would be delicious.
posted by schroedinger at 9:31 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


I'd take a reference to Game of Thrones and Littlefingers as enough to cause Trump to go off on his hand size.
posted by mrzarquon at 9:38 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


The echos symbol has been kicking around the alt-right for a couple of years as a signal for "look how the people saying stuff seem to conveniently be Jews all the time," pretty much a stock "Jews control the media" trope. It

GAH I AM BEHIND THE TIMES my friends are still surrounding names in parentheses for virtual hugs.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 9:58 PM on July 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


I really, really hope there is some slick way Clinton can slip mentions of Cruz into the debates. It would be delicious.

I'm pretty sure she'll at least remind people to "vote your conscience."
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 10:20 PM on July 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


Can Trump even get a security clearance? That would be awkward if someone decided he was a little concerning on several of the adjudication guidelines

From an Adjudication FAQ:
The adjudicator considers the following factors when evaluating an individual’s conduct:

The nature, extent and seriousness of the conduct
The circumstances surrounding the conduct, to include knowledgeable participation
The frequency of the conduct
How recently the conduct occurred
The individual’s age and maturity at the time of the conduct
The voluntariness of participation
The presence or absence of rehabilitation and other pertinent behavioral changes
The motivation for the conduct
The potential for pressure, coercion, exploitation, or duress; and
The likelihood of continuation of the conduct
Um...
posted by ctmf at 10:53 PM on July 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


The wheels on the bus go round and round until you are thrown under the bus I guess.

As being tossed under the wheels goes, not having a "major speaking role" is relatively toothless. Seems like more of an optics thing than anything else but optics are important.
posted by Justinian at 11:06 PM on July 23, 2016


A compromise between the Bernie and Hillary people will bind roughly 2/3 of superdelegates to their state results in future elections.

Nothing on caucuses. Probably because primaries/caucuses are decisions made on the state level. But I'd still like an official statement strongly urging all states to go with primaries as caucuses are basically the least democratic method imaginable short of having one person make the decision.
posted by Justinian at 11:12 PM on July 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


Hey Everyone.

I just remembered Last Week Tonight comes back on the air this Sunday night.
posted by mrzarquon at 11:24 PM on July 23, 2016 [8 favorites]


Democratic chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz no longer has major speaking role at convention, source says, in wake of email leak at DNC.

She should have been removed from leadership of the DNC before this election cycle, but at least it's some kind of public rebuke, I guess.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 1:28 AM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


Great, the media has already got their "DNC is a Disaster Too!" narrative and we haven't even started yet.
posted by mmoncur at 1:59 AM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


This year the only non-disaster American political convention is probably the Libertarian one.
posted by Apocryphon at 2:32 AM on July 24, 2016


Well, I mean, by definition anything that happens at the Libertarian convention is acceptable to all other Libertarians. Freedom!
posted by Joey Michaels at 2:34 AM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


At the Convention Center there is the actual car in which JFK was assassinated

Which is very historically interesting but a little weird at the WE! ARE! CHEERFUL! convention. Because you're staring at it and thinking about JFK and Camelot and then Dallas and oh but we have LBJ and hello Vietnam.
posted by angrycat at 3:31 AM on July 24, 2016


(and I'm an LBJ fan, it's just that the sixties were politically tough)
posted by angrycat at 3:32 AM on July 24, 2016


Wasn't the Libertarian convention the one where they kept playing music from the musical celebrating the guy who came up with all the stuff they despise?

But yes, I fully expect the DNC to be a trainwreck, brought to you by the kind of person who is sure that "we" would survive a Trump presidency, and the people who wouldn't are acceptable collateral damage.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 4:28 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


This year the only non-disaster American political convention is probably the Libertarian one.

They already had theirs back in May. Among the highlights on stage were a striptease, a candidate insisting that small children be allowed to inject heroin, and the nominee being booed for saying he would have voted for the Civil Rights Act. I don't know if that counts as a disaster, but it certainly came off as a clown show.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:46 AM on July 24, 2016 [53 favorites]


John Kerry has just proposed cooperating with Russia in Syria and that plan is being denounced as naive and risky. It's hard to imagine the party of Reagan is being led by a man sympathetic to Putin. I don't think Americans are ready to rethink their stance on Russia.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:17 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


I have really bummed out trans women friends in their 20's voting for Jill Stein.

I try to be kind and loving and supportive, but I'm sure they sense a lot my other feelings that I'm not sharing as well.
posted by Annika Cicada at 5:19 AM on July 24, 2016


Oh boy. @realDonaldTrump seems to have been taken over by Meredith. Sad!
Looks to me like the Bernie people will fight. If not there blood, sweat and tears was a total waist of time. Kaine stands for opposite!
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:32 AM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm actually in agreement that small children should be permitted to inject heroin, but I find in practice they're clumsy and keep missing my veins.

what, I should inject my own heroin? like some animal?
posted by um at 5:38 AM on July 24, 2016 [13 favorites]


Um, that comment just painted eleven different horrific dystopian futures for me hahahaha. Y'all know I used to be a libertarian? When I was 18 I voted for Andre Marrou. Christ I was such a passionate little shit back then.
posted by Annika Cicada at 5:42 AM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


So apparently Bernie isn't going to be pulling a Ted Cruz at the convention, anyway. Not that I ever thought he would, but it sounds like he's going to be giving Hillary a full, enthusiastic endorsement.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:49 AM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


I haven't seen this posted yet.... what the hell is Trump's social media team doing?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:52 AM on July 24, 2016 [15 favorites]


I haven't seen this posted yet.... what the hell is Trump's social media team doing?

Okay..
That was really, really weird.

"Vote for me. Look at the percentage of applause I get!"
posted by Jalliah at 6:00 AM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


...The Republican nominee for president made comments Friday that one might expect from a patient in a mental institution, the kind of stuff you might read on blog with really small print and pictures of UFOs. And yet his remarks barely register as news. There are no condemnations from fellow Republicans. His supporters shrug them off as Trump being Trump.

...All of this misses the point. It's not about tactics or messaging. It's about something simpler and something much more important: Donald Trump is not of sound mind.

His amplification of the Cruz-Oswald conspiracies is part of a long pattern of embracing crazy. He hinted that Antonin Scalia was murdered. He's suggested autism is linked to vaccinations. He claimed "thousands" of Muslims celebrated in the streets of New Jersey after 9/11. He said many people consider Vince Foster's death a "murder" and called it "very fishy." And before he ran for president, his deepest foray into politics was a campaign to prove that Barack Obama wasn't born in the United States. (It failed.)
Donald Trump Is Crazy, and So Is the GOP for Embracing Him
posted by y2karl at 6:26 AM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


Omg that honestly seems like a Clickhole video.
posted by mothershock at 6:26 AM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


Here is everything you need to know about TowelCharmGate.

1.) Mike Pence's wife has a website* that sells Towel Charms, which is a small piece of jewelry in the shape of a hot dog or clam or baseball glove that you attach to your towel so that no one walks off with your towel at your next pool party.

2.) Jezebel made fun of this item. Others followed.

3.) Now according to Newsmax, Sarah Palin has responded on Facebook:
"Absolutely amazes me that the liberal mindset allows mocking the American work ethic," the former Alaska governor said on Facebook. "Belittling an entrepreneurial spirit got us into the mess we're in with dependency on a failed, bankrupt government.
Good to see that Sarah Palin is still alive and well. I got a little worried when she was absent from the RNC because "Alaska is too far away" and she was apparently too busy to make a video. Thankfully she is not too busy to read Jezebel and update her Facebook page.

*I'm not linking to her website because "The owner of towelcharm.com has configured their website improperly. To protect your information from being stolen, Firefox has not connected to this website."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:32 AM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


Trump For Narcissist in Chief!
posted by sotonohito at 6:34 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Maybe we can just find a nice pond to sit Trump by and the problem will solve itself.
posted by Talez at 6:37 AM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


Preferably in the Everglades.
posted by y2karl at 6:44 AM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]




Oh my goodness, those towel charms cost $6.25 each, not for a whole set! Four of them would cost $25. For towel charms! Guys: we have Pinterest now. If you really need towel charms, you can figure out how to make them with about $2 worth of supplies from Michaels (or Hobby Lobby, if you want Christian towel charms, which I'm sure Karen Pence does.)
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 6:54 AM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Those towel charms would probably be great for keeping track of your towel at your next orgy
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:55 AM on July 24, 2016 [16 favorites]


This is my favorite response to the applause video so far:
I have been sitting here for five minutes trying to think of a parody of this video and I cannot. There are no jokes to make.
posted by XtinaS at 6:57 AM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


Finally got a chance to watch his speech in Miami, and holy cow you guys - he's Jimmy Stewart, he's a Norman Rockwell painting come to life, someone up thread said he's what their Catholic grandma wished the poster had grown up to be, and yeah. (This is not snark, this is my cynical ass being amazed that folks like this are still in politics.) Even if it's half fake, that cheerful helpful sincerity is gonna go over like gangbusters here in the Midwest - we're gonna eat him up like a cupcake. I got no problem at all with the guy. (I bet he gives the Secret Service fits, though. He's gonna want to pull over at every other roadside diner and small business and go shoot the shit with the patrons and employees.)

And back to being pretty cynical - if you're a journo on the road, which campaign would you want to be on? The one with the angry orange yelling guy and the stick-in-the-mud, or the one where the cheerful goof hangs out on the press bus and plays gin rummy and is all, "Hey you guys, here, you gotta try this homemade kolacky they gave us"? I bet the Dem campaign just got a serious bump in the positivity of their press coverage.
posted by soundguy99 at 7:06 AM on July 24, 2016 [44 favorites]


Does Donald Trump even have a campaign? He has the occasional rally, right? But isn't it just him and Twitter? What is there to cover?

I feel like Trump is the control in an experiment to find out if campaigns matter: if you actually need to go on the trail, organize volunteers, give speeches, run ads, get out the vote, collect data, do anything. And maybe you don't.
posted by argybarg at 7:14 AM on July 24, 2016 [19 favorites]


24 ÷ 75 = 32%. Typical 1%-er math.
posted by biogeo at 7:15 AM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


Sanders on DWS on Meet the Press: "I think she should resign, period. And I think we need a new chair who is going to lead us in a very different direction."
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:17 AM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


I really like Tim Kaine, but I already see people insisting he's (1) unethical for receiving gifts and (2) in bed with radical Islamists because he gave a speech at a PAC where another guy (who had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood) also spoke.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
posted by stolyarova at 7:22 AM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


Sanders on DWS on Meet the Press: "I think she should resign, period..."

She's resigning at the end of the convention, so Thursday night or Friday. He needs it to be faster? He thinks whatever job responsibilities she has at the convention can be hastily shoved onto someone else without any stumbles?
posted by puddledork at 7:52 AM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


This year the only non-disaster American political convention is probably the Libertarian one.

They already had theirs back in May. Among the highlights on stage were a striptease, a candidate insisting that small children be allowed to inject heroin, and the nominee being booed for saying he would have voted for the Civil Rights Act. I don't know if that counts as a disaster, but it certainly came off as a clown show.


Everything about this screams disaster. The whole world is in disaster-mode. (sorry for Washington Times link. Go moonies!)
posted by dis_integration at 7:55 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


She's resigning at the end of the convention

Got a link for that? Last I heard they were talking about it but no decision was made.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:56 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


So apparently Bernie isn't going to be pulling a Ted Cruz at the convention, anyway. Not that I ever thought he would, but it sounds like he's going to be giving Hillary a full, enthusiastic endorsement.

Which isn't surprising, since he already gave Clinton his official endorsement before the RNC even started.

Speaking of which, it looks like the Bernie or Bust phenomenon was a bit overblown, surprising nobody. (~18% favourable sounds like a big deal until you remember that "views favourably" is not the same as "will turn out to vote for".)

the one where the cheerful goof hangs out on the press bus and plays gin rummy and is all, "Hey you guys, here, you gotta try this homemade kolacky they gave us"?

Well, now we know what The Onion's take on Tim Kaine will be.
posted by tobascodagama at 8:04 AM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


I thought one of the orders of business at the convention was to vote for a new party chair, and that it would likely be someone that Clinton hand-picked? That's the impression I got from this article among others I have been reading for many months.

It makes Sanders' campaign against DWS a little bit Quixotic, unless he really thinks Clinton will want her for another term.
posted by muddgirl at 8:07 AM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


Bernie continuing to support the Democrats makes him look like a sad Chris Christie figure after this leak.

Bernie continuing to support the Democrats, after receiving DWS' head on a platter, is more respectable.

Kayfabe with her on the way out anyway...
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 8:13 AM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]




I don't get the impression that Sanders is capable of kayfabe. I think he is genuinely upset at the fact that DWS and the DNC have no respect for him, and he wants to make them bleed, even though taking the high road would likely lead to better results for him and for his movement.

A lot of Democrats are not happy with DWS as party chair and would be more than willing to help stymie her re-election, if that was an option on the table. But Sanders appears to be constitutionally incapable of making and keeping allies.
posted by muddgirl at 8:20 AM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


That kolacky comment got me really excited thinking that was Tim Kaine's Ice Cream.
posted by mrzarquon at 8:26 AM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


Bernie continuing to support the Democrats makes him look like a sad Chris Christie figure after this leak.

Or maybe to Bernie it's about a lot more than Bernie.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:27 AM on July 24, 2016 [19 favorites]




'See you in Philly': Anti-Clinton protesters converging on Democratic convention

Count me really skeptical about how CNN got that figure of "tens of thousands" of protestors - most of the related-hashtag tweets seem to have a few hundred likes or retweets at best.

And considering one of the "things to watch out for" they mention is a group with a giant inflatable joint . . . yeah, this is the MSM trying to bump the "look at the Freakshow!!" elements, maybe hoping for a repeat of 1968. I want much better evidence before worrying that there's a serious concerted organized effort to disrupt the convention.
posted by soundguy99 at 8:37 AM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


The gifts thing seems pretty weaksauce as scandals go. If this is the best dirt they've got on Tim Kaine than the man is, by political standards, a saint.

It was all duly reported and aboveboard. And, hell, by the standards of such things in politics, pretty low-value. The largest two donors, as far as I can tell ($45K from Obama for America, $20K from Moving Virginia Forward) weren't even giving him gifts, much less quid-pro-quo gifts --- they were paying his expenses while he was performing a perfectly legitimate task for them in his professional capacity. The third largest gift is from someone who AFAICT is a personal friend of Kaine's who had no particular agenda to float, just a vacation home to share. Look down the list and most of these are seriously hard to tie to any actual or even potential corruption. I haven't looked at all the smaller donations, but the Teva Pharmeceuticals ($12K) donation is the closest there is to something which could be regarded as seriously compromising.

(Aside: it costs $12K to attend the Democratic Governors' Association meeting? Seriously?)
posted by jackbishop at 8:42 AM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


That towel charm thing uggggh. Jezebel making fun of them is so low. It's just like wine glass charms. I just spent 5 minutes arguing that if we got a hot tub and I wanted to have an organized wine and hot tub party we could have both wine glass and towel charms. It would be pretty cool. Mrs. Pence's are actually pretty decent looking (when I saw hot dugs and baseball gloves I was expecting variations on brown plastic.)
posted by R343L at 8:42 AM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


Tim Kaine can speak Spanish. But most Hispanics don't care.

Makes sense, since polls before the Kaine pick showed Latinos picking Clinton by huge margin.
posted by fitnr at 8:43 AM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


Got a link for that?

Whoops. I read it somewhere on the intertubes. So the truth level of my assertion is looking doubtful.
posted by puddledork at 8:44 AM on July 24, 2016


Does Donald Trump even have a campaign? He has the occasional rally, right? But isn't it just him and Twitter? What is there to cover?

It's a little surreal how little of a campaign he has. I live here in one of the most vital swing states and yet the Pennsylvania section of his website hasn't been updated since the primary in May.
posted by octothorpe at 8:50 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


I am glad that our black and brown brothers and sisters, our LGBTQ brothers and sisters, our Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, etc brothers and sisters are keeping their eyes on the prize.

If you are White, Male, Cisgender, Christian, etc you might be willing to risk Trump. I know that my privilege will insulate me from almost all the negative consequences of a possible Trump presidency. I am lucky, I was born with a ton of advantages and through my life have been able to add to those advantages.

However I refuse to be one of those people that pull up the drawbridge behind me. Are Hillary and Kaine perfect? Nope but they are good enough and compared to the alternatives I can't see choosing anything different.
posted by vuron at 8:51 AM on July 24, 2016 [25 favorites]


Tim Kaine can speak Spanish. But most Hispanics don't care.

...says a Bernie campaign surrogate, the reporter, and a poll from last year.
posted by one_bean at 8:53 AM on July 24, 2016 [18 favorites]


That was really, really weird.

"Vote for me. Look at the percentage of applause I get!"


Seems to me Tovarishch Stalin had a similar metric. Than again, he had the NKVD waiting in the wings to haul away the first person who stopped and sat down. Stalin had the best security apparatus – they were just unbelievable. I mean, you have never seen security like this.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 8:55 AM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


I thought one of the orders of business at the convention was to vote for a new party chair, and that it would likely be someone that Clinton hand-picked? That's the impression I got from this article among others I have been reading for many months.

Yes, Clinton placed her own selection, Brandon Davis, in charge of the DNC over a month ago when the primaries were over. Debbie Wasserman Schultz's role is only figurative until a new leader is formally chosen. Sanders obsession seems petty and personal, similar to Trump's obsession with Cruz. It makes him appear as a bitter old man who still hasn't accepted the fact that he was beaten and beaten soundly. But that isn't stopping Clinton from making a gesture by handing over DWS's bloody head.
posted by JackFlash at 8:55 AM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


I know that my privilege will insulate me from almost all the negative consequences of a possible Trump presidency. I am lucky, I was born with a ton of advantages and through my life have been able to add to those advantages.

I invite you to do some reading on what happened to German liberals, socialists, and communists in the Reich.
posted by Pope Guilty at 8:57 AM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


True that, which is all the more reason to stop this shit now before people lose their lives
posted by vuron at 9:00 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Seems to me Tovarishch Stalin had a similar metric

Well the NYTimes did just run the headline Donald Trump, Man of Steel!

Count me really skeptical about how CNN got that figure of "tens of thousands" of protestors

Yes, I'm not sure how they got that figure. One thing that is happening is that some socialist groups and others are meeting in Philly during the DNC convention. However for my money they're probably going to be outnumbered by disgruntled Bernie supporters. We'll see how it plays out.
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 9:02 AM on July 24, 2016


Sanders obsession seems petty and personal, similar to Trump's obsession with Cruz. It makes him appear as a bitter old man who still hasn't accepted the fact that he was beaten and beaten soundly.

It is as if Sanders can't leave it behind unless he knows he has defeated someone.

The gendered aspect of his (and Weaver's) obsession with that someone being Wasserman Shultz rather than, for instance, the other high-ranking officials (such as CFO Brad Marshall) who wrote many of the questionable emails from the wikileaks dump is probably just a coincidence, but is still quite striking.
posted by dersins at 9:06 AM on July 24, 2016 [16 favorites]


Vote for me. Look at the percentage of applause I get!

Mew York Times interview:
HABERMAN: What do you think people will take away from this convention? What are you hoping?

TRUMP: From the convention? The fact that I’m very well liked.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:07 AM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


>I know that my privilege will insulate me from almost all the negative consequences of a possible Trump presidency

I sure as hell don't.

People think we survived the serial Bush fuck-ups, but I'm not so sure.

Like Bush's unthinking bravado, Trump too will write checks somebody else is going to have to cash.

A Trump admin will get the ol' GOP gang back together --> Coolidge/Hoover, Ike/Nixon, Reagan/Bush, GWB/Cheney . . . I see a pattern there, a trajectory if you will.

One more turn of the screws just might do it.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 9:07 AM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Tim Kaine can speak Spanish. But most Hispanics don't care.

They probably care a lot that the response to Kaine was "I didn’t have to get a translator" and a reduction of their languages, heritages, and cultures to Dora the Explorer.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:10 AM on July 24, 2016 [11 favorites]


Oh my goodness, those towel charms cost $6.25 each, not for a whole set!

I spend less than $6.25 on the beach towel.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:10 AM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


Tim Kaine can speak Spanish. But most Hispanics don't care.

"Here's what the minorities think; A series for White people who don't know any."

I heard they love Trump.
posted by bongo_x at 9:12 AM on July 24, 2016 [14 favorites]


They probably care a lot that the response to Kaine was "I didn’t have to get a translator" and a reduction of their languages, heritages, and cultures to Dora the Explorer.

The Trump campaign should just bow to the inevitable and make their slogan, "With Friends Like These, Who Needs Enemies?"
posted by soundguy99 at 9:14 AM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Trump definitely needs enemies, as many as possible. It's hard to scare your followers without them.
posted by EarBucket at 9:17 AM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


I'm really happy to see most of y'all have come around on the Kaine VP pick. If he can change a bunch of pissy Democrats' minds by giving one speech, he must doing something right. Now he just has to help convince independents, NeverTrumpers and Bernie-or-Bust hold-outs.

I'm an evil Bernie supporter from Virginia who used to live in Richmond when he was mayor. Is he a social democrat like me? No. Is he a decent Democratic candidate, who actually seems to genuinely care about opposing racial discrimination and inequality (unlike most white Democratic politicians in Virginia, unfortunately)? Yes! I have no problem with this pick.
posted by nangar at 9:17 AM on July 24, 2016 [15 favorites]


Well the NYTimes did just run the headline Donald Trump, Man of Steel!

And just below the headline, this super PAC ad. For shit's sake.
posted by tivalasvegas at 9:18 AM on July 24, 2016


The whole "Tim Kaine can speak Spanish" thing seems to be missing the point. Yeah, if a politician busts out his three semesters of college Spanish to get in tight with the minority voters than the Latin demographic will roll their eyes and not without reason, but it's not like Kaine picked up Spanish just on a lark or to fulfill his BA requirement or somesuch. He spent a year on a social-work mission in Honduras, and that's the context. And, yes, while Honduras is culturally distinct from, say, Mexico or the Dominican Republic or Puerto Rico, having actual Latin-American experience of an emphatically non-touristy character does resonate with those voters, far more perhaps than the fact that he had the language-acquisition skills to learn how to speak the language in the process. Although speaking the language reminds them of all that other stuff too.
posted by jackbishop at 9:26 AM on July 24, 2016 [28 favorites]


I agree with the more benign interpretation of the use of triple parentheses. My brother is media director for a major human rights organization and he has also used them as a symbol of solidarity with the *targets* of white supremacists.

To me this tangent serves as a convenient distraction / smear which shouldn't have any bearing on the actual *content* of the leaks (which wikileaks didn't create, remember), but nevertheless probably will.

I would hope more thoughtful people will be able to keep the originator of the content separate in their minds from its publisher and their motivation. Just because you or I don't like the publisher's motivation, whatever it is, doesn't make the content any less factual; remember, the DNC emails are (presumably) ver batim material.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 9:27 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


So here's my problem with Tim Kaine, Hillary, and the "vote for the centrists in the pocket of the capitalists or get the fascists in the pockets of slightly different capitalists."

Oh you needed more than that? OK, All of you centrists act like the left vote is so untrustworthy and that's why the democrats don't court our vote. However, we always end up seeming to vote for these puppets anyway. I know I'm voting for Hillary. The DNC acts like our vote is in the bag and therefore never have to court us. This is the last election for me knuckling under the pressure of centrists afraid of the poor getting food, workers getting decent wages and benefits, and people of color getting treated as humans. I know you all SAY that's what you want, but your very next sentence is "But what can you do, amirite?!"
I'm sick of this shit. In 1932, this country was sick of this shit & voted for FDR and a whole bunch of ground breaking regulations to get this country back on it's feet. 80 some odd years later and all I hear is Well, what can we do? I know what I can do, I'm gonna start voting for people who reflect the change I want to see in this country and not a bunch of centrists who want to continue feeding at the trough, and maybe throw a bone at the progressives every once in a while. I'm actually starting this election with my votes for congress and any local elections. Go ahead keep voting for figurative change (well she's a woman!) I'm done.
posted by evilDoug at 9:35 AM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


Leaks are inherently one-sided. We don't get to read the RNC's e-mails because Russian hackers, coincidentally, haven't deigned to access them. When you get one-sided information without anything to compare it to, you have to evaluate the source and their motivations. It's like saying "well sure Cheney has spent his life enriching himself off of energy and defense concerns, but as far as I can tell Hussein really does have yellow cake uranium." When you're evaluating information that you're not supposed to have, understanding why you have it is fundamental to its interpretation.
posted by one_bean at 9:35 AM on July 24, 2016 [32 favorites]


evilDoug: I know you all SAY that's what you want, but your very next sentence is "But what can you do, amirite?!"

Literally no Democrat I've supported has ever said anything remotely similar to this, and I certainly don't believe it myself.
I'm also not a centrist, yet do not feel unrepresented by Clinton. I think most of us voters contain multitudes.
posted by Superplin at 9:38 AM on July 24, 2016 [25 favorites]


considering what the republicans are willing and eager to say in public and on the record i shiver with nausea to imagine what they're saying in private.
posted by poffin boffin at 9:39 AM on July 24, 2016 [14 favorites]


An RNC leak would be way, way worse, but it's still a little horrifying how gross many people were willing to be using DNC addresses.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:39 AM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


(which wikileaks didn't create, remember)

They didn't create this leak, but they are curating its release. For example, they claim "The emails cover the period from January last year until 25 May this year." but I have seen zero emails related to Sanders from prior to the aftermath of the Nevada caucus. Not a single person at the DNC mentioned Sanders prior to that? Really?
posted by muddgirl at 9:44 AM on July 24, 2016 [17 favorites]


How is hacking the DNC's emails any different from the Watergate break-in? If Trump wins the election, that's a clear path to his immediate impeachment, no?
posted by Sys Rq at 9:44 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


i assume there would need to be a clear evidence path linking trump directly and/or knowingly to the hack, which, considering the intelligence of the person in question, i further assume exists and is comically blatant. so fingers crossed really.
posted by poffin boffin at 9:46 AM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


not the hack itself, i mean, he's barely intelligent enough to use twitter. i mean linking him to the deliberate release of the information.
posted by poffin boffin at 9:47 AM on July 24, 2016


I don't think Trump had anything to do with the leak.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:48 AM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


I'm sick of this shit. In 1932, this country was sick of this shit & voted for FDR and a whole bunch of ground breaking regulations to get this country back on it's feet.

Yes, but would today's Left do it? Would he be pure enough?
posted by bongo_x at 9:50 AM on July 24, 2016 [18 favorites]


Nope, just Trump's most fervent supporters.
posted by oneswellfoop at 9:50 AM on July 24, 2016


I know you all SAY that's what you want, but your very next sentence is "But what can you do, amirite?!"

Actually, I hear a lot of people say "Get the key issues in the platform, and people who fight for those issues in downticket races." That sounds dismissive, but to use an analogy from our evil twins, the Tea Party became a force to be reckoned with in the Republican party not by getting their chosen candidate at the top of the ticket, but by getting an awful lot of their people into state legislatures, Congress, and governorships. Substantive change in American politics begins at the bottom, and it all too often looks (even if inaccurately) like progressives only show up every four years to fight the same fight for the same lofty position without ever changing their position on the ground.
posted by jackbishop at 9:51 AM on July 24, 2016 [37 favorites]


This year the only non-disaster American political convention is probably the Libertarian one.

Samantha Bee has this covered!

(Spoiler alert: she goes to the Libertarian convention. It's kind of a disaster.)
posted by triggerfinger at 9:51 AM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


I don't think Trump had anything to do with the leak.

idk if i do either, really? but what i mean is that if he DID, then i assume that there is cartoon batman supervillain levels of buffoonery wrt ridiculously blatant evidence that he did. like a big box labeled CRIME EVIDENCE or something
posted by poffin boffin at 9:53 AM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


BLM needs to talk to their parents, because a lot of them were behind the crack panic.

Usually best to avoid:

- assuming people fighting their own oppression don't know their history
- telling people fighting their own oppression "hey u r doin it wrong"
- assuming BLM is made of up of naive young people
- blaming black people for the fucking crack panic that the lily white media hyped and the lily white federal government used to criminalize an entire generation of the black community, wrecking their life prospects in the process

I'm sorry but that comment is insanely gross.
posted by sallybrown at 9:54 AM on July 24, 2016 [78 favorites]


Tim Kaine can speak Spanish. But most Hispanics don't care.

Anecdotally one of my Latino friends who is still a major BernieBro posted to facebook that he found it insulting that Kaine thought he could appeal to Latinx people by speaking Spanish while Clinton passed over actual Latinx people for the spot.

All my other Latinx friends think it's pretty cool that Kaine can and does speak Spanish.

zombieflanders They probably care a lot that the response to Kaine was "I didn’t have to get a translator" and a reduction of their languages, heritages, and cultures to Dora the Explorer.


Holy shit. It's like the Republicans are actively trying to drive away any Latinx voters that might possibly be inclined to vote for them. And Trump's English was a "language understood by all Americans".

They're going full bore American == white. If you don't speak English, to them, you're just not an American.
posted by sotonohito at 9:54 AM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


I know what I can do, I'm gonna start voting for people who reflect the change I want to see in this country and not a bunch of centrists who want to continue feeding at the trough, and maybe throw a bone at the progressives every once in a while. I'm actually starting this election with my votes for congress and any local elections. Go ahead keep voting for figurative change (well she's a woman!) I'm done.

I have almost always voted Green in the past (at the national level) as a protest against exactly the dynamic you identify.

This November, for the first time in my life I'll be voting for the Democrat for President. I can't be content with a small victory against the fascists. I want to run up the fucking score.
posted by tivalasvegas at 9:55 AM on July 24, 2016 [41 favorites]


If you don't speak English, to them, you're just not an American.

this has openly been the case for hundreds of years.
posted by poffin boffin at 9:56 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Electing a woman President isn't "figurative" change. It's literal, actual change of the status quo.
posted by sallybrown at 9:57 AM on July 24, 2016 [35 favorites]


BLM needs to talk to their parents, because a lot of them were behind the crack panic.

The crack PROBLEM was one in the Black community. The crack PANIC was a promotional effort by an alliance of the people who wanted to build a"prison-industrial complex" and the more-white-than-black record executives who wanted to make "Gangsta Rap" a popular genre.
posted by oneswellfoop at 9:59 AM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


It's literal, actual change of the status quo.

Yeas, at the margins.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 9:59 AM on July 24, 2016


Go ahead keep voting for figurative change (well she's a woman!)

Claiming that female representation is merely figurative in the way that only a man can do!
posted by triggerfinger at 10:01 AM on July 24, 2016 [65 favorites]




I don't get the impression that Sanders is capable of kayfabe. I think he is genuinely upset at the fact that DWS and the DNC have no respect for him, and he wants to make them bleed, even though taking the high road would likely lead to better results for him and for his movement.

Or maybe he somehow thinks the best thing for his movement is party leadership without a record of trying to sabotage that movement

so weird, right
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 10:02 AM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


evilDoug, why is it the responsibility of everyone to the right of you to agree with you?
posted by argybarg at 10:03 AM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


Michael Bloomberg Will Endorse Hillary Clinton

ctrl + c
ctrl + v
send to Dad
posted by sallybrown at 10:05 AM on July 24, 2016 [13 favorites]


> There it is!

Did you even read your own link.

If you have a critique for the resistance—for our resistance—then you’d better have an established record of critique of our oppression. If you have no interest… If you have no interest in equal rights for black people, then do not make suggestions to those who do. Sit down. - Jesse Williams
posted by rtha at 10:05 AM on July 24, 2016 [20 favorites]


I find the whole towel charm thing silly-- both the items themselves but also the kerfuffle. If she can make money from selling towel charms, then what do I care? However, I don't really see how spending $25.00 for a set of four is going to pay off in reduced laundry bills nor as a houseguest would I be "charmed" by being offered a towel with a piece of sharp metal dangling from it. I guess I am not her audience.

And if that is not enough faux outrage for you today there is this: Bernie Sanders has a framed photograph of the gorilla Harambe on his shelf. Oh no wait! He doesn't.
Irish Twitter user @PrayForPatrick shared this mocked-up photo purporting to show a framed photograph of the gorilla Harambe, who was shot and killed at the Cincinatti Zoo and Bonatical Gardens earlier this summer, on Sanders’ bookshelf. Meanwhile people soon started to *actually* believe that Bernie Sanders actually had a framed photo of Harambe in his living room.
With varying reactions both positive and negative. People really, really cared about this issue.

My husband, an inveterate Reddit reader, said the main reaction there was to point out that Bernie still has DVD and video players
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 10:12 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


I think he is genuinely upset at the fact that DWS and the DNC have no respect for him

I hold out no torch for DWS and her ongoing reluctance to assist challengers to her Republican congresscritter friends from Miami, but the DNC is an organisation with the primary purpose of getting Democrats elected, and its respect tends to go to Democrats who get Democrats elected. Howard Dean managed to reconcile his disappointment with the institutional party, and while the 50-state strategy wasn't perfect, he was a highly effective DNC chair because he's a Democrat who wants to see Democrats elected.
You know, Al Gore was one that set me straight. I was ranting and raving. Why should I be a Democrat after the way I've been treated? And he said, look, this is not about you. Its about the country.
What Sanders can't do is turn his platform into an airing of grievance against the DNC and the primary system, because "Dems in disarray" is a template that every mainstream journalist has bookmarked for easy retrieval. He is perfectly entitled to go up and say "my campaign and my supporters have made a difference, and I will make sure they go on doing so to get Hillary Clinton elected, and when she is president."

Anyway, it occurred to me in the wake of Clay Shirky's comments over the past few days that one of the tacit underpinnings of Trumpism is essentially "reparations for white people" to compensate them for having to live around Others. It manifests itself in a number of ways -- from handing over federal lands to Bundy-style nutjob moochers to promising jobs in places where he's never hired people -- but the sentiment is that of the reparations argument: something has been taken away from you and I will give you something else to make up for it.
posted by holgate at 10:13 AM on July 24, 2016 [15 favorites]


In 1932, this country was sick of this shit & voted for FDR and a whole bunch of ground breaking regulations to get this country back on it's feet.

Today's left would never in a million years vote for FDR, an almost-unimaginably privileged member of the 0.01% who, as Assistant Secretary of the Navy, had championed the expansion of Naval aviation and the submarine fleet, which were basically the drone programs of their time.

"Sure he talks about reform," they would say, "But in 1913 he defended using bombs and torpedos. A vote for Roosevelt would be blood on our hands."
posted by dersins at 10:13 AM on July 24, 2016 [75 favorites]


argybargy, where in my comment do I say it's your responsibility to agree with me? Or is this some sort of twisted logic that because I don't agree with you I'm demanding your agreement? Honestly, believe what you want.
posted by evilDoug at 10:15 AM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Yep. Another response to And yes, I've considered the specter of a Trump presidency. It sounds pretty awful, but we will survive. There can be no progress in this country unless our standard for liberal politics is higher than 'not Trump', and Clinton's ilk needs to learn this.
Did we, in fact, survive the Bush/Cheney years? Starting with a stolen election that made a mockery of democracy, then a horrible loss of life in a terror attack and a lack of leadership following it, the Patriot Act and the serious erosion of civil liberties, the War on Iraq - based on deliberate lies and causing thousands of Allied deaths and the deaths of at least 125,000 Iraqi non-combatants and which led directly to ISIS, a war which cost trillions of dollars that benefited big corporations. Tax breaks and free rein for capitalists which led to the Great Recession and the further impoverishment of so many people. Ask anybody who lost their house if they 'survived'. Bush-Cheney couldn't/wouldn't respond effectively to Hurricane Katrina, contributing to the loss of life and health and hope. The erosion of voting rights, in which the Republicans cynically and systematically try to keep the poor and non-white from voting.

The standard of 'not Trump' is an excellent standard; it's important, really important. And you can get sucked in to the Hillary-bashing campaign of The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy if you like, but she's a terrific candidate. Imperfect, well, yes, she's an actual human, but she's hard-working, well-prepared, and focused on doing the right thing. Her version of the right thing isn't perfectly aligned with Bernie, or with you, or even me, and I'm fine with having a smart, thoughtful, well-educated President who disagrees with me some of the time. I'd be cheering for Hillary even if the GOP had found a candidate who wasn't vile, and the whole flock was vile. But Trump is especially vile, and is proceeding to exploit the nastiest darkest parts of America. It is on us to stop him. It matters.
posted by theora55 at 10:18 AM on July 24, 2016 [40 favorites]


Bernie Sanders has a framed photograph of the gorilla Harambe on his shelf. Oh no wait! He doesn't.

I don't understand a single thing about this story. It might as well be in another language.
posted by bongo_x at 10:19 AM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


Triggetrfinger, I'm suggesting, THIS WOMAN, is figurative change. I'm all for Jill Stein. Or are you under the impression she's the ONLY woman running?
posted by evilDoug at 10:21 AM on July 24, 2016


CAn I just say that I'm completely on board with DWS and her whole regime at the DNC going away? In theory "establishment opposes anti-establishment candidate" shouldn't be news, but in practice it was incompetent enough that it's made the party look bad and made these people in particular look bad at their jobs.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 10:22 AM on July 24, 2016 [13 favorites]


Federal support for homeopathy "research" would in fact be substantive change, I'll grant you that.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 10:23 AM on July 24, 2016 [49 favorites]


I'm not talking about me. I'm talking about the Democratic Party, and the general electorate. Bernie's constituency represents a minority of the party. To many people, Tim Kaine is too much of a leftist for their taste. To many, many more, he's about where they are — the center. Should I assume the opinion of both groups is meaningless to you?
posted by argybarg at 10:23 AM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


Also, I did fail to mention that the crack PROBLEM was due partly to the efforts of foreign Cocaine producers' goals to expand their market.

And FDR? He didn't run on a platform of groundbreaking reformations. He was a very safe Establishment camdidate who, upon election, became anything but. History. Learn it. (Although I don't always get it exactly right myself)

Here: have a big dose of History.
(disclaimer: I don't agree with EVERYTHING here, but it is highly nutritious Food for Thought)
posted by oneswellfoop at 10:23 AM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


It sounds now like DWS won't be at the DNC at all.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:23 AM on July 24, 2016


Harambe has become a handy reference used in jokes that mock clueless, somewhat unconsciously racist/biased panic. Lots of jokey signs outside the RNC involved Harambe.
posted by sallybrown at 10:23 AM on July 24, 2016




bongo_x, all I can say is that people really, really care that Bernie has a framed photograph of a dead Gorilla on his bookshelf because it either makes him a caring soul or a monstrous libtard. As to why an Irish blogger thought it would be fun to photoshop a framed picture of a dead Gorilla onto Bernie's bookshelf...I guess he had time on his hands?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 10:24 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


evilDoug: "Triggetrfinger, I'm suggesting, THIS WOMAN, is figurative change. I'm all for Jill Stein. Or are you under the impression she's the ONLY woman running?"

Jill Stein has no chance of winning and thus no chance of making any change whatsoever, figurative or otherwise.
posted by octothorpe at 10:25 AM on July 24, 2016 [38 favorites]


also "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it".

Nader in 2000 is History. The Green party and its supporters have failed miserably to do anything but TRY to repeat it.
posted by oneswellfoop at 10:26 AM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


I'm all for Jill Stein.

Ah yes the medical doctor who supports zany homeopathy, GMO panic, and anti-vaxxers. Change we have to believe in (because it has no scientific bases)!
posted by sallybrown at 10:27 AM on July 24, 2016 [45 favorites]


"Jill Stein" is just a protest vote. No one who is promising to vote for her seems to care about her policies, achievements or organization skills, or those of the Green Party in general.
posted by argybarg at 10:30 AM on July 24, 2016 [22 favorites]


The highest elected office Jill Stein has ever held was town-level. Completely aside from her beliefs I have zero confidence in her ability to function as the president of a country of 300 million people. The presidency is an insanely difficult and demanding job with a particular skill set, not just a blank slot for a set of beliefs.
posted by showbiz_liz at 10:31 AM on July 24, 2016 [42 favorites]


The Green Party is homeopathic politics-- futilely trying, over and over, to prove that getting 1% of the vote is an effective treatment for our country's ills.
posted by dersins at 10:31 AM on July 24, 2016 [44 favorites]


in 1932, this country was sick of this shit & voted for FDR and a whole bunch of ground breaking regulations to get this country back on it's feet

There was a 100-seat swing in the House in 1932, 12 in the Senate, moving Congress from 50/50 to 60/40 Dems, with the Dems increasing their majorities in 1934 and 36 (the conservative SCOTUS blocked much of FDR's recovery program prior to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_switch_in_time_that_saved_nine.

I would have voted for Bernie if I saw such a sea-change coming this year or 2018.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 10:32 AM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


Here in philly it is so hot that this huge hawk fell out of the sky. The bus driver saved the bird by jumping out of the bus and pouring water on the hawk until it came to
posted by angrycat at 10:35 AM on July 24, 2016 [48 favorites]


I finally watched the speech and here's what I think: Kaine is likeable. He has some interesting bonafides and personal interests that make him less boring than he would first appear. I like that his interest in world affairs is personal, I get tired of hearing old, white, men pontificate endlessly about global strategy. Be a person! But at some point, I started to get really excited. And I started to feel like the Dems would win. Not just a little but potentially a lot. A lot, a lot. He's a man speaking out for a woman. And we all know how hard it is to hear a woman until a man says what she just said. He's a mansplainer's mansplainer. But it is possible to harness this power for good. I think that's what we've got. We're gonna win.
posted by amanda at 10:36 AM on July 24, 2016 [19 favorites]


Here in philly it is so hot that this huge hawk fell out of the sky. The bus driver saved the bird by jumping out of the bus and pouring water on the hawk until it came to

but are you SURE it wasn't an eagle?
posted by sallybrown at 10:37 AM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


Here in philly it is so hot that this huge hawk fell out of the sky. The bus driver saved the bird by jumping out of the bus and pouring water on the hawk until it came to

Clearly an omen, and possibly a metaphor.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 10:38 AM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


I'm all for Jill Stein.

Why her? Why not pick someone more capable who also has a 0.0% chance of winning?

Is it the Greens? You want the Greens to replace the Democrats in our current system?

That's futile, at least compared to changing the Dems from within, like how movement conservatives have re-wrought the GOP.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 10:40 AM on July 24, 2016 [11 favorites]


The common feature of the Tea Party, and (the most diehard only) Bernie voters is a terminal impatience with the democratic process and the compromises it entails. Democracy, conducted among 330 million people with profound differences in everything about their lives, is never going to a sweet, cathartic sweep into a new place. It takes endless patience among all three branches of government and at local and national levels to build consensus.

Attempted end-runs around that consensus are not worthy of respect. But at least the Tea Party and the hard left act on what they see as ideological impulses; Trump represents just "what the fuck, let's see what happens" and Trump's omnivorous ego.

The only counterpoint is not a countering rigid ideological purity but methodical process and public honoring of real listening.

I guess I'm a Hillary type.
posted by argybarg at 10:41 AM on July 24, 2016 [22 favorites]


I don't want to get into the Jill Stein arguing, but I will say that in my over 25 years of voting, I've seen a non-presidential Green Party candidate show up on my ballot once. By comparison, the Libertarians usually have nominees up and down the ballot for local and state races. And this is Seattle we're talking about here.

I wish the Greens would be a more serious party in this country, but their unwillingness to put the effort into capturing state legislatures and city councils suggests they don't want to.
posted by dw at 10:46 AM on July 24, 2016 [37 favorites]


I'm still in the middle of Barney Franks auto biography and he spends most of his recounting of the 70s as a state rep from Boston battling with Harvard lefties who want instant revolution rather than progress. Now I disagree that activism isn't necessary: you need someone to constantly be pushing politicians to keep their promises, but one thing I agree with him on is his admonition to never spit on a partial victory. That is how change occurs in America. One state votes for a weak, illegal form of gay marriage, take it. Medical weed? Go for it. One step at a time. The alternative is tyranny.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 10:51 AM on July 24, 2016 [41 favorites]


Many years ago, I registered as a Green. At that time, they had enough votes to get the same standing as Dems and Republicans at the state level. Unfortunately, there were some manipulative shenanigans behind the scenes to prevent that, and it never happened. I didn't pay much attention at the time, so no details on it.

I suspect that kind of thing has gone on across the country, dw. The Dems and Rs want to keep their stranglehold.

Sorry if I'm not making much sense, still working on my first cup of coffee...
posted by annsunny at 10:55 AM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


The common feature of the Tea Party, and (the most diehard only) Bernie voters is a terminal impatience with the democratic process and the compromises it entails.

Lessig (PDF) has frequently stated that the two camps could be combined into one over the issue of creeping "legalized corruption" in the campaign finance system, and possible reform / public financing through personal vouchers. I believe there's something to this.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 10:57 AM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


Democrats, Looking Past Obama, Are a Party Without a Cause

Obviously, eliminating half a million medical-debt bankruptcies a year and reducing the trillion-plus dollar student loan debt isn't worth calling a "cause;" plans that free up money and make people able to focus on productivity are too nebulous to label them as a central focus. Besides, there's no villain. How can a political party have a cause without a mustachio'd black-hat fellow to point at?

... Any political party attempting to appeal to more than half the people in the US, needs to have its causes spread widely; the central theme is going to be an abstract concept (like "stronger together") rather than "health care" or "international outreach" or "crime reduction" or "fix the tax code."

Are they complaining that the Democrats aren't playing the "Muslim Terrorists Are The Cause Of All Your Problems" game?

Bah. We've got a ticket that has decades of experience with compromise and collaboration, a pair of people who know to their cores that there isn't any Silver Bullet that will instantly slay the Demons Of Bad Stuff In America. They need a multi-directional approach for problems that don't have a single original source.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 10:57 AM on July 24, 2016 [27 favorites]


Oh come now. You think the Ds and Rs have to actively suppress the Greens? That's an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence.
posted by argybarg at 10:57 AM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


The highest elected office Jill Stein has ever held was town-level. Completely aside from her beliefs I have zero confidence in her ability to function as the president of a country of 300 million people. The presidency is an insanely difficult and demanding job with a particular skill set, not just a blank slot for a set of beliefs.

Victoria, British Columbia has a strong grassroots Green movement. One of our Members of Parliament is a Green, and one of our state-level reps is a Green. The mayor of Victoria is closely affiliated with the Greens.

Based on the performance of all three, I will never, ever vote Green again (I voted for mayor, unfortunately, but not the other two).

Completely weird politics, lacking in empathy, reactionary (they all hate unions), divisive, nasty, all suffering from engineer's disease.

And the sanctimony of the Greens makes the Bernie Bros or the Corbynistas look positively inclusive in comparison.
posted by My Dad at 10:58 AM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


The Dems and Rs want to keep their stranglehold.

The D's and the R's don't have to do anything to keep the other parties down, they take care of that themselves. I don't think the big parties give them a second thought.
posted by bongo_x at 10:59 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Red tailed Hawks are big, big birds. A pair have a six foot wide nest on a cellphone tower near where I work.
posted by y2karl at 11:02 AM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


Oh come now. You think the Ds and Rs have to actively suppress the Greens? That's an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence.

Ralph Nader had a piece in the WaPo about that
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 11:04 AM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


argybarg, not any more, the greens really don't seem to have momentum at all, just saying they did at one time have a chance.
posted by annsunny at 11:06 AM on July 24, 2016


In terms of ancient Greek auspicy, a raptor falling from the sky is an ill omen by itself but the revival by watery anointment is a sign of redemption, or so I would think. So, keep hope alive.
posted by y2karl at 11:08 AM on July 24, 2016 [17 favorites]


My experience with Left-identifying grass roots politics is that it does an efficient job of self-destruction, no outside help needed.
posted by argybarg at 11:08 AM on July 24, 2016 [10 favorites]


Triggetrfinger, I'm suggesting, THIS WOMAN, is figurative change. I'm all for Jill Stein. Or are you under the impression she's the ONLY woman running?

Uh, what?

There's a segment of the left that likes to pretend that only the issues that they care about define the true left. This idea that the only "real" change is the ticking of some amorphous, often economics-related boxes is myopic and ridiculous.

The fact of the matter is that Clinton wants to change a number of things economically in this country. Her announcement speech and campaign centered on taxing the rich, reigning in Wall St, and helping the poor, working and middle classes. Her proposals have included raising the minimum wage, and just as importantly, pinning it to inflation. She proposes free public college for students whose parents make less than $125k/year, repealing Citizens United, and a number of other things dear to people on the economic left, as well as ongoing and improvements in protections for women, LGBTQIA and people of color.

But beyond that, in a country where women were granted the right to vote within living memory, in a climate in which women are 50% of the population, but only 10% of governors, 20% or congress and 4.5% of CEOs, electing a woman to the presidency is a huge, significant change.

If women and black men were proportionally represented in the executive office, we'd have had about 1.5 more black male presidents than we've had and 22 more female presidents (of any color) than we've had.

In a recent NBC/WSJ poll, only 55% of people are "comfortable" with the idea of a woman president -- any woman president.

So maybe you're a man and your president has always represented you. Or maybe you're a woman who has internalized the sexism of the status quo. But the idea that Clinton doesn't represent change in a number of ways or that it's not actually a huge departure, still completely radical, to have a woman in the white house, is completely absurd.
posted by pocketfullofrye at 11:09 AM on July 24, 2016 [76 favorites]


Man, how some people have internalized years of Republican calumny heaped upon Hillary Clinton. Joseph Goebbels must be beaming with pride from his circle of Hell.
posted by y2karl at 11:14 AM on July 24, 2016 [38 favorites]


Here in philly it is so hot that this huge hawk fell out of the sky. The bus driver saved the bird by jumping out of the bus and pouring water on the hawk until it came to

How long before we see Republicans distort this incident to justify waterboarding?
posted by juiceCake at 11:15 AM on July 24, 2016


Triggetrfinger, I'm suggesting, THIS WOMAN, is figurative change. I'm all for Jill Stein. Or are you under the impression she's the ONLY woman running?

I know who you were talking about - good to see we're on the same page.

I'm also talking about Hillary. Because representation of women in office makes a huge difference for all women. Much of the impact is based on mere representation and has nothing to do with the policies they propose.

But it does matter. Enormously. A woman president would be — by far — the biggest, most salient, and most important example of a successful woman in American politics likely inspiring secondary and tertiary waves of women's election runs and election victories. Victories that would themselves carry important symbolic value but also generate concrete changes in how the country is governed and what the political system pays attention to...

...The life experience and personal identity of the governing class matters enormously, and a Clinton presidency would shift the composition of the American government in a profound and unprecedented way.


And I know we (Metafilter) have hashed this out on here a thousand times before, so I'm sorry to be a broken record about it, but the old canard about how we'd vote for Jill Stein/Elizabeth Warren/whatever woman, it's just Hillary we don't like, is always a little suspect to me:

Voters are less likely to vote for female politicians when they perceive them as power-seeking, though male politicians are not penalized. (cite)

...even progressive demigod Elizabeth Warren was seen as “unlikable” when she ran for the Massachusetts senate seat. Local outlets published op-eds about how women were being “turned off” by Warren’s “know-it-all style”—a framing that’s indistinguishable from 2016 Clinton coverage. (cite)

I'm not saying your criticism of Hillary falls into the patterns outlined in the above articles. I don't think she's perfect and I think there are plenty of legitimate criticisms that can be levied towards her. But, I think that sexism, the media coverage/criticism of her and the importance of visible women in office are intimately intertwined (in other words, a person can be legit critical of Hillary without any sexism involved and we still need to talk about how sexism and representation affect our current cultural climate).

What I am saying is I think a large amount of the criticism she gets is based on deeply ingrained unconscious bias we have towards women, and unconscious bias is really difficult to change. Something that does change it, and makes a big difference in so many other ways, is having lots of women in visible positions of influence and power. We need to see women of all kinds in all sorts of positions so we can start to see them as multifaceted and capable. Then we can maybe stop falling back (usually subconsciously) on stereotypes of how women "should" act and denying women everywhere opportunities which lie outside of narrowly acceptable parameters. Representation is POWERFUL, and in my opinion, matters a hell of a lot more, and has a bigger impact than most anything else that will differentiate otherwise similar progressive candidates.
posted by triggerfinger at 11:18 AM on July 24, 2016 [55 favorites]


Ingrained sexism + rigid ideological purism has make a perfect storm, with the result that many of my friends have to not be friends of mine until election season is over at least.
posted by argybarg at 11:25 AM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


I have long thought that I would like to start The Sensible Party. The Sensible Party would be open to new ideas but they would have to be grounded in logic and science. Mainly it would be a case of getting rid of outdated, disastrous policies like abstinence-only sex ed, the War on Drugs, and VooDoo economics to name the first three that popped into my head. The Sensible Party wouldn't be worried about Patriotism or Making America Great instead we would concentrate on bringing dignity back to the lives of everyone living in The United States. Health Care for all, a living wage, and zero discrimination would be our tent poles. Bloated Bureaucracies and a fully funded Defense Department would be fine if it meant everybody could get work. We would invest heavily in scientific research as well as infrastructure so that means some people would be paying higher taxes.

I haven't thought all of this through but this is enough to be going on. Join in me in being Sensible!
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 11:27 AM on July 24, 2016 [13 favorites]


That's the other thing Barney says about the 70s. The left assumed that there was a vast silent majority of people who agreed with them, and that the establishment of the Democratic Party was holding them down. But it turns out, there wasn't. Or more exactly, some people agreed with them on some things and not on others. You have to make a case, AND have a number of charming, personable leaders ready to make that case, to change the party itself permanently. We (Berniebros) aren't there yet. Take Bernie's ideas and put them to work down the ticket by finding awesome lefties and electing them in Dem primaries Blue states, convince current Dems who lean this way to come out in support of bank regulation, free college, law enforcement reform, etc. Find ways to stay connected with each other.

Hoping to god that this is the last gasp of the GOP. The future of the Democratic Party is either of a tenuous but effective alliance between hard left and centrists completly dominating national seats for a few years and battling over how far to go with changes OR a center right party picking up votes from moderate Rs while battling an emergent new party of Democratic Socialists in major urban centers which probably will take years and years to get past all the purity testing and semantics into actually fielding real local challengers. I'd prefer the former because I think it gets more done to fix what is broken about capitalism faster.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 11:32 AM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


pocketfullofrye, took me a second read to understand the math of your comment. For some reason I thought you meant that it would take 22 women presidents for us to finally have had equal representation, which sounded low to me. Then realized you were saying if all along we'd had even representation, we'd have already had 22. (whereas by now we'd need 44 to even the scales)

I think it's pretty nice to contemplate that perhaps, in eight years, it will have been sixteen years since the president of the United states was a white male. That in that election there will be people voting with no memory of their president having ever been a white male. It's a pretty cool thought. It makes me happy. Even though most of the news these days makes me utterly depressed.
posted by Cozybee at 11:40 AM on July 24, 2016 [24 favorites]


The inability of people to place gender and race oppression horizontally on equal footing with economic oppression signals to me an unwillingness to engage ALL the issues we face in a fair and equitable way.

I get that you're pissed off. I'm pissed off that black trans sex workers are killed and criminalized in this country but I'm not getting up your face painting all of our political leaders as cishet scum.

From my point of view the invective looks a lot to me like "unable to play nicely with others" and is really bad optics for your cause. Which incidentally, economic justice is my cause too. But I guess since I'm supporting a neoliberal that means I'm tainted and a turncoat or something.
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:43 AM on July 24, 2016 [26 favorites]




Leaked DNC Email Refers to Potential Latino Voters as 'Brand Loyal Consumers'

Have you ever talked to a marketing department? This is what they do day in, day out. Potato chips, adult diapers, political parties: it's all the same market research with a few nuggets of reality layered within nonsense.
posted by zachlipton at 11:50 AM on July 24, 2016 [16 favorites]


I don't have any issue with demographics and market research.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:52 AM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


Oh look this is the how the sauce is made! It's a nice distraction but not really a revelation.
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:52 AM on July 24, 2016 [11 favorites]




I'm not seeing what the problem is with that email except that I hate marketing.

I'm honestly surprised there weren't way worse things in the DNC emails than we've seen so far. I guess my opinion of political operatives was a little harsh.
posted by bongo_x at 11:58 AM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


If the Bernie holdouts want to use the DNC leaks + Kaine to turn the convention into muck and eviscerate the party, they can. Nothing can stop them, up to and including entreaties and level-headed assessments of what the leaks actually show us. I guess we have to leave it in their hands.
posted by argybarg at 11:58 AM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


That's the other thing Barney says about the 70s. The left assumed that there was a vast silent majority of people who agreed with them, and that the establishment of the Democratic Party was holding them down

Children’s TV is so radical these days.
posted by Going To Maine at 12:00 PM on July 24, 2016 [11 favorites]


>I guess my opinion of political operatives was a little harsh.

What kind of organization has people titling their emails, regardless of content, "No Shit" ? ?

UNSURPRISING peek behind the curtain of the DNC, what I want to know is who in the media was actually prompted to ask the attack questions between May 5 and the KY primary, which was May 17.

Googling, I see Bernie was asked these questions before, back in Jan.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 12:05 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


From the Gawker article:
The document makes sweeping generalizations about Latinos (which on planet earth is usually referred to as “racism”) in order to sell them, as “consumers,” on the Democratic vote.
This is a really casual bandying about of the term “racism”.
posted by Going To Maine at 12:08 PM on July 24, 2016 [10 favorites]


Posting every single semi-credible pseudo-issue anti-Clinton/DNC "news" article that's available somewhere on Teh Intarwebs has a distinct "wake up SHEEPLE!!" vibe which, no.
posted by soundguy99 at 12:08 PM on July 24, 2016 [36 favorites]


What kind of organization has people titling their emails, regardless of content, “No Shit” ? ?

One where the employees have a casual, bantering relationship? I don’t like swears in my work email, but I’m not sure that “no shit” is a particularly harassing subject line in and of itself.
posted by Going To Maine at 12:10 PM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


What kind of organization has people titling their emails, regardless of content, "No Shit" ? ?
Are you serious? Exactly how delicate are your sensibilities? I don't think my 96-year-old grandmother would have been shocked by "no shit." I know actual members of the clergy who I think might title an email "no shit."
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 12:10 PM on July 24, 2016 [32 favorites]


What kind of organization has people titling their emails, regardless of content, "No Shit" ? ?

You would not BELIEVE the kind of irresponsible crap people put in their workplace email - affairs, racism, cussing to the max, clearly drunk angry rants, etc. In my experience it's not limited to any particular career track.

Source: years of document review for a law firm
posted by sallybrown at 12:13 PM on July 24, 2016 [38 favorites]


What kind of organization has people titling their emails, regardless of content, "No Shit" ? ?


I'm not even sure I understand the question.
posted by bongo_x at 12:13 PM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


I think it's inappropriate to send an email with the title "no shit" for the sole reason that it can get misinterpreted, copy/pasted, and sent anywhere.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:14 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


The DNC needs a lot of work. That damn organization. Sheesh. Good thing it's not all that difficult to influence changes there. Really, it's just a matter of organizing effectively, like when kos busted ass with other groups to get Howard dean as chair. Politics are malleable...
posted by Annika Cicada at 12:14 PM on July 24, 2016


Maybe some sort of manure store that is running really low on supplies.
posted by Going To Maine at 12:14 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


But that would probably be either “Shit?” or “No shit!”
posted by Going To Maine at 12:15 PM on July 24, 2016


(Not that I think it makes some of that DNC email not idiotic. I'm just saying they have plentyyyy of company.)
posted by sallybrown at 12:15 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


I sent an ill-considered email I regret at work as recently as eight days ago. With how upset folks seem to be getting over these leaks, I reckon me and these DNC folks must be the only ones to have ever done that.
posted by EatTheWeak at 12:17 PM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


Nicholas Kristof at The New York Times (op-ed, obvs): “Is Donald Trump a Racist?”
posted by Going To Maine at 12:18 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Least suspenseful headline of all time
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 12:19 PM on July 24, 2016 [27 favorites]


I think it's inappropriate to send an email with the title "no shit" for the sole reason that it can get misinterpreted, copy/pasted, and sent anywhere.

That's a valid opinion, not sure what it has to do with the election. Kind of up there with someone in the campaign wearing a clip on tie, except not as offensive.
posted by bongo_x at 12:19 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Coincidentally, I can think of a subject line from a DNC email that would answer his question!
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:20 PM on July 24, 2016 [10 favorites]


I mean, any member of the public can file a freedom of information petition, pay a fee to have a lawyer redact private student information, and get access to all of my email, and I subscribe to the basic theory that I don't put anything in work email that I would not want to see on the front page of the local newspaper. But I would still not worry too much about titling an email "no shit," because the fact that I sometimes say "shit" is not a thing I would be embarrassed to have published on the front page of the newspaper.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 12:21 PM on July 24, 2016 [11 favorites]


Nicholas Kristof at The New York Times (op-ed, obvs): “Is Donald Trump a Racist?”
posted by Going To Maine at 3:18 PM on July 24 [+] [!]


Betteridge FAIL
posted by Cookiebastard at 12:24 PM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


I agree with the more benign interpretation of the use of triple parentheses. My brother is media director for a major human rights organization and he has also used them as a symbol of solidarity with the *targets* of white supremacists.

To me this tangent serves as a convenient distraction / smear which shouldn't have any bearing on the actual *content* of the leaks (which wikileaks didn't create, remember), but nevertheless probably will.


Wikileaks and Assange have a history of both subtle and blatant associations with bigots, including anti-Semites. They spent last week complaining that organizing racist and misogynist harassment against Leslie Jones and her supporters was perfectly acceptable for Twitter to allow. There's nothing they've done that gives them any benefit of the doubt in this case.

I would hope more thoughtful people will be able to keep the originator of the content separate in their minds from its publisher and their motivation. Just because you or I don't like the publisher's motivation, whatever it is, doesn't make the content any less factual; remember, the DNC emails are (presumably) ver batim material.

And I would hope more thoughtful people will be able to look at the wider context here. Does the DNC look like assholes? Yes. Does it look like there was voter fraud, or that anything they talked about came from Clinton or her campaign, or that any of the many similar accusations levied against them are true? No. In the meantime, do you have no curiosity at all as to why they chose the DNC and only the DNC? Does it not worry you that Wikileaks has allied themselves with the Trumpist alt-right?
posted by zombieflanders at 12:25 PM on July 24, 2016 [39 favorites]


Yeah the Billboard Test has been a pretty standard guideline everywhere I've ever worked. If you wouldn't want your email maliciously edited and put up in Times Square next to your face, don't hit send.

It's pretty dumb to get yourself in trouble with careless emails in 2016 and I wouldn't cry if it prompted some folks to 'spend more time with their family' but it's also really hard to get worked up about is as anything deeper.
posted by Skorgu at 12:29 PM on July 24, 2016


Leaked DNC Email Refers to Potential Latino Voters as 'Brand Loyal Consumers'

It's becoming more and more clear with tweets like this that the most vocal agitators about the e-mail leaks believe adding an exclamation point to the end of a sentence constitutes a political philosophy.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 12:41 PM on July 24, 2016 [13 favorites]


To: Sherlock
CC: Watson
Subject: No shit
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 12:43 PM on July 24, 2016 [39 favorites]


Market Research is about making informed guesses about consumers so that you can focus on their preferences and needs. While there might be something unsavory about it from the outside this is part and parcel of any modern marketing operation whether you are selling Pepsi Blue or a Political Party.

One of the things that a lot of marketers apparently love about the Latinx community is that they are extremely loyal consumers. This means if you manage to get them to buy a brand early in life there is a high confidence interval that they will be loyal to that brand for decades. This type of consumer is the Holy Grail of consumers because it's not just a one time sale but a potential life long relationship. This is extremely valuable to marketers and this not incidentally is why Spanish Language Television is prime advertising space for companies.

When you factor in Latinx demographics which skew towards the extremely young end of the spectrum this magnifies their value to companies even more so because you could potentially be getting a consumer locked into a multi-decade relationship. If you are in marketing the value of the Latinx market is beyond massive.

However it's also not completely monolithic and some products are easily substituted for others. http://www.latinpost.com/articles/20878/20140908/brand-loyalty-u-s-hispanics-myth-vs-reality.htm

What this means from a political perspective is that if you are a Democratic consultant that is looking to grow the Democratic "brand" you want to focus a ton of outreach on the Latinx market because they are literally the future of American politics and you want them buying your Pepsi Blue instead of the Republican Coke.

And if you are a Democratic consultant you are watching the Republican party basically replace their formula not with new coke but something completely unpalatable like Moxie Cola (Yankees are welcome to hate me but you know it's true).
posted by vuron at 12:43 PM on July 24, 2016 [13 favorites]




The DNC needs a lot of work.
The DNC could have prevented some of the electoral successes of the Tea Party Republicans the last six years, but they thought working on one election, the Presidency, every four years was enough. That's not DOING "a lot of work". I blame the "once every 4 years voters" a LOT less than the "once every 4 years" organizers. If they were doing their job, the "Potential Latino Voters as 'Brand Loyal Consumers'" memo would have been archived years ago.
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:47 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


So yeah so I saw this giant hawk open its giant beak to recieve water that the bus driver and a growing crowd were offering. It was a motherfucking beautiful giant bird and that bus driver is my hero

In other Philadelphia bird news, Bernie supporters are wearing hats with tiny birds atop them.
posted by angrycat at 12:48 PM on July 24, 2016 [21 favorites]


It’s becoming more and more clear with tweets like this that the most vocal agitators about the e-mail leaks believe adding an exclamation point to the end of a sentence constitutes a political philosophy.

The power of exclamation points really amazes me. In an email, an exclamation point for a period makes everything seem more enthusiastic. In a headline, it makes it so easy to gloss over context and take it as given that this must be scandalous news.
posted by Going To Maine at 12:49 PM on July 24, 2016


XQUZYPHYR: ""This damaging leak shows democrats actively and blatantly trying to cater to important and growing voting bloc.""

I love the responses to that. No one on Twitter ever gets sarcasm.
posted by octothorpe at 12:50 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]




CNN sources now suggesting DWS is resigning by the end of the day, assuredly placating everyone on Twitter.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 12:51 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


That Current Affairs article makes me feel sorry for calling Bill Kristol the stupidest man in the world.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:55 PM on July 24, 2016 [15 favorites]


well, i saw a robin on a lawn who was staring at the traffic on the road like he didn't know what the hell was going on

it's a portent, an omen, a thing of great significance, an absolute canny sign of kismet
posted by pyramid termite at 12:56 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


'You should be terrified when people who like "Hamilton" run our country'

I'm more sick of hearing about Hamilton than anybody here, but that article was long. What gives you the kind of energy to maintain a rant like that? Although everything after the first couple of paragraphs could have been ipsum lorem, no one will ever know.
posted by bongo_x at 12:57 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


Wikileaks and Assange have a history of both subtle and blatant associations with bigots, including anti-Semites. They spent last week complaining that organizing racist and misogynist harassment against Leslie Jones and her supporters was perfectly acceptable for Twitter to allow.

Man, you weren't kidding:

WikiLeaks:
Cyber feudalism: @Twitter founder @Jack banned conservative gay libertarian @nero for speaking the 'wrong' way to actress @Lesdoggg

posted by Atom Eyes at 12:57 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


Yep, it's official: DWS resigning after the convention.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 12:59 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


Kristol, turn around, bend over, I’ll show you
Where my shoe fits
posted by Joey Michaels at 12:59 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


Just a potential Trump VP pick and possible Secretary of Defense retweeting blatant anti-Semitic "back-stabber myth" propaganda. No biggie, nothing to see here.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:01 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


So as a Leftist who feels disillusioned by the Democratic Party (and who will be voting for Clinton, yadda yadda), I took the advice of people who told Sanders supporters in earlier threads to get more involved in local politics. I already vote in every election, right down to town primaries, but I reached out to the state party to volunteer. When I finally got a reply, I got blown off. I live in RI, where the Democratic Party is fairly conservative at the local level and it's very, very insular. You kinda have to "know a guy" to get inside, and my guy is Chafee, as I volunteered for his gubernatorial campaign, so that doesn't help. It's frustrating, because I am trying to be the change I want to see.

I did throw some money to Clinton for corb, though.
posted by Ruki at 1:03 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


@BenjySarlin: RNC and DNC holding an impressively competitive “this is fine” contest this cycle
posted by Going To Maine at 1:05 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


What gives you the kind of energy to maintain a rant like that? Although everything after the first couple of paragraphs could have been ipsum lorem, no one will ever know.

Hamilton's star is at its zenith, and it's high time for some "your favorite play sucks and why you should feel bad" contrarianism. Illustrating why that damnable musical encapsulates everything about the fin de siècle is a nice touch.
posted by Apocryphon at 1:07 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


RNC and DNC holding an impressively competitive “this is fine” contest this cycle

As dumb as the DNC has been at times, it doesn't come close to comparing to the horrorshow of the RNC convention this year.
posted by sallybrown at 1:07 PM on July 24, 2016 [17 favorites]


Actually, in terms of hot take critiques of Hamilton, I quite like Cornell profs Jason Franks and Isaac Kramnick’s NYT op-ed “What ‘Hamilton’ Forgets About Hamilton”
posted by Going To Maine at 1:09 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


In other Philadelphia bird news, Bernie supporters are wearing hats with tiny birds atop them.

They should probably watch out for hawks.
posted by dersins at 1:09 PM on July 24, 2016 [21 favorites]


Right. The DNC being in favor of Hillary Clinton (which was obvious to everyone paying attention) is in no way equivalent to the Trumpster Fire we just witnessed. But hey, like Winston Churchill said, we should be neutral between the fire brigade and the fire!

Wait, that's not what he said? Damn.
posted by Justinian at 1:09 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


...I remember when, only a few years ago, I really believed that anti-Semitism did not have major political traction in the US, that it was the province of a few old racists and some extremely marginal people who thought Nazi LARPing was political action. It has been a real lesson to me to realize that it wasn't gone, just more hidden - which people said at the time but I did not believe because it seemed so bizarre to me. It's scary. It really illustrates how a bad ideology can seem to go into abeyance and then burst forth again, and it illustrates how there can be a mixture of cynicism, true belief and appeals to ignorance in how that ideology is expressed.
posted by Frowner at 1:10 PM on July 24, 2016 [50 favorites]


Current Affairs: 'You should be terrified when people who like "Hamilton" run our country'

Christ what an asshole.

There's certainly value in critiquing Hamilton (and others have done so far more competently), but when you start off with the premise that it's an equal to some guys on America’s Got Talent rapping "Yo ho yo ho," you're not coming from a serious place. The article then goes on to claim that Hamilton is ridiculous because nobody has seen it, seemingly not realizing the album can be streamed for free on YouTube.

Ultimately, he seems to want the musical to do literally everything: address every complicated question around the Revolution, properly address every big of racial concern in America, properly celebrate the Founders and properly hate them for their crimes, and apparently also make us all appropriately angry about every time the Obama Administration has failed the left. Hamilton is a great big musical, but no work of art can do all that. If you're angry at a musical because the government has deported too many people, you're doing it wrong.

But clearly this guy thought he could show up over a year late to the party and be contrary in the service of pageviews, and it probably will work. Sit down Alex you–––.
posted by zachlipton at 1:15 PM on July 24, 2016 [20 favorites]


Each great fandom deserves an equal and opposite reaction.
posted by Apocryphon at 1:19 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Oh man I kind of want a farmer refuted piece written about that Current Affairs article but I feel like it would be giving that guy more credit that he's worth.

But still part of me is wanting to go all Hercules Mulligan on him.
posted by vuron at 1:22 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


octothorpe: Too much Poe's Law around, especially with Trump ("look at my applause numbers, isn't it neat?") in the mix.
posted by XtinaS at 1:23 PM on July 24, 2016


Literally nobody has ever quoted Hamilton in my presence.


I take some comfort knowing the author doesn't read MeFi.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 1:23 PM on July 24, 2016 [13 favorites]


2016 and people are still writing "you kids and your hippity-hop music" columns?
posted by octothorpe at 1:25 PM on July 24, 2016 [16 favorites]


Just finished watching Kaine's speech in Miami. That was absolutely fantastic and I'm not only no longer worried, I'm actually excited.
posted by odinsdream at 1:26 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


What strikes me about that Hamilton critique is that Nichols doesn't seem super comfortable with the idea that hip-hop, like, has artistic merit. And I am kinda sketched out by white people who take that line (the googs suggest that Nichols is white).

I think that some critical analysis of any major story about Our National Myths is wise, because people do tend to seek out even critique that is comforting, but when someone writes an essay peppered with, basically, "hip hop is low culture and only culturally deficient people could think it important" (see the little dig at Michelle Obama at the end, for instance) I tend to think that I know a bit about their racial politics.
posted by Frowner at 1:26 PM on July 24, 2016 [22 favorites]



2106 and people are still writing "you kids and your hippity-hop music" columns?

Most prescient typo ever.
posted by soren_lorensen at 1:27 PM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


Fixed.
posted by octothorpe at 1:28 PM on July 24, 2016


No kidding, octothorpe, if I didn't know better that column felt like Bill Cosby telling people to pull up their damn pants bit.
posted by vuron at 1:28 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Most prescient typo ever.
posted by soren_lorensen at 1:27 PM


Threads like this move too fast to know what you're talking about.
posted by yesster at 1:29 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


The DNC could have prevented some of the electoral successes of the Tea Party Republicans the last six years, but they thought working on one election, the Presidency, every four years was enough.

Doing presidential elections is kinda the raison d'etre of the DNC. This is why there are also the DCCC and DSCC.

2106 and people are still writing "you kids and your hippity-hop music" columns?

Sometimes things like this make me realize that my wee little niece and nephew have good odds of seeing 2106, which I find sort of weird in the same way that it's weird that my grandparents could have heard about the Civil War from people who lived it.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 1:30 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


Yeah, I'm reasonably sure I could go off on a long uninformed rant about why I'm sick of hearing about Hamilton (memail me) without any "those people".
posted by bongo_x at 1:32 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


basically, "hip hop is low culture and only culturally deficient people could think it important" (see the little dig at Michelle Obama at the end, for instance) I tend to think that I know a bit about their racial politics.

I don't think it's a dig against hip-hop, so much as against the specific subgenre of nerdcore, which is often dominated by white people. Though contrarian takes on nerdcore are hardly new. If anything, the article is chiding "Hamilton" boosters for being squares for appreciating hip hop now when it's in a bland, safe, white-audiences consumable form (not unlike critiques of nerdcore)- "Plus it contains hip-hop, an edgy, up-and-coming genre with only 37 years of mainstream exposure."
posted by Apocryphon at 1:33 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


And truth be told a Hip-Hop Pirate musical with Lin-Manuel Miranda score and lyrics would be so beyond awesome as to quite possible melt it's way down to the core of the earth with it's white-hot awesomeness.

Think of all the references to Gilbert and Sullivan, think of the epic group numbers, think of the sword fights in the rigging.

On the off chance that LMM is reading this thread or someone close to him is a mefite, please please please make this happen.
posted by vuron at 1:33 PM on July 24, 2016 [18 favorites]


There's actually one and a half good points in that article, but man that first half is just confusing ranting. (MC Router is a deep pull. I wonder if they just goggled "nerd rap")
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 1:34 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


I really shouldn't be criticizing his article as it was too long and confusing for me to read. Apologies.
posted by bongo_x at 1:35 PM on July 24, 2016


Oh man I kind of want a farmer refuted piece written about that Current Affairs article but I feel like it would be giving that guy more credit that he's worth.

(he's not worthy of the many hours it would take to do the counterpoint certainly)

Heed not the rabble who scream "yo ho yo ho"
They have not your interests at heart
Ranting and raving are not a solution
Don't be a complete utter tool
This article does not speak for me
You're asking too much of this play
I pray Lin-Manuel shows you his mercy
Good day, good day…

Bonus line: why should a musical across the Hudson regulate the strikes of drones?
posted by zachlipton at 1:36 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


Think of all the references to Gilbert and Sullivan, think of the epic group numbers, think of the sword fights in the rigging.

On the off chance that LMM is reading this thread or someone close to him is a mefite, please please please make this happen.


truly we are living in Kali Yuga
posted by Apocryphon at 1:36 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


If anything, the article is chiding "Hamilton" boosters for being squares for appreciating hip hop now when it's in a bland white-audiences friendly consumable form (not unlike critiques of nerdcore)

“Let's do the math: if I was black, I woulda sold half” - Eminem
posted by Going To Maine at 1:38 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


Jill Stein also cheered the Brexit vote before trying to cover up that she had, going so far as to attempt to gaslight someone on FB rather than admit to a mistake. She displayed a serious lack of good judgment at every step of this process.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 1:44 PM on July 24, 2016 [37 favorites]


2016 and people are still writing "you kids and your hippity-hop music" columns?

A bit of a derail, but I'm reminded of something which I'm pretty sure Josh Fruhlinger once pointed out: the comic strip "Curtis" started in 1988, when the notion that the 11-year-old title character and his father Greg would have radically divergent notions on hip-hop and rap would be pretty bog-standard stereotypical black family dynamics. It is now 28 years later and, in the eternal now of comic-strip world Curtis is still 11, his father looks to be the same age as he was then, and they still (when last I looked, anyways) were going through the same "back in my day" gyrations, even though black people Greg's age today (which I'm not sure is ever specified, but one can guess) came up with hip-hop as an established part of their cultural fabric.

The point, I guess, is that a lot of people who were adults in the 80s have not realized that culture changes when they're not watching it.
posted by jackbishop at 1:50 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


The worst thing about the DNC leaks is that /r/SFP was about to calm down and people were starting to reconcile the whole "yeah it's not Bernie but holy shit #nevertrump" and now it's just a reinvigorated shitshow.
posted by Talez at 1:54 PM on July 24, 2016 [11 favorites]


Re: the Hamilton article,
1. it's a cleaned-up version of a Medium post from 4 months ago.
2. I don't see any evidence that "Nichols doesn't seem super comfortable with the idea that hip-hop, like, has artistic merit." In the circles I'm aware of where this kind of Hamilton critique is current (basically left weird Twitter and offshoots thereof), the aesthetic complaint is not that Hamilton contains rap, but that, as rap, it sucks. E.g. Chapo Trap House, whose theme song is a Gucci Mane track, devoted a big chunk of their second episode to "the phenomenon that is HAMILTON and why our media and political elites love this corny bullshit."
posted by DaDaDaDave at 1:56 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


the aesthetic complaint is not that Hamilton contains rap, but that, as rap, it sucks

Which is why it's a Broadway musical encompassing a diverse range of musical styles instead of a rap album.
posted by zachlipton at 1:58 PM on July 24, 2016 [17 favorites]


left weird Twitter

Is this a big thing, or is it, like, MetaFilter sized or smaller?
posted by Going To Maine at 1:58 PM on July 24, 2016


I mean, maybe that's the worst repercussion of behaving in a corrupt and unbecoming manner. Like I dunno, maybe if you are in charge of a party attempting to sell itself with something more than "not just actual fascists," you shouldn't be doing things that blow up in your face when everyone finds out.
posted by dame at 1:59 PM on July 24, 2016


The worst thing about the DNC leaks is that /r/SFP was about to calm down and people were starting to reconcile the whole "yeah it's not Bernie but holy shit #nevertrump" and now it's just a reinvigorated shitshow.

Not coincidental timing by Wikileaks, I'd wager.
posted by Superplin at 2:00 PM on July 24, 2016 [21 favorites]


To which I should probably add I find it enormously depressing that the winners on the Dem side of this primary give me great worries about their ability to actually defeat Trump and that has very little to do with Bernie-lovers on the internet getting all conspiracy theory. That only works because the Dems don't have a very good narrative.
posted by dame at 2:01 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Retuers: Democratic Party head resigns amid email furor. Democratic National Committee head Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned amid a furor over leaked emails, throwing the party into disarray on the eve of the Hillary Clinton's presidential nominating convention.
posted by Doktor Zed at 2:03 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


Disarray? Is she taking the keys to the clubhouse with her? Is she the only one with a car?
posted by bongo_x at 2:06 PM on July 24, 2016 [24 favorites]


Speaking of birds, hereabouts it's the season for baby crows on the wing, begging, begging, begging -- c'wah! c'wah! c'wah! -- their moms and dads to feed them from dawn to dusk. Do they ever pick up the cheese I toss in the street ? Hell, no! Man, they are annoying...
posted by y2karl at 2:06 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Will that be enough for the Bernie people? I don't really get what they want.
posted by Biblio at 2:06 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


And, with DWS resigning immediately before the convention, that narrative has already been chosen for us:. "Dems in disarray."

The timing of this could not be worse. Why couldn't she have stayed in the background for the next week, and quietly announce that she wouldn't be seeking reelection after the convention?
posted by schmod at 2:07 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


That only works because the Dems don't have a very good narrative.

Because only in 2016 is "groundbreaking highly experienced leader with hundreds of pages of detailed policy briefs running to (try to) increase the minimum wage and tie it to inflation, make college more affordable, deliver immigration reform, and help working parents afford child care, among other things" not "a very good narrative."
posted by zachlipton at 2:07 PM on July 24, 2016 [63 favorites]


Someone please explain to me what a better narrative would be (that would actually result in a candidate that appeals to a plurality of the electorate). I am all ears.
posted by soren_lorensen at 2:10 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


New DNC emails released, party in disarray;

"DWS isn't going now so my mom won't let me go to the convention until we find a new chaperone. Sucks."

"Does anyone know where Debbie put the balloons?"

"Hey guys, looking for a ride."

"Debbie, I know you were holding all our tickets for us, but you should probably just give us our own or find someone else to pass them out at the door."
posted by bongo_x at 2:15 PM on July 24, 2016 [10 favorites]


Will that be enough for the Bernie people? I don't really get what they want.

A re-do in which their white, male, 20+ years in Congress "non-establishment" candidate doesn't get beaten by a woman
posted by Cookiebastard at 2:18 PM on July 24, 2016 [39 favorites]


It's pretty amazing too that the DNC Wikileaks thing sort of mirrors the Chilcot report in the U.K.

In both cases, you have the farther and further-right winning some sort of partial victory (Brexit, the nomination of Trump), but leading to a backlash that could lead to their fairly straightforward defeat (the fact that no one in the British right, either Tory or even UKIP apparently, wants to be the one to actually deliver a Brexit; Trump being unpalatable to the general electorate), but then the leading center-left chooses this of all years to get into a fit of in-fighting.
posted by Apocryphon at 2:20 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


Ruki: So as a Leftist who feels disillusioned by the Democratic Party (and who will be voting for Clinton, yadda yadda), I took the advice of people who told Sanders supporters in earlier threads to get more involved in local politics.

I wonder if you would have more luck by getting involved with a group like Rhode Island Progressive Democrats of America rather than the party itself? (Just googled them up, can't vouch for them in particular. [And was there really no acronym option that didn't start with "RIP"?])

The idea is to find or form a group that can support local progressive candidates in primaries via endorsements and early fundraising and GOTV and so on. Invite candidates to contact your group early and then support them if they fit your vision of what the Democratic Party should be. If you're able to get candidates elected you become hard to ignore.
posted by john hadron collider at 2:24 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


I finally had to unfollow an acquaintance on Facebook, the most vocal of the Bernie deadenders I know. She is convinced these leaked emails prove that the primaries were rigged, and that Sanders is essentially a saint for continuing to work with them despite the now tangible evidence of what "everyone" already knew--even heping them put together a party policy about superdelegates.

"He still does so much. They said he couldn't get anything done, that he didn't know how to cooperate. He's proven them wrong over and over again. Is it wrong to be so romantically in love with him?"


On the one hand, now I guess I understand where so much of what I view as willful blindness comes from.
On the other hand, I feel I was better off not knowing and wish I could go back to my previous state of mild exasperation.

posted by Superplin at 2:24 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


Speaking as someone who was an early and vocal Bernie supporter: He had better shut this shit down hard in his speech tomorrow. No more of this fence-sitting "Well I can't speak for all my supporters but..." nonsense.

As a major leader of the Left, he has a responsibility to get up there and tell the idiot straight white radical dank-meme dead-ender boys to shut up and get in line. Not in spite of our progressive ideals but because of them.

Solidarity, now.
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:26 PM on July 24, 2016 [58 favorites]


It's pretty amazing too that the DNC Wikileaks thing sort of mirrors the Chilcot report in the U.K.

Sure, I see the parallel you're making, except that the the Chilcot Report is a look at how everybody got into a war where hundreds of thousands of people died, while the DNC emails are mostly people being shocked, shocked that a bunch of professional politicos don't all exhibit Sam Seaborn-levels of political purity and wholesomeness.
posted by zachlipton at 2:26 PM on July 24, 2016 [30 favorites]


The infighting is a terminal feature of the left that barring failures every 500 or so years resulting in a super massive genocide, actually seems to be able to hold at the center and move humanity forward. We continue the constant internecine bickering and some weeks leave me less despairing than others at how much rancid shit we find to talk at each other.
posted by Annika Cicada at 2:28 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


Not sure if this is still the case in an up to the minute sense, but as of a week ago I still had BernieBro friends on Facebook insisting that Bernie could still somehow snag the Democratic nomination. I've since hidden their posts because I'm ready to fight Trump and sick of their shit, but my guess is that there's a diehard circle of loyalists who somehow think they can turn this Wikileaks thing into Sanders being handed the nomination at the convention.

So, yeah, that might be what they want.
posted by Sara C. at 2:28 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


I never trusted that Seaborn schtick anyway. Ditto for Chris Traeger.
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:29 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


I mean, I can't do your work for you. You want Hillary because you think she's the best. That's cool. I believe you. (I would prefer not to be call misogynist for disagreeing, but evs.) But "lots of research and somewhat milquetoast changes while suggesting you kids just want handouts" is not really very powerful against "everything is going to shit and I will save you with my bold policies that the elite won't give you!" It just isn't. And I get you all think it should be and maybe in a perfect world it would be (though a lot else would be different in that perfect world, too, for sure.)

It really disturbs me that so many Hillary supporters don't appear get this. If everyone thinks she lies anyways, then come out with some bold-ass pandering lies. Tell me a story that isn't "if you don't her you hate women" or "stop being an unreasonable baby." Or else I guess we just all better pray that there are enough disaffected moderate Republicans to put her over. I am genuinely afraid there are not.

(PS: This is where I reiterate that I live in a place so blue my vote doesn't matter and so large that I will never have an effect on even the local Dems.)
posted by dame at 2:30 PM on July 24, 2016 [11 favorites]


"He still does so much. They said he couldn't get anything done, that he didn't know how to cooperate. He's proven them wrong over and over again. Is it wrong to be so romantically in love with him?"


Well, he is dreamy.
posted by bongo_x at 2:30 PM on July 24, 2016


The infighting is a terminal feature of the left humans
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:30 PM on July 24, 2016 [11 favorites]


My only real complaint about the email thing is that if they knew the emails had been hacked (and they did) and they knew they were gonna get dumped to the public (which they did), why wouldn't they have given up DWS' scalp earlier in the process to defang it? The timing doesn't make sense to me.
posted by Justinian at 2:31 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]




You would not BELIEVE the kind of irresponsible crap people put in their workplace email

Back in the 90s I was in a very famous TV show when Usenet was a much bigger thing, I hung out on a group with bunch of other twentysomethings. There was one guy who repeatedly and persistently Did Not Get It about things, and one of these things that made him absolutely livid was that his employers were trying to get him not to have his email signature quote a song lyric that featured the word "fuck" extremely prominently.
posted by Mr. Bad Example at 2:32 PM on July 24, 2016 [13 favorites]


I also don't get the need to deny that Bernie got things done in Congress. He was known for his ability to get amendments and get them to votes. I understand theoretically preferring other candidates, I understand being frustrated people don't share your views / have dug in when you think they should be activated. But he hasn't accomplished nothing and it takes nothing away from Hillary to admit that.
posted by dame at 2:34 PM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


Someone please explain to me what a better narrative would be (that would actually result in a candidate that appeals to a plurality of the electorate). I am all ears.

Well, obviously, if she were a white man.

Proposing better hypotheticals is silly, so my only attempt at trying is to say that, for all her ostensibly policy proposals and experience, the capsule summary remains “four more years of Obama!” If that’s your best blurb, it’s pretty darn weak. She also has a supremely antagonistic relationship with the press, and while the apologetics explaining why this is so have been nice, I’d prefer a nominee who at least occasionally held a press conference.

As many reporters have noted, Clinton would be the most-disliked candidate ever if not for Trump, and that ain’t nothing. The hagiographic framing of her as the best, most qualified candidate ever hits all of her good points while ignoring that massive dislike. We could argue about how much of the dislike of Clinton is due to misogyny (spoiler: a lot), but the dislike is real, and it affects votes. I mean, heck, I’ve seen people get fired up by the fact that so many great people are going to be proxying for her -Warren, Sanders, Obama, her husband -which itself seems like a weird critique. What does she have to say about all of this? (Of course, this could also be getting hyped in part because of the dearth of proxies representing Trump. Media is complicated.)

I don’t know who the best candidate is, and I’m excited about her run, but her success is at least partly due to the shallowness of the Democratic bench and its inability to find someone to counter her clout. If Clinton were to lose, who would run in 2020? (Maybe Kaine?) There’s no one there. Her story is great, but it’s partly great because it hasn’t got opposition.
posted by Going To Maine at 2:34 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


dame: Tell me a story that isn't "if you don't her you hate women" or "stop being an unreasonable baby."

I have never said either of those things, but if someone is convinced that everything she says is a lie, everything any media source says about her is because they are in her pocket (with the exception of some cherry-picked sources whose trustworthiness I am not allowed to question), that the entire electoral process is rigged and she won the primary due solely to underhanded tactics up to and including fraud, and that any objectively verifiable actions of Hillary I may point to that would support something positive about her are dismissed as cynical pandering in pursuit of power or outweighed by the Iraq war vote she says she regrets or the fact she stayed with her husband during his infidelity or name your other talking point... well, you know, we are not really going to be able to engage in a productive dialogue.
posted by Superplin at 2:38 PM on July 24, 2016 [32 favorites]


I am about to stop serially commenting for a little, but can I please just ask folks to stop with the "Bernie supporters only like white dudes" thing? I am not white; I am not a dude; I would absolutely *die* if a woman I supported was running (preferably a black one :D). But it is really insulting to people — including me, who is engaging with honestly and trying very hard not to insult people.
posted by dame at 2:39 PM on July 24, 2016 [33 favorites]


I'm in downtown Philly, and I haven't seen a single Clinton t-shirt yet.

That's because there was a huge pro-Bernie/pro-Jill Stein (I think? I only know about it through posts on Facebook) rally at City Hall. Also, incidentally, it was a bajillion degrees outside at midday, and it's likely that a ton of people who would be out and about have wisely chosen to stay someplace a little cooler. (i.e., me. Seriously, I had to walk about a quarter mile yesterday around midday and genuinely started to get sick from it, and I'm young, fairly heat-hardened, and in good shape.)
posted by kalimac at 2:39 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


It really disturbs me that so many Hillary supporters don't appear get this. If everyone thinks she lies anyways, then come out with some bold-ass pandering lies. Tell me a story that isn't "if you don't her you hate women" or "stop being an unreasonable baby." Or else I guess we just all better pray that there are enough disaffected moderate Republicans to put her over. I am genuinely afraid there are not.

The best line I ever heard about Clinton over Sanders came, I think from Matt Yglesias, and went something like “Multi-issue times require a multi-issue candidate.” Which I like, but tends toward the vague. Which is a problem.
posted by Going To Maine at 2:39 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


In terms of ancient Greek auspicy, a raptor falling from the sky is an ill omen by itself but the revival by watery anointment is a sign of redemption, or so I would think. So, keep hope alive.

I would respect our cable news more if they dropped all pretense of having rational analysis and just did straight up tea leaf-reading, tarot & I Ching divination, augury, etc.

Speaking as someone who was an early and vocal Bernie supporter: He had better shut this shit down hard in his speech tomorrow.

Going off the Twitter comments of his that I've seen, I'd expect basically this. But there will always be some dead-enders who will write it off like "THEY got to him, man!", and I can guaran-damn-tee that /r/SFP is going to be a hotbed of that sort of thing.
posted by tobascodagama at 2:40 PM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


But there will always be some dead-enders

Plus a number of false-flaggers just yanking our chains
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 2:42 PM on July 24, 2016 [10 favorites]


Well, look, I donated to Bernie the literal day he threw his hat into the ring and I pulled the lever for him in the primary. In politics no one winds up covering themselves in glory, Bernie and his people included. But when it comes to compelling narratives, it's incredibly upsetting to me that even my own side seems to think that it's impossible to counter "delusional narcissist billionaire with more than a passing resemblance to Mussolini" with "one of the most successful female politicians in the history of our nation who could be the first female president, following our first black president, upholding a platform more progressive than the last time we did this".
posted by soren_lorensen at 2:42 PM on July 24, 2016 [40 favorites]


We could argue about how much of the dislike of Clinton is due to misogyny (spoiler: a lot), but the dislike is real, and it affects votes.

This seems to be an argument that the Democrats should wait to put up a woman candidate until we fix misogyny. People love Hillary as long as she's not running for office. I can't wait for men to like me to get shit done, and neither can Clinton.
posted by muddgirl at 2:42 PM on July 24, 2016 [31 favorites]


I'm trying not to be testy, but the idea that she only won because there's no bench is just silly. If she loses, who will run in 2020? LISTING THESE PEOPLE DOES NOT IMPLY I SUPPORT THEM, but maybe Andrew Cuomo. Or Kirsten Gillibrand. Or Cory Booker. Or Amy Klobuchar. Or, hell, Al Franken. Or Julian Castro, assuming this current thing blows over. Or Villaraigosa. That's just off the top of my head.

There was not much competition this year because those folks and others looked at Clinton and the weight she carries and the kind of campaign she would be able to run and said "Fuck no." The lack of competition this year was an absolutely strategic response to the towering strength of Clinton's candidacy.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 2:43 PM on July 24, 2016 [46 favorites]


I'm in downtown Philly, and I haven't seen a single Clinton t-shirt yet. #DNCinPHL

Pretty shocking considering this dude has been covering the DNC protests all day.
posted by one_bean at 2:43 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


I don't want a candidate who matches Trump's simple-mindedness with a corresponding simple-mindedness from the Left.

I don't know what comes next. I think the Left will eat its own, the press will continue to have no effect on Trump except to enlarge him, and he wins. Then we better unify somehow, because some really horrible shit is on its way.
posted by argybarg at 2:44 PM on July 24, 2016


Hey dame: I hear you and I hope I haven't painted all Bernie supporters as white men. I know a lot of people (including my wife and I) who invested a lot of time and effort in the primary supporting Bernie. But there were a lot of problems inside the campaign that led to him not winning, and rolling everything up under the single issue of citizens United is where he defeated himself IMO. It's why he lost me and where I believe a lot of other people couldn't take him seriously anymore.
posted by Annika Cicada at 2:45 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


Tell me a story that isn't "if you don't her you hate women" or "stop being an unreasonable baby."

If "most highly qualified and competent candidate in recent memory running on the most progressive Dem platform in decades if not ever" isn't a good enough story for you, your expectations may in fact be somewhat unreasonable.

Seriously, though-- who throws a tantrum over getting 80% of what they want from a major political party? Do you even realize how rare that is?
posted by dersins at 2:47 PM on July 24, 2016 [59 favorites]


Also: Trump is in a beneficial cycle where saying ridiculous shit and getting negative press boosts his reputation as Señor Loco, the Unpredictable, Powerful and Entertaining. It also generates anxiety, which is the growing medium for his messages.

Whereas for Hillary, negative press is just negative press.
posted by argybarg at 2:50 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm so glad diehard Sanders supporters are actually working on down-ballot races instead of protesting a valid majority popular and delegate vote. It really shows how serious they are about involvement in the process.
posted by zombieflanders at 2:55 PM on July 24, 2016 [13 favorites]


Why are we STILL debating Sanders vs. Clinton the day before the DNC starts? Clinton won. Sanders lost. Sanders' merits over Clinton matter about as much as Dean's merits over Kerry, at this point.
posted by Sara C. at 2:57 PM on July 24, 2016 [41 favorites]


We could argue about how much of the dislike of Clinton is due to misogyny (spoiler: a lot), but the dislike is real, and it affects votes.

This seems to be an argument that the Democrats should wait to put up a woman candidate until we fix misogyny. People love Hillary as long as she’s not running for office. I can’t wait for men to like me to get shit done, and neither can Clinton.

I fully appreciate that any woman is going to have a harder time than a man, that the first woman candidate for high office apparently needs these kinds of overloaded qualifications, and that in an extreme case it would mean no women candidates ever. Nonetheless, that dislike makes it pretty easy to argue that we could find a better candidate than Clinton, especially if that bias is taken as a given to be hard votes against her and not simply shifting more folks into the “lean R” column. Clinton’s history of bad choices is part of her story, and even if those choices were highlighted by misogyny, the highlighting is done, and the choices are out. “Extremely careless” isn’t praise in any universe, and she earned that.

Do you even realize how rare that is?

(Not saying this is incorrect, but it does seem to read as telling someone they are being an unreasonable baby.)
posted by Going To Maine at 2:58 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


I'm so glad diehard Sanders supporters are actually working on down-ballot races instead of protesting a valid majority popular and delegate vote. It really shows how serious they are about involvement in the process.

To be fair, many are. It's just the handful of prominent loudmouth twitter / reddit / facebook jackholes who are giving the rest a bad name.
posted by dersins at 2:58 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


Plus a number of false-flaggers just yanking our chains

Yeah, it's all getting a bit The Man Who Was Thursday. Not that there aren't some people who genuinely are still feeling annoyed/frustrated/outraged by the primary loss. But the number of people who (a) would have voted Clinton in the general but (b) are now not going to because of something that happened between Sanders and the DNC/DWS/The Man is approximately zero.

It's fine to say that Clinton is too far right and you're not voting or voting Green (although I disagree with that on other grounds) but then you really were never going to vote for her anyway. Just say so.
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:59 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm in downtown Philly, and I haven't seen a single Clinton t-shirt yet.

To be fair, everyone I know in Philly has either decamped down the shore or is huddled inside somewhere in the dark, preferably anywhere that isn't Philly. I'm surprised anyone survived a four mile walk outside, let alone a four mile march while shouting (or in jeans, as with Matt Pearce??) Dear everyone outside in Philly of whatever political bent, please stay hydrated and cool!
posted by jetlagaddict at 3:00 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


I pretty much have supported Bernie through this time. It looks inevitable that Hillary is going to be the nominee. She actually made a smart pick with Kaine. Warren is seen as a sell-out among hard-core Bernie people. Kaine has supported Hillary all along. So nobody can call him a sell - out. Maybe hard-core Berners don't like him but Bernie has spoken kindly of him.
I think because DWS antagonized so many Bernie supporters, Hillary needs some insurance. Kaine will draw in saner Republican cross-over votes.
And no, Trump is out of the question.
There is no way he and his Nazi-Vampire Countess should be in the White House.
Bernie Sanders gets that. Would I prefer if some miracle results in Bernie being nominated? Absolutely I would. I don't think we'll get that though.
So back to least of two evils voting for me.
It was fun having a candidate I could respect and love even. It won't happen again in my lifetime. The system has not rewarded that.
I'll never let myself actually give a damn again.
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 3:02 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


It looks inevitable that Hillary is going to be the nominee

This has been the case since Super Tuesday, when delegate math (pledged delegate math) put Sanders in a hole too deep to for him to climb out of, barring something unprecedented and catastrophic.

Anything and everything else since then has been magical thinking.
posted by dersins at 3:08 PM on July 24, 2016 [34 favorites]


Seriously, though-- who throws a tantrum over getting 80% of what they want from a major political party?

I don't understand what you're referring to with "throwing a tantrum." Dame basically said something like, "I'm not that enthusiastic about Clinton and I worry about her ability to inspire and motivate people enough to counter Trump effectively." I'm not that pessimistic about Clinton personally, but I think you may be arguing with someone who's not here.
posted by en forme de poire at 3:08 PM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


Seriously, though-- who throws a tantrum over getting 80% of what they want from a major political party? Do you even realize how rare that is?

I'm not sure if anyone here is "throwing a tantrum" per se, but I think it goes back to the narrative issue. People don't vote simply on issues, there is a matter of connecting with the politician and understanding who they are and what they are going to do. Personally that's never mattered to me but it's obvious it matters to many. Many people who lived through the Clinton years felt betrayed by them on various issues, so there's that group. Young voters clearly didn't think that Clinton was going to do anything for them, and they still need to be convinced.

I think a lot of this goes away in the general. Clinton is calm, intelligent, rational, and qualified. She knows this country inside-out, is fluent in every possible issue, and appeals to a wide variety of people from every race, religion, ethnic group, age, and gender. In short, she is everything her opponent is not. The narrative this time around really doesn't need to be more than that she is by far the best candidate. That may not get people excited like Bernie did, but that was a very small group of the overall electorate that were all-in for Sanders. I think Trump wins a matchup against Bernie in the general; I think Clinton will destroy Trump and make him look like a giant loser.
posted by cell divide at 3:08 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


Katjusa, I hope you are able to feel less defeatist and resigned in the future and I understand if you need a long ass damn time to get there.
posted by Annika Cicada at 3:10 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


To anyone who is honestly worried about Kaine being a net loss for Clinton in terms of voter outreach, I encourage you to watch the video posted above. He is good.
posted by saturday_morning at 3:11 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


Bernie Sanders endorsed Hillary Clinton. He could have continued all the way to the convention or endorsed Jill Stein or simply said he was disgusted with the whole process and walked away completely. But he did not. So, maybe those who still consider themselves Sanders supporters should think carefully about why he chose to endorse and what he's trying to get across to his supporters by doing this.
posted by FJT at 3:15 PM on July 24, 2016 [23 favorites]


The condescension and strawmanning directed at (former,current) Sanders supporters is so incredibly bad for the election of Hillary Clinton. If you just *can't believe* anyone wouldn't support Hillary because she's *so incredible* then you should be making an effort to give friendly, positive reasons for people to support her. You should be keeping your mouth shut about how their policy preferences are imaginary, unrealistic, or tantrums.

Really. Do you think that strongly implying that someone's policy preferences are childish and silly is going to convince them that your candidate will take them and their concerns seriously?

This behavior is the equivalent of responding to a customer complaint with an eye-roll and a loud sigh. It does not solve the problem, and it makes you a very bad representative of the cause you allegedly support.
posted by Rock 'em Sock 'em at 3:16 PM on July 24, 2016 [40 favorites]


(Hillary's campaign and the DNC set this tone, by the way. It was a big, big mistake in an election cycle driven by feelings of resentment and alienation.)
posted by Rock 'em Sock 'em at 3:17 PM on July 24, 2016 [22 favorites]


I'll never let myself actually give a damn again.

When Obama was elected for the first time, somebody here at Metafilter (I can't find the quote) changed its slogan to "hope for change - prepare to be disappointed." I think that's a wise position to take about any human - no matter how inspiring they might be - running for office.

Putting our faith in individuals is going to result in at least some disappointments 100% of the time. Putting our faith in groups I think leads to something like a 275% disappointment rate.

What we should all give a damn about isn't people or systems but ideas and results. In theory, any person can be influenced to do the right thing (Nixon went to China, as it were). No matter who gets elected - even if it's the darkest time line option - we need to push for the things we value. We can't rely on even the best leaders to do those things we think are best unless we stay on them.

So let's get Clinton elected and then let's push her and our Congress critters and our local officials to enact positive change.
posted by Joey Michaels at 3:17 PM on July 24, 2016 [18 favorites]


...about as much as Dean's merits over Kerry, at this point.


Wait we were supposed to get over that?
posted by Annika Cicada at 3:19 PM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


It was fun having a candidate I could respect and love even. It won't happen again in my lifetime. The system has not rewarded that.

I'll never let myself actually give a damn again.


Here's the thing about democrats, not (necessarily) members of the Democratic Party but democrats, the international movement of people who believe that ordinary people can and should govern ourselves:

We aren't -ists. Not Mao-ists, not Bonapartists not Clintonists or Sandersists.

We listen to each other, and learn from each other. Sometimes we find that one person has the right thing to say at the right time, and we organize around them.

But when it comes down to it, we don't look for one bright star. We have whole constellations.
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:19 PM on July 24, 2016 [29 favorites]


The irritation, frustration and disappointment right before the DNC makes me wonder if the Democratic Party would have been better served by Bernie conceding in May. I was glad he stayed in because I wanted him to have gravity in the forming of the platform but it seems to have come at the cost of a lot of hurt feelings and unmet expectations.
posted by Annika Cicada at 3:25 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


on the bright side maybe 2017 will be the year that everyone starts giving a fuck about email security
posted by murphy slaw at 3:25 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


[One comment deleted. We really have been around the block one hundred million times on "Sanders supporters are like this" vs. "Clinton supporters are like that" stuff, and this thread needs to not just be a recapping of those other fights.]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 3:26 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


I think that's a wise position to take about any human - no matter how inspiring they might be - running for office.

Yeah, it's almost like the job is harder than it looks to us. I try to vote for the person who has the same kind of principles and priorities I do. But then I get that hopefully, I'm also voting for someone smarter, more savvy, and better at that kind of thing than I am myself. And that they will then have more information than I do. It comes as no surprise that they will do some things I don't think I would have done. I can only hope they communicate why.

But then sometimes I think they're blundering idiots who spend all their time fundraising instead of thinking.
posted by ctmf at 3:28 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


also someone should explain to congress that secret back doors on encryption software are the sorts of things that will enable the DNC leaks of the future, that might get their attention
posted by murphy slaw at 3:29 PM on July 24, 2016 [24 favorites]


Someone should also explain to the infosec guys that their job is to support rather than hinder.

In most large organizations I've worked at, the IT / IS attitude was "These are the security protocols we have in place. Figure out how to do your jobs."

It should be precisely the other way around: "This is how we do our jobs. Figure out how to make it secure."
posted by dersins at 3:36 PM on July 24, 2016 [14 favorites]


random observations from the Bernie Sanders protest march this afternoon

-signs for vote for HEXIT OR HEEXIT, which I guess could be interpreted a couple of ways but selling the Brexit vote as a yay thing I mean come on
-a dude in full furry rat suit. I am not joking when I say I have been worried about this dude's health all day because I nearly had heatstroke going from 13th to 19th sans furry rat costume
-women chanting and burning oils in some sort of ritual. I'm not complaining; it smelled good. But really, it is too hot to be engaging in bullshit with burning scented oils
--everybody was really nice. most of the signs, aside from HEEXIT were pro protecting the planet, so that was good
--this isn't specific to the giant Bernie Sanders puppets but you know that thing that giant puppet puppeteers do where they put the giant puppet hands on sticks and so these looooong puppet arms are reaching about? that never fails to give me the creeps. You don't need to animate the arms.
posted by angrycat at 3:39 PM on July 24, 2016 [17 favorites]


You know I was and am very open to Bernie's ideas. I and my husband went to one of his rallies when he was in Boston, really rather enthusiastic. I will always support single-payer healthcare, a higher minimum wage, more opportunities to go to college for everyone, and holding the banks accountable for dangerous decisions. I think of myself as a very progressive person; I am generally the most left-wing person at any gathering.

We came away disappointed, mainly because while I liked his slogans, I didn't see much about how exactly these policies were going to be achieved. It didn't seem like he'd really thought through what it would take to actually break up the banks, how to pick up the pieces from the fallout of that, and I also felt that he wasn't giving Obama enough credit for making the best decision at a bad time - i.e. propping up the economy even if some its worst players did not get the consequences they deserved because the consequences for ordinary people of the economy collapsing would be worse. His health care plan contained estimations that allowed for prescription drug savings greater than the total amount spent on drugs in the US.

So I decided that I preferred Clinton, mostly because her solutions appealed more to me as the kind of person who thinks accomplishing things is generally complicated, who thinks that systems generally have lots of intersecting parts and you can't yank at this part of the system without also accounting for the changes to this other part. For example, moving to single-payer is actually a really difficult thing to accomplish given what a large part of the US economy is based in the healthcare industry.

Still, I liked Bernie. I liked his enthusiasm and was happy that he would pull the party left. However, his candidacy was seized upon by a number of people who were frankly, acting more from a position of being anti-Hillary, than purely from leftwing ideals. There were also a number of genuine leftwing people, who believed that even if Bernie couldn't accomplish everything he set out to do, it was worth trying, and that just having a President who would start from that position was worth something. I didn't necessarily agree with them, but fair enough. However, over time, those of his supporters who were acting more on an anti-Hillary basis started pulling in more and more right-wing talking points about her. What was really disappointing was Bernie's failure to repudiate these talking points, to distance himself from his supporters who acted like this. I waited and waited, and didn't hear anything like that from him. Instead, there was more fuel on the fire, and finally his extremely drawn-out concession drew the primary out longer than it should have, resulting in a group of people who are too committed to him to understand the greater danger of Trump. It is difficult to pivot from dislike of an opposition candidate, to suddenly being their supporter, which is why I wish Bernie would have (and would) make the process easier for them.

What would that look like? Not just say that you'll do everything to defeat Trump, but say that you are an enthusiastic supporter of Clinton's and want her to be the next President. During the RNC, not just tweet about how horrible the Trump speech is, and how you don't want your supporters to support Trump, but also to tell them to go support Clinton. Not just say that you want more Democrats to be elected down the ticket, but acknowledge the important role that Clinton has played in supporting and funding these candidates. And finally, not just make a speech at the DNC, but refrain from telling reporters on the eve of the DNC that you need DWS's head on a platter, because you realize how very important this election is, and you do not want the media narrative during the DNC to be about some "stupid emails."
posted by peacheater at 3:42 PM on July 24, 2016 [46 favorites]


The irritation, frustration and disappointment right before the DNC makes me wonder if the Democratic Party would have been better served by Bernie conceding in May. I was glad he stayed in because I wanted him to have gravity in the forming of the platform but it seems to have come at the cost of a lot of hurt feelings unmet expectations.

IDK, I really don't think this is such a big deal. Sanders' beef with DWS and the DNC has hardly been a secret; if anything, this is an official conclusion to that conflict. And these e-mails aren't going to change the fact that he is still going to endorse Clinton and campaign for her. Meanwhile, at the RNC, the runner-up literally pointedly refused to endorse the nominee and Trump probably still got a little convention bounce (waiting to see how it shakes out in the polls).
posted by en forme de poire at 3:43 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


The purpose of modern 24 hour news cycle social media era conventions is to smooth over everything that happened during the primaries and present a unified front to the general public, as well as a shiny happy "here's everything that's awesome about our team" parade.

A week from now, we're all going to be talking about Tim Kaine's amazing VP speech, or how that Cory Booker is gonna be POTUS someday (remember 2004?), or how pretty and smart and poised the Obama sisters are. Not some weak sauce Monday morning quarterbacking from Sanders diehards.
posted by Sara C. at 3:46 PM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


Sara C., I really really hope you're right. I am generally a worrywart.
posted by peacheater at 3:48 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


To sum up many posts here, here is my reaction to a Clinton presidency, and here is my reaction to a Trump presidency.
posted by zardoz at 3:51 PM on July 24, 2016 [17 favorites]


To sum up many posts here, here is my reaction to a Clinton presidency...

Where did you find this footage of the exact moment Bernie Sanders decided to endorse Clinton?
posted by dis_integration at 3:55 PM on July 24, 2016 [19 favorites]


2017 should also be the year we start to fix our crazy election process. There should be one way to register and vote, trackable, mail-in ballots which would be publicly counted. No calling elections on the news. Reform of campaign finance, restoration of the Voting Rights Act.

Quit treating political parties as private clubs. A lot of bad things happen and go un-redressed because parties are treated as private clubs.
Government puts a lot of money into the infrastructure for primary elections and caucuses. Maybe government needs to assure fairness.

Do we even still need conventions in the 21st Century?

The Democratic Convention is crazy expensive. People had GoFundMe pages. I quit donating to Sanders at the end and donated to 3 of my local delegates. I figured that that was more useful. I kept it to people I've known awhile and trust.

The logistics of even getting to Philadelphia were terrible for anyone from Alaska or Hawaii or Puerto Rico or any island outposts of the US.
These things probably are the same for Republicans. It's stupid and extravagant.

I could go on and on about the caucus system too. A lot of people think it's better than secret ballots, but intimidation, playing with the rules and general incompetence can happen with caucuses.
If you get too many people at caucuses it doesn't take much for it to get chaotic. No one even has to be up to no good if there's a lot of people.

Paper ballots, with a receipt, a strict chain of custody, public oversight.
No mass purges of voter lists in election years. I think standardizing election procedure nationally would be a terrific idea.
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 3:59 PM on July 24, 2016 [19 favorites]


soren_lorensen But when it comes to compelling narratives, it's incredibly upsetting to me that even my own side seems to think that it's impossible to counter "delusional narcissist billionaire with more than a passing resemblance to Mussolini" with "one of the most successful female politicians in the history of our nation who could be the first female president, following our first black president, upholding a platform more progressive than the last time we did this".

Neither one of those is a narrative. They're descriptions, and accurate descriptions, but not narratives.

A narrative is a story, a way of looking at and imagining the political landscape to be. People are, mostly, story driven, which is why having a narrative (ideally something fairly simple) helps make politics work.

Trump has a nice, simple, totally false, and horribly bigoted narrative: "Once America was great and all you white people were doing fine, then the nasty lazy colored people stole your stuff and America sucks now. I'll kick the shit out of brown people to get your stuff back."

There's more to it than just that, the Trump narrative has all sorts of details and curlicues and it conflicts internally fairly often, but that's the core of it.

Despite being total bullshit, and evil bullshit at that, the Trump narrative has several critical advantages:

1) It offers an explanation for why "the economy" is better but you aren't getting any benefit.

2) It offers an easily identifiable villain on which to blame everything (basically anyone who isn't, cis, white, straight, and male is at fault).

3) It offers a simple solution: elect Trump so he can kick the shit out of minorities and get your stuff back.

Trump didn't really invent the narrative he's riding, it's been around since forever. MLK spoke about it in his Address at the Conclusion of the Selma to Montgomery March way back in 1965, and it existed long before that. Trump just inserted himself as the savior.

What Clinton and the Democrats offer isn't a competing narrative, it isn't a story, it's just a bunch of policy proposals. And policy is great, but it isn't narrative.
posted by sotonohito at 4:00 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


Looks like Trump has made the pivot from "just" retweeting anti-Semitic dogwhistles to sending them out himself.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:09 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


Thanks for defining the word narrative but "one of the most successful female politicians in the history of our nation who could be the first female president, following our first black president, upholding a platform more progressive than the last time we did this" is definitely a very compelling story, especially when you take into account how she has built those policy proposals - by listening to Americans and absorbing what they, what we, are telling her. That's basically unheard of and she's built a successful career out of it.

I'm not just voting against Trump, I am voting for her. I am tired of being asked to explain why I believe in her to people who aren't listening.
posted by everybody had matching towels at 4:13 PM on July 24, 2016 [53 favorites]


Caucuses need to go, even Iowa's caucuses. Unfortunately that's not something the national parties can force but they should firmly encourage their abandonment.

I actually don't mind the super delegates as the chances they'll circumvent the will of the popular vote are about zero. Still they in theory can be useful to cover the outlandish result of a late season campaign meltdown. For instance if Clinton was actually indicted the superdelegates could be seen as a safety valve. However I don't mind if some are tied to the state popular vote in some way.

I have no desire to force all open primaries, why should people that are not Democrats have an equal say about who Democrats select as candidates? I don't think that we should force an all closed primary system either but if a state wants one form or another I'm okay with it.

Proportional delegate sharing seems like a solid way to go, winner take all would've forced Sanders out sooo much sooner but I don't mind the drama (although the end result was actually determined by Nevada and SC, Super Tuesday just made it official).

I would like a condensed primary schedule and maybe a rotating primary schedule so that NH and IA don't have disproportionate control over the nominating process especially since rural white people are barely present in the current Democratic coalition but I know that's basically impossible to force.
posted by vuron at 4:15 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


Hillary's statement on the resignation needs to be read in full. Lots of people are burying the lede that she's officially now an honorary chair of the Hillary campaign team.
“I want to thank my longtime friend Debbie Wasserman Schultz for her leadership of the Democratic National Committee over the past five years. I am grateful to Debbie for getting the Democratic Party to this year’s historic convention in Philadelphia, and I know that this week’s events will be a success thanks to her hard work and leadership. There’s simply no one better at taking the fight to the Republicans than Debbie–which is why I am glad that she has agreed to serve as honorary chair of my campaign’s 50-state program to gain ground and elect Democrats in every part of the country, and will continue to serve as a surrogate for my campaign nationally, in Florida, and in other key states. I look forward to campaigning with Debbie in Florida and helping her in her re-election bid–because as President, I will need fighters like Debbie in Congress who are ready on day one to get to work for the American people.”
I grudgingly think it's best to table this whole trainwreck and revisit after the election, because it's important for everyone to be united against Trump right now. But Hillary's team sure is making it hard. This is like rubbing salt in the wound. I don't see how any of this is sound political strategy, either. There's "no one better"? I would think the smart move would be to distance yourself from her as much as possible. She is now a major liability, and a prime representative of the establishment politics that Trump et al are railing against. It's a bad move. I wonder what the decision-making process was.

For all the talk of this team being a bunch of savvy politicians capable of playing the game, I'm not seeing it on display. They've self-sabotaged and doubled down on unforced errors, dozens of times, when it shouldn't be this hard. Really, it shouldn't.
posted by naju at 4:17 PM on July 24, 2016 [25 favorites]



I'm reminded of my time spent working on local campaigns. As you get deep into campaign season, you develop a kinship with your counterparts on the opposing campaign. Spend enough time in the back of enough high school auditoriums and you get to know each other. It's not uncommon to borrow supplies, share your flask, and carpool to and from events. Most campaigns I've worked have been friendly rivalries.

The exception to that is almost always the yard sign team.

The yard sign team spends the whole campaign putting up signs and knocking down the opponent's yard signs. Then the other side goes out the next day and does the same thing. Resentments are had. Eventually you end up with the following situation. As the community meeting winds down, Inside the VFW hall members of opposing campaigns are breaking down folding tables and having a laugh and flirting with each other. Meanwhile, outside in the parking lot, the yard sign teams are threatening to punch each other in the face. Always hilarious.

Not sure what this has to do with the current campaign, other than to encourage everyone to get involved in local politics. It's way more fun!
posted by billyfleetwood at 4:20 PM on July 24, 2016 [18 favorites]


There was a very good piece on 'Faith Matters' on PBS about both Muslim and Jewish Republicans.
After watching the RNC, and then this story this morning, I felt bad for these people. I felt like calling them up and inviting them to switch, because as rough as things have been between Democrats, at least they would have been welcomed and treated with dignity. I got the feeling that many had a less than wonderful time in Cleveland.
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 4:21 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Re: DWS's new position:

It is terrible optics. Terrible timing and terribly dumb. It will be read as a giant Middle Finger to many people which it might very well be.

Bad bad move in my opinion.
posted by futz at 4:24 PM on July 24, 2016 [21 favorites]


Politically, "Wasserman Shultz done goofed" and "Welcome to our campaign team" sorta seem at odds with each other. I get the whole quid pro quo thing, but damn, couldn't it have waited a bit?
posted by Mooski at 4:25 PM on July 24, 2016 [19 favorites]


It's pretty dumb. I assume it has something to do with DWS's relationships with donors, but it ends up just sort of insulting everyone for no particularly great purpose.
posted by zachlipton at 4:28 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


ugh yeah notwithstanding what I said above, that is a dumb move by the Clinton campaign
posted by tivalasvegas at 4:30 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


Why not the simpler inference that party bias means there's something systemic that causes all of this corrupt behavior--thus, failing to appropriately distance/account Schultz from positions of power is just a continuation of that. Individuals and groups don't (can't) learn new ethics in a day; it takes time and structural change.
posted by polymodus at 4:31 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


an honorary position is usually a unpaid role with little or no actual duties, right?
posted by futz at 4:32 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


posted by everybody had matching towels at 5:13 PM on July 24 [10 favorites +] [!]

Karen Pence would love to have a word with you.
posted by bibliowench at 4:33 PM on July 24, 2016 [29 favorites]


No I disagree Sotonhito the underlying narrative is still present for the Democrats it's just that they are soft selling it.

That underlying narrative is that whether you are black or brown, Gay or Straight, Cisgender or Transgender, Rich or Poor, etc you have value and you have a place at the table. That yes there are economic challenges facing this country but privileging one group over another is not the way forward.

That means that the Latinx starting a business on the "bad" side of town is just as important as the white guy starting a business on the "good" half of town. It means that government is about providing a hand up not a hand out so that everyone has the ability to succeed.

It means making sure that kids growing up on the wrong side of the tracks have access to good quality schools, that they don't live next to toxic industries, that they have access to health care and nutrition.

That these sorts of programs are expensive and require taxes but in the end the benefits for everyone vastly outweigh the costs.

Yes the Republicans have a compelling narrative but essentially it boils down to 2 things a) screw you I got mine or b) you know those guys stole yours. That's fundamentally bullshit and it needs to be rejected even if it's a pretty compelling narrative.

Unfortunately we have a whole lot of White Men (let's be honest they are the Republican base) that have been hearing for decades that the Black or Brown Man is stealing their jobs and cutting in line and expecting a seat on the front of the bus. The Democrats have even been willing to say at times that Black and Brown and LGBTQ people need to wait their turn. I'm grateful that people like BLM are standing up and saying "Fuck that, economic policies and class differentials are important but police are fucking killing us in the streets, that is fucking important".

I want class issues to get solved as much as anyone but you know what I'm tired of white people always feeling like our needs need to be prioritized over everyone else.
posted by vuron at 4:33 PM on July 24, 2016 [16 favorites]


Looks like Trump has made the pivot from "just" retweeting anti-Semitic dogwhistles to sending them out himself.

Trump's problem is that he has to be the centre of attention, no matter what. If there is trouble for the Democrats, he helps them by going too far, yelling that everyone should look at him "taking them down". See also the response to the FBI criticism of Clinton. This trait is a fucking gift to Trump's opponents at times like these. He is amazing at disrupting a news cycle which is damaging his opponents. If any trait is going to lose him the election, it is this. But if any trait will make his possible victory a likely trigger of world catastrophe, it is also this.
posted by howfar at 4:33 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


The most progressive platform in history, that is.
posted by persona au gratin at 4:34 PM on July 24, 2016


I suspect that many people--especially Trump supporters--will be unable to separate this email leak/scandal from Hillary's existing email scandal, and there is no reason for Hillary to take action to separate herself from DSW to reach them - they've already decided she's guilty of horrible crimes with emails, and that the courts that failed to convict her are Democrat-run machines.

Other people will be able to look at the emails themselves, and note that they involve a lot of shady talk and no notable action. Yes, it looks like the committee was biased against Bernie; no, it doesn't look like they did anything illegal with that bias. (AFAIK. Maybe new data has shown up.)

Hillary may assume that most people following the news fall into two categories: Those who hate her, and aren't going to be happy no matter what she does, and those who are willing to consider that there's an awful lot of context going on that we don't know about, and also political leaders aren't saints, and wait for more nuanced explanations that are not going to have time to come out before the convention.

Everyone else will have forgotten it by next week, so she's putting a temporary note in place for the people who want detailed "wtf happened?" answers, and not bothering to make it Trumpist-friendly. She's very clearly said "If DSW has done anything wrong, it's not bad enough for me to throw her out of my campaign plans." And that'll bother some people - but I'm not sure that throwing DSW out would save those people's votes.

It's not like Trump is going to convince anyone new that she's crooked. (Doesn't mean undecided voters can't be convinced that she's too crooked for them - just that Trump won't be doing the convincing.)
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 4:37 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


Not happy about the DWS thing. I was really hoping we'd be done with this story. Moving her from the DNC to the campaign is out of the frying pan into the fire, and entirely unnecessary.
posted by Superplin at 4:39 PM on July 24, 2016 [11 favorites]


I don't understand the Clinton campaign's reasoning for keeping DWS. It seems like a reward for services rendered during the primary campaign season.
posted by stolyarova at 4:41 PM on July 24, 2016 [17 favorites]


I don't know, "honorary chair" just seems like throwing a necessary bone to someone who wasn't ready to give up power in exchange for nothing. Probably something the Bernie camp agreed to... I hope.
posted by mmoncur at 4:41 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


Wait. Clinton says that she wants DWS to fight Republicans for her in **FLORIDA**? There's no possible way Clinton is unaware of the fact that DWS threw several Florida races because she was all chummy with the local Republicans.

I'm sure DWS has many sterling qualities, but being a fighter is clearly not among them.

vuron I'm not advocating that Clinton adopt Trump's narrative, like I said it's a horrible and evil narrative. But I think the Clinton campaign needs to get better at presenting their own narrative, whatever it may be. It doesn't even have to be a direct counternarrative to Trump's, an argument could be made that it shouldn't be because that would strengthen his own narrative.

Much as I'm very much on the side of economic justice, it doesn't even have to be a narrative that talks about the economy (though, eventually, the Democrats are going to have to do just that, even if it makes rich Democrats uncomfortable, because if we can't fix it then I think there will be a Fascist uprising).

But I do think that on a basic level Clinton is suffering from the same basic problem that Democrats have for a long time: they've got policies, but no stories. They need an elevator pitch. They need a simple set of things that "everyone knows" the Democrats stand for.

The Republicans have that, it's a bunch of bullshit and lies, but if you ask people what the Republicans stand for you'll generally get the same basic list: a strong military, capitalism, and family values. You can say that all three of those are lies and I'll agree. But that doesn't change the fact that the less politically involved citizenry, even if they don't believe it themselves, at least knows what the Republicans claim to stand for.

What do the Democrats stand for? Right now the answer is "well, they aren't Republicans", and that's a lousy answer.
posted by sotonohito at 4:41 PM on July 24, 2016 [10 favorites]


And policy is great, but it isn't narrative.

This is exactly the reasoning behind why I voted for Obama in the 2008 primaries rather than Clinton. Obama had such a strong narrative during that campaign, about civic engagement and the power of the citizenry to make its communities and world better not merely through the power of the ballot but through real political engagement. And so I told my friends and family, "I like both Clinton and Obama. But Obama has the narrative that America needs so much right now, after eight years of Bush and a growing feeling that we're powerless in our government."

And in Obama's victory speech, he underlined that narrative, and why it was so important, saying:
There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as President, and we know that government can't solve every problem. But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And above all, I will ask you join in the work of remaking this nation the only way it's been done in America for two-hundred and twenty-one years - block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand.
And yet the grassroots coalition that got him elected essentially patted itself on the back and went home, abandoning the field to the conservative obstructionists. Instead of remaining active in getting progressive politicians elected to local and state offices, and attempting to reach out and educate less politically tuned-in citizens about critical issues like climate change, financial reform, and militarism, my progressive friends started complaining that Obama was too quick to compromise, too slow to push progressive reforms (through a Congress on which they applied no real political pressure), too "establishment." And while the Obama administration has ended up accomplishing or making significant progress towards a huge amount of what he originally promised to do, many of my progressive friends are still angry that he hasn't done enough, forgetting that they hadn't upheld their part of the bargain that Obama offered on election night in 2008. Obama's vital narrative about civic engagement had given way again to the narrative that Washington doesn't work for us.

So this year I had less faith in the power of narrative, less faith that progressives would remain politically engaged in a meaningful, not-just-snark-and-expressions-of-disappointment way. This year I said, "I like both Clinton and Sanders. But Clinton has the policies that America needs so much right now."

So I guess at this point I would say, narrative is great, but it isn't policy. And as for whether it's even true that the Clinton campaign has no narrative at this point, vuron put it better than I could.
posted by biogeo at 4:43 PM on July 24, 2016 [23 favorites]


I actually am not that uncomfortable with super-delegates as such. I am sure the Republicans wish they had them! They could have put in someone less awful.
Super-delegates should be more quiet about picking a favorite. Early in the process is a bad idea. I think the proposal on the current platform about super-delegates is not bad, maybe even good.
Yes to having the early and late primaries rotate! NH and Iowa definitely should not always be picking our presidents!
Compressing the primary season makes sense to me as well.
It takes way too long.
I understand the objections to totally open primaries, but being able to register and pick a party closer to election time would be a good thing.
New York State has an absurdly long time prior to elections and California has absolutely bizarre rules. I think you should be able to do what you do in Washington state, simply declare your party on your ballot envelope. No fair voting for anyone on the other side in the primary. Here in my state that will invalidate your primary ballot.
Both parties need to get over who is a 'real Democrat' or who is a 'real Republican'.
It's time both parties realized that independent voters are who really decides elections.
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 4:43 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Why not the simpler inference that party bias means there's something systemic that causes all of this corrupt behavior--thus, failing to appropriately distance/account Schultz from positions of power is just a continuation of that.

Nothing Clinton has done is “corrupt”, but it has the optics of corruption. This is her curse.
posted by Going To Maine at 4:43 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


What Clinton and the Democrats offer isn't a competing narrative, it isn't a story, it's just a bunch of policy proposals. And policy is great, but it isn't narrative.

Sure, but that's only because the Republicans have already had their convention, and the Democrats haven't yet. The entire point of the DNC this week is to create a cohesive narrative. Trump is lucky that his people picked a tried and true one that has a proven track record among previous right-wing candidates. But there are equally trusty liberal political narratives.
posted by Sara C. at 4:44 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


I'm sure DWS has many sterling qualities
cite please
posted by murphy slaw at 4:44 PM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


Probably something the Bernie camp agreed to... I hope.

I find this highly unlikely.
posted by futz at 4:46 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


This is not my first hold-your-nose-and-vote-for-the-Dem presidential election, but it is the first to make me worry that I might at some point twist my nose right off my face.
posted by Lyme Drop at 4:46 PM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


I don't know guy, this feels like putting a black hole (the RNC) on par with a chicken sandwich tainted with salmonella
posted by angrycat at 4:47 PM on July 24, 2016 [18 favorites]


That underlying narrative is that whether you are black or brown, Gay or Straight, Cisgender or Transgender, Rich or Poor, etc you have value and you have a place at the table. That yes there are economic challenges facing this country but privileging one group over another is not the way forward.

That's a wonderful mission statement; it's not a narrative, and they do desperately need one. They need something like:

"In the past, America grew to greatness, in large part because of the unacknowledged labor of disenfranchised and oppressed people. Every time we have made advances in technology, in wealth, in social standing in the world, it has been because of massive effort from everyone - and yet these groups have been shoved aside when the prizes were handed out. This has caused anger, pain, and violence. Well, no more. Everyone is part of the greatness of America, and everyone deserves their share of the credits and rewards. In our future, we will reapportion the rewards system so that those people who've been shut out for so long, have the opportunity to claim their just due."

The problem with that narrative is that even a quick look says, "those who currently are sitting on the stack of rewards are going to have to give some up," and there's a whole lot of people who're going to say, "but I earned this!" Or their father did and left it to them, or whatever.

The narrative needs a second part:

"Many people have received rewards that should rightfully have gone to these marginalized people. We know that those who were rewarded, want to be fair - they want to be rewarded for what they have done; they don't want to claim a trophy that was stolen off someone else's shelf and handed to them. We know it'll be frustrating for them to realize they didn't actually earn that trophy, but we're counting on them to be true Americans by recognizing where credit is due, and allow the resources to be reallocated so the whole team can move toward victory. "

That's a complicated message and a hard sell - the Republicans have a much easier time with "evil thugs are taking your stuff and I'm gonna beat them up and get it back to you."
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 4:49 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


Sanders is now stuck in a position where he had called for her resignation, he got it but it pivoted into a middle-finger by the Clinton team, and now he has to give a ringing endorsement of Clinton at the DNC to unite the party into one big loving family. Tomorrow, while this is all still fresh and wounding. Things are all tangled up right now. I don't have high hopes for the DNC putting everything together again.
posted by naju at 4:50 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


I'm sure the feeling will pass once the news cycle rotates. Hopefully "honorary" means "placatory and we'll never hear about her again" re: DWS. She didn't write the objectionable emails, apologies have been issued, and so on.

My bigger fear presently is violence at the DNC protests. Since there wasn't any violence in Cleveland, it'll make Trump look good and give him talking points if violence breaks out in Philadelphia. Bernie needs to come out vocally for Clinton (and swinging for Trump) to try to break his supporters' conspiracy bubble.
posted by stolyarova at 4:51 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


I think Obama has been a terrific president. One of the best ever. I think Clinton will continue and expand on the progress we've made under Obama. I will vote for her with enthusiasm.
posted by persona au gratin at 4:53 PM on July 24, 2016 [27 favorites]


Remember, the Hillary campaign is the one that let Mark Penn screw things up in 08. They're loyal to a fault. I'm not surprised to hear about DWS.
posted by persona au gratin at 4:55 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Bernie needs to come out vocally for Clinton (and swinging for Trump) to try to break his supporters' conspiracy bubble.

Conspiracy bubbles are unbreakable, as a general rule. But I suspect people are largely overexaggerating the degree to which Bernie supporters are susceptible to tin-foil-hattery. In any case, giving a speech in her favor as the opening highlight of the DNC is about as vocal as you can be.
posted by dis_integration at 4:55 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


Sanders is a professional politician. He knows the score and he'll be fine tomorrow.
posted by Justinian at 4:56 PM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


Come on guys, The worst you can say about Trump is that the FSB has made his election a strategic goal in the hope that a destabilized America won't do anything about their westward expansion into Europe. Being shitty about Sanders in email when everyone knows you're shitty about Sanders is CLEARLY the equal of that.
posted by Artw at 4:59 PM on July 24, 2016 [16 favorites]


Newsweek from June: Why Don't People Like Debbie Wasserman Schultz?

Spitballing, but maybe Clinton legit sees DWS as an ambitious hardworking woman leader being thrown under the bus (like that never happens, right?), who's been a loyal friend for decades, and doesn't think it's right to abandon her, damn the optics. Not because it's quid pro quo, but because Clinton is loyal. So, give her a role - not a huge role, not a big-deal role, not an important role at all, clearly designated "honorary" - but enough to show her she's still on her side.

Loyal to a fault, indeed.
posted by cdefgfeadgagfe at 5:03 PM on July 24, 2016 [24 favorites]


I am done with the primaries and ready for the general. Enough with the emails for now. In my opinion. Which you can ignore. But I promise this will be the last thing I type anywhere about DWS, Bernie or The DNC that isn't actual general election strategy related.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:03 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Narrative for the Democrats: Without Democrats, it would be the rich robbing the poor, the warmongers sending your kids to die in war, corporations poisoning the rivers and hypocrites pushing their phony morals down our throats. you need us to keep things fair and on the level. After all, we think and care about this stuff.
posted by argybarg at 5:05 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]




Screw narrative. I like policy, and I vote.
posted by kyrademon at 5:06 PM on July 24, 2016 [21 favorites]


Alternate explanation: Perhaps the Clinton campaign had to offer DWS this in order to get her to resign? So Clinton effectively sucked the poison out of the wound and took it into herself? While that spin is satisfying, I'm not convinced.
posted by stolyarova at 5:06 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


And also, none of the sources I'm looking at seem to care about DSW's honorary position. They're all shouting ding-dong-the-witch-is-dead.
posted by argybarg at 5:09 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


regarding IT security, I do that for a living, it's complicated work and I can assure you the effort I put into being inclusive, understanding and actively listening here is the same exact effort I put into my job.

And I'm hardly alone, the other 8 people on my security team are held to that exact standard.

I'm sad people work at places where their ITsec staff are top-down blowhards. That's not security. That's someone on a power trip who needs to be managed out of a job.

Just my professional, as in I do this for a living perspective on IT security and how it gets done.
posted by Annika Cicada at 5:10 PM on July 24, 2016 [13 favorites]


In other Philadelphia bird news, Bernie supporters are wearing hats with tiny birds atop them.

They should probably watch out for hawks.
posted by dersins at 1:09 PM on July 24
[13 favorites −] Favorite added! [!]
The birds all started with the little female gold-finch which famously buzzed Bernie at his Portland OR rally.
Small birds have been kind of a Berner thing ever since.
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 5:12 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


I went away to stop commenting all the time but then I came back! Anyways, I am into what ErisLordFreedom is putting down.

Stuff like this:

Without Democrats, it would be the rich robbing the poor, the warmongers sending your kids to die in war, corporations poisoning the rivers and hypocrites pushing their phony morals down our throats. you need us to keep things fair and on the level. After all, we think and care about this stuff.

I think will be less successful. Even though I mostly agree, "we don't do evil" is a terrible slogan.
posted by dame at 5:18 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


I really think the Dems are going to win on positivity and inclusiveness. Even the "neutral" parts of the MSM called Trump's speech dark. Turn on the lights, DNC!
posted by Sara C. at 5:22 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


Yeah, Day One will have Bernie not-Cruzing Hillary. It's an easy story and a positive contrast.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:24 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


Even though I mostly agree, "we don't do evil" is a terrible slogan.

I would have thought "we're gonna do tons of evil!" would be a terrible slogan too but it is working pretty well for Trump.
posted by Justinian at 5:25 PM on July 24, 2016 [16 favorites]


The vibe I get from the Democratic Party is very 1939 France; their electoral math lead is the Maginot line - on paper an unbeatable lead, but they're beset by lassitude and uncertainty. Stronger engagement with Black Lives Matter or the socialist wing might have put some more fight in them but as it stands I fear they're gonna get blitzkrieged. We'll see how the convention goes, I suppose...
posted by nicolas léonard sadi carnot at 5:30 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


I think if Trump wins it will be because nothing was going to stop him. Obviously we shouldn't go screwing this up but I don't think the campaign is going to decide this. Either a malevolent hurricane is building in the public or it isn't. (And still: knock on doors, get out the vote, and so on.)
posted by argybarg at 5:35 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


I don't know guy, this feels like putting a black hole (the RNC) on par with a chicken sandwich tainted with salmonella

Did somebody do that?
posted by Lyme Drop at 5:45 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


This is not my first hold-your-nose-and-vote-for-the-Dem presidential election, but it is the first to make me worry that I might at some point twist my nose right off my face.

Personally, I was far more nauseated by my own Gore/Lieberman vote. Not because I didn't like Gore, but because I loathed Lieberman, loathed the dems' pandering, rightward shift, was decidedly unfond of Tipper, and not least significantly, I genuinely believed in Nader.

But goddamn, after the GWB presidency started, I felt AWESOME about that vote. And four years later, I felt awesome about throwing everything I had behind Kerry.

There are many things I dislike about Hillary Clinton, from the political to the personal, but you know what? That's alright. She does not to be my Danaerys Targaryen. She is hyper-smart, she is profoundly competent, and I dig the current democratic platform much more than I have any other year. (Thanks, Bernie!) Voting for her will be fine. Registering voters for her and phone banking for her will be fine. I will not feel compromised by doing any of those things.

But at the same time, voting for her does not mean prospectively approving everything that she subsequently does. Once she's elected, we will all have to keep any eye on her. When she chooses business interests over human interests, we will have to speak up and hold her feet to the fire. We will have to be prepared to hit the streets, hard, if she engages in belligerent foreign policy. We will all, in short, have to keep working as activists and agitators long after the election is over. I am okay with that too.
posted by palmcorder_yajna at 5:46 PM on July 24, 2016 [49 favorites]


We are all standing here going in circles about how awful this all is. I should go outside.
posted by stolyarova at 5:47 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


Agreed with your entire comment, p_y.
posted by Lyme Drop at 5:47 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


What Clinton and the Democrats offer isn't a competing narrative, it isn't a story, it's just a bunch of policy proposals. And policy is great, but it isn't narrative.

Hillary Clinton victory speech, June 8, 2016:
Now, I know it never feels good to put your heart into a cause or a candidate you believe in – and to come up short. I know that feeling well. But as we look ahead to the battle that awaits, let’s remember all that unites us.

We all want an economy with more opportunity and less inequality, where Wall Street can never wreck Main Street again. We all want a government that listens to the people, not the power brokers, which means getting unaccountable money out of politics. And we all want a society that is tolerant, inclusive, and fair.

We all believe that America succeeds when more people share in our prosperity; when more people have a voice in our political system; when more people can contribute to their communities. We believe that cooperation is better than conflict, unity is better than division, empowerment is better than resentment, and bridges are better than walls

It’s a simple but powerful idea. We believe that we are stronger together. And the stakes in this election are high. And the choice is clear.
posted by kirkaracha at 5:50 PM on July 24, 2016 [24 favorites]


Everytime I start feeling really scared, I revisit the Kaine speech and the schedule for this upcoming week. The speakers they have are just marvelous - both the bigwigs and the names you might not recognize.

I have faith that Bernie will draw upon the better angels of his nature (get thee gone Jeff Weaver) and bring it on home tomorrow night. He knows what a Trump presidency would mean for the struggling people he sincerely, deeply cares about.
posted by sallybrown at 5:50 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


To me, she's a B/B-, Kaine is an A-, and Donald Trump is the first unequivocal F candidate of my lifetime. (Nixon, when I was 2 in 1972, was a D, and George W Bush was a C-.)

So obviously the agony over Bernie (a B- for poor organization and specifics) is heartbreaking and mystifying to me.
posted by argybarg at 5:50 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


It's because we all have different internal grading systems. My heartbreaking and mystifying is different than yours.
posted by futz at 5:54 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


Cripes. We haven't even had the convention yet and we're all already writing articles like "Five Reasons Donald Trump Will Win." You don't see the Rs doing this shit. They know that the only narrative that counts to a lot of people is "I'M A WINNER." And Trump is the best at that narrative, due to his various delusions and personality disorders. So, on one side we've got "I'M A WINNER" repeated ad nauseum and on the other? "Uh, I think we might be the losers here guys, idk, what do you think?"

You want to improve the narrative? Every time you talk to someone about politics from now until the election, tell them that Clinton/Kaine is a WINNING TICKET. Repeat it frequently. Put it in your tweets. Change your FB status. Whatever. But "I'm going to vote for the side with the most defeatist losers" is something that no voter said ever.
posted by soren_lorensen at 5:56 PM on July 24, 2016 [39 favorites]


The speakers they have are just marvelous - both the bigwigs and the names you might not recognize.

Not that I watched it, but I fail to see how the Dem speakers are going to top Chachi. Get real.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 5:57 PM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


Right? I keep hearing people say "I like Clinton better than Trump but people just aren't enthusiastic about her ;_;" and I want to shake them and say THEN GET REVVED UP BECAUSE HERE WE GO IT'S YOU AND ME.
posted by stolyarova at 5:58 PM on July 24, 2016 [30 favorites]


Not that I watched it, but I fail to see how the Dem speakers are going to top Chachi. Get real.

Major oversight not to ask Henry Winkler to slowly walk across the stage, pause to pull a comb out of his back pocket, and slick back his hair.
posted by sallybrown at 6:00 PM on July 24, 2016 [16 favorites]


Stronger engagement with Black Lives Matter or the socialist wing

"Wing" is a bit of an over-statement given there's exactly 1 small-s socialist out of 535 seats in Congress today.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 6:01 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Clinton-Kaine say they won't sling mud at Trump:
SCOTT PELLEY: He calls you Crooked Hillary.

HILLARY CLINTON: Hmm.

SCOTT PELLEY: What do you call him?

HILLARY CLINTON: I don't call him anything. And I'm not going to engage in that kind of insult fest that he seems to thrive on. So whatever he says about me, he's perfectly free to use up his own air time and his own space to do. I'm going to talk about what he's done, how he has hurt people in business time after time after time.
...
TIM KAINE: ...it is beneath the character of the kind of dialogue we should have. Because we got real serious problems to solve. And look, most of us stopped the name-calling thing about fifth grade.
posted by kirkaracha at 6:01 PM on July 24, 2016 [86 favorites]


Here's the narrative: Eat the rich.
posted by Strange_Robinson at 6:01 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


Honestly, I'm extremely confident in Clinton-Kaine, not so confident as to be complacent but nonetheless extreme confidence.

The fundamentals underlying the election are extremely positive for Clinton, the economy is strong and while it's undeniable that people are being left behind the fundamentals are solid. Obama is extremely popular for a 2 term lame duck President. Demographics are giving the Democrats a solid starting point in terms of electoral math. Republicans basically have to run perfect campaigns in this decade which is why they have to begin to appeal to Latinx voters.

Of course they decided to blow off Ruboto and Cruz in favor of the narcissist and nativist talking Cheetoh.

Clinton is holding firm despite being more or less being subject to nation state espionage in favor of Trump.

Don't be complacent, don't be fearful, be quietly confident because just like Obama in 2012 she's got this shit.
posted by vuron at 6:01 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


Nixon, when I was 2 in 1972, was a D

So even as a toddler you recognized that Nixon belonged in your diaper just like shit and piss did?

:)
posted by futz at 6:01 PM on July 24, 2016




Clinton-Kaine say they won't sling mud at Trump:

They really work well together. It's such a contrast from Trump/Pence who don't look like they even want to be in the same room together.
posted by octothorpe at 6:10 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Leaked DNC emails reveal the inner workings of the party’s finance operation

Political party trades access to political figures for large donations. Film at 11.
posted by tonycpsu at 6:11 PM on July 24, 2016 [12 favorites]


I expect Clinton/Kaine know that they can rely on tens if not hundreds of millions of Super PAC dollars to sling all the mud one could hope for at Trump. Plus you can go all kinds of negative without resorting to an "insult fest".

Negative campaigning works and they're gonna do a ton of it.
posted by Justinian at 6:11 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


TBF it's hard to talk about Trump without negatives.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 6:14 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


Given that Trump doesn't have any actual policies to campaign against and offer alternatives to, he doesn't really leave much room for anything but going negative.
posted by soren_lorensen at 6:16 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


It's pretty cool that Sarah McBride is speaking on Thursday a little before Clinton. She's a trans woman. History being made folks. Don't harsh my joy peeps. I need this.
posted by Annika Cicada at 6:17 PM on July 24, 2016 [51 favorites]


Eww, futz
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:19 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


TIM KAINE: ...it is beneath the character of the kind of dialogue we should have. Because we got real serious problems to solve. And look, most of us stopped the name-calling thing about fifth grade.

This is why Kaine is going to be such an effective surrogate: he's able to attack Trump with a "Gee whiz, get a load of this guy, what a piece of work" grin on his face. He's a total breath of fresh air.
posted by EarBucket at 6:21 PM on July 24, 2016 [35 favorites]


My narrative:
If Trump wins, the Supreme Court will hand down many pro-corporate and pro state's rights decisions. This is a certainty.

In addition we will likely fight stupid wars badly and have trade wars and a renewed war on drugs and maybe martial law. (The most orderly kind of law.)

Wrecking the system we have now will create a less stable and more violent set up. It's practically a law of physics. Trump plus a Republican Congress doesn't give us the kind of gridlock that Obama vs an R Congress yielded. Maybe Congress will stop the most crazy stuff, but anyone who hasn't already should take some time and look at Paul Ryan's vision of the future. It will scare you.

(And now I'm a shitty scare-monger like Trump. I feel dirty.)
posted by puddledork at 6:27 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


I work often in the arts and there's an extensive dialog ongoing about the mires of philanthropy wherein the fundamentals of white generosity preclude effective racial equity platforms in funding and production. It just isn't possible for a system to balance towards poor artists of color when the fingers of wealth are pressing on the scale to whichever intent. This is largely true of human society more generally. Diversity initiatives don't work well when a few powerful people are the ones providing the implementation for everyone else.

I sense the same structures at play in today's Democratic party. For as horrifying as the Republicans are I'm actually jealous that their (very wrongheaded) people got to kick the usuals in the pants and take control of the party. Imagine if instead of Trump the emergent movement was represented by a pro-consumer, pro-individual freedoms (bedrooms, bathrooms and beyond,) pro-work together candidate who was ok with taxes the way they are, felt like a little immigration was good for business and argued that we should be dramatically more thrifty about military spending and subsidizing wall street?

Clinton's campaign wouldn't stand a chance against an opponent like that in a climate like this. A whole lot of people are between a rock and hard place — we (I'm not sure who "we" is here) don't want the candidates that the party has chosen even if they're great politicians and effective leaders. Because parties shouldn't be choosing our presidents for us. That's our job, not theirs.

I don't know how we get to a place where people get to choose their own leadership in some kind of meaningful way. But we've got to try from an understanding of what it feels like to come into the political process and realize all the decisions have already been made.

DWS is part of this, Clinton's donors are part of this, the favoritism evidenced in the emails is part of this, the disenfranchisement of the convoluted primary/caucus system is part of this, and the basic language that leaders like Obama and Clinton are using to describe problems and our approaches to their solutions is also part of this.

Sanders was successful for many more reasons than "men hate women" and everyone owes it to the political climate to comprehend at least a few of them.

I bring all this up because I'm stinging from all the missteps by the DNC and Clinton campaign that each have felt like a shove towards the door.
posted by an animate objects at 6:41 PM on July 24, 2016 [18 favorites]


we're all already writing articles like "Five Reasons Donald Trump Will Win."

Well, no. Michael Moore wrote that. Not "us". Judging by how prolific Moore was during the Bush administration and how little we've seen of him since, a Trump win would be very profitable for him.
posted by Sara C. at 6:45 PM on July 24, 2016 [18 favorites]


I shouldn't be surprised, and to be fair I made the same mistake in 2000, but god damn it's amazing how quickly people take the last eight years for granted.
posted by aspo at 6:46 PM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


Looks like I picked the wrong week to re-read Parable of the Talents. I mean, seriously, the book was written in the 90s and the strongman presidential candidate that's the book's main bad guy literally uses the slogan "Making America great again." Little on the nose there, Octavia Butler.

Oh, it's also set in 2015.
posted by stet at 6:48 PM on July 24, 2016 [27 favorites]


Michael Moore also assured us that Romney was going to win because of his superior ground game.
posted by argybarg at 6:50 PM on July 24, 2016 [14 favorites]


god damn it's amazing how quickly people take the last eight years for granted.

2010 showed us how easy it is to take two years for granted.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 6:57 PM on July 24, 2016 [23 favorites]


. A whole lot of people are between a rock and hard place — we (I'm not sure who "we" is here) don't want the candidates that the party has chosen even if they're great politicians and effective leaders. Because parties shouldn't be choosing our presidents for us. That's our job, not theirs.


Last time around the people selected Obama over Clinton. This time the people selected Clinton over Sanders. I've seen no convincing proof that more people voted for Sanders. Am I misreading this?
posted by Joey Michaels at 6:57 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


I sense the same structures at play in today's Democratic party. For as horrifying as the Republicans are I'm actually jealous that their (very wrongheaded) people got to kick the usuals in the pants and take control of the party. Imagine if instead of Trump the emergent movement was represented by a pro-consumer, pro-individual freedoms (bedrooms, bathrooms and beyond,) pro-work together candidate who was ok with taxes the way they are, felt like a little immigration was good for business and argued that we should be dramatically more thrifty about military spending and subsidizing wall street?

Clinton's campaign wouldn't stand a chance against an opponent like that in a climate like this. A whole lot of people are between a rock and hard place — we (I'm not sure who “we” is here) don't want the candidates that the party has chosen even if they're great politicians and effective leaders. Because parties shouldn't be choosing our presidents for us. That’s our job, not theirs.

It is debatably true that Sanders was the “emergent movement” politician that you mention, and for all that he did really well his clock was effectively cleaned months ago and converted (through some hardball tactics that I really didn’t think would work, and still feel rather bitter about) into pushing Clinton’s candidacy to the left. That is to say: I’m dubious that such a dark horse candidate could emerge and be successful against Clinton. Similarly, Clinton won the majority of the primary vote. That’s not the nation, but she didn’t get where she did through machinations and secret committees. She got there by being popular.

Of course, if the Rs enthusiastically fronted a Sanders-style candidate things would be different, but their particular coalition depends on certain demons that make that unlikely. That said, the notion that the best way to push the Overton Window to the left is by dragging the right over has quite a few teeth, but I’m not sure how many people on MetaFilter would vote for such a candidate because, in the end, he/she wouldn’t definitionally not be as left as the D.
posted by Going To Maine at 7:04 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


2010 showed us how easy it is to take two years for granted.

Presidencies. We take presidencies for granted.
posted by Going To Maine at 7:05 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


here are some random thoughts:
  • Those emails revealed that while people did not personally like Bernie, they also resolved to do nothing in retaliation towards him despite those feelings. I think that says a lot about how "rigged" the process was.
  • Removing her speaking position and appointing her "Honorary chair" followed by "she's going back to Florida" (i.e. DWS's home state) scream "Please get the fuck out of here, you may have this hand towel to keep a scrap of your dignity intact". DWS still has a lot of power in Florida, an important swing state. They cannot afford to completely alienate her.
  • I am really fucking tired of people acting like nobody voted for Clinton and she was chosen by the party when she crushed Sanders in both popular and pledged delegate votes.
  • I wish the Left was as good at manipulating right-wing outrage as the Right is at manipulating the Left.
posted by schroedinger at 7:06 PM on July 24, 2016 [120 favorites]


schroedinger, you're my favorite commenter today. If I had a gold star I would give it to you.
posted by stolyarova at 7:08 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


Is anyone else seeing a rise in "Trump is like FDR not Hitler" talking points in their world?
posted by Joey Michaels at 7:14 PM on July 24, 2016


#ColbertRNC: By the Numbers
posted by biogeo at 7:17 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Joey Michaels: Is anyone else seeing a rise in "Trump is like FDR not Hitler" talking points in their world?

Thankfully, no, because that is horseshit.
posted by Superplin at 7:17 PM on July 24, 2016 [19 favorites]


That's not gonna sell Trump to Republicans. It'd be like trying to market Clinton as Goldwater: for the target audience, that person is basically Satan.
posted by stolyarova at 7:19 PM on July 24, 2016


Amen, palmcorder_yajna. Very well put indeed.

Hillary will be a good president. Let's get her elected and save the Republic.
posted by persona au gratin at 7:22 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


A little spite music: The songs—and subtle trolling—of the RNC band:
For the most part, Smith’s garage-dad band filled it with the kind of innocuous classic rock and soul songs you’d expect to hear at the wedding of your dental hygienist cousin.
...
But looking at some of the tunes that snuck their way onto the official playlist these past four days, one begins to suspect that G.E. Smith and The Just-a-Gig Band were staging their own slyly subversive protest, right there in the Quicken Loans Arena.
posted by kirkaracha at 7:24 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


schroedinger: "Those emails revealed that while people did not personally like Bernie, they also resolved to do nothing in retaliation towards him despite those feelings. I think that says a lot about how "rigged" the process was."

Uhh, what about actively trying to emphasize his atheism in highly Christian states? That's a pretty clear indicator that there were at least some efforts to hurt the Sanders campaign for Clinton's benefit. And presumably for every intervention like this that someone was stupid enough to put it in writing, there were many organized only verbally.

I mean, Clinton won the primary vote, she's the candidate fair and square. That doesn't mean that Sanders supporters are being irrational in being a little peeved that the folks who were supposed to be organizing an impartial, democratic process in fact were favoring one candidate.
posted by crazy with stars at 7:25 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


an animate objects: Bernie has done really valuable work in making clear there is a strong social democratic voting block in the US. This is reflected in by far the most progressive platform (2016 Dem) in the history of American politics. And Hillary won't forget how people have spoken in favor of those ideals. She'll be following Obama, and not ReaganGHWB.

Fwiw, taxes would have been substantially higher under Sanders's plans. Some of us think that's a good thing. But even with some Ryanesque magic asterisks, taxes would go up.
posted by persona au gratin at 7:29 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


their trotting out of Bruce Springsteen’s “Born In The U.S.A.” to soothe a savage Chris Christie—the latest in a long line of politicians completely misinterpreting the lyrics—was obviously because it’s still a go-to jingoist jam.


It is because Repubicans insist it is. Which is about as PoMo as they're going to get.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:33 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


the folks who were supposed to be organizing an impartial, democratic process

The purpose of the Democratic National Committee isn't to organize an impartial, democratic process. It's to get Democrats into office.

Sanders was obviously not going to be the candidate as of Super Tuesday. He refused to concede after losing primary after primary, refused to concede after he mathematically could not possibly win, and refused to concede after the primaries were over and he had been trounced. At the point when all of the particularly incriminating emails are dated, it behooved the DNC to get Sanders out of the race by hook or by crook so they could begin the long road to party unity, in anticipation of a Clinton vs. Trump general election. Are some of the emails kind of mean? Yes. But it's not the DNC's job to be nice. It's their job to get Democrats in the White House.

The people who were supposed to be organizing an impartial, democratic process are the state election boards.
posted by Sara C. at 7:43 PM on July 24, 2016 [58 favorites]


Hell, nothing requires the DNC to hold primaries at all. They could simply tell us who the candidate is. That would be a bad idea for a great many reasons but there's nothing saying they couldn't do it.
posted by Justinian at 7:47 PM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


Seconding Sara C. To my knowledge the parties themselves have never been responsible for, as she says, organizing an impartial, democratic election process.
posted by worldswalker at 7:47 PM on July 24, 2016


To my knowledge the parties themselves have never been responsible for, as she says, organizing an impartial, democratic election process.

Then why did they repeatedly deny that they were biased? More (much much more) transparency might have saved the dnc a lot of headaches. They sure put out the message that this was an impartial democratic process. Foot, meet bullet.
posted by futz at 7:54 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


Uhh, what about actively trying to emphasize his atheism in highly Christian states? That's a pretty clear indicator that there were at least some efforts to hurt the Sanders campaign for Clinton's benefit. And presumably for every intervention like this that someone was stupid enough to put it in writing, there were many organized only verbally.

Saying "we should do this" is not the same as actually doing something. Venting is not the same as actually doing something. You can find multiple emails where someone says "ugh what about this" and the reply is "no, we're not going to do anything."

Do you think impartiality means "We have no opinions about this, as individual people" or "We are going to act in accordance with our by-laws and policies irrespective of our feelings"? You can't expect the former from any human--in fact, I put far more trust in the person willing to admit their biases and then actively act against them than someone who claims to be wholly impartial on a personal level. Meanwhile, there's no evidence in the emails that the DNC did not act behave in the latter form, and multiple emails where different people stated that's what they were going to do despite their negative feelings.
posted by schroedinger at 7:55 PM on July 24, 2016 [20 favorites]


Uhh, what about actively trying to emphasize his atheism in highly Christian states? That's a pretty clear indicator that there were at least some efforts to hurt the Sanders campaign for Clinton's benefit. And presumably for every intervention like this that someone was stupid enough to put it in writing, there were many organized only verbally.

I think that email is shitty and I'm not about to defend it. Someone should resign for it. I do, to some extent, question its importance though, and its importance is what matters if you're going to use it to argue the election was "rigged."

The timeline doesn't really make sense. The email is dated May 5th. The electoral math was pretty much stacked against Sanders all the way back on Super Tuesday in March, or at least after Florida on March 15th. By April, it was pretty clear Sanders had no path unless Clinton essentially quit the race or was forced out by outside circumstances, and by May 4th, just a day before the email was sent, it was mathematically impossible for Sanders to win without superdelegates overturning the will of the voters. So by its timing, it's merely an awful thing to say about someone, rather than something that could have materially changed the outcome.

Beyond that, Sanders already spoke about his faith back in March, after ducking the question a few times previously: "'I’m very proud to be Jewish,' Sanders said. 'Being Jewish is so much of what I am.'" I knew that, so I'm not sure why a bunch of people paid to make this their job didn't, but here we are. And, I mean, we're talking about Bernie Sanders here. People kind of already knew he was Jewish.

And lastly, there doesn't seem to be any indication anybody actually acted on the plan.

Yes, maybe people did other things behind the scenes and were competent enough not to put it in writing. Such claims require evidence however. There was a bunch of stuff with the debate schedule that happened, I'll certainly give you that, but we also had nine debates, including two the same week in March, and 13 forums, so we kind of had plenty of opportunities. That some of them occurred on Fridays or Saturdays, in a world filled with DVRs and YouTube, surely does not amount to rigging an election.

So my question is where are the shenanigans back when it might have made a difference? Because if want a list of people annoyed at Bernie Sanders for hurting the party and Clinton in May and June, you're going to need a lot of paper, and the people in charge of building a war chest for general to come, distasteful as that job may be and much as I wish it didn't exist, were surely going to be toward the top of that list.

Anyway, if you want to talk about dismissive, talk about the way the DNC swatted down the Lessig Campaign.
posted by zachlipton at 7:59 PM on July 24, 2016 [21 favorites]


What ad ever came out in which Bernie Sanders' presumed/rumored atheism was discussed? Was it ever discussed by a Hillary Clinton surrogate? I don't remember hearing about any such thing. Was even a whisper campaign discussed anywhere? A Super PAC campaign, whatever, a la the "John McCain fathered a black baby" thing of the 2000 GOP primaries? I remember that one pretty distinctly.
posted by raysmj at 8:00 PM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


Saying "we should do this" is not the same as actually doing something. Venting is not the same as actually doing something.

Better watch out. The Trump camp may latch onto this.
posted by futz at 8:01 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


futz: I'd guess it's because, over my adulthood at least (the last roughly 25 years), fewer and fewer voters realize that primaries mean squat. I think they're meant to both winnow the field down and give voters the sense that their opinions matter ... but the parties can run pretty much whoever they damned well choose.
posted by worldswalker at 8:05 PM on July 24, 2016


@SteveKovach: Imagine the kind of emails the RNC sent about Trump over the last year
posted by Going To Maine at 8:06 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


Until the past two big primary seasons, I think the DNC expected that how this works nowadays is that you have a stable of prospective nominees at the start of the process, and a few primaries happen, and one front-runner very quickly emerges. Usually by Super Tuesday.

I remember it being a shock that Obama was able to come from behind and overturn the "inevitable" Hillary candidacy in 2008. This election has somewhat existed in the shadows of 2008, where I think because of that precedent, and also to an extent because of sexism, Sanders managed to hold onto the Obama model despite not having the numbers Obama did at all. Instead of the typical mass exodus of candidates after Super Tuesday.

I'm curious whether, in the next primary cycle that consists mostly of white dudes, we'll stick to the more recent horserace model or go back to the "everything is decided by Super Tuesday" pattern of previous elections.
posted by Sara C. at 8:12 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Well it's not like the FSB is going to release those.
posted by Artw at 8:12 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


Is anyone else seeing a rise in "Trump is like FDR not Hitler" talking points in their world?

Ain't seen it, but I thought it myself. I think Trump == Hitler is extremely overblown, but I think we could expect the magnitude of Trump's fascism to compare roughly with that of FDR, the current USG record holder for Most Fascist President: Economic populism primarily targeted at White people. Running roughshod over the courts. Deportation or internment, respectively, for subjects of disfavored ethnicities. Might Trump aim to overturn the two-term amendment as Roosevelt overturned the unwritten two-term precedent?
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 8:16 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'd guess it's because, over my adulthood at least (the last roughly 25 years), fewer and fewer voters realize that primaries mean squat.

Neither Bill Clinton nor Obama were establishment candidates. Democrats were terrified of Bill Clinton's history of indiscretions, and Hillary Clinton was the preferred candidate in 2008. McCain wasn't establishment, and shit, Trump is a perfect example of primaries not turning out the way the "establishment" wanted them to.

Don't let an air of cynicism blind you to facts.
posted by schroedinger at 8:18 PM on July 24, 2016 [22 favorites]


The purpose of the Democratic National Committee isn't to organize an impartial, democratic process. It's to get Democrats into office.

Seconding Sara C. To my knowledge the parties themselves have never been responsible for, as she says, organizing an impartial, democratic election process.

From Article 5, Section 4 of the Democratic Party charter:
In the conduct and management of the affairs and procedures of the Democratic National Committee, particularly as they apply to the preparation and conduct of the Presidential nomination process, the Chairperson shall exercise impartiality and evenhandedness as between the Presidential candidates and campaigns. The Chairperson shall be responsible for ensuring that the national officers and staff of the Democratic National Committee maintain impartiality and evenhandedness during the Democratic Party Presidential nominating process.
posted by naju at 8:19 PM on July 24, 2016 [30 favorites]


Aren't all these emails from May? As I recall, Bernie already needed to clinch nearly 70% of the remaining pledged delegates to win the pledged delegate majority at that point. A bunch of cranky DNC emails weren't keeping him from the 70%; his campaign's late start, inability to make real inroads among PoC, and overall inconsistency doomed him.

And the "brand loyal" Hispanics line... yep, they're so taking them for granted they are nominating a Catholic fluent in Spanish for veep.
posted by dw at 8:19 PM on July 24, 2016 [10 favorites]


Obama overcame the same disadvantages as Sanders. Sanders didn't lose because of the DNC. Sanders and his campaign lost the election. They failed to broaden their base beyond the passionate core to connect with the whole Democratic party. Many of us saw him as an arrogant, finger wagging jerk making false promises and cheap shots for votes.
posted by humanfont at 8:20 PM on July 24, 2016 [15 favorites]


the Chairperson shall exercise impartiality and evenhandedness as between the Presidential candidates and campaigns. The Chairperson shall be responsible for ensuring that the national officers and staff of the Democratic National Committee maintain impartiality and evenhandedness during the Democratic Party Presidential nominating process.

This does not at all contradict what Sara C. wrote.

Saying that the Chairperson, officers and staff shall remain impartial and evenhanded during the nominating process is not at all the same as saying those people must ensure that the process itself is impartial.

This is not splitting semantic hairs-- it is a crucial distinction.
posted by dersins at 8:25 PM on July 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


(To be clear, the emails that I have seen strongly suggest that at least some of the DNC's staff and officers did indeed utterly fail at maintaining impartiality during the process, but that does not mean the process itself was rigged or even unfair. As others have noted, state parties run their respective primaries and caucuses, not the DNC.)
posted by dersins at 8:28 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


I'm not surprised that the DNC didn't throw its weight behind Sanders.

But, right now, I'm really surprised that Tim Kane didn't emerge as a viable candidate.
posted by schmod at 8:40 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


To be clear, the emails that I have seen strongly suggest that at least some of the DNC's staff and officers did indeed utterly fail at maintaining impartiality during the process

Which is exactly what Sanders is saying: "The party leadership must also always remain impartial in the presidential nominating process, something which did not occur in the 2016 race."
posted by en forme de poire at 8:45 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


Seems to me like he could run in 8 years after HRC, and win another 8 years, giving the US a 24 year run with a gridlocked GOP-controlled congress cutting of the electorates' noses to spite our democratically elected presidents.
posted by Annika Cicada at 8:46 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Congress may flip within 8 years. District boundaries will be redrawn by the people elected in 2020, which (unlike 2010) will also be a presidential election year (with the increased Democratic turnout that implies).
posted by Jpfed at 8:48 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


I supported Sanders though the early primary process, and I'll happily vote for Clinton. That said, my problem with the way DWS is being handled has a lot less to do with her conduct (good, bad, or indifferent) during the primary so much as the Clinton campaign appearing to support (even hire) a person being taken to task for not being above board.

Clinton doesn't need this shit right now, and it makes me grind my teeth a bit to see the campaign shooting itself in the foot the day before the convention.
posted by Mooski at 8:50 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


But, right now, I'm really surprised that Tim Kane didn't emerge as a viable candidate.

Not enough name recognition to compete with Clinton on an even footing, and without the firebrand image that Sanders used to build support outside the establishment.

Competence isn't sexy.
posted by tobascodagama at 8:50 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


I find it curious that in May so many people were saying "don't be ridiculous and conspiratorial, the DNC is impartial and unbiased," and now after the emails came out, many of the same people are saying "of course the DNC can do what it needs to do, no one said they have to be impartial" without any apparent awareness of the contradiction. Where was that argument in May, then? Suspiciously absent from everything I'd read...
posted by naju at 8:50 PM on July 24, 2016 [20 favorites]


Clinton doesn't need this shit right now, and it makes me grind my teeth a bit to see the campaign shooting itself in the foot the day before the convention.

Yes, it's a shockingly stupid move. I don't think it'll matter in the long run, but it's an unforced error of the exact variety that Clinton's people are supposed to be too smart for.

The way you're supposed to do this kind of cronyism is that you accept the resignation and then quietly offer some cushy position in the administration after you win.
posted by tobascodagama at 8:52 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


I find it curious that in May so many people were saying "don't be ridiculous and conspiratorial, the DNC is impartial and unbiased"

Did anyone actually say this, or are you paraphrasing your half-remembered composite of a kind of conversation you had at the time?

Because what I heard then matches what people are saying now. Namely, that the process itself did not seem to be compromised, that Sanders was a flawed campaigner who lost fair and square and would have done even if the staff of the DNC had been totally impartial.
posted by tobascodagama at 8:55 PM on July 24, 2016 [11 favorites]


DWS has a "honorary" title and is getting sent home to Florida as a surrogate, all while trying to survive a contentious primary.

Friday, she was head of the DNC. Tomorrow, she's watching the convention from home.

Clinton's campaign is trying to save face for her quitting in lieu of getting fired. A bunch of people on the Hillary side think DWS has been the subject of some very sexist targeting by the Bernie side, and they really don't want to seem them "win." So, a little face-saving.

Tomorrow Bernie will endorse Hillary and come out guns blazing against Trump, and I expect DWS will be forgotten by Thursday night.
posted by dw at 8:58 PM on July 24, 2016 [18 favorites]




This notion of "process" as divorced from everything the DNC does is rather interesting. Process includes such things as, for example, sanctions to a campaign, the organization and scheduling of primary debates, strategizing / shaping narrative for one campaign at the expense of another, declaring one of the candidates' campaign over when there are nine primaries left, colluding with media to influence one candidate over another, and much more. I'm not saying all of this or any of it happened, but it's "process." It's "conduct and management of the affairs and procedures of the Democratic National Committee." We're rules-lawyering, and badly at that, if we're carving that kind of thing out entirely.
posted by naju at 9:01 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


I find it amazing that people are still trying to come to grips with, and find a theory to explain why Sanders lost. A majority of people thought Clinton would be a better president.
posted by bongo_x at 9:04 PM on July 24, 2016 [39 favorites]


I'm not saying all of this or any of it happened

then what are we even talking about?
posted by murphy slaw at 9:06 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


The DWS "fiasco" is important to about 500 people on the internet. 99.9% of people are seeing it on the news and saying "I don't know who that is and don't care, why does the news talk about this shit?".

I think she was sacrificed to get people to shut hell up. But apparently some people didn't see enough blood.
posted by bongo_x at 9:09 PM on July 24, 2016 [17 favorites]


This notion of "process" as divorced from everything the DNC does is rather interesting.

What's really interesting is how you define the DNC's "process" as a list of unproven accusations based in anti-Sanders conspiracy theories

as long as we're talking about stuff that's "interesting"
posted by schroedinger at 9:09 PM on July 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


I find it amazing that people are still trying to come to grips with, and find a theory to explain why Sanders lost.

Who, specifically, is doing that in this thread at this point?

Also, "he wouldn't have won anyway" is not actually a response to "did DWS and the DNC act in a fair and impartial way during the primary."
posted by en forme de poire at 9:10 PM on July 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


I can't wait til the primary is over
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:11 PM on July 24, 2016 [37 favorites]


Last Week Tonight is featuring the RNC as its main story. This is going to be good.
posted by zachlipton at 9:12 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


then what are we even talking about?

We're talking about evidence (not all of which as even been released yet, as more leaks are forthcoming) that the DNC did not act impartially and evenhandedly in the conduct and management of the affairs and procedures of the DNC. And that this is a violation and unacceptable.

I'm not getting into what did or didn't happen specifically in my comment. We're not even at "this is a wrong thing", so I'm taking baby steps here. Sigh.
posted by naju at 9:12 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


The DWS "fiasco" is important to about 500 people on the internet. 99.9% of people are seeing it on the news and saying "I don't know who that is and don't care, why does the news talk about this shit?".

Yep, this is on the CNN front page because it's a slow news day. The #2 pictured story on the page is a man who claims to have "Caught all of the Pokemon."

If anyone named Kardashian does anything at all this will be out of the news.
posted by mmoncur at 9:14 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


I can't wait til the primary is over

i find it encouraging that you think it will be over at some point
posted by murphy slaw at 9:14 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


Except that, -regardless- of if the DNC is proven to have -wholly shifted the entire election somehow-, that proof is not likely to be resolved in a useful (or usable) way before the election.

Even assuming actual criminal activity occurred (which doesn't seem very provable from what evidence has come to my attention so far, but I admit to having not read anything in depth yet), the process of correcting that activity is not even a slightly speedy one.

This isn't going to be some magic bullet that changes the direction of the current campaigns.
posted by Archelaus at 9:15 PM on July 24, 2016


a list of unproven accusations based in anti-Sanders conspiracy theories

I said "I'm not saying this stuff happened." I'm not saying that as a dodge. I literally don't know if any of it happened. They're examples of ways the DNC can impact an election by favoring one candidate over another.
posted by naju at 9:16 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Thought this was an interesting tidbit from that Politico article:
Several senior Democratic officials with ties to Hillary and Bill Clinton told POLITICO that campaign higher-ups have been trying to replace the oft-off-message Florida congresswoman from the start of Clinton’s campaign late last year. ... John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman – and a former top adviser to Barack Obama – broached the idea of replacing Wasserman Schultz as early as last fall, only to be rebuffed by the president’s team, according to two people with direct knowledge of the conversation.

The Obama team – especially 2012 campaign manager Jim Messina – long viewed Wasserman Schultz as a major campaign liability, questioning her fundraising prowess and her tendency to appoint personal aides to positions of authority, prioritizing loyalty over competence and effectiveness as a spokesperson for Democrats.
posted by en forme de poire at 9:17 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


declaring one of the candidate's campaign over when there are nine primaries left,

Well, it was. The comeback Bernie needed was unprecedented, and his campaign was running on fumes. Trump was clinching. The party wanted to shift attention to the general, and yet Bernie and Co. insisted he still had a chance even though we were talking about 1 in 50,000 odds. Go back and look at the numbers. Bernie's only hope was a blowout in California large enough to overcome however well Hillary did everywhere else.

I'm tired of the conspiracy thinking. A number of the ways the party did things helped Bernie, e.g. caucuses. This election went fairly clean, Arizona the primary exception. But here we are, again, talking about Hillary as some corrupt, evil thing. I can just hear Rep. Gowdy warming up the Benghazi committee again.
posted by dw at 9:19 PM on July 24, 2016 [20 favorites]


Literally nobody in this thread has been talking about Hillary as corrupt, much less evil.
posted by en forme de poire at 9:29 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


I suspect that kind of thing has gone on across the country, dw. The Dems and Rs want to keep their stranglehold.

Coming back to this... this is certainly true in a number of states. In Washington, though, there's no party registration, no partisan primaries, and the top two get through regardless of party. Washington, especially Seattle, is a perfect place for the Greens to make an impact. And yet they've been barely impacting our ballot, even as Goodspaceguy runs for Senate and Uncle Mover (formerly Mike The Mover) runs for Governor.

Could be a local problem, but it seems weird that given the low bar for ballot access they couldn't get anything going.
posted by dw at 9:31 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


John Oliver ends with a full on music video that radically misunderstands the situation of music licensing for live campaign events. Great.
posted by zachlipton at 9:33 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


Seriously @wikileaks is retweeting @AnnCoulter cc @JoyAnnReid

Even if they're not in the hands of the Russians, they're sure frittering away their goodwill.
posted by dw at 9:38 PM on July 24, 2016 [10 favorites]


[A couple of comments deleted. Please folks, try to keep it a little bit cool, don't make it personal, don't make it a discussion of "Metafilter is like X."]
posted by taz (staff) at 9:40 PM on July 24, 2016


I really hope this is all opening night jitters, and we can lay to rest re-litigating the primaries for a few months.
posted by gofargogo at 9:47 PM on July 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


I was thinking the other night that the only explanation for Donald J Trump is that he is in actuality an enormously over-pampered and inbred cat.

Think about it: The cruelty. The entitlement. The selfishness. The lack of boundaries. The aggrieved yowling. It all fits.

My recommendation is for Hillary to put down a can of tuna and a squeaky toy during the debates, and see what happens.
posted by um at 9:51 PM on July 24, 2016 [16 favorites]


If there are poll numbers pointing to it being mathematically, incontrovertibly impossible, sorry.

It depends how you define "incontrovertibly". Here are your polls. Sanders never led, never broke 50%. His campaign was already pushing the idea that superdelegates ought to overturn the majority among the pledged delegates, which should tell its own story about how they viewed the numbers.

What wouldn't be "rubbing salt in the wound" here? Because it appears to me that the Clinton campaign, which had its doubts about DWS as national chair but no power to remove her, has much bigger doubts about throwing her under the bus and reversing over her five times for the benefit of a) the Trump campaign; b) the gossip-mongering political media; c) a slender fringe of Sanders dead-enders, given Florida's pivotal role in November. It starts to feel like grievance without an object. What do you actually want to come out of this, and can you reconcile that with hitting the ground running towards November?
posted by holgate at 9:58 PM on July 24, 2016 [11 favorites]


My recommendation is for Hillary to put down a can of tuna and a squeaky toy during the debates, and see what happens.

Or spike his microphone with catnip?
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 10:03 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


A subtly deployed laser pointer could be sublime.
posted by dersins at 10:07 PM on July 24, 2016 [14 favorites]


I was thinking the other night that the only explanation for Donald J Trump is that he is in actuality an enormously over-pampered and inbred cat.

So in other words, he's Garfield in a badly fitted suit?
posted by NoxAeternum at 10:11 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


The Clean energy march from earlier today (covered by unicorn riot, video 1hr30min).

The final RNC platform (the entire thing is wild).
We the People (66 page pdf)
We are the party of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The Declaration sets forth the fundamental precepts of American government: That God bestows certain inalienable rights on every individual, thus producing human equality; that government exists first and foremost to protect those inalienable rights; that man-made law must be consistent with God-given, natural rights; and that if God-given, natural, inalienable rights come in conflict with government, court, or human-granted rights, God-given, natural, inalienable rights always prevail; that there is a moral law recognized as “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God”; and that American government is to operate with the consent of the governed. We are also the party of the Constitution, the greatest political document ever written. It is the solemn compact built upon principles of the Declaration that enshrines our God-given individual rights and ensures that all Americans stand equal before the law, defines the purposes and limits of government, and is the blueprint for ordered liberty that makes the United States the world’s freest and most prosperous nation.
posted by phoque at 10:17 PM on July 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


... wow. I do believe their claim to be the guys responsible for the Constitution and the Declaration, and that all people have rights, while they're simultaneously fighting for no rights for certain people, has caused my stomach to spit acid into my brain.

Pardon me while I keel over now.
posted by Archelaus at 10:19 PM on July 24, 2016 [4 favorites]


The Obama team – especially 2012 campaign manager Jim Messina – long viewed Wasserman Schultz as a major campaign liability, questioning her fundraising prowess and her tendency to appoint personal aides to positions of authority, prioritizing loyalty over competence and effectiveness as a spokesperson for Democrats.

Even with her gone, DWS will have done lasting damage to the left. Few seem to walk away from her wanting to be her champion, it seems. Even now, after being thrown under the bus, she seems to have few friends and practically no one having any good words to say about her. I wonder if Trump will get the same treatment after he loses.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 10:29 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


We believe the Constitution was written not as a flexible document, but as our enduring covenant.

Article Five of the United States Constitution:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress...
As Americans and as Republicans we wish for peace — so we insist on strength

"War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength"
posted by kirkaracha at 10:31 PM on July 24, 2016 [9 favorites]




But what about all the Supreme Court justices Trump would appoint, I asked her.

“As opposed to having Hillary Clinton in power starting an air war with Russia over Syria because she wants a no-fly zone,” Stein responded. “She’s all about challenging Russia and provoking Russia and surrounding Russia with nuclear weapons and missiles and troops. Do we really want an aggressive war hawk in the White House who has a proven track record of actually doing the things that Donald Trump says?”


OK, yeah, but what about Donald Trump appointing Supreme Court justices?
posted by Joey Michaels at 10:52 PM on July 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


Also, Trump won't be any threat to the homeopathy and other pseudoscience businesses. Gotta take care of your own interests first.
posted by oneswellfoop at 10:56 PM on July 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


"Sometimes you have to lose elections to build your power,” Stein told RI Future in a wide-ranging, 35-minute interview Wednesday."

By that metric, surely we should be living in a single-party state run by the Green Party by now.
posted by