Some Democrats say that they are “blue no matter who.” Trump, they say, is such an existential threat that they will vote for anyone who winds up as the Democratic nominee for president. But is it really wise to extend such a blank check to a party that has disappointed us so many times before?
Blue No Matter Who
Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication and WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a contributor to Centerclip and co-host of "The Final Countdown" talk show on Radio Sputnik. He is a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "2024: Revisited."
10 Comments. Leave new
(You should have had smoke pouring out of her ears. “Illogical. Illogical.”)
The behavior described is, regrettably, about as high up the rational scale as many democratic voters can go. I suspect that the holding of one’s nose cuts off oxygen to the brain, resulting in woodenheaded moves.
In many ways, the BNMW movement resembles the psychology of abuse victims. Your spouse treats you like shit, punches you around, and you say, “I’m leaving!” The spouse promises to do better. And the whole cycle starts all over again. It is very difficult to convince abuse victims that they are in danger.
2020 is not like 2016. The Sanders movement is much more established. In 2016, it was like a pop-up shop. Suddenly, there was someone arguing for healthcare and a higher minimum wage and war criminals like Hillary Clinton (Henry Kissinger’s star pupil) mocked Sanders all the way. As did the media. The Sanders supporters voted for Hillary because Trump was presented as an existential threat.
That’s all media PR. Is Trump a good president? No. But go through the crises. Compare them to 40 years of stagnant wages, the decades of dithering around climate change by various administrations, the increase in prison population, the Flint water supply, Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, bailing out the bankers while homeowners suicided, NO HEALTHCARE, college tuition rising like a rocket. Christ I almost forgot 9/11 and the genuine existential threat Bush’s half-drunken stupor cost all those people. Trump’s “existential” threat (cue the black berets, turtlenecks and clove cigarettes while discussions on ennui rage in the background) is hardly that. But it sure sells ad space on the David Muir Super Serious Looking Show.
This time, the choice is much clearer, so much so that a lot of the abuse victims are waking up. If the dems don’t make Sanders the candidate, whatever dolt they do run simply won’t have the numbers. The Sanders people won’t do it nose-holding vote again, especially now that Bernie just floated the CancelStudentDebt balloon.
> The Sanders supporters voted for Hillary
Speak for yourself, I voted for Jill. (although some did vote for that which they considered a lesser evil)
I wrote in Sanders in 2016. I would not vote for Hillary the War Criminal Who Ran the Money Laundering Operation Called the Clinton Foundation Clinton. 2016 was still too early in the process of the transformation of the dissatisfied members of the democratic party into a cohesive voice.
Call it a dress rehearsal for 2020.
I hope Sanders picks a good veep. And I hope it’s a woman because nothing–well, almost nothing–would give me greater joy than seeing 2024 as the year of the first U.S. president. I only hope W.C. Hillary Clinton is still alive to try to take credit for it so that everyone can explain it to her that she’s the reason it didn’t happen sooner. Her and her third-way, triangulating, neo-con warhawk bullshit.
: whew : you had me worried there for a sec, Alex.
Dear CrazyH:
Thanks for that affirmation.
I have noticed–I say that because I have had the opportunity to tuck into a large quantity of lager–that the “usual suspects” of thinking rarely hold up to prolonged interrogation. For instance:
1. In today’s pointless democratic debate, no one pointed out the following sorites (or do I mean syllogism? James Blish would know):
a. many millions of Americans own guns.
b. very few Americans died as random victims of gun violence.
c. gun violence isn’t a fraction of the epidemic that the dems are painting to be in a desperate attempt to make themselves sound relevant.
Meanwhile, the “issues” of healthcare (mental and physical) as well as military budgets have already been resolved via a multitude of political discourses:
a. giving everyone healthcare is the cheapest path.
b. pulling U.S. gestapo out of upteen-bazillion countries is actually the most sensible course.
Hating Hillary War Criminal Clinton isn’t some sort of hysterial emotional reaction It’s an unavoidable reaction to her illogical–dare I say stupid hysterical pandering–stances.
Jimmy Dore had the same idea as you, Alex, but he frames it (since he’s Irish Catholic) that such voters are like the Adult Children of Alcoholics- they get more angry at the people pointing out that they’ve been abused by the Democrats, than by the Democrats abusing them. I think there’s also a psychological dimension where looking at someone who voted based on their conscience brings up the question “Why did I vote for the lesser evil? Why didn’t I vote in principled manner?” Their response is to try and demonize the person who caused that cognitive dissonance, not to think “Maybe I should vote my conscience.”
And to agree with your last point, Trump has yet to start a new war. That may just be his overall incompetence, but can we be sure [insert name of Corporate Democrat] won’t invade Iran or Venezuela or N. Korea if given a chance? As an anti-Imperialist I prefer an incompetent leader of the American Empire, who brings the collapse of it closer, faster, by pissing off allies and saying the real motives of American foreign policy out loud. Maybe it can collapse before the climate catastrophe it is causing can destroy the planet.
Say what one will about Mr Trump (whom I detest), but he certainly does things that no other US president would dare, as the meeting with Kim Jong-un in Panmunjom suffices to show. (I don’t for a minute believe that it was the result of thought that came to Mr Trump just a day before the meeting took place ; after all, Mr Trump did run a reality show for 14 seasons – I can’t wait to read Mr Moon’s memoirs when they are published….)
In any event, if this meeting does, in fact, contribute to a real relaxation of tensions on the Korean peninsula (and as we all know, Mr Trumps version of «reality» differs from most’s) and therewith in East Asia, then he and Messrs Kim and Moon will deserve a great deal of praise….
Henri
It’s time for Trump to go down (hopefully before the election, but that’s not looking so good) Not, “No matter who” – but I may be more open to Biden than I was to Hillary.
On the bright side: according to most recent polls both Sanders and Warren are doing better & either could win against Trump. If I can’t have my DeVito / Meredith ticket, I’ll take Warren/Sanders or Sanders/Warren.
Fearful unconditional BLUE voters are the greatest asset of Democrats in the duopoly’s race to the bottom in their service to the oligarchs’ upside of the inequality of exchange.
It’s time to step out of the slums and slumps created by the greatest meddlers in elections, the thieving Republicans and Democrats.
Vote your aspirations, not your fears. Fearful voters win elections but lose for their winning.
When the Republicans and Democrats go low, the 45% (who vote for candidates that have no chance of winning or who abstain from voting at all) go high and away from the fecal piles left by Rs and Ds to those who live on the downside of the inequality of exchange.
When fearfully choosing between a negative and a negative, relax and choose a positive not offered.
A positive can be won if only enough people choose a positive even if not offered under the auspices of the duopoly. Where do you think Social Security came from?
Only the 45% can knock the duopoly off the teat of the oligarchs. The 45% can beat any of the duopoly, each of whom depends on getting 27.5% + 1 of the vote, all the while denying the existence of the 45%.
Violence is rampant by and within the US.
Violence is a quest for identity, observed Marshal McLuhan.
Violence is a response to the denial of one’s existence.
The 45% needs to make its existence undeniable by means other than violence.
Nailed it, Ted. It’s not the policies that matter, it’s the personalities. Keep in mind that Mr Trump has been registered as a Democrat back in the day….
Henri