Democratic Week of Destiny - Will they take the leap?

[Cordelier]

This week we're in right now leading up to the South Carolina primary vote on Sat., Feb. 29 (a leap day, fittingly enough) is going to decide the election. It's as simple as that. So, in the interests of clarity and the hopes of pissing off some people and getting a good debate going, I'm going to post my thoughts on the state of the Democratic race.

Bernie Sanders: Sanders isn't going to become President, even if somehow he pulls off a miracle, he's not going to actually get anything done. In choice between Sanders and Trump, people are just going to go with the devil they know. I know all of you Sanders supporters out there feel deeply about the man and his plans... but Joe Q Public is afraid of the unknown. He wants affordable healthcare, but he's afraid of socialism. He may hate Trump's guts, but he's going to vote out of fear of the unknown. Plus, I've seen Bernie operate in Congress for almost 30 years... he's a "my way or the highway" guy. He doesn't cut deals. That makes for good sloganeering, but it doesn't get bills passed in Congress. So, best case scenario with Sanders is that we end up with a left-wing version of Jimmy Carter.... worst case, we end up with 4 more years of Trump.

Joe Biden: Biden is boring. He's beige. But he knows how Washington works. He's forgotten more about Congress than anyone else in the race (with the exception of Klobuchar) has ever learned. He probably wouldn't make a great President, but he could make a pretty good one.

Michael Bloomberg: I don't know what your Grandmother was/is like... but if she was a self-righteous uptight prig with a sarcastic bite, she'd probably have a personality like Bloomberg's. If Tom Steyer wasn't still in the race, I'd say his campaign was the biggest act of public masturbation I've ever seen. Watching Bloomberg talk is almost like watching him piss down his pantleg.... it may give him a warm feeling, but it makes everyone watching a little uneasy.

Elizabeth Warren: C'mon, Liz.... it's over. Stick a fork in it. New Hampshire knows you pretty well from the neighborhood, and what'd they think of your campaign?

Pete Buttigieg: This week is make-or-break for Pete.... but he's got to go out on a limb. He's got to be willing to throw the Hail Mary now. No playing it safe. Here's the thing about African American voters that makes them different from anyone else... they're real. They're who they are. They don't "put on appearances" and pretend to be something they're not. You know why? Because they get slapped upside the head if they try. So if you want to appeal to them, you've got to be as real as they are. They know when someone is the real deal. If Buttigieg can find it within himself to do whatever it takes to get some high-quality endorsements (Cory Booker, I'm looking at you) and summon up what it takes to make a speech - a real speech - at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal, then he could blow the top off of this race. If he wants this, he's got to take it... at the end of this week he could be Bobby Kennedy '68... or he could be Paul Tsgonas '92.

Amy Klobuchar: I know... it's a piss-off. Life isn't fair. You do all the work and Buttigieg gets the credit. Chalking it up to gender inequality just leaves you covered in chalk dust. But let's look at the bright side... you're tailor-made for Veep. So why not take advantage of that Midwest pragmatism, drop out and throw your support to Biden? Let's face it... if he does win, odds are pretty good he'll be a one-termer. And if he doesn't, you'll have wiped the floor with Pence in the VP debate. Either way, you're in a primo spot for 2024.

Tom Steyer: See Bloomberg, above.

 

[Surrealistik]

This week we're in right now leading up to the South Carolina primary vote on Sat., Feb. 29 (a leap day, fittingly enough) is going to decide the election. It's as simple as that. So, in the interests of clarity and the hopes of pissing off some people and getting a good debate going, I'm going to post my thoughts on the state of the Democratic race.

Bernie Sanders: Sanders isn't going to become President, even if somehow he pulls off a miracle, he's not going to actually get anything done. In choice between Sanders and Trump, people are just going to go with the devil they know. I know all of you Sanders supporters out there feel deeply about the man and his plans... but Joe Q Public is afraid of the unknown. He wants affordable healthcare, but he's afraid of socialism. He may hate Trump's guts, but he's going to vote out of fear of the unknown. Plus, I've seen Bernie operate in Congress for almost 30 years... he's a "my way or the highway" guy. He doesn't cut deals. That makes for good sloganeering, but it doesn't get bills passed in Congress. So, best case scenario with Sanders is that we end up with a left-wing version of Jimmy Carter.... worst case, we end up with 4 more years of Trump....

I'm not sure on what factual basis you're predicating this assertion about Bernie, and Joe Q Public's supposed paralyzing fear of him.

According to Real Clear Politics aggregates, Sanders is currently polling the best of the entire field in head to heads vs Trump whom he beats, and perhaps more importantly, he beats Trump in key Rust Belt states. Meanwhile, his core policies have durable majoritarian support among the general public. As before, in the interest of saving myself time:

As stated earlier, Sanders is more likely to win in my estimation than any other candidate in the field:

Bloomberg is unelectable for reasons that should have just been made abundantly clear.

Buttigieg is a small time mayor who is utterly unqualified and is despised by both the progressive wing and minorities.

Warren has the intellect and largely has the policy but sorely lacks charisma, and is essentially bereft of good political instincts; she would make a killer cabinet member though, like Yang.

Biden... has dementia, and a notably more exploitable past.

Klobuchar has the least charisma of any of the serious Democratic candidates by far, and also struggles with the progressive and minority vote.

Meanwhile, besides consistently winning head to heads by substantial margins against Trump, including in pivotal states and the Rust Belt, Sanders is most trusted nationwide on the question of healthcare which is _the_ #1 issue according to Americans, surpassing the economy, and this to a backdrop of Trump cutting Medicare, Medicaid and the CDC to give himself and his rich friends permanent tax breaks, even as we look upon one of the worst outbreaks in modern history.

 

[Acadia]

Thanks for your thoughtful analysis. I thought what you wrote about Biden would have him be the front runner and easy winner of the Dem primary, but omg, he sucks at campaigning and don't think he'll pull it off.
The whole Democrat campaign has been truly fascinating to watch, and not at all what I anticipated.

 

[Cordelier]

Thanks for your thoughtful analysis. I thought what you wrote about Biden would have him be the front runner and easy winner of the Dem primary, but omg, he sucks at campaigning and don't think he'll pull it off.
The whole Democrat campaign has been truly fascinating to watch, and not at all what I anticipated.

It's like watching a slow motion version of this film:



I've seen Biden run in 1988...and 2008. He hasn't improved with age.

 

[Cordelier]

I'm not sure on what factual basis you're predicating this assertion about Bernie, and Joe Q Public's supposed paralyzing fear of him.

According to Real Clear Politics aggregates, Sanders is currently polling the best of the entire field in head to heads vs Trump whom he beats, and perhaps more importantly, he beats Trump in key Rust Belt states. Meanwhile, his core policies have durable majoritarian support among the general public. As before, in the interest of saving myself time:

No factual basis, Surreal... it's all just my opinions, so take it for what it's worth. I only thing I can think of that would set progressive causes back further than having Sanders lose in November would be to have him win and then not be able to do a damn thing as President.

 

[Cordelier]

I'm not sure on what factual basis you're predicating this assertion about Bernie, and Joe Q Public's supposed paralyzing fear of him.

According to Real Clear Politics aggregates, Sanders is currently polling the best of the entire field in head to heads vs Trump whom he beats, and perhaps more importantly, he beats Trump in key Rust Belt states. Meanwhile, his core policies have durable majoritarian support among the general public. As before, in the interest of saving myself time:

"Biden... has dementia, and a notably more exploitable past."

Jesus... ageism much? An exploitable past if you're willing to buy into Trump's demented conspiracy-mongering. But those people are already voting for him.

 

[Surrealistik]

No factual basis, Surreal... it's all just my opinions, so take it for what it's worth. I only thing I can think of that would set progressive causes back further than having Sanders lose in November would be to have him win and then not be able to do a damn thing as President.

Here's the thing: even if Sanders ends up compromising on some or even many of his policies, and I have no doubt he will to some extent, I can trust that unlike Obama, he will conduct negotiations properly and vigourously, make full use of his bully pulpit, start off by demanding the whole loaf while working like hell to get it, versus his Dem predecessor asking timidly for half and walking away with crumbs, having failed to fight hard for what he purports to believe in. There is full stop no one I have greater confidence in to best advance the progressive cause.

 

[Surrealistik]

"Biden... has dementia, and a notably more exploitable past."

Jesus... ageism much? An exploitable past if you're willing to buy into Trump's demented conspiracy-mongering. But those people are already voting for him.

I go by what I see; I do legitimately feel, in good faith, that Biden is grappling with the early stages of dementia. It has nothing to do with ageism and everything to do with how he acts, behaves, and the things he says, as well as his campaign's enduring (and understandable) efforts to keep him out of the spotlight as much as possible.

 

[chuckiechan]

If anything it's a question of how Bernie got so far and how much collateral damage they will sustain dumping him by hook or by crook or a well timed Clinton style heart attack.

 

[Cordelier]

Here's the thing: even if Sanders ends up compromising on some or even many of his policies, and I have no doubt he will to some extent, I can trust that unlike Obama, he will conduct negotiations properly and vigourously, make full use of his bully pulpit, start off by demanding the whole loaf while working like hell to get it, versus his Dem predecessor asking timidly for half and walking away with crumbs, having failed to fight hard for what he purports to believe in. There is full stop no one I have greater confidence in to best advance the progressive cause.

I've got to concede that point to you... I have no doubt that he'll fight hard. He won't be a pushover like Obama was. Harry Truman fought hard too... but at the end of the day, I've got to ask myself how much of his program did he get passed? There's got to be a sweetspot between Truman and Obama where a President can fight hard and still deliver - that's where FDR and LBJ were... and I just don't see Sanders finding it.

 

[Cordelier]

I go by what I see; I do legitimately feel, in good faith, that Biden is grappling with the early stages of dementia. It has nothing to do with ageism and everything to do with how he acts, behaves, and the things he says, as well as his campaign's enduring (and understandable) efforts to keep him out of the spotlight as much as possible.

I think that has more to do with his chronic case of foot-in-mouth disease... but he's always had that.

 

[joko104]

Too bad there isn't a strong DEMOCRAT challenging SOCIALIST Sander's raid on the Democratic Party.

Don't discount Bloomberg. I do not see this as a Sanders - Biden showdown. I see it as a Sanders - Bloomberg showdown. But we'll see.

 

[Surrealistik]

I think that has more to do with his chronic case of foot-in-mouth disease... but he's always had that.

I think that is a _very_ optimistic way of explaining his increasingly idiotic and bizarre behaviour/sayings, that thus far notably dwarfs the weirdest gaffes during his time in the White House.

 

[Surrealistik]

I've got to concede that point to you... I have no doubt that he'll fight hard. He won't be a pushover like Obama was. Harry Truman fought hard too... but at the end of the day, I've got to ask myself how much of his program did he get passed? There's got to be a sweetspot between Truman and Obama where a President can fight hard and still deliver - that's where FDR and LBJ were... and I just don't see Sanders finding it.

FDR is probably the closest equivalent tbh.

 

[Cordelier]

FDR is probably the closest equivalent tbh.

I definitely don't see that one... FDR was a legislative wizard. He got that way because his left hand never knew what his right hand was doing.

I'll give you an example... FDR named John Nance Garner as his running mate... that'd be like Sanders naming Joe Manchin. Could you see him doing that?

 

[Cordelier]

Too bad there isn't a strong DEMOCRAT challenging SOCIALIST Sander's raid on the Democratic Party.

Don't discount Bloomberg. I do not see this as a Sanders - Biden showdown. I see it as a Sanders - Bloomberg showdown. But we'll see.

It's the same as the 2016 Republican primaries... it's a shame there wasn't a strong Republican to challenge Trump. Then you might still actually have a party.

 

[Surrealistik]

I definitely don't see that one... FDR was a legislative wizard. He got that way because his left hand never knew what his right hand was doing.

I'll give you an example... FDR named John Nance Garner as his running mate... that'd be like Sanders naming Joe Manchin. Could you see him doing that?

I couldn't, mainly because Sanders isn't young or healthy enough to risk a conservative Dem running mate inheriting his office and taking a giant dump over his agenda.

Having said that, aside from the obvious parallels between FDR and Sanders on account of them both advancing revolutionary rather than incremental agendas, and their disdain for and by monied and powerful interests and a backdrop of economic malaise (in FDR's time it was the GD, with Sanders' it's unaffordable healthcare, stagnant real wages, historic falling life expectancies and income inequality), core to FDR was his skillful use of the bully pulpit in various forms and his undeniably forceful and compelling nature; to call FDR's legislative success specifically or even mostly a function of wizardry and manipulations rather than being more prominently owed to the raw strength of his message, oratory, convictions, and nature as a fighter is in my view wholly inaccurate.

 

[Drawdown]

Too bad there isn't a strong DEMOCRAT challenging SOCIALIST Sander's raid on the Democratic Party.

Don't discount Bloomberg. I do not see this as a Sanders - Biden showdown. I see it as a Sanders - Bloomberg showdown. But we'll see.

Bloomberg is #2, up one over Biden. nationally. Down 13 on Bernie. Guess reports of his death after debate #1 for him were exaggerated.

 

[Cordelier]

I couldn't, mainly because Sanders isn't young or healthy enough to risk a conservative Dem running mate inheriting his office and taking a giant dump over his agenda.

Having said that, aside from the obvious parallels between FDR and Sanders on account of them both advancing revolutionary rather than incremental agendas, and their disdain for and by monied and powerful interests and a backdrop of economic malaise (in FDR's time it was the GD, with Sanders' it's unaffordable healthcare, stagnant real wages, historic falling life expectancies and income inequality), core to FDR was his skillful use of the bully pulpit in various forms and his undeniably forceful and compelling nature; to call FDR's legislative success specifically or even mostly a function of wizardry and manipulations rather than being more prominently owed to the raw strength of his message, oratory, convictions, and nature as a fighter is in my view wholly inaccurate.

And this is exactly what the progressive wing of the Democratic party doesn't get. I'm sorry if this sounds patronizing, but it's the same refrain I hear echoed down through the generations. You all seem to think all it takes to get things passed is some grassroots support from the public and a few high-sounding speeches. How does a car work? Just turn the key and go.

I don't think you have any idea what it takes to make things happen on Capitol Hill. You've got to get in there under the hood. You've got to tear the transmission apart.. replace the seals, gaskets and bands. Take that engine apart, rebore the cylinders. I don't care what you're trying to get through Congress how much public support you've got, there are going to be 1) people opposed to it.... there are going to be 2) people who are lukewarm and think you're going too far. And there are 3) people who think you're not going far enough. I don't know if you're counting here (and we're talking Congress here, so you should get used to counting as part of your breathing cycle - inhale, count, exhale, repeat), but out of those three groups who can and will cause you problems, 2 of them are in your own caucus... you want to know the difference between a caucus and a cactus? On a cactus, all the pricks are on the outside. And if you think it's hard keeping the caucus on-side... just imagine what it takes to get votes from group 1).

The raw strength of his message, oratory, convictions and nature as a fighter. *L* Jesus... instead of watching Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, why don't you tune into C-Span 2 every now and again? Every time you see a Senator out there making a speech for the ages, just try to grab a glimpse of how empty the chamber is.... the speeches are for public consumption. And the people making them are already decided and counted. That's why they're speaking about it. All the real wheeling and dealing is done off the Senate floor. A speech isn't going to change anyone's mind. A well-timed rider, though, can make a world of difference.

I'll tell you what... name me any piece of New Deal legislation. I don't care which one. I'll see if I can find the key point on which it turned.

 

[joko104]

I couldn't, mainly because Sanders isn't young or healthy enough to risk a conservative Dem running mate inheriting his office and taking a giant dump over his agenda.

Having said that, aside from the obvious parallels between FDR and Sanders on account of them both advancing revolutionary rather than incremental agendas, and their disdain for and by monied and powerful interests and a backdrop of economic malaise (in FDR's time it was the GD, with Sanders' it's unaffordable healthcare, stagnant real wages, historic falling life expectancies and income inequality), core to FDR was his skillful use of the bully pulpit in various forms and his undeniably forceful and compelling nature; to call FDR's legislative success specifically or even mostly a function of wizardry and manipulations rather than being more prominently owed to the raw strength of his message, oratory, convictions, and nature as a fighter is in my view wholly inaccurate.

Sanders will say or do anything to become president. He admitted on his 2A votes that he votes on political expediency, not principle. He won't give a damn what happens after he dies.

 

[Surrealistik]

And this is exactly what the progressive wing of the Democratic party doesn't get. I'm sorry if this sounds patronizing, but it's the same refrain I hear echoed down through the generations. You all seem to think all it takes to get things passed is some grassroots support from the public and a few high-sounding speeches. How does a car work? Just turn the key and go.

I don't think you have any idea what it takes to make things happen on Capitol Hill. You've got to get in there under the hood. You've got to tear the transmission apart.. replace the seals, gaskets and bands. Take that engine apart, rebore the cylinders. I don't care what you're trying to get through Congress how much public support you've got, there are going to be 1) people opposed to it.... there are going to be 2) people who are lukewarm and think you're going too far. And there are 3) people who think you're not going far enough. I don't know if you're counting here (and we're talking Congress here, so you should get used to counting as part of your breathing cycle - inhale, count, exhale, repeat), but out of those three groups who can and will cause you problems, 2 of them are in your own caucus... you want to know the difference between a caucus and a cactus? On a cactus, all the pricks are on the outside. And if you think it's hard keeping the caucus on-side... just imagine what it takes to get votes from group 1).

The raw strength of his message, oratory, convictions and nature as a fighter. *L* Jesus... instead of watching Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, why don't you tune into C-Span 2 every now and again? Every time you see a Senator out there making a speech for the ages, just try to grab a glimpse of how empty the chamber is.... the speeches are for public consumption. And the people making them are already decided and counted. That's why they're speaking about it. All the real wheeling and dealing is done off the Senate floor. A speech isn't going to change anyone's mind. A well-timed rider, though, can make a world of difference.

I'll tell you what... name me any piece of New Deal legislation. I don't care which one. I'll see if I can find the key point on which it turned.

I think you completely misunderstand me and what is actually being asserted here.

I never asserted that political wizardry and brokering played no role in FDR's success (per his re-conciliatory overtures towards and employment of fiscal hawks like Douglas and Morgenthau as an example); of course it did. I said it probably wasn't the most decisive factor; moreover you seem to be discounting wholesale FDR's ability to generate enormous political capital and apply commensurate pressure to exact his agenda which was both historic and utterly undeniable.

If FDR lacked those qualities I just cited, and that you mocked, it is easily doubtful that he would have managed to get elected in the first place, nevermind manage to pass his more ambitious legislative priorities.

 

[Cordelier]

I think you completely misunderstand me and what is actually being asserted here.

I never asserted that political wizardry and brokering played no role in FDR's success (per his re-conciliatory overtures towards and employment of fiscal hawks like Douglas and Morgenthau as an example); of course it did. I said it probably wasn't the most decisive factor; moreover you seem to be discounting wholesale FDR's ability to generate enormous political capital and apply commensurate pressure to exact his agenda which was both historic and utterly undeniable.

If FDR lacked those qualities I just cited, and that you mocked, it is easily doubtful that he would have managed to get elected in the first place, nevermind manage to pass his more ambitious legislative priorities.

I apologize, Surreal.... I didn't mean to come across as mocking you. I fully agree that FDR had remarkable "outside" skills and charisma that helped him to get elected and helped to maintain his popularity. I do think, though, that you kind of hit a button for me that's been on my mind for the last few days - I saw an interview of Senator Sanders where he said he was going to pass bills by reaching out to the public and gathering enough grassroots support to demand change. And all I could think of when he said it was "Jesus... that was Jimmy Carter's philosophy". He didn't need the Washington insiders... he wasn't beholden to them, and he was going to shake things up by not playing the old game anymore. Only it never works out that way for the simple reason that that's not the way it works. And if he has been in Washington for the last 30-odd years and still hasn't figured that out... then what the hell has he been doing?

I don't know... maybe I'm being unfair here, and maybe I'm not giving the man enough credit.... but I sure wish I had some evidence that that's the case.

 

[Surrealistik]

I apologize, Surreal.... I didn't mean to come across as mocking you. I fully agree that FDR had remarkable "outside" skills and charisma that helped him to get elected and helped to maintain his popularity. I do think, though, that you kind of hit a button for me that's been on my mind for the last few days - I saw an interview of Senator Sanders where he said he was going to pass bills by reaching out to the public and gathering enough grassroots support to demand change. And all I could think of when he said it was "Jesus... that was Jimmy Carter's philosophy". He didn't need the Washington insiders... he wasn't beholden to them, and he was going to shake things up by not playing the old game anymore. Only it never works out that way for the simple reason that that's not the way it works. And if he has been in Washington for the last 30-odd years and still hasn't figured that out... then what the hell has he been doing?

I don't know... maybe I'm being unfair here, and maybe I'm not giving the man enough credit.... but I sure wish I had some evidence that that's the case.

It's fine. See, that's the thing; I don't feel that Sanders is some kind of hard nosed absolutist or blowhard who is into all-or-nothing politics, and per his extensive political background as amendment king and demonstrated ability to work with others in the Senate. Though he may be a man of unshakable principle, he's not a blind ideologue who is fundamentally incapable of compromise; if that were true, he wouldn't have campaigned harder for Clinton than any other primary opponent in the past 50 years or so, and worked tirelessly to unify the party; he wouldn't have affirmed his commitment to supporting the party no matter the candidate, even if it were someone as fundamentally distasteful and repugnant as Bloomberg, nor would have he earned his reputation as Amendment King. Though I trust he will be a hard and firm negotiator, I feel he is obviously not someone who is willing to let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and that he will indeed make necessary compromises and deals in order to maximize the implementation of his agenda.

 

[Paradoxical]

This week we're in right now leading up to the South Carolina primary vote on Sat., Feb. 29 (a leap day, fittingly enough) is going to decide the election. It's as simple as that. So, in the interests of clarity and the hopes of pissing off some people and getting a good debate going, I'm going to post my thoughts on the state of the Democratic race.

Bernie Sanders: Sanders isn't going to become President, even if somehow he pulls off a miracle, he's not going to actually get anything done. In choice between Sanders and Trump, people are just going to go with the devil they know. I know all of you Sanders supporters out there feel deeply about the man and his plans... but Joe Q Public is afraid of the unknown. He wants affordable healthcare, but he's afraid of socialism. He may hate Trump's guts, but he's going to vote out of fear of the unknown. Plus, I've seen Bernie operate in Congress for almost 30 years... he's a "my way or the highway" guy. He doesn't cut deals. That makes for good sloganeering, but it doesn't get bills passed in Congress. So, best case scenario with Sanders is that we end up with a left-wing version of Jimmy Carter.... worst case, we end up with 4 more years of Trump.

Joe Biden: Biden is boring. He's beige. But he knows how Washington works. He's forgotten more about Congress than anyone else in the race (with the exception of Klobuchar) has ever learned. He probably wouldn't make a great President, but he could make a pretty good one.

Michael Bloomberg: I don't know what your Grandmother was/is like... but if she was a self-righteous uptight prig with a sarcastic bite, she'd probably have a personality like Bloomberg's. If Tom Steyer wasn't still in the race, I'd say his campaign was the biggest act of public masturbation I've ever seen. Watching Bloomberg talk is almost like watching him piss down his pantleg.... it may give him a warm feeling, but it makes everyone watching a little uneasy.

Elizabeth Warren: C'mon, Liz.... it's over. Stick a fork in it. New Hampshire knows you pretty well from the neighborhood, and what'd they think of your campaign?

Pete Buttigieg: This week is make-or-break for Pete.... but he's got to go out on a limb. He's got to be willing to throw the Hail Mary now. No playing it safe. Here's the thing about African American voters that makes them different from anyone else... they're real. They're who they are. They don't "put on appearances" and pretend to be something they're not. You know why? Because they get slapped upside the head if they try. So if you want to appeal to them, you've got to be as real as they are. They know when someone is the real deal. If Buttigieg can find it within himself to do whatever it takes to get some high-quality endorsements (Cory Booker, I'm looking at you) and summon up what it takes to make a speech - a real speech - at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal, then he could blow the top off of this race. If he wants this, he's got to take it... at the end of this week he could be Bobby Kennedy '68... or he could be Paul Tsgonas '92.

Amy Klobuchar: I know... it's a piss-off. Life isn't fair. You do all the work and Buttigieg gets the credit. Chalking it up to gender inequality just leaves you covered in chalk dust. But let's look at the bright side... you're tailor-made for Veep. So why not take advantage of that Midwest pragmatism, drop out and throw your support to Biden? Let's face it... if he does win, odds are pretty good he'll be a one-termer. And if he doesn't, you'll have wiped the floor with Pence in the VP debate. Either way, you're in a primo spot for 2024.

Tom Steyer: See Bloomberg, above.

Very fair and balanced analysis I think the end result is that the Democrats are screwed. Bernie will probably get the nod or there will be blood in the streets. But, he has no charisma. He looks like one of those muppets but really angry and scolding like a grampa talking to a 5 year old and embarrassing the mother.

 

[Michael Cole]

This week we're in right now leading up to the South Carolina primary vote on Sat., Feb. 29 (a leap day, fittingly enough) is going to decide the election. It's as simple as that. So, in the interests of clarity and the hopes of pissing off some people and getting a good debate going, I'm going to post my thoughts on the state of the Democratic race.

Bernie Sanders: Sanders isn't going to become President, even if somehow he pulls off a miracle, he's not going to actually get anything done. In choice between Sanders and Trump, people are just going to go with the devil they know. I know all of you Sanders supporters out there feel deeply about the man and his plans... but Joe Q Public is afraid of the unknown. He wants affordable healthcare, but he's afraid of socialism. He may hate Trump's guts, but he's going to vote out of fear of the unknown. Plus, I've seen Bernie operate in Congress for almost 30 years... he's a "my way or the highway" guy. He doesn't cut deals. That makes for good sloganeering, but it doesn't get bills passed in Congress. So, best case scenario with Sanders is that we end up with a left-wing version of Jimmy Carter.... worst case, we end up with 4 more years of Trump.

Joe Biden: Biden is boring. He's beige. But he knows how Washington works. He's forgotten more about Congress than anyone else in the race (with the exception of Klobuchar) has ever learned. He probably wouldn't make a great President, but he could make a pretty good one.

Michael Bloomberg: I don't know what your Grandmother was/is like... but if she was a self-righteous uptight prig with a sarcastic bite, she'd probably have a personality like Bloomberg's. If Tom Steyer wasn't still in the race, I'd say his campaign was the biggest act of public masturbation I've ever seen. Watching Bloomberg talk is almost like watching him piss down his pantleg.... it may give him a warm feeling, but it makes everyone watching a little uneasy.

Elizabeth Warren: C'mon, Liz.... it's over. Stick a fork in it. New Hampshire knows you pretty well from the neighborhood, and what'd they think of your campaign?

Pete Buttigieg: This week is make-or-break for Pete.... but he's got to go out on a limb. He's got to be willing to throw the Hail Mary now. No playing it safe. Here's the thing about African American voters that makes them different from anyone else... they're real. They're who they are. They don't "put on appearances" and pretend to be something they're not. You know why? Because they get slapped upside the head if they try. So if you want to appeal to them, you've got to be as real as they are. They know when someone is the real deal. If Buttigieg can find it within himself to do whatever it takes to get some high-quality endorsements (Cory Booker, I'm looking at you) and summon up what it takes to make a speech - a real speech - at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal, then he could blow the top off of this race. If he wants this, he's got to take it... at the end of this week he could be Bobby Kennedy '68... or he could be Paul Tsgonas '92.

Amy Klobuchar: I know... it's a piss-off. Life isn't fair. You do all the work and Buttigieg gets the credit. Chalking it up to gender inequality just leaves you covered in chalk dust. But let's look at the bright side... you're tailor-made for Veep. So why not take advantage of that Midwest pragmatism, drop out and throw your support to Biden? Let's face it... if he does win, odds are pretty good he'll be a one-termer. And if he doesn't, you'll have wiped the floor with Pence in the VP debate. Either way, you're in a primo spot for 2024.

Tom Steyer: See Bloomberg, above.

Almost complete agreement.

Trump probably has the upper hand against Sanders, but no one thought Trump would win either. I think it's a toss up.

From what I've seen of Steyer, he's not the ahole Bloomberg is, but his motives are identical.

I agree 100% with Biden/Klobuchar. I'm sure both campaigns already discuss this, and maybe we'll be in for a surprise. I can only hope.