Yeah - but, again, he is probably still not the guy to do it.
It would be like, “We should do a performance of ‘Waiting for Godot’ at the community theater.” One would hardly blame George Clooney for turning down the invitation to act at said community theater, and it isn’t his fault if they later decide not to do the play.
Thanks for this. Here’s hoping we can pull it off as Clooney describes.
Because $30 is a donation and $30k is an investment.
By denying him membership in the Democratic Party, at least if he was planning on running for President. Unlike Cruz he only recently became a Dem. The DNC is under no obligation to give anyone membership.
The superdelegates don’t necessarily exist for that purpose. But this year that’s their main role according to the chair. There’s no conspiracy about how any political party’s leadership operates. Carrots and sticks from the chair are SOP.
Exactly. I’ve found 30 bucks while doing my own laundry. Not an opportunity Mr. Clooney is likely to have. Although, I suppose he is welcome to do my laundry.
Maybe in about September:
Trump: “The difference between me and Hillary is that if you throw $1 bills at my motorcade I won’t stop to pick them up.”
Clinton: “We didn’t stop to pick the money up, I’m tired of Trump’s campaign lying about me.”
I for one welcome our new orange-tinted overlords.
I am guessing some of it too is a status symbol type thing – oh did you see who was at the Clooney’s last night? An opportunity for people with money to burn to do so in a posh setting amongst the Hollywood elite. In other words, the event for a different Democratic candidate some of the same people would have been there.
Why the heck doesn’t George Clooney run for president? Can’t be any worse than Reagan. It’s not like the guy never ever gets involved in humanitarian and political activism anyway. Amal Clooney could pass for Jacqueline Bouvier and then some.
For a lot of Ammrkns (I suppose I am one) it’s all about how presidential a candidate looks/acts. He’s an actor. I bet he could easily beat some of the inept debaters we’ve seen this election cycle, he just needs someone to write him some really solid lines as a fallback if he can’t improv his speech on camera. Imagine Clooney debating Trump or Cruz.
Wikipedia says he’s distantly related to Abe Lincoln.
Just a thought…
Just to play devil’s advocate for a moment, I can understand somewhat why the DNC is hesitating in throwing its support behind Bernie. Their entire existence revolves around promoting Democratic candidates. Bernie has been a proud lifelong independent; he only ran as a Democrat this time around because he knew that he needed a major party behind him to have a legitimate shot at the nomination. Of course the DNC is going to keep pressing its support of a candidate who’s been a Democrat for her entire political existence.
Well, most of it.
But yeah. And it’s clear that Sanders is supported much more heavily among those who see the DNC as the lesser of two evils.
Not for the first time, I wonder how Elizabeth Warren would have done if she’d run.
Which is my point. The general isn’t won or lost on party loyalists alone. They’re swing states because of swing voters. There’s a weird assumption the Democratic party tends to make that swing voters are sort of mythical and that they’re just Republicans and Democrats in disguise. That assumption has burned them before, and it will burn them again, whether it’s this election or a future one.
Maybe he would for $30K? 
The assumption from (both parties) is valid to a degree, because we effectively have a two-party system and independent voters who go to the polls will end up voting for a GOP or Dem candidate more often than not.
Also, they’re swing states not primarily because of independent voters but because – due to geography, population, and economic history – there’s a harder divide between liberals (usually in urban areas) and conservatives (usually rural and exurban) than in other states. That results in slimmer margins when it comes to certain political offices. Independent voters and/or party loyalists can make a big difference in those situations.
The people attending this fundraiser are the type of people that will spent $5k to $10k on wine at a restaurant. $30k is the kind of thing they will charge to their AMEX and it won’t even stand out on their monthly statement. It’s chump change.
My understanding was that the American swing voter was largely a mythical creature anyway, and that elections were won or lost by turnout. From a pure want-to-win point of view I think Sanders is much better because he brings a low-turnout demographic to the polls. All those, “It’s my duty to vote” people can basically be taken for granted, and that candidate that can actually get people under 30 to vote is going to clean up.
In the (imperfect and idealistic) analogy I like to use wherein Bernie Sanders is Obi-Wan, Elizabeth Warren is at least Leia - she’s a keen political mind already involved in supporting the rebellion however she can, but she’s being stopped and threatened at every turn thanks to the machinations of the government she’s fighting.
I keep wondering who Luke is going to be. Someone maybe from a rural, Reblican-leaning state…someone a bit young, but with great promise…maybe someone who, as the campaign goes into its final stages, we find out is actually related to a powerful Republican operative…
Does Trump have an illigitimate liberal son somewhere in Missouri or something? Or maybe this analogy has outlived its usefulness…
Maybe Ron Reagan Jr will be the Luke to Sanders’ Obi-Wan. This makes Ronnie Darth, too.
Well it’s not about how much this amount of money means to a donor it’s more how much this means for an organisation receiving the donation. Plonking 30K to any organisation will get you certain degree of attention. It is about sending a signal: - Hey I am willing to plonk 30 grand on a fancy dinner party. Imagine how much I am willing to give for something that really matters to me? - This is what it is all about.
Of course, there was no need to primary Obama in 2012, since he did such a bang-up job of ending wealth inequality.
OK this is not related to the US presidential elections but to elections in general.
It seems to me that the moment you don’t vote for who you want but rather vote for someone you don’t want in office out of fear has perverted democracy the same way money has perverted politics.
/rant.
