‘I Just Don’t Think She Has A Presidential Look’

That's Donald, speaking of Hillary. Personally, I think Donald DOES have a presidential look... think of former Serbian President Slobodan Milošević, for example, crank down the charm by about 10 percent, and you've got Trump.

But that's not my real point. My real point is that Trump evaluates women entirely by their physical appearance. His wife... er, wives... are good evidence of that: not that any one of them is stupid, but all of them are attention-getting for their looks alone. So the statement that Hillary lacks "a presidential look" means exactly two things:

• she is not male, and
  
• she does not meet Trump's standard of femininity.
  

Go figure... when Hillary was First Lady, my father used to remark on her good looks. But what part of a president's toolkit is her looks, anyway? My mother was bright and articulate from my earliest memories, but I have pics of her in her young adult years, and she was striking... it's no surprise my father went for the whole package, brains, looks, speaking ability, writing ability, etc. (Occasionally, perhaps just to prove a point, Mom would tune the family car. Farm girls often acquire skills like that, though in her case I think it was probably the tractor she tuned.) But Trump clearly evaluates women with one thing in mind. What a schmuck that man is.

A reminder for poll-watching voters. Lately the big three broadcasting networks have been saying that Trump and Clinton are in a dead heat, statistically tied, use your own favorite phrase (but please... not "neck and neck"). Before you believe that statement in its usual sense, go read FiveThirtyEight.com; it's on this site's blogroll. You'll find the networks are cherry-picking the polls they average, and rotten-apple-tossing the tweaked results at you. If you can put aside their "methodology" (heh) for long enough to see what Nate Silver & Co. are saying, you'll see Hillary is still several points in the lead... and noticeably more likely to win the office. This does not mean she or her supporters can afford to be complacent, but neither is it time for them to tear their hair out.

Bernie Sanders For President Admirable Person Of The Year

I understand how difficult it must be for Bernie to step aside. But I hope he faces this inevitability as he has courageously faced so many others: the delegate counts simply aren't there for him, and Secretary Clinton, FBOW, will be the Democratic Party's candidate for POTUS. Considering the likely catastrophe threatening our nation if Trump should become President, Sen. Sanders would best serve our nation by ending his own run for that office.

What we progressives owe him is incalculable: the public dialog on traditionally progressive/liberal issues has moved noticeably leftward thanks to Sanders's run, and he has surely made Clinton a better candidate by engaging with her on those issues.

As ambivalent as I am about Hillary Clinton, I admit Hillary is easily the most qualified candidate between the remaining two who have a realistic chance of winning (or, in Trump's case, stealing) the presidency. I'd like to give Sen. Sanders a day or two to make his own endorsement of Secy. Clinton before I remove my own endorsement of him from this site and (as seems likely at this point) begin my advocacy for Hillary Clinton.

More as it happens...

Whose Party Is It?

Josh Marshall, the estimable if too-moderate-for-my-taste editor and publisher of Talking Points Memo, expresses outright in an editorial a thought that's been troubling my mind in the past few days. Here's his conclusion:

...

Let's put it starkly. Whose Republican party is this? McCain's? Romney's? Bush's? Boehner's? Ryan's? There's little question that the 2016 GOP is the party of Sarah Palin. Donald Trump is simply the successor who is bringing what she started to fruition - the Joshua to her Moses, the Umar to her Muhammad. This is not simply a commentary on the colorful, antic quality of this political cycle. It's rooted in the same basic themes and beliefs: a mix of grievance and aggression, sharp tongued impatience with cosmopolitan thinking and 'political correctness', paeans to the righteous resentment of hard-working white folk, and all packaged in a media savvy gift for gab. It is no accident that the two on stage today are both reality TV stars. Perhaps he has talents to bring things to fruition which she could not. But it's her brand and her message.

This may all sound like a snark. But that's only the outer layer at most. Look back over the last eight years with the jostling factions of the GOP, establishment wings, Tea Partiers, post-2012 post-mortemers, House backbenchers, Palin and Joe the Plumber. What has it all arrived at? Whose party does it end up being? For right now, there's just no debating it: Palin comes out on top. It's her party.

The good Dog help us all, Marshall is very probably right. The GOP is defunct; long live the (new) GOP?

I don't know. America has reached a point of decision: do we retain a flawed two-party system, or do our wide assortment of crazies throw out both major parties and forcibly replace them with their vision of a one-party system? Given the temperament of those crazies, you can bet that a one-party system will more resemble today's GOP... yes, Sarah Palin prominent among them... than the Democratic Party of any era, even in its current sad state.

What do we see when we look down the road a dozen years? Is it His Most Excellent Supreme Ruler Trump, with his Lord High Executioner Palin, who clearly would love to dispatch more than turkeys? You thought we were done with her, and suspected we would be done with him after this primary season. I'm not betting against either one: in its current collectively fractured frame of mind, the diminishing White American majority, in a last rash act, could thrust the baton into their hands.

Ted Cruz For Child Abuse! Ted Cruz For Child Abuse! Ted Cruz...

I have known parents who spank their children; most of those parents use corporal punishment sparingly and with regret even as they consider it necessary. (Personally, I consider it anti-effective in several ways. Don't get me started.)

These with his right hand...

... this one in his wildest dreams.

But not Ted Cruz. He spanks his 5-year-old daughter and he's proud of it, and he says voters should "spank" Hillary Clinton. What a metaphor! As a society, we've been that route in schools, though mostly with boys; the primary results have been a) boys who hold contests to see who can provoke the most swats, and b) a rising juvenile crime rate.

To me, this statement is just more evidence (if anyone needs more) that Ted Cruz is temperamentally unsuited to be president. Not to mention misogynistic...

Well, OK: The Dem Debate

The Dems seem to have gotten their act together. Sanders apologized to Clinton, but emphasized that firing the offending staffer was the most one could reasonably expect of him. The debate was superb: it was not merely staged, it was better than staged. All three candidates... Sanders, Clinton and O'Malley... had their best nights tonight. Perhaps more importantly, they persuaded at least this old-time Democrat that they are in fact mainstream Democrats and concerned with the larger cause to which Dems have always addressed themselves. I am still a Sanders supporter; however, if the inevitable happens, I can live with Clinton as president. The GOP is reported still to be intent on hammering Dems with the Sanders-Clinton conflict, but I do not believe the R's can get much milk out of that sac, and the D's all certainly pounded on Trump as the token (if absent) GOP candidate. ABC analysts spun the debate as being to Trump's advantage, but honestly, I doubt that. Time will tell.

The Basic Nature Of Bernie Sanders: Sanders Saves Andrea Mitchell From Being Trampled

Mikesco at Kos:

Immediately after the debate, a huge stampede of reporters were charging towards the candidates. Reporter Andrea Mitchell, near the front of the crowd, fell down and the crowd didn't appear to slow down. There was a real risk that she was going to be trampled.

Bernie Sanders charged forwards, shouting for the reporters to make way, and was able to stop the onrush of reporters. Then, he helped Andrea Mitchell to her feet. "Are you all right?" he asked her.

She said she was. "That was a dangerous situation," she added.

...

(Mikesco adds a link to the video. Didn't work for me, but hey, I'm running this weirdo operating system...)

This one act says, better than mere words, who Bernie Sanders is and why his motivation to become president is fundamentally unselfish. Think about the act: how many people would rush in, probably at some personal risk, to prevent a trampling? It's the decent, humane thing to do, regardless of whether it was the political thing to do.

The Democratic Party: Not In Disarray Like Another Party I Could Mention

If last night's debate proved anything, it's that the Dems, for all their reputation for internal squabbling, are not the party close to chaotic dysfunction one sees in the GOP. Five candidates rather than more than a dozen? that's just a sign of, ahem, democracy at work. Actual disagreements among the candidates? none half so vehement as the perpetual disagreement between the Dem candidates and Anderson Cooper, unabashedly hostile and partisan, whose mother needs to wash his mouth out (and possibly his brain) with soap. But for the first time in ages, I could call myself a Democrat and not wince at the thought: they all sounded like Democrats, if you put aside for a moment all thoughts of who may own some of their political souls.

The online post-debate post most worth reading: Ed Kilgore's Last Night's Debate: Democrats Vs. CNN... no f^<king kidding, Ed!

A thought: CNN lived up to its nickname, Conservative News Network, and did so even in the face of the most right-leaning Democratic Party in my lifetime. Do Dems really need CNN in future elections, badly enough to put up with the "Fox Jr. Reporter" kits their staff seem all to have requested from Santa for Christmas? The entire Democratic field handled those offensive throwbacks almost flawlessly, but isn't there another major network that could have conducted the debate without flinging so much sh!t at the candidates?

Another thought: more than ever, I believe America needs Bernie. And more than ever, I feel that's not gonna happen. It's a hard road being old; it makes one less presentable in so many ways. Hillary isn't all that old (67, same as me, actually nearly a year older), but she doesn't come across that way when she speaks in public; Bernie is 74 but seems committed (as am I) to looking the stereotypical progressive in his public appearance. Will the public accept that? If they can ignore that, will they accept his intellectual-socialist manner of speaking? I just don't know. I'm hoping for Bernie but acclimating myself to backing Hillary. Hey, it's not the first time!

Bernie In The News This Week

First, let me say I saw Bernie live on CBS News this morning (sorry; I can't find that particular segment online) and I am even more convinced we need this man as president.

Second, note that Hillary no longer has an insurmountable monopoly in all polls, indeed she has dropped even in some national polls. And in at least two early states, New Hampshire and Iowa, Sanders leads Clinton: he holds a 22% lead in NH and a 10% lead in Iowa. I am not an enthusiastic poll-watcher and I don't think this means Bernie will become the Democratic candidate; I just want to rebut those who insist I am wasting my vote. Strategy is well and good, but an honest, democratically motivated vote is never wasted. And yes, I'll switch to Hillary when Bernie leaves the race.

Now a couple of article links:

• Catherine Thompson at TPM: Bernie Sanders Thinks The GOP Debate Was 'Pretty Sad'
• Joshua Holland at The Nation: What ‘The Wall Street Journal’ Gets Totally Wrong About Bernie Sanders’s Agenda
• Jen Hayden at Kos: Bill O'Reilly tried to ambush Bernie Sanders—Bernie wasn't having it

You gotta love a man that Bill-O can't succeed in ambushing...

NO, Damn It, I'm Not Watching The Free Air-Time Being Misrepresented As A Debate

The White House is right to announce that it has better things to do than watch. Actually, there is probably nothing to do that is NOT a better use of the time.

Debate, MFA! If any "debate" "moderator" asks an even slightly challenging question to even one, let alone all of the GOP candidates, the whole party will be whining about it for weeks.

To Hell with each and every one of them, including the network owners giving away the air time! So what's next: will Dems, who appear to have three or at most four primary candidates, be generously granted a share of air time proportional to the number of candidates, or proportional to the number of political parties? or both, to minimize both total and individual Democratic air time? I suspect I know the answer to that one, but either way it's an unfair distribution, goddamn the network administrators...

Maybe it's time to declare an end to the debates and compel network reporters to interview every officially entered candidate individually in prime time, so that both the candidates' credentials and the reporters' are on the line with no fakery about a "debate" to get in the way. Never happen, of course, but that is what it would take to make the time spent worthwhile to the viewer.

A Kossack Explains How To Choose Between Bernie And Hillary

... and they get it just right. Please read.

I Wish Bernie Could Become President: We Need Him

Unconvinced? Watch him as he summons his poise and diplomacy to wrap the RWNJs at Liberty University around his little finger. Part of being POTUS is having all the skills necessary to engage one's own... and the nation's... adversaries face on, and walk away with more than anyone expected from the encounter. Bernie's got those skills, packed full and running over.

---

Oops. That was the livestream, which was over a couple hours ago. Here is a YouTube of (I think) the same encounter.

Oops. Not the same encounter, but rather a speech on the same day in the same place with many of the same people; it makes my point.

GOP Prez Candidate Raises $100 Million... No Beating (Around) The Bushes!

How would you like another Bush family member as POTUS? He would be the THIRD member of his family to hold that office, and I understand their younger generation is reaching adulthood. Royal dynasty, anyone?

Well, you just might get another Bush, like it or not: more than a year out from the 2016 elections, in fundraising through the second quarter, John Ellis Bush has already raised a hundred million US dollars ($100 million)... probably enough to buy the election a couple of times over. (Warning: link is to auto-starting CNN video page. See several well-scrubbed Republicans talk enthusiastically about well-scrubbed Republican fundraising!)

$100 million? Jeebus!

Or perhaps I should say, JEB!ush!

We should have known Citizens United would get us another Bush in the White House. You know I do not lightly advocate amending our Constitution, but if we don't end Citizens United we could very likely see the end of our democracy. What's that? Oh. Yeah, I suppose one could argue it's already gone... [/sigh] I suppose you may as well just Put Your Trust in JEB!ush... (Note: the music is actually pretty cool! Somehow, though, I don't think they're singing about JEB!ush...)

WSJ Article On Bernie Is Not As Unflattering As One Might Expect

"Bernie Sanders Draws Crowds With Matter-of-Fact Message," says the headline in the online edition of the Newspaper of the 1%, and I have to admit, that is what draws me to Sen. Sanders, at least as much as his policy positions: Sanders is as no-nonsense a candidate for high office as I have ever encountered.

Let me make one thing clear. I understand that Sanders will not become the Democratic Party's candidate for president. (I admit, though, I am astonished that, per WSJ, he is only "[t]railing Hillary Clinton by nearly 50 points," pretty good for a guy with scant official party backing and no history of residence in the White House.)

And I want to see a woman POTUS within my lifetime. When Sen. Sanders is, inevitably, defeated in the primaries, I shall vote for Secy. Clinton with no serious regrets.

But meanwhile, I urge you to help me help Sen. Sanders to represent the "democratic wing of the Democratic Party" (as the late great Wellstone put it, and believe me, that wing includes me) in the face of the now almost fully dominant neoliberal wing of the Party. That wing needs to hear from the rest of us, the FDR/JFK wing, loud and clear. Join me in shouting... we can be strident and undignified in a way that Bernie would never allow himself to be!

Endorsing Bernie: Four Posts, A Video And A Short Rant

I am endorsing Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) (no, that's not a mistake; from what I've read, he's running as a 'D') for President, for as long as he's in the race. Yes, I'll switch my vote to Hillary when Sanders inevitably loses at the primary level. Why am I doing this? That's easy to demonstrate.

First, the video:



... then some articles:

• DSWright at FDL: Team Clinton Worried Sanders Will Make Hillary ‘Look Like A Corporatist’
• John Nichols at The Nation: Bernie Sanders to Billionaires: ‘You Can’t Have It All!’
• tvdude at Kos: Bernie Sanders blows Wolf Blitzer's mind with a simple idea (guess it doesn't take much)
• John Nichols at The Nation: ‘Don’t Underestimate Me’: Bernie Sanders Knows a Thing or Two About Winning

Look. This could easily be my last presidential election. When it comes to voting, I've been a dedicated Democrat all my life. What did I get for my troubles? A rightward-running party (or at least its leadership), almost as corporatist as the GOP, wholly devoted to the surveillance state, supporting secret "free trade" agreements guaranteed to damage the average working American, running presidential candidates more conservative than Dwight Eisenhower, absorbing immense "campaign contributions" (virtual bribes) from corporations, again just like the GOP. As restaurant customers sometimes say, who ordered that? Not I, and not any other rank-and-file Democrat I know!

If I am to continue as a Democrat, there are going to have to be some changes to the disappointing entity the Democratic Party has morphed into in the past few decades. If that means I have to retract my commitment to strategic voting and actually vote my conscience in this potentially last show, well, damn the whole Obama‑Rahm‑a, that's what I'll do.

And there's no one actually running in the Democratic presidential field more credible, more consistent with my own political conscience, than Bernie Sanders. So at least for the primary, I'm voting for Bernie, and I urge you to do the same. If we end up with the semi-corporatist anyway, well, at least we will have done what we could toward the creation of (to paraphrase the late great Paul Wellstone) a democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

Bernie 2016... join me!

A Presidential Candidate I Could Vote For — With A Clear Conscience

(Click for larger image)

Who else but Sen. Bernie Sanders! Apparently Sanders is contemplating a Democratic primary run against Hillary Clinton. It's not clear in how many states he would appear on the primary ballot; many states have erected unbelievably high financial obstacles to prevent independents from doing just what Sanders apparently intends to do.

Sanders is not a Democrat but an independent who has for years decades caucused with Democrats in Congress. It is very unlikely he could beat Hillary in a Democratic primary. But if he could force her to take positions even one millimeter to the left of her Wall-Street-driven propensity, that would be a very good thing indeed.

Run, Bernie, run!

Pulitzer-Winning WSJ Columnist: GOP Should Nominate Ron Rand Paul For Prez, Because They Need Another Nationwide Landslide Loss

First, last names reversed?

Who says irony is dead in today's high-level journalism? Not WSJ columnist Bret Stephens: he urges the GOP to nominate Sen. Rand Paul (R‑Hunger) for president, "[L]et's get it over with," he says, launching into a catalog of Paul's very public flaws. But, concludes Stephens, it won't matter:

And so [Paul] should be [nominated]. Because maybe what the GOP needs is another humbling landslide defeat. When moderation on a subject like immigration is ideologically disqualifying, but bark-at-the-moon lunacy about Halliburton is not, then the party has worse problems than merely its choice of nominee.

Remember, you heard it first from the WSJ. And no one could be more macho than a man named "Bret"!

(H/T Tom Kludt of TPM.)