Democratic centrists say nothing is more important than defeating Donald Trump. That’s their argument, again, for why progressives should support a centrist Democratic nominee. But it’s not like progressives suffered when Hillary Clinton lost or that they would be better off if Hillary Clinton were running for reelection today.
It’s Not like Progressives Are Exactly Suffering Because They Didn’t Vote for Hillary
7 Comments. Leave new
However true these speculations ring, there is, however, a snag. Perhaps only 75% of Bernie voters (primary) actually turned out for Clinton. But that’s a lot – relatively speaking.
According to
Henderson, M, DS Hillygus, and T Tompson. 2010. ““ ‘Sour Grapes’ or Rational Voting? Voter Decision Making Among Thwarted Primary Voters in 2008.”” Public Opinion Quarterly. (figure 1)
Voter turnout for Obama vs McCain of primary voters was approx. 90% for Obama voters (!), approx. 70% for Clinton voters, and <50% for others (i.e. John Edwards who made a play for the left and was supported by Kucinich).
So perhaps progressives really didn't have much of an alternative to Clinton/Kaine? Arguably that's all the more reason Clinton should have picked someone like Warren as VP to retain even more of the progressive vote?
I do agree it is likely that a counterfactual progressive Clinton VP would have been shown to a repurposed janitor's broom closet and nominally given a consumer protection agency to play with, while the neolibs would have partied like it's 1995: passing NAFTA 2.0 with Republican votes, opening up the Washington Monument to fracking, and starting WWIII with Eurasia and Oceania while watching the Beverly Hills reboot. So not that different from Trump…
I’d challenge the notion that HRC was/is a “centrist.”
She’s more accurately considered an Attila the Hun wannabe. (I do agree with Ted’s ongoing implication that HRC is hardly to be assumed out of the 2020 primary campaign.)
That (former Republican) Warren is a progressive also deserves question.
I’m still wondering if Sanders has a public foreign policy and if it is “progressive.” See, for example, his hideously “centrist” responses to questions 4 & 8, (the essence of arrogant and reckless US imperialism) in the CFR interview at the following Link
It must be noted that Sanders, alone, had no less than 50% of the 2016 primary vote, so having to combine with Warren now to come to the same percentage can hardly be considered a “victory” for “progressives.” It does explain, however, why Warren is there and has the apparent support of the media (i.e. to neutralize Sanders.)
Note also a SECOND former Republican, Bloomberg, has entered the race, presumably to fill the soon-to-be Biden vacancy. Link
As far as the DNC/Clitonistas are concerned, there is actually ONE thing that takes precedent over defeating His Hairness (aka “Trump”). That is: NOT allowing anyone remotely describable as “progressive” to get the Dem nomination.
The only question is how Sanders will be cheated and if he accepts it AGAIN like a meek subordinate of the DNC.
In her third debate with Trump, Secretary Clinton promised regime change in Syria and Russia on Day 1. She planned a Libyan-style regime change in Syria, with death or prison for the entire Syrian government, while demanding that Putin step down. Or else.
Putin is not the kind of person who would have said, ‘Yes, Ma’am.’
My own take was that Trump was probably terrible (he turned out to be much worse than I thought), but that anyone who voted for Secretary Clinton was voting for a Darwin award..
After reading your link (for which, many thanks) Sanders seems a great improvement on Trump and Clinton (but I prefer Senator Tulsi).
«After reading your link (for which, many thanks) Sanders seems a great improvement on Trump and Clinton (but I prefer Senator Tulsi).» Agree with you, Michae,l about Mr Sanders, who not only has better foreign policy positions than either Mr Trump or Ms Clinton, but who, over the course of half a century, has demonstrated that these are not the result of triangulation after the latest polls, but based on deeply held convictions (which is good, because they for the most part happen to correspond to my own). Note, however, that Tulsi Gabbard is not a US Senator, but rather a member of the US House of Representatives since 2013 ; she has decided not to seek reelection to the House in order to concentrate on her presidential campaign….
I’d add that personally I’d like to see a Democratic ticket comprised of Mr Sanders for president and Ms Gabbard for vice president, but I refrain, as I don’t wish to be accused of «meddling» in your elections….
Henri
Why do we have to stop Trump? What, precisely, has he done that imperils us so greatly …
(I’ll give everyone a minute or two to sputter in outrage) … that hasn’t been done by a previous preznit? Trash the environment? Be anti-science? Crap all over the middle class? Help the business class bleed the country dry? Dropped bombs on children? Locked up people for the prison-industrial complex? You name it, and Trump’s not the only one singing that song.
My conclusion, after these many months?
Trump is no different than all the others. But all these others have to act outraged because the last thing they need is everyone suddenly figuring out that all the politicians are grabbing all of us by the pussy.
Loved that last frame, Ted ; I presume the chap on the left is a member of the DNC ?… 😉
Henri
I dunno. I think Hillary Clinton, war criminal extraordinaire, might have waged a war on poverty. “And this time, we’re going to make sure that the poor never have a voice in this government ever again!”
And I’m wondering if WordPress is moderating messages that mention the name Donald Trump and any impolite words, such as crap or pussy. Let’s see if this gets blocked. If it doesn’t, I’ll go back and remove this paragraph.
And it moderated me. Ted, perhaps your tech guy can check with WordPress about whether “Trump” triggers an autoblock. Or words like crap and pussy? Or a combination?