The heat is on

As you can see, our Front Page Editor is not shy about his opinions as we head into the general election race. I don't share them but he takes a better photo than your humble columnist. He also represents a not insubstantial portion of Bernie-struck progressives. Now that [the real-estate developer] has made his nomination virtually inevitable, I do have a few observations.

1. It's amusing seeing the pearl-clutching, "how could we have been so wrong?" musings of the pundit class. See the New York Times' Nate Cohn here. If you want further laughs, there's always Thomas Friedman, sans taxi driver. As someone rightly tweeted, "@tomfriedman wrong on every single thing he writes, every day of his life, & it will not in any way jeopardize him."

Even a simple, small-town boy from Phoenix could tell that Trump was formidable from the get-go. He is a reality TV star in Moronistan. He doesn't give a damn about "conservative" dogma, but knows how to push just the right buttons with the real conservative base in today's America. He was facing nullities as opponents. Time magazine anointed Marco Rubio as "the Republican savior," among a host of covers crowning Chris Christie, Rand Paul et al. As commenter Concern Troll would say, "lol lol."

2. Neither "conservatism" nor the Republican Party are dead. They have merely taken off their human suits, shucked off the last of William F. Buckley intellectual respectability, seen their Gingrich Revolutionaries tote each other to the guillotine, and found their true north in [the real-estate developer].

There was not, as George Wallace would say, a dime's bit of difference between the creepy Ted Cruz and the pleasant John Kasich. All were in thrall of the nostrums of The Party That Wrecked America. The Party of Lincoln and TR, even a mass American political party, had been dying for some time. But don't be under any delusions.

The same political savants now predicting mass defections are wrong. When they get to the polling place, they will vote for [the real-estate developer]. Unlike the most fervent backers of Sen. Sanders, they know there's a huuuuge! difference between him and Hillary. More significantly, they will continue to vote Republican down-ticket. This will especially matter if Democratic fratricide continues.

3. Maybe John Nichols is right and the Democrats would benefit from a "contested" convention (quotation marks because Sanders has almost no chance to win enough delegates; Hillary didn't invest in Indiana because she was already pivoting to the general election, and won almost as many delegates there anyway). 

Sanders might have leverage to push the platform to the left (and remember, the "center" in American politics has been shifted so far to the right that Dick Nixon would be considered a commie). Such a convention would make for riveting television. Such a convention could be clarifying, particularly if it resulted in a strong message about the benefits of big infrastructure investing and taking on climate change (check out the monstrous Fort McMurray fire in Alberta, heart of the tar sands that have done much to worsen emissions).

These are big "ifs." Patrick Buchanan's 1992 insurgent speech at President George H.W. Bush's convention in Houston was a disaster for the party and for Bush's chances in the fall. Everybody we know likes the points Bernie has raised about the banksters and the rigged economy. But we don't know everybody and my concerns about Sanders shelf-life, much less his electability as the nominee, remain (see here, here, and here).

The hatred that so many Sanders backers on Holy Social Media hold for Clinton baffles and troubles me. I don't hate Bernie — I am only convinced he is unqualified and unelectable. If he's the nominee, of course I would vote for him.

No difference between Clinton and the Republicans? She believes climate change is real and human caused — and must be addressed. She will make sane picks for the Supreme Court. Those two reasons alone are compelling.

As for the "long game," hoping she loses, or indicted or both, leading to a progressive "revolution" in 2020 — I find it unconvincing, to say the least. If you missed the essay, "America Has Never Been So Ripe for Tyranny," I urge you to read it. The long game is the Democratic Party regaining control at the state level, or there will be no reversal of national suicide, only holding it off by holding the White House. As Gov. Roscoe's court-packing scheme in Arizona shows, the right is alive and unafraid to use its power in the most audacious ways.

Who are the Whigs? It's anyone's guess. Perhaps the Sanders wing breaks off and forms a potent third party, leaving the Democrats denuded. The Republicans will still be around, white, old, powerful. And they will have decisive "majorities" in a three-party system — if our elections matter at all after this year.

The heat is on, in Fort McMurray — which should be our climate-change, hair-on-fire, moment for major action — and everywhere else.

 

 

Comments

[Cal lash]

Jon, I think Front Page editor is my long lost legitimate bro.
Good post. Go Bernie!

[Mombo Number Five]

I like the current scoreboard.

Trump 1,Republican establishment 0, corrupt media 0.

Sanders 1, Democratic establishment 0, corrupt media 0.

Currently winning big: the pissed off electorate.

[ross]

The problem with Trump is he has no record as a government official to base an informed opinion about his intentions.

The problem with Clinton is that she has a record of government service to base an informed opinion about her intentions.

[B. Franklin]

Trump may not have a record as a government official, but he does have a record as a businessman...

Multiple "strategic" bankruptcies, with other people left holding the bag. Hey, maybe they can add an amendment to the Constitution allowing the US to do that.

Imported, non-union laborers. There's always somebody, somewhere willing to work for less.

Mob connections. Thanks Dad.

Outsourced production to China. 'Cuz everybody else is doing it.

His intentions, I think, are fairly obvious. Trump uber alles.

How that would translate to being the leader of what we somewhat optimistically call the free world is frightening to contemplate.

[Cal Lash]

WKG, re your post on Santos, U should be here she is in town at the book store. lady.http://www.changinghands.com/event/may2016/fernanda-santos-fire-line?utm_source=Changing+Hands+Bookstore+News&utm_campaign=2f42507d03-ThisWeek050516&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8ac356e149-2f42507d03-206805713

and just for you WKG, Fernanda and Sheriff Joe
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/joe-arpaio-gets-selfie-love-from-new-york-times-fernanda-santos-w-update-6666946

[wkg_in_bham]

@Cal: the selfie made my eves hurt.

Hope to get to read more of “The Fire Line” tomorrow. The whole operation seemed to be one big fustercluck.

[Cal lash]

Wkg, Google John Dougherty and New Times. Johns A REPORTER and the guy I trust on investigative reporting and a guy who is more interested in hiking the Grand Canyons with his family and not being a Selfies movie star pretending to be a "journalist".

[Cal lash]

Jon since Friedman and the "Journalistic" columnists and pollsters got it so wrong! What U think Hillary by a Landslide if the Feds don't indict her.
Or Trump in a Squeaker?
Regardless,
I'm downloading citizenship papers for Uruguay
Kemo Sabe, u wat a copy or U staying on the boundaries these white folks stuck U in?
Wonder what Vine Deloria would say?

[ytkealoha]

Does Obomba pardon Clinton before or after her election?

How about a piece on what happens with the clinton Foundation and CEO Bill, when she is Prez?

[sj]

Love the Front Page, and love the Front Page editor.

[INPHX]

Let's see:

There is a candidate for US President.

She and her husband made about $23.0M last year.

She voted for the Iraq war and against the surge.

She takes large speaking fees from Wall Street firms because "that's what they offer"

She and her husband run a Foundation that redefines the terms "inherent conflict" and "inappropriate political influence"

She was for military intervention in Libya.

She was on the Board of Wal Mart.

And she claims to be a Democrat?

If those traits were exhibited by a Republican candidate, there would not be enough bandwith on the Internet to absorb the liberal outrage.

[#theintellectualassassin]

INPHX is right--clinton may be the "sane" choice but the US lost its mind during the Recession when nobody was prosecuted for it. Why should we trust Clinton to fix it? She won't. She can't. She'll lead us somewhere new, for sure, but millions of people who lost their present and future will be continued to be denied justice for the fraud that occurred during the Recession if she is elected President.

It breaks my heart to see how my parent's generation has failed us. "Late-stage democracy has failed us?" These are the rumbles of a bipartisan detente on voting restrictions--as though the cries of hoi polloi are of no concern?

Our inability to respond to the demands of our citizens has failed us. Trump was the ONLY Republican candidate who wasn't owned by the big money which destroyed this country--Sanders was the only candidate who seemed genuinely infuriated about the damage big money has done to this country. Why are there NO other candidates who can do that?

This doesn't even take the issue of identity grievances into account. And I know that Trump v. Sanders is tricky because *gasp* Sanders is a perverted socialist. Trump is a perverted conservative!! Let's have an election on who has the seedier past! How would Trump win? Unless, there are a bunch of people out there who secretly don't think what he represents is all that bad. How can you say that when people are ALREADY protesting the current treatment of subaltern communities? If you're invested in social justice, how do you go from #notonemore to Trump?

In addition to all the other sins INPHX noted, Clinton helped start mass incarceration and doesn't know what email encryption is! There isn't enough bandwidth to absorb the outrage (from both the right and the left) which is why we're hearing about this "too much democracy" nonsense. It's so sad, honestly.

And this is why I say y'all failed us--you'd rather have Howard Hughes than Woody Allen and now we're going to get the blockbuster extravaganza of Spielberg.

[Vintage Thinker]

Yes, the long battle is at the state level. The Koch Bros, frustrated with a do-nothing congress, discovered that effective (and cheaper) change can be found at the state and local level (utility boards). They throw parties in Palm Springs, buy steaks and bourbon dinners, and for dessert hand legislation to legislators. They are reaping their investments now.

[Mike Doughty]

The RR bosses in the 19th century loved the Az. legislature.They said it was the cheapest one they ever bought.The Koch suckers have figured out the same.

[Jeanette Gibson]

BERNIE "UNQUALIFIED"? GET NEW GLASSES!
I'd like to know how you and so many people out there overlook the facts and proclaim Bernie is not qualified to be prez. Just look up his bio on Wikipedia! 35 YEARS in public office! That's not experience? What do you need? Compare that to Hillary's big 12 years (first ladying doesn't count).
Bernie was content to represent the small, cozy state of Vermont because he enjoyed rural life. Sure, he could have moved to NY and into the limelight,like Hill. If Hill is a dedicated public servant, why didn't she stay in Arkansas and represent those lovely people? The reason is obvious--career-building.
Furthermore, Bernie was a civil rights activist as a student at the U of Chicago. He saw MLK Jr. give his "I have a dream" speech. He walked over the Edmund Petus Bridge on Bloody Sunday, in 1964. What more creds do you want? Integrity is a very important qualifier for any job--one that should get more attention. Bernie has more years of experience that most candidates ever had--and a hell of a lot more integrity.

[Cal lash]

Good post Cuz Jeanette.

[Mike Doughty]

Yes-Bernie is qualified to be president.Certaily more so than the last two presidents.However,he would be crucified by the right and their media as a wild-eyed socialist plant by the Russians.Let's let the Republicans melt down with the Donald and not add to the drama
.By the way,a socialist believes that the means of production should be owned by the government-look it up.Although I doubt gov. could screw it up any worse.Imagine what Fox news and rightwing radio would do with that.

[Kevin in Preskitt]

I don’t understand why people express such hatred for Hillary Clinton. The Clinton presidency saw me go from teenager to twenty-something professional, and I look back at those years as some of the best for me, my family, and this country.

My parents’ income increased dramatically during that those years, and they were able to build a nice home on horse property and move out of our violence-plagued Maryvale neighborhood.

My brothers and I were able to get a quality, affordable university education (Go NAU!). I even spent a semester at a university in Mexico, and still was able to pay off my student loans within two years of graduating (And no, my parents didn’t pay my way through college).

Society became much more open toward gay and lesbian people. I, and many of my friends, were able to work up the confidence to come out to our friends and loved ones, and in almost all cases, we found acceptance for who we really are.

My savings account had fairly high interest rates not seen since then, and yet I was able to buy a condo at the end of the Clinton presidency for a very affordable price.

When campaigning in the 90s, Bill Clinton said that we would get “two for one.” That is why I also associate Hillary with those good times. Yes, I know that there are other possible reasons for the prosperity of that period besides who was president (and first lady) at the time. Yet, much like the older folks who yearn for the days of Reagan, I remember the Clinton era fondly.

And, yes, I would vote for Bernie if he were the nominee. I like him, too. I just don’t see how he will turn his pie-in-the-sky Scandinavian dreams into a reality in a country where Obamacare is still such a point of contention. If he were ten years younger, he would be a great VP choice for Hillary.

[Concern Troll]

LoL- thanks for the shout out in a column- now I have made the big time. Almost as fun as making Doug McE turn red with apoplexy...

I have to laugh, Trump is a total wildcard, and the R establishment is coming apart at the seams because he will utterly slaughter the sacred cows. Koch bros are stunned their little conswervative project can so easily be derailed by populism. They, and the current gov/lobbyist establishment are terrified of El Trompe, because he doesn't dance their merry jig.

I give him a 45% chance of being elected. The earthquakes of that event will be immense- starting with the end of the chamber kissing Republican azz. Trump is the person who can possibly implement quite a bit of the Ron Paul fantasy isolationist play- which would leave the rest of the world in shock, utter shock.

The really funny part would be him intimidating his party into compromise after compromise with the D's to get national legislative changes done.

That is even further unexpected.

Clinton on the other hand would lead to more stagnation, and unless she manages a Senate and House majority on her coattails, calls for impeachment would start January 21. On the other hand, I think she also will pivot isolationist.

We as America are done with the economic burden of leading the free world, that is the biggest message of this election. America now needs to nation build at home.

As for the worst idea in PR- those dreamer kids waving those Mexican flags- what an utter PR disaster- why are they not smart enough to wave American Flags? You wanna be American, be American, the reality is the great melting pot will continue to operate, in spite of old white dying midwestern values.

LoL. As for Arizona- if Trump doesn't swing hard downticket, DD could be facing a Dem swing in two years time.

Which would be even more hilarious.

[Cal lash]

Arizona will remain a Confederate theocracy until the Mexicans come to the voting booths in large numbers. Housing may be slow but the developers are still building places for old white people, to hit little white balls on illegal grass.
But it's all bullshit anyway given the world's population (7 Bil and counting) and the damage to the planet. Soon there will be more plastic in the oceans than fish.
But then maybe I can get a ride out of here with Eldon Musk.

[Cal lash]

Disease is here. Famine is on its way.
Malthus is back from the dead still breathing.

[Cal lash]

If U R not in the Sonoran Desert today, U R missing a great cool sunnny clean air day with great white voluptuous clouds. Another day in Paradise. And all is quite as all the illegals left for Canada last week.

[wkg_in_bham]

Hello from the heart of deepest, darkest Moranistan (which is a lot nicer than SNL’s moniker of “Dumbfuckistan” - but you know when you’re not funny anymore…)

Re “The hatred that so many Sanders backers on Holy Social Media hold for Clinton baffles and troubles me.’: I wouldn’t say hate so much as loathing. The more you learn about team Clinton, the greater the loathing. I’ll say this for Bill: at least he’s a likable guy with a learning curve (except when it comes to women).

I predict that this will be one of the lowest, hit-below-the-belt campaigns ever. I’m sure the Trump will not play nice like the Bern has. The entire Clinton closet will be trotted out. For a preview read “Clinton Cash” by Peter Schweizer (http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/clinton-cash-peter-schweizer/1121369496?ean=9780062369284&st=PLA&sid=BNB_DRS_Core+Shopping+Books_00000000&2sid=Google_&sourceId=PLGoP452&k_clickid=3x452). The Clintons are not new to the game of all out dirt. She maintains an Enemies List (ala Nixon) and a long memory.

Here’s the main thing: the country (or at least a good bit of it on the right and left) are fed up with business as usual. A Bernie-Trump race would be invigorating. Instead we get Hill-Trump – which should be amusing.
Regardless, Congress will keep anything too extreme from actually happening.

Just finished “The Last Lion” today. It’s part Volume Three of a Winston Churchill biography. William Manchester wrote the first two volumes and died. It was finished by Paul Reid – a newspaper writer. I recommend the first two books. Manchester wrote for a general audience and had a good sense of how much detail to get into and an eye for interesting trivial about the times. Book three plods. I was struck by a couple of things that are relevant to today.

First: at the outbreak of WWII England truly was an empire – it controlled one-fourth of the planet’s land surface and population. As they say “the sun never sets on the Empire. England was overextended in every way. Germany was kicking their ass. And not just with their army. The UK was being bombed relentlessly by the Luftwaffe and U boats were bringing the island to a state of starvation. It was on the verge of bankruptcy. Churchill was literally begging FDR for everything – including food. Meanwhile he had troops and ships scattered all over the globe. When the Japs piled on, the situation was hopeless. Fortunately for him the US and USSR were able to bail him out. His dominions and colonies were more of a liability than assets. Sound familiar?

Upon the wars end the Brits kicked Churchill out of office (actually his party) and went socialist big time. The full menu of social services; and nationalization of the steel, coal and railroads. There may have been others. To pay for this, taxes were raised to levels even higher that war time. They never really recovered from the war until at least the seventies – if you can call it recovered at all. Even food rationing continued until 1955. Compare to other countries that were bombed to shit in the war: Germany, Japan and the USSSR. Venezuela is currently giving us a good lesson in Socialism.

The lesson is that your defense and social programs must be sized to what your economy can pay for. Well this pot as already too long so I’ll quit.

[Noelle]

Climate Change. Yes, the climate is changing and for a HUGE part of that we can thank the constant aerosol spraying of our once blue skies with toxic particulates. Our "weather" is no longer God made...it is "engineered" via chemtrails or whatever one wants to call them. It is the elephant in the room. And the first presidential candidate that opens that discussion...well then, I'll start listening.

[B. Franklin]

You're snarkily looking for "a good lesson in Socialism" and you choose Venezuela?!

Wow...just...wow...

Now I know Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, indeed most of western Europe, don't fit the narrative you've chosen, but still...

Venezuela?

Through that sort of lens, I suppose the 2000 Presidential election would be a good lesson in American democracy.

[ChrisInDenver]

"Even a simple, small-town boy from Phoenix could tell that Trump was formidable from the get-go."

Howard Stern predicted Trump's nomination the day he announced his candidacy.

[terry dudas]

If Emil were still posting, he would do a boffo post on 'chem-trails'

We're waiting, Emil.

[Bradley Dranka]

Probably the main contributor to the discontent on both the left and the right is the realization that for both sides, their respective "parties" were in it for themselves--and not for the "supporter."

"Payback," in the rise of voter dissatisfaction, is a BITC-.

But really, people, did you think the political "parties" were anything but "parties" partying at your expense???

That realization, that they hoodwinked you, has made you angry.

Please look up the lyrics to Living Colour's, "The Cult of Personality."