Republicans have always been mysterious to me. Their ideas make no sense to me, their policy positions often strike me as flat our evil. I just don't get it, as a rule. I try, but it almost never works. I've kind of gotten used to it.
Lately, though, the GOP has taken the mystery up to a whole new level. Out of the whole, huge, field of candidates for their party's presidential nomination, there's just one who seems even remotely electable, but thus far he's garnered only minimal support. Just to be clear, it's not that I think any of the clown carload of contenders would be anything short of disastrous as president, just that one of them might have a shot at winning.
Every bit as much as any of his rivals', John Kasich's ideas repell me. He's every bit as misogynistic and homophobic as the next Republican candidate, so far as I can tell. But in the mayhem of the GOP debates, he's an oasis of relative calm. Compared to Trump's rantings, Jeb's awkward stumbles, Carly Fiorina's mean girl smirks, he comes across as charming, kind of, and relatively sane. Most compellingly of all, though, if nominated he'd bring Ohio and its 18 electoral votes with him to the general election.
Then I think John Kasich has no real intention of becoming president this time around. Maybe he's just hoping to get himself and his name out there for 2020. Maybe he's really running for vice president, like Chris Noth on The Good Wife. If Jeb Bush hadn't been doing such a good job of making himself unelectable lately, I might be concerned about the prospect of a Bush/Kasich ticket next November. Adding Bush's 29 Floridian electoral votes to Kasich's 18 would make for quite a head start, on the road to 270.
But as long as Jeb keeps saying things like this, I don't think there's much to worry about.
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Thursday, October 15, 2015
Wednesday, October 14, 2015
Hearts and Minds
Hilary Clinton has always had my mind. But she took at least a little piece of my heart during Tuesday night's debate, when she described herself as, "a progressive who likes to get things done." A turn of phrase that could describe me as well as it does Clinton, and gave me a sense of connection to Clinton I'd never felt before. It also does a great job of summarizing why she's had my support since before she ever announced her candidacy for 2016.
Maybe there was a time when I'd have fallen in love with Bernie Sanders and his calls for revolution, but I doubt it. My political leanings have always been as pragmatic as they are progressive. I certainly want all the things Bernie champions. Tax the 1% into oblivion, open the doors to all the public universities, it all sounds great to me. Unfortunately, none of it will be happening in this country anytime soon. As everyone with two brain cells to rub together knows, whether they choose to admit it to themselves or not.
With his focus on impossible dreams, Sanders ignores the possible. When pressed on issues other than income inequality, he says more or less the right things, but his heart doesn't really seem to be in it. His passion for ameliorating economic injustice is admirable, I guess, but even there, his plans seem vague, at best. How's he going to fund public universities in the absence of tuition, or convince Congress to tax the richest of the rich at the rates he supports? If the devil is in the details, Bernie's soul is safe as houses.
Clinton, on the other hand, is all about the details. She dives right in to the often tedious work of getting things done, and, well, she gets them done. Her accomplishments may not rise to the level of Bernie's dreams, they probably won't. But they'll be steps in the right direction. And they'll be real. When it comes to matters of my heart, reality, however difficult, will always beat out even the loveliest of dreams.
Maybe there was a time when I'd have fallen in love with Bernie Sanders and his calls for revolution, but I doubt it. My political leanings have always been as pragmatic as they are progressive. I certainly want all the things Bernie champions. Tax the 1% into oblivion, open the doors to all the public universities, it all sounds great to me. Unfortunately, none of it will be happening in this country anytime soon. As everyone with two brain cells to rub together knows, whether they choose to admit it to themselves or not.
With his focus on impossible dreams, Sanders ignores the possible. When pressed on issues other than income inequality, he says more or less the right things, but his heart doesn't really seem to be in it. His passion for ameliorating economic injustice is admirable, I guess, but even there, his plans seem vague, at best. How's he going to fund public universities in the absence of tuition, or convince Congress to tax the richest of the rich at the rates he supports? If the devil is in the details, Bernie's soul is safe as houses.
Clinton, on the other hand, is all about the details. She dives right in to the often tedious work of getting things done, and, well, she gets them done. Her accomplishments may not rise to the level of Bernie's dreams, they probably won't. But they'll be steps in the right direction. And they'll be real. When it comes to matters of my heart, reality, however difficult, will always beat out even the loveliest of dreams.
Tuesday, October 13, 2015
Post Debate Snap Judgment
The first Democratic debate was all I could have hoped for. Not a lot of surprises, but more substantial discussions than I've seen in the Republican debates thus far. Plus overall stronger moderation from Anderson Cooper tonight than we got from either Megyn Kelly or Jake Tapper in the first two GOP debates,
Hilary killed it. She did exactly what she needed to do. She effectively rebranded herself as the progressive who's unwilling to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Or, as she put it, she's, "a progressive who likes to get things done." She was unflustered by questions about Benghazi, her email, or the problems of political dynasties. Most importantly, she was by far the most charming and charismatic person on that stage. I say most importantly not because it matters so much to me, but because for the last 50 years or so, Americans have consistently voted for the cadidate who's best on tv. As of tonight, that's Hilary, no question. She is far and away the best candidate for the general election,
Bernie Sanders had one great moment. He responded to a question about Hilary's email scandal, such as it is, by declaring, "The American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails!" I'm pretty sure most people couldn't agree with him more. Otherwise, as expected, he did his level best to bring his answers to questions about all manner of things back around to his single topic, income inequality. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't work at all, not even a little bit. Also, his voice and hand/arm gestures were just kind of annoying to me I'm not sure why.
Jim Webb was very upset about not getting as much time to speak as other candidates, like, you know, the two who are actually polling in double digits. That seemed to be the point he found most worthy of endless iteration, at any rate.
Martin O'Malley seemed a little dazed at first, but became more animated and impressive as the evening progressed. He might be a good candidate for Hilary's VP, if he brought anything more than the electorally irrelevant state of Maryland to the campaign table.
Lincoln Chafee cares a lot about the environment. He also wants you to know he'd just been appointed to his Senate seat in the aftermath of his father's death when he voted to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act, without which 2008's financial crisis probably couldn't have happened.
Hilary killed it. She did exactly what she needed to do. She effectively rebranded herself as the progressive who's unwilling to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Or, as she put it, she's, "a progressive who likes to get things done." She was unflustered by questions about Benghazi, her email, or the problems of political dynasties. Most importantly, she was by far the most charming and charismatic person on that stage. I say most importantly not because it matters so much to me, but because for the last 50 years or so, Americans have consistently voted for the cadidate who's best on tv. As of tonight, that's Hilary, no question. She is far and away the best candidate for the general election,
Bernie Sanders had one great moment. He responded to a question about Hilary's email scandal, such as it is, by declaring, "The American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails!" I'm pretty sure most people couldn't agree with him more. Otherwise, as expected, he did his level best to bring his answers to questions about all manner of things back around to his single topic, income inequality. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't work at all, not even a little bit. Also, his voice and hand/arm gestures were just kind of annoying to me I'm not sure why.
Jim Webb was very upset about not getting as much time to speak as other candidates, like, you know, the two who are actually polling in double digits. That seemed to be the point he found most worthy of endless iteration, at any rate.
Martin O'Malley seemed a little dazed at first, but became more animated and impressive as the evening progressed. He might be a good candidate for Hilary's VP, if he brought anything more than the electorally irrelevant state of Maryland to the campaign table.
Lincoln Chafee cares a lot about the environment. He also wants you to know he'd just been appointed to his Senate seat in the aftermath of his father's death when he voted to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act, without which 2008's financial crisis probably couldn't have happened.
Tonight's the Night
Out of all the different kinds of politics the U.S. has to offer, my very most favorite is the presidential version. Which is, of course, the one normal people hate the most. I adore it all, from the debates to the exit polling, and everything in between. At this very moment, I'm so impatiently awaiting tonight's first Democratic debate I can barely stand it. The suspense might actually kill me, hours before Anderson Cooper says a word. Probably not, but it's not impossible.
My hope for tonight's debate, if I'm completely honest, is for Hilary Rodham Clinton to squash Bernie Sanders like a bug. I've surprised even myself with my lack of interest in Senator Sanders. It's hard to be more liberal than I am, and he's supposed to be the liberal dream, but he's just not mine. I tried, for a minute or two, to let him win me over. But he wasn't making much of an effort to do the winning, so it never happened.
To be fair, Bernie would have been fighting an uphill battle for my support, given the utter impossibility of his winning the general election. Maybe it's just as well he didn't bother trying, but it irks me, nontheless. Because it's not just me he is ignoring, but liberal women in general. Surely he'd sway some of us, if he gave us just a moment of his time. I don't doubt his positions on the issues that matter most to me would largely line up with mine. When asked, he's said as much. But they don't seem all that important to him. He rarely brings them up himself.
The lack of interest in things like reproductive rights, women's access to health care, our rights to be free from the dangers of sexual assault and street harrassment reminds me of the Bernie Sanders his supporters prefer to pretend never existed. The one who didn't get a real job until his forties. The one who may have been less than perfectly consistent with his child support payments, and has been in no hurry to correct misstatements about his own history with truths voters might have found problematic. The one who, quite frankly, seems like kind of a dick.
It isn't only women the Senator's ignoring. Some African Americans have been similarly frustrated by his singleminded focus on issues of economic inequality, and relative lack of engagement with those of racial injustice. Protestors associated with Black Lives Matter went so far as to rush the stage, effectively shutting down his speech. Everyone understands that economic inequality is real, and important, no one's questioning that. But other kinds of inequality, based on race or gender, for instance, are real too.
If Bernie Sanders is a white man, talking to other men, what exactly is so progressive about that?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)