Sanders, Progressivism, Clinton's Loss

→ PureThoug has joined
ⓘ Bernie run in 2020, maybe a little shred of hope.
ⓘ Drunkest set mode +v PureThoug
ⓘ PureThoug is now known as yUmadTHO
+Mr-X
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/12/clinton-campaign-may-have-been-too-smart-to-win.html
@Drunkest
Clinton Campaign May Have Been Too Smart to Win ( http://tinyurl.com/z63xcu2 ), linked by Mr-X
+yUmadTHO
Mr-X: What does this article mean to you?
It is noteworthy that there was a pretty strong, positive correlation between education level and opposition to Trump.
+Mr-X
yUmadTHO: It means that establishmentarian democrats are doing everything they can to miss the point of why Hillary lost.
yUmadTHO: No there really wasn't.
+yUmadTHO
Mr-X: I am confused.
There is data that supports my claim.
+Mr-X
That was claimed in some of the polling but it looks to not have been nearly as sharp a divide as suggested.
Look, here is the truth.
+yUmadTHO
I'm grabbing a citation.
+Mr-X
Hillary represented "Third Way" democratic ideals. That is to say, she was basically a corporatist.
+yUmadTHO
I think the causes of the election result are multifactorial.
+Mr-X
She couldn't offer any meaningful contrast to Trump on this pivotal subject
+yUmadTHO
As is everything (virtually) of interest in the universe.
So, the fact that dumber people tended to like Trump more was a cause in the election result.
+Mr-X
Since both sides were selling corporatism, the people bought it, but they bought... you know, an actual successful capitalist, not someone who begs wall street for meals.
+yUmadTHO
The real question is, What's its r^2 value?
And I don't know, and I don't know if anybody does.
+Mr-X
I bet you have a poster of Nate Silver in your room dont you
+yUmadTHO
That was a fallacy.
+Mr-X
Hrm?
+yUmadTHO
How many fallacies do you think I should accept from you?
+Mr-X
No fallacy, just an attempt at humor
+yUmadTHO
I agree with you that Democrats don't seem to be learning the right lessons from their loss.
Truth be told, it was a very close election and so they could re-run that election with a different candidate and probably win ~50% of the time.
(If not higher)
I think the correct lesson they should learn is to pivot towards progressive politics.
+Mr-X
Its in the interest of the powers that be that they dont, because the real lessons are that the powers that be are awful, awful people
+yUmadTHO
As Bernie Sander is the most liked politician in our nation.
I agree that she was a corporatist.
+Mr-X
yUmadTHO: I agree completely. But the donors rule the party, clearly, and wont let that happen.
+yUmadTHO
The donors do not appear interested in that, agreed.
+Mr-X
Special interests, a phrase we all stopped hearing about a year ago
+yUmadTHO
https://youtu.be/9R30petM1k0?t=1120
@Drunkest
Enigmatic World @ Powerful Chillout Mix  2016 P - YouTube ( http://tinyurl.com/zhkzjdu ), linked by yUmadTHO
+yUmadTHO
Bernie Sanders should become the head of the Democratic Party.
+Mr-X
Eh Sanders nah
Ellison or someone like Feingold
+yUmadTHO
I am inclined to agree with Cornell West that the Democratic Party may be beyond reform.
+Mr-X
I've been saying it for a while
+yUmadTHO
Bernie Sander is literally the most popular politician in our country.
Why shouldn't he be the leader?
+Mr-X
The Whig solution is probably the only one left
He's not a good politician
He threw the election to Clinton
+yUmadTHO
According to which metrics?
+Mr-X
Admittedly, my subjective ones
+yUmadTHO
Explicate "threw", please.
+Mr-X
But I think I can support them with plenty of evidence
yUmadTHO: He pulled his punches and fell on his sword for her
+yUmadTHO
I agree, in part.
+Mr-X
yUmadTHO: He echoed her campaign talking points about the e-mail scandals, which were more than the nothing she and her supporters claim.
+yUmadTHO
Did you see Lincoln with Daniel Day-Lewis?
+Mr-X
yUmadTHO: He failed to vigorously hit out at her weaknesses at all, generally. Or even to sound the alarm at the massive corrupt machine working against him.
yUmadTHO: I did.
+yUmadTHO
Do you remember the speech by Thaddeus Stevens in favor of equal political rights of freed slaves, but not their full equality?
And how hard that was for him.
+Mr-X
Spielberg's a hero of mine
+yUmadTHO
That's how I ultimately interpreted Sanders' choice post end of his campaign.
+Mr-X
It wasn't just at the end though.
His whole campaign was softball
+yUmadTHO
He fought the battles he thought were the right battles to fight at the time.
+Mr-X
And to me, that makes him a bad politician
He passed on the good battles and fought pointless ones
+yUmadTHO
It's a difficult choice. I agonized over it.
+Mr-X
The e-mail stuff
Why not hit her on that?
+yUmadTHO
Thaddeus Stevens no doubt lost a lot of allies when he abandoned their goal of full equality for freed slaves.
+Mr-X
Why not hit her on swearing to the FBI that she didn't know what a classification mark was when she was the friggin secretary of state?
It wasn't some noble thing he did
He didn't achieve anything
+yUmadTHO
Mr-X: Seeing as how big of an issue that was for the general electorate, it seems it would have been good for that issue to be raised more.
+Mr-X
He just sold out to the man for a seat at what he thought was going to be a well appointed table
And ended up with bupkis
+yUmadTHO
The Democratic Party failed to vet the candidates to the true market of American voter.
I disagree that he sold out at any point.
+Mr-X
Again
Why didn't he hit her on the email
Why didn't he hit her on her inconsistency, faux liberalism, her corporatism, her ingenuineness
+yUmadTHO
He felt that it was more important to discuss issues of larger scope like healthcare.
+Mr-X
I can't buy that though
He saw the polls
+yUmadTHO
He did hit her on the moderate/progressive issue.
+Mr-X
He knew he was losing
Not with any strength, he pulled his punches
+yUmadTHO
I think that we have to settle on what should be the framework to analyze a candidate/person in order to really address these issues.
+Mr-X
I could have run a stronger campaign than he did
+yUmadTHO
A few choices:
1 - Your candidacy should reflect the market of American voters
2 - You should figure out which issues you think are the most important and pursue those
3 - You should hold opponents accountable for past actions as much or more than their policy suggestions
+Mr-X
The job of a leader in a democracy is not just to listen, its not just to dictate, it's... a conversation
+yUmadTHO
Each of those (there are more) seem reasonable, and they're in conflict
+Mr-X
But you have to participate in that conversation or in many cases it doesnt even happen
+yUmadTHO
It's unlikely you could have run a stronger campaign than he did
As his was historically strong
+Mr-X
Here is where the Democrats suck compared to the GOP
The GOP can take an issue with 20% popularity
And in a few years that issue will have 60%
The Democrats cannot and will not even try to do this
+yUmadTHO
Mr-X: I'm not convinced there are any good examples of that
+Mr-X
They suck at actually leading anywhere
+yUmadTHO
Can you name three?
Conservative ideology has been a minority viewpoint for decades
Conservatives have lost every major social fight for about four decades
+Mr-X
yUmadTHO: Then why do they keep winning elections?
No they haven't!
+yUmadTHO
Mr-X: Are you aware of the cognitive science research on political affiliation vis-a-vis cognitive styles?
+Mr-X
Heller being a major example
Citizens United
+yUmadTHO
Citizens United does seem to be a win for conservative ideology
+Mr-X
yUmadTHO: Quite a few different theories yes
yUmadTHO: So does Heller
+yUmadTHO
I don't see Heller as conservative, but I can see why you might
+Mr-X
Uhm
It recognized an individual right to bear arms
Thats definitely a big win for conservative groups and a big loss for liberal ones
+yUmadTHO
I agree that liberal organizations tend to not have that view
So, I guess it is a win for conservative ideology
+Mr-X
Movement conservativism
+yUmadTHO
I, personally, don't see that as a conservative-liberal issue
But I guess the population does as a whole
+Mr-X
Where is the movement liberalism of our time
+yUmadTHO
And so I will defer to that
+Mr-X
You have some people protesting an oil pipeline
But ignoring their own president keeping Gitmo open
+yUmadTHO
Mr-X: After the 1964 political re-alignment, most of the authoritarians in our population drifted towards the Republican Party
Are you familiar with that research
Conservative intellectuals, with strong basis, were against the Civil Rights Acts as a violation of Free Association
+Mr-X
yUmadTHO: No, and frankly I'd question it at least in our time
yUmadTHO: There are a ton of authoritarian leftists in our time
+yUmadTHO
Also, lots of dumb, authoritarians who were racist, opposed the Civil Rights Acts because racism
+Mr-X
The whole SJW movement is authoritarian leftism
+yUmadTHO
And so they conflated the reasons of the conservative intellectuals with their tribalism and migrated
+Mr-X
Third wave feminism is inherently authoritarian
+yUmadTHO
Mr-X: I agree the control-left is a type of authoritarianism
The ratio is pretty high towards conservatives, though
About four to one, from the data I've seen
I might agree, in part, that authoritarianism is an element of third-wave feminism
+Mr-X
I've seen some interesting research on general psychological predictors of political alignment
+yUmadTHO
I know some equity feminists assert that
I don't have enough data at this time to say how big of an element
Mr-X: Here is why I think Republicans keep winning elections
+Mr-X
Third wave is pre-occupied with power and power structures. It clothes itself in various language to obscure its obsessive intent, but that path remains obvious despite their efforts.
And their tactics allow us to know the lion by its claws.
+yUmadTHO
First, since 1992, Republicans have won the national election three times out of seven.
Two of those times, they lose the popular vote.
+Mr-X
Why draw a line at 1992?
+yUmadTHO
Because it is 24 years. It's arbitrary.
24 years seems a reasonable amount of time to consider for 'recent political movements'
I could accept from 2000, also.
Or 1980.
1980 seems a bit far for current trends, though.
Since 2000, they've won three out of five.
Two of which they lost the popular vote.
So, Republicans are losing at the national level.
+Mr-X
1980 seems like a logical point to me
Honestly
+yUmadTHO
Okay.
+Mr-X
1980 was the start of new conservativism
+yUmadTHO
Then 6 out of 10.
Two of which they lost the popular vote.
So, slightly unfavored, including the Republican years of the 1980s.
Republicans were in charge of most state legislatures in 2010.
+Mr-X
well, popular vote isn't the deciding factor
+yUmadTHO
They were responsible for the redistricting which has been described, at this point, by multiple federal courts as "systematically designed to disenfrachise black people"
Or "identical to 1900 Jim Crow" laws
Mr-X: We are/were discussing the relative successes of the two broad political movements in America
Noting both the formal result, and the popular vote, seems correct
Republicans are currently in charge of 69/99 branches of state legislatures
And have a majority in the Senate and House
In the last two Congressional elections, Democrats won a majority of Congressional votes
Something like 54-46%
However, due to gerrymandering by Republicans, the Republicans remain the majority party in both branches of Congress
So, in fact, Republicans are in many important ways, the minority party
Even though they are currently in charge of both branches of Congress, the presidency (soon), and most state legislatures
What does this mean to me?
The Republicans, due to their high rates of Christian evangelism, which is inherently anti-American, and their high rates of authoritarianisim/tribalism, are not a legitimate political party in our country
They are an insurgency movement by people who hate the US Constitution
In North Carolina, we currently have the state legislature trying to amend the power of the governor because they lost
So, when they win, they win
And when they lose, they win
This is what a significant portion of Republicans want
+Mr-X
bbias bro
+yUmadTHO
It is incompatible with American democracy
Okay
+yUmadTHO
I certainly do not have all the answers
I think, and I hope this isn't wishful thinking on my part, may be seeing some of the last grasps at real power by the Republicans
Which is a pretty bold thing to say given the current landscape in offices
+Mr-X
We have nothing to replace them
+yUmadTHO
But, again, liberals/progressives are winning on most issues (polls)
They have the current demographics
They have the future demographics
+Mr-X
Liberals have to get a party again first
+yUmadTHO
Like 70% of young people are socialist
Or progressive
I agree that liberals need a party and it is currently not the Democratic Party
Hillary Clinton was a very bad candidate to run
She would have lost even bigger to every other Republican
The Democrat Party allowed themselves to get hijacked by an uncompetitive candidate
(Though, she got as much votes as Obama in 2012)
I dunno -- maybe it's just the Electoral College, really
She trounced Trump in the popular
Maybe he would have campaigned differently had it been decided by a popular vote
I'm inclined to say not so much because he already ran a sort of national campaign using mass media
Though he did target key areas, to an extent
He also ignored key areas, too
(For which he received considerable criticism by party insiders)