Hacked Audio Reveals Hillary Clinton Sees Herself Occupying “Center-Left to Center-Right”
Bloggers (example) are reading this quote in particular as Clinton mocking millennial Sanders supporters:
CLINTON: Some are new to politics completely. They’re children of the Great Recession. And they are living in their parents’ basement. They feel they got their education and the jobs that are available to them are not at all what they envisioned for themselves. And they don’t see much of a future. I met with a group of young black millennials today and you know one of the young women said, “You know, none of us feel that we have the job that we should have gotten out of college. And we don’t believe the job market is going to give us much of a chance.” So that is a mindset that is really affecting their politics. And so if you’re feeling like you’re consigned to, you know, being a barista, or you know, some other job that doesn’t pay a lot, and doesn’t have some other ladder of opportunity attached to it, then the idea that maybe, just maybe, you could be part of a political revolution is pretty appealing. So I think we should all be really understanding of that and should try to do the best we can not to be, you know, a wet blanket on idealism. We want people to be idealistic. We want them to set big goals. But to take what we can achieve now and try to present them as bigger goals.
But that’s not what Clinton is doing here. The people she’s describing aren’t living in their parents’ basements because they’re losers. They’re doing it because they have no choice.
The more valid concern that will be raised by Clinton’s opponents is that here she is in February saying she’s a proud moderate and that the economy has failed an entire generation, and in late September she’s saying she’s a proud liberal and the economy is doing great. And Clinton’s critics will be right to hit her on that — but even there, Clinton has a reasonable response, which is that she’s a liberal who believes in incremental, achievable change, and that while the economy is improving it has a long way to go.
Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey reaches different conclusions here than I do — most notably, whether the Democrats proposed to attack Sanders for his Jewish heritage. The way I read it, DNC CFO Brad Marshall is saying his West Virginia and Kentucky “peeps” might not have a problem with Sanders’ Judaism, but would have a problem with an atheist.
Either way, it’s wrong. And it suggests that Marshall might have been fine using anti-Semitism against Sanders if it would work.
And it’s even more wrong that somebody higher up than Marshall, the organization CEO, thought the whole thing was a jim-dandy idea, even though there is no evidence the DNC ever followed through on this idea or any other attacks on Sanders.
Sanders did well in both West Virginia and Kentucky.
Internal Democratic party emails disclosed by WikiLeaks appear to show officials trying to figure out how to stop Sanders from beating Clinton. These include trying to use Sanders’ religion — the DNC believed he is an atheist — against him. One DNC official said “my Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist.”
No evidence the DNC acted on the discussion, but it’s wrong for them to even talk about it. Don’t know which is worse, that they discussed violating their requirement to remain neutral, or that they discussed using a man’s religion against him.
I’ve been puzzled why Bernie Sanders hasn’t quit the race. Certainly he should know by now that it would take a miracle for him to win. He should have quit weeks ago, after California, when he had maximum leverage to negotiate his exit with the Democratic leadership. Every day he delays, his negotiating position gets weaker. Surely he knows this. Why hasn’t he quit?
Now I see it: He’d be a fool to quit until the FBI decision on mailgate comes in. If Clinton is indicted, that’s Sanders’ miracle, and maybe a cranky old socialist with a groundswell of support looks good to the Democratic leadership.
The FBI interviewed Hillary Clinton today. The next two weeks will be huge. [Chris Cillizza/The Washington Post]
Brexit, Hamilton, and the limits of democracy
Felix Salmon says direct democracy is a bad form of government because governing is a hard job, requiring execution by professionals — technocrats.
In the Brexit vote, voters in the UK rightly rejected a technocratic regime that forgot it was supposed to serve all the people, not just London. And we’re seeing the same in the US now with support for Sanders and Trump (with New York and DC instead of London of course).
The political establishment has had economic efficiency and growth as its goals for at least 30 years. Those should not be the goals of government economic policy. The goal should be the greatest for the greatest number. Any other goal will inevitably lead to the majority firing the technocrats.
Democrats Will Learn All the Wrong Lessons From Brush With Bernie
Democrats are complacent about beating back the Sanders insurgency and gleefully watching the Republican Party tear itself apart. But the Sanders campaign wasn’t a freak led by a Washington maverick. It was an uprising of fed up voters, as the Trump campaign had been. The Democrats shouldn’t be complacent. They’re next.
If they had any brains, Beltway Dems and their clucky sycophants … would not be celebrating this week. They ought to be horrified to their marrow that the all-powerful Democratic Party ended up having to dig in for a furious rally to stave off a quirky Vermont socialist almost completely lacking big-dollar donors or institutional support. …
But to read the papers in the last two days is to imagine that we didn’t just spend a year witnessing the growth of a massive grassroots movement fueled by loathing of the party establishment….
The twin insurgencies of Trump and Sanders this year were equally a blistering referendum on Beltway politics. But the major-party leaders and the media mouthpieces they hang out with can’t see this, because … Washington culture is too far up its own backside to see much of anything at all.
[Matt Taibbi/Rolling Stone]
Bernie Sanders says he will vote for Clinton, isn’t endorsing her yet, but is staying in the race.
This actually makes sense to me, which means I’ve been following politics too closely for too long.
Sanders will vote Hillary
[Cory Doctorow/Boing Boing]
Bernie Sanders Meets President Obama and Pledges to Work to Defeat Donald Trump [Alan Rappeport and Julie Hirschfeld Davis – The New York Times]
Sanders wants to do what’s right for America. Trump must be spanked and sent to bed without supper in order to get anything else done
Probably Clinton. But I may feel the Bern when I get into the booth.
I wrote this in response to a conversation elsewhere on the Internet:
I, personally, would vote for any Democrat against any Republican in this election, and would have no problem voting for Sanders. But the overwhelming majority of Americans would not agree with me.
Polls predicting Sanders would win against Trump aren’t useful because voters are still unfamiliar with Sanders. Clinton has been going easy on him for the same reason the Republican candidates went easy on Trump – she doesn’t want to alienate his supporters.
The Republicans have no such compunctions, and they will gleefully flaunt Sanders’ early membership in a Trostkyite socialist party, which called for the abolition of the military budget. That same party proclaimed solidarity with Iran during the hostage crisis. The Republicans will dig up Sanders’ past writings where he espoused child nudity, girls having sex with their boyfriends in defiance of parental wishes, and his opposition to private charity.
And those are just the facts. There are also rumors that Sanders went to Nicaragua in the 80s and joined a demonstration where they chanted, “Death to the Yankees!” And accusations that his wife ripped off the Catholic Church.
The Republicans would win against Sanders in a landslide of historic proportion. Any Republican candidate would do that. Even Donald Trump.
This Is What a Republican Attack on Bernie Sanders Would Look Like [Michelle Goldberg – Slate]
Social Conservatives, However Reluctant, Are Warming to the Idea of Trump – Jeremy W. Peters, The New York Times
Only a fool would believe that Trump is now sincere in his support of social conservative values, when his entire life has been lived in pursuit of the opposite, and he stands to gain a great deal by claiming to have converted.
If social conservative values matter to you, then vote Democrat. You can vote for Hillary Clinton, who kept her marriage together 40 years despite her husband’s philandering. Or you can vote for Bernie Sanders, who sowed wild oats in his youth but has remained married to the same woman for 28 years and raised his stepchildren as his own.
She favors Ninja Squirrel from Whole Foods Market.
TIME asked the campaign of Bernie Sanders, Clinton’s Democratic rival in the New York primary Tuesday, if he also likes to feel the condiment burn. “His bold ideas are his hot sauce,” responded spokesman Michael Briggs.
Donald Trump is hugely popular with less-educated white men. Everybody else hates him, according to Jonathan Martin and Nate Cohn on the New York Times.
“We’re talking about somebody who has the passionate devotion of a minority and alternately scares, appalls, angers — or all of the above — a majority of the country,” said Henry Olsen, a conservative analyst. “This isn’t anything but a historic election defeat just waiting to happen.”
Hillary Clinton is likely to be the Democratic nominee, and beat Trump in the general election. Interestingly, Sanders is less likely to win the Democratic nomination but more likely to beat Trump in the general, The Times says.
The “general-election universe is vastly larger and more diverse than the Republican primary electorate” – about 30 million votes anticipated in this year’s GOP primary, compared with 129 million voters in the 2012 Presidential general election, according to the Times.
Electoral Map is a Reality Check to Donald Trump’s Bid [Jonathan Martin and Nate Cohn – The New York Times]
Bernie Sanders doesn’t work with others. He doesn’t get stuff done, says blogger Dave Winer:
About Sanders, what did he get done in the 25 years he’s been in Congress? Basically not very much because the guy didn’t work with others. No compromise in him, I guess, or maybe he just isn’t that social. But it’s not going to get any better for him if he’s President. We’ve elected Presidents before who thought Congress had to come to him, it doesn’t work that way.
The most effective presidents are pretty much assholes you wouldn’t want to have a beer with. Look at some pictures of Lyndon Johnson relating to other DC politicos. He used to talk to people while he was taking a shit, with the door open! And when he got in your face he totally got in your face. Not a great pal, but boy did he get things done.
Also: If you don’t vote in off-year elections, you don’t get change. “Because the government serves people who vote.”
Learning from Bernie and Barney [Dave Winer – Scripting News]