Yeah, but we’ve got a hell of a way to go before a truly progressive third party gains traction. Teddy Roosevelt was a one-off, and he lost his election as a third party presidential candidate, but he paved the way for Bob LaFollette. LaFollette also lost his election, but his Progressive Party dominated in his home state of Wisconsin for a few decades, and now it’s ceased to exist. Strom Thurmond, Harry Byrd, George Wallace, etc gained massive traction and still have our collective balls in a vise, but they have managed to do it through the system, not as a third party.
1 Like
My take on that is that Clinton was capable of losing to anybody.
Romney or Jeb or Rubio or Fiorina or Walker or Christie or even Cruz would have defeated her handily.
And O, dear Cthulhu. how I prayed for a Clinton versus Rand Paul matchup…
1 Like
A truly anti-corruption, anti-cronyism, anti-lobbyist third party would pull a lot of votes from both the left and right. Given that this year’s race was between a lifetime bribe taker and a lifetime bribe payer, I’m not surprised at the low turnout.
4 Likes
People are far too quick to concede to working within a deliberately broken system. It would be more productive if the increasing numbers of people who feel they aren’t represented are firm that if the current system refuses to represent the people then it has no authority. Meaning that the public are not obliged to it. The fed gets away with it because the public has little resolve, they complain but still accept their government’s legitimacy on a day-to-day basis.
4 Likes
Clinton is not and has never been a neocon. If you imagine she is you do not know what that term means. Clinton’s policy vs Trump’s policy on Syria differ, but Trump’s view is to back Russian support for Assad. Trump’s policy is to assist a dictator’s mass murder of civilians. There’s nothing in his policy that’s less bloody and murderous than Clinton’s desire to reduce civilian bombings via a no-fly zone. Trump’s policy in general so far as he’s bothered to enumerate anything has been promises of greater bloodshed than anything Clinton actually proposed. You have to ignore what Trump says he wants to do then infer conspiratorially your fantasies of Clinton’s plans to justify your position.
8 Likes
Clearly Im guilty of a common misconception.
"…including Kagan, who said in 2014: “I feel comfortable with her on foreign policy … If she pursues a policy which we think she will pursue, it’s something that might have been called neocon, but clearly her supporters are not going to call it that; they are going to call it something else.”
With respect to Assad I would suggest a lesser of two evils argument. Of course one has to consider the source. A lot of people don’t like using information from weird religious sects. Either way, its hard to unambiguously support people who sever the head off of a 12 year old boy and film it.
Bishop Antoine Audo, SJ, head of Caritas Syria and Chaldean bishop of Aleppo, corroborated the Carmelites’ words in an interview with Vatican Radio: “The testimony of the Carmelite nuns is reliable,” said the bishop. “To us it’s important to let people know that in the Western part of Aleppo, where there are two million inhabitants, many Christians have left because of the bombs that are being dropped everywhere and every day, with no one saying a thing. For example, yesterday morning they bombed a school in the Christian quarter, killing four or five children, and injuring some 50 people. A school!”
This election seems ready made for Mencken. He lived too soon, not knowing that history was preparing a moment in time taylor made just for him.
“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” -H. L. Mencken
7 Likes
No, you’re guilty of the kind of confused thinking that imagines that if some people have some positions in common that they’re of the same mind. Sure, Kagan/whoever agreed with Clinton on some policy positions. You could find areas of agreement between some Marxists and Clinton if you went looking, but she’s not a Marxist (despite regular claims that she is that are about as intellectually rigorous as the neocon claims). Re: The Guardian article, see Betteridge’s law.
I can’t respond to your tangents on Syria since that would just be a waste of time.
7 Likes
Er, ok. But surely you want to address that comment to Robert Kagan. He is the one who is confused. He also has the advantage of having private access to Mrs Clinton where she could fully outline her thinking on these issues. That dinner was widely reported. Sadly I don’t have such access, but maybe you do. I think Max Boot was similarly enthusiastic. But you are right. Just because you walk like a duck and talk like one does mean you are a duck. Just that reasonable people could confuse you for a duck - oh and other ducks might endorse your ducky-ness.
Not my tangent either. That was the Catholic Church reporting the comments of the Syrian Coptic Church and the Carmelite nuns of Aleppo. Its them you dont have the time to respond to. I was just letting you know they disagree with you. And I think they are entitled to their opinion. They said some very supportive things about Assad which was why I thought their comments pertinent. I’m sorry you didnt.
However I do agree that Assad was not a nice leader. If I was gonna be one for regime change to get rid of nasty leaders I would probably aim at the KSA first. The clue is in the K. And they appear to have been involved in a lot of Wahhabist terrorism around the world. Including sponsoring quite a lot of the people the Catholic Church was complaining about.
But most of all, wasnt there a bit of a straw man here. I didnt say she was a “neocon” just that she was more of one than Trump. The quote is above but the endorsements sort of make that point pretty well on their own dont they?
But hey, everyone has an opinion.
Oh man the hot takes today are something.
3 Likes
Sorry, I should also have noted that I am a Marxist and I cant think of a policy position I share with Mrs Clinton.
I’m just replying to apologize to others for taking your trolley bait. Don’t worry, it won’t happen again.
3 Likes
This is what I said.
You reply with HRC is not a neocon. Bait and switch?
I point out that she is endorsed by 9/10 neocons which directly addresses whether her policies would be considered attractive to neocons.
You respond with Im too busy to argue and you are off the point on Syria.
And Im the trolley?
I can’t say he has either. The guy is the proverbial “Man born on 3rd base who acts like he hit a triple”
7 Likes
I suppose a few weeks ago Trump or someone in his camp heard the myth that DC was built on a swamp and thought they might seem clever using the phrase. 
3 Likes
Ugh… i couldn’t stomach much of that. The words pot, kettle and black sprang to mind.
2 Likes
Yeah I feel for you!
Possibly the college debt one? Free education should be a right, not a privilege.
7 Likes
Just came back from a road trip, else I’d have replied sooner…: I just now found Glenn Greenwald’s echo of what I’d said then, what I said at Brexit, and what I said now. Lifting the second paragraph from his screed:
The indisputable fact is that prevailing institutions of authority in the West, for decades, have relentlessly and with complete indifference stomped on the economic welfare and social security of hundreds of millions of people. While elite circles gorged themselves on globalism, free trade, Wall Street casino gambling, and endless wars (wars that enriched the perpetrators and sent the poorest and most marginalized to bear all their burdens), they completely ignored the victims of their gluttony, except when those victims piped up a bit too much — when they caused a ruckus — and were then scornfully condemned as troglodytes who were the deserved losers in the glorious, global game of meritocracy.
It’s worth the time to read the whole thing and to follow the links Mr. Greenwald always provides to support his points.
For those who find Greenwald a little to wordy, you go through Michael Moore’s post-election list on Facebook [shudder…facebook].
Everyone must stop saying they are “stunned” and “shocked”. What you mean to say is that you were in a bubble and weren’t paying attention to your fellow Americans and their despair. YEARS of being neglected by both parties, the anger and the need for revenge against the system only grew.
Edited to add: Oops! Cory also posted a link to the Greenwald’s opinion piece.
2 Likes
