« Sanders delegate's video of DNC "shaping" the audience last night | Main | Syria - 30 July 2016 »

29 July 2016

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Margaret Steinfels

All: Not an electioneering post. Not a plea for a Clinton vote.

No more than most who write here do I look forward to her NATO, Ukraine, Russia, Syria policies nor her appointments to the Department of State and Pentagon nor her export of America's culture war issues. All issues as I say most Americans don't care about, and that goes for the military budget as well.

However much Trump may appear to some a cunning mind and an artful innovator, the evidence of his career and business dealings strongly suggest that should he be elected what we will get is chaos at home and abroad.

Sorry to have disturbed the general opinion.

rjj

above off-the-wall, knee-jerk, ad hom was response to "Most Americans will vote for the candidate who not merely promises, but seems likely to deliver on domestic policies "

turcopolier

Margaret Steinfels

No. No. You are here to be a disturbance in the force, as am I. pl

turcopolier

rjj

The Maenads reference appealed to the vestigial English major in me. pl

NotTimothyGeithner

There is no evidence for this effect. The Democrats are already the womens party so to speak. Women candidates on the "left" (identity hostage taking and slavish pro corporate policy isn't the left in any sane society) do no better than a generic male candidate. There is movement to the right where shallow existing women voters will cross over to vote for gender unity, and non voters are the impressed by shiny baubles or they wouldn't be non voters.

I don't mean to say Republican voters are less shallow, but the shallow indicators are different.

William Fitzgerald

Margaret,

I concur and have been thinking along the same lines lately. Almost anyone with whom I try to talk about Ukraine, Syria, Russia, NATO, etc. has little knowledge and not much interest. Most seem to gain an impression from the propaganda outputs of CNN and its cohorts in the news business.

In terms of Domestic policies, HRC's collection of cliché's and artfully vague promises seems to be selling well.

WPFIII

WPFIII

kooshy

That the Americans don’t pay much attention to “Foreign Affairs” can’t be all that true. Through out the recent history much of the american politics is ran by making the americans fearful of foreigners and foreign hostilities. If the American politicians for domestic political gains constantly make fear of foreign an issue, that should make one believe that Americans do make note of that, otherwise it wouldn’t have been used. Better said was, that most of the time American politician and their supporting (controlled) media misinform (fool) the Americans on foreign issues, and realities. Maybe that is the reason Margaret S. is posting her frustrated comment here on SST.

kooshy

OTOH, if MS is correct and americans do not vote for FP issues then according to all analyst Trump stamped as an isolationist, and focused on internal economic issues should win.
At this stage of 16 elections, now that the major parties have elected their nominees it is normal for Demos like Margaret to try to shift the focus away from foreign policy and affairs, their FP record particularly HRC’ frankly sucks, they sure don’t want the americans think about that.

Fred

Margaret,

As that young country music singer who keeps getting harassed on stage by Kanye (why doesn't Hollywood ever point that out) sang, "haters gonna hate, hate, hate, hate, hate" and, I will add, carpet baggers gonna carpet bag. Which is why the First Lady of Arkansas ran back across the Mason-Dixon line as fast as she could. It sure ain't called the Clinton American Initiative. To cover those domestic issues, (e.g., schools, pre-school, police, homelessness)

Maybe you read this one in that paper that prints only what news that is fit to print:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/30/us/13-detroit-school-principals-charged-in-vendor-kickback-scheme.html
The Democratic machine in Detroit ran the schools into the dirt while the dirty dozen enriched themselves at the cost of children's futures. Hilary will say zero about this and Ellen, LGBT advocate tv host, will say nothing about the corrupt principle who danced on the show with that half million dollar check she was handing out only weeks before he was arrested. The culture of corruption runs deep in the heart of the city and it keeps getting re-elected too.

Police? The apparently incompetent Baltimore State's Attorney General is now being sued by the police she tried to prosecute. Is Hilary going to support the police in that one? How about Black Lives Matters, which did manage to get a provocateur hired as head of the Baltimore City Schools "Human Capital" I'm sure he's well versed in ERISSA, contract negotiations and the other essential duties of the position and this is not a 1/3 of a million over two years of the "interim" position as a payoff. Naw, that would never happen.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/27/us/baltimore-marilyn-mosby-officer-lawsuits-freddie-gray/

Homelessness? What new federal program is going to cover that one? Ah, more section 8 housing vouchers. Where we can federally fund emptying out the inner city crime problem into the suburbs. That's going to go over well ... with the pro-gentrification crowd.

I notice you left out "Immigration". Apparently we can't link the former to low wages, unemployment or affordable housing. We can also as why we graduate more STEM graduates every year but apparently "need" H1B immigrants in STEM fields for entry level work. Why would we need that?
http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2016/03/displaced-american-stem-workers-spur-senate-hearing

Other unmentionables would be trivial things like Little Rock, Ft. Hood, Chattanooga, Boston, San Bernardino, Orlando. Better not mention those at all.

Mark Gaughan

Irreversible harm? What do you have in mind?
I can sort of see Donald Trump as Harold Hill. He's in it for himself, but he may do some good, if elected.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSXRJwspGU0
Hillary Clinton may also do some good, if elected. I don't know.
There's also a gridlocked Congress to think about.
I'm having a hard time picturing Hillary dancing maniacally to the sound of loud music, whirling, screaming, getting drunk, uprooting trees, tearing a bull apart with her bare hands and eating its raw flesh. (thanks to Wikipedia for some of that language)

Ken Halliwell

The Democrats are the party of war? I must be confused. I thought GW Bush and his neocon warriors were republicans.

Jack

Margaret

IMO, most Americans don't also care about domestic policy. They're gonna have blank stares if you ask them their opinion on Glass-Steagall. If Hillary gets too wonkish she'll lose most of them. Americans tend to vote on their gut feel on personality and who can be more effective. I recall interviews of primary voters in Indiana. Their main issue was jobs and offshoring trade deals. Folks who voted Trump said he'd be best at negotiating better deals. Those that voted Cruz said he was a good Christian. Several that voted for Hillary said she was a safer choice to defeat Trump. Sanders voters Saud they felt alienated from the political system as it only catered to the elites.

I believe the reason Trump won the GOP nomination is he didn't waste his time on policy detail and instead focused on a certain image being non-PC. Hillary won because Sanders underestimated the level of resentment and did not organize earlier in the south with blacks. Hillary comes across as inauthentic every time she speaks. Very few are voting for her because they like her and believe she'll be a great president. They're voting her because they want the status quo and they hate Trump. She has all the institutional advantages as the big money, big media and the establishment of the duopoly are pulling out all the stops for her. Trump is smart enough to recognize that he can't run a traditional campaign.

Ex-PFC Chuck

Definitely agree. IMO there's nothing more important than backing off the confrontation with Russia. The Hilbots scream about the purported danger of his finger on the button, but the real danger is a policy that makes it necessary for the three main "nuclear presidents" to keep their fingers poised, hovering just above the buttons 24/7. That said, backing off from Russia should be a backing off from the messianic, fundamentalist neoliberal foreign policy that has driven US international affair s since the turn into the 20th century.

Ex-PFC Chuck

Unfortunately it seems that each generation has to learn its lessons anew.

Ex-PFC Chuck

my closest female friend is very forthright in asserting that the only qualification for president that counts this election cycle is whether or not the candidate has a vagina. Her words, not mine. However even she is being ground down, not least by her two 30-something daughters.

Sam Peralta

Margaret Steinfels

"should he be elected what we will get is chaos at home and abroad."

What kind of chaos do you see? He's going to have to overcome the inertia of the bureaucracy and overcome the proclivity of our members of Congress to ensure the well being of their "constituents" aka the big money that bankrolls their elections and provides them the revolving door when they lose.

Lesly

I'll join the chorus in pointing out that should she win the election, Clinton is not obligated by her office to deliver on any of her promises. I would settle for the promise of good governance from candidates.

Aside: I don't understand the butthurt from some Sanders supporters. The guy decided to run as a Democrat aware of the super delegate system and most likely expecting the centrist, triangulating DNC to stack the campaign in her favor. She won. She didn't win fairly, but she won. He endorsed her as he promised from the get go. He kept his word like a mensch. Now back to your regularly scheduled program of complaining about pols who don't do what they say they will do.

As for Americans being unaware about FP, I would like to pin this on the media but I think voters are unconcerned with the carnage the USG can sow in its effort to remake the world in our own image under GOP/DNC regimes. For all our discussions about life and freedom what happens abroad is okay as long as we believe our intentions are well meaning. Now where's my tax cut and SCOTUS nominee?

tilde

"Whereas Hillary Clinton will deliver on some of them."

I take that to mean that Hillary controls the Democratic members of congress much more than Trump does the Republican members? There's some limited value in that.

And firm control of her own party can be a double edged sword too, at least if you're a democrat who might be a populist (nevermind progressive). If Clinton wishes to convince Democratic lawmakers to vote for bills that are unpopular with actual voters, she will be better at that.

I don't see how either Clinton or Trump can win any sympathy or cooperation from the other side.

Hood Canal Gardner

Trey N, She (Bernie as well) gave us/the convention another walk through the FDR candy store that's been closed since Eisenhower.

Margaret Steinfels

Replying to Jack @11:41:

Maybe the details of domestic policy and each and every issue pass people by. But since you bring up Glass-Steagall: I have been astonished at how many people I have heard mention it during the primary campaigns. Maybe they're just old New Dealers who think Frandklin Roosevelt is a saint, but by and large these folks understood what G-S did: kept commercial banking separate from investment banking. They think it was good for the country. Somewhere in the 90s Robert Rubin convinced people otherwise, so did a lot of Democrats and Bill Clinton signed the bill. Interesting that both platforms call for a return of Glass-Steagall, whether or not its absence led to the 2008 financial collapse and whether or not, it would resolve any current problems.

So....people may not have the details about banking policy, but they know that once upon a time there was a law that regulated it more closely than the current laws.

On Hillary's "inauthentic" speech: Are you sure your ears aren't grating on her midwestern accent?

Fred

Margaret,

Who are you responding too? Which of Hilary's speeches are you referring too, the ones at Goldman Sachs?

Margaret Steinfels

To Jack @11:41. Comments seem to have gotten out of order.

Trey N

Are you calling Trump a fraud because "his book" was ghostwritten? If so, do you actually believe that Hillary Rotten Clinton wrote even one single syllable of "her books"???

As far as the scumbag Tony Schwartz goes, Trump gave a young Jewish writer who hadn't done squat the opportunity of a lifetime -- and gets repaid by being stabbed in the back now.

What a total lack of character and integrity! If the schmuck didn't like Trump from the get-go, then he shouldn't have agreed to write the book. Once he decided to sell out for $$$, he should have had the decency to keep his damn mouth shut. If his conscience is bothering him that badly today, then he should repay the dirty money he took years ago -- with interest!

No one should hold their breath waiting for *that* act of true repentance to happen....

Jack

There's no doubt her voice is grating but I think many people just get a vibe that she really doesn't have any convictions. She's been in powerful positions a long time and people have seen her behavior and her attitude. There's got to be some reason why so many view her unfavorably.

Jack

I'm not so sure. My wife is a registered Democrat. She is sitting out this election because she feels both parties have nominated the worst candidates. She voted for Sanders in the primary who won our county. Her reasoning was "at least he's not corrupt".

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28            
Blog powered by Typepad