The unraveling

Matt Taibbi's column entitled "RIP, GOP: How Trump is Killing the Republican Party" is a compelling, entertaining read. He writes:

After 9/11, it felt like the Republicans would reign in America for a thousand years. Only a year ago, this was still a party that appeared to be on the rise nationally, having gained 13 Senate seats, 69 House seats, 11 governorships and 913 state legislative seats during the Obama presidency.

Now the party was effectively dead as a modern political force, doomed to go the way of the Whigs or the Free-Soilers.

But I'm not sure his argument here ultimately holds up. Nor does his premise that the Republican base has finally awoken from its trance, realized they have been sold down the river by the GOP, and are finally ready to "fight for their economic lives," if even with the incoherent [real-estate developer].

My sense of the base is that its rage is driven by that (Black) Man in the White House, people of color allegedly getting free things they don't deserve, Hispanics illegal and legal, SOCIALISM, and the usual culture war tropes from guns to, now, transgender bathrooms. And come November, every Republican from David Brooks and Paul Ryan to the red suburban precincts of Phoenix will dutifully cast their ballots for [the real-estate developer].

Things will not go that way on the other side. If any party is on the abyss of the Whigs and Free-Soilers, it is the Democrats.

Having a conversation about Sen. Bernie Sanders is now impossible. The battle lines have hardened. It is increasingly clear to me that this man who was not even a Democrat until two years ago set out to hijack the party for its nationwide ballot access. Why run as a Green or a social democrat when you can take control of one of the nation's two major political parties? And if you can't? Bern down the party.

The violence and threats in Nevada, which Sanders refuses to condemn, are but a prelude. Wait until the convention in Philadelphia. That Hillary Clinton has won more delegates (of both varieties) and more popular votes is irrelevant to Sanders hard-liners. The party "elites" rigged the system, stole the election from their pure savior. It is the circular, vacuum-sealed "reasoning" of all conspiracy theories.

Part of me would love to see Sanders get the nomination. This was always going to be a tough election for the Democrats. So we could see how many Americans would vote for the Bernie Sanders who had been depicted by more than three months of GOP attack ads.

I saw retired ASU President Lattie Coor a few weeks ago. "Bernie was my mayor," he told me. As president of the University of Vermont, Coor had frequent interactions with the then mayor of Burlington. He recalled going to a city council meeting where Sanders had pushed through a city recognition of the Sandinistas, the Soviet-backed guerrillas in Nicaragua. No progress was made on pressing parking issues involving the city and university. "So Burlington had a foreign policy but not a parking policy," Coor said.

It would be interesting to test the power of this new New Left at the ballot box. I may be wrong, but I suspect it would get creamed, all the shouting notwithstanding. Do you really think those white people who voted Sanders in the Indiana, Michigan, West Virginia, and Kentucky primaries will vote for him in the general? Of course not. Contrary to some wishful thinking, they have not figured out where their economic interests lie. They will continue to vote Republican, as they have for 36 years, based on cultural and national security issues, and no small amount of racial fear and antipathy.

As it is, the circular, vacuum-sealed Bernie ideology can blame Hillary. Sanders has done his part to recycle Republican smears against her in recent months.

And then? With a triumphant GOP, I could easily see the rest of the electorate shattering into two blocs, a rump Democratic Party and a new Democratic Socialist Party, carrying forward Sanders' ideas. And quit dreaming about the rebound in 2020. If the Democrats lose the White House to GOP fascism this year, they won't stand a chance in four years.

For those of you who are wary of Hillary and still reading at this point, I want to end by unpacking the idea that she is merely "GOP Lite."

A President Clinton would make sane nominations to the Supreme Court, as opposed to those proposed by the [real-estate developer]. These are lifetime appointments that can't be undone in 2020. Hate Citizens United? Just wait for a Trump court. Think about that. Second, she believes in mainstream science about our true existential threat, climate change. If those were the only two reasons to support her (and there are many more), I would vote "GOP Lite."

 

Comments

[sj]

Jon,
You wrote: "Do you really think those white people who voted Sanders in the Indiana, Michigan, West Virginia, and Kentucky primaries will vote for him in the general? Of course not."

Well . . . yeah, I do.

But please explain to me your thinking.

[Ytkealoha]

Not gop lite Jon, but neo con heavy with Kagan and nuland. More wars for sure. Bigger deal than the court are the endless wars.

So math of the day is Clinton=neo cons and more wars.

[Chris Thomas]

Jon:

Of course Hillary would be better than Trump. Bernie himself said so at the outset of the campaign, around the time he also said the e-mail issue was unimportant. Your argument about Sanders' alleged failure to condemn vigorously enough purported violence at the Nevada caucus is close to nutpicking. Indeed, the pervasive fainting couch act on this issue is, I believe, strong evidence that Hillary has decided to tack right rather than cut any deal on policy to being Bernie into the fold. That is, it's the beginning of the inevitable hippie punching. That doesn't mean Hillary's Supreme Court picks would not be better, but it doeean she is offering precious few other reasons to vote for her. That's both disappointing and bad politics.

[ross]

Jon, The old Supreme court scare doesn't work on me anymore. If the next nominee isn't a right winger they won't get past the Republicans in the Senate. I can't stand them but at least they fight for what they believe or paid to fight for. Unlike the party of the spineless.

Interesting you bring up the Nevada convention. Maybe you can tell us what got people so riled up? The MSN hasn't done a very good job of reporting on the details. Might it have something with more candidate rigging by the Clinton forces? Anyway I hope you don't think that Clinton can unite the Dems. That idea seems pretty well put to rest.

As for me I prefer the odds of beating Trump with Bernie than loosing to Trump with Clinton. If you think things were nasty in Nevada just wait until Clinton gets the nomination if we are so unlucky. Trump is not old money proper like the Bushes were and she has a long train of baggage filled with dirty laundry. It would be easy to hit a few of the highlights but maybe later.

As a former Dem now Independent I resent the fact that legitimate criticism's of Clinton are dismissed as recycled Republican talking points. There is history here larger than Lattie Coor's complaints about the parking situation in Burlington.

[B. Franklin]

This would be a good time to list all of the proven allegations against Hillary Clinton...

Proven now. Not just what Fox News says. Or Trey Gowdy. Or Darrell Issa. Or that pig Limbaugh. Or any other right wing bullshit conjecture.

Proven.

Because if any of them had been proven...

Look, I don't like her much either.

But between her and Il Trumpo?

That's as close to a no brainer as you can get.

[Cal Lash]

Good column Jon, I kinda agree with U.

Last night I sat around the ole campfire with the white guys on alcohol. In a nut shell the problem with Amerika is as follows, Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama, Mexicans and Muslims. The Clinton's were never mentioned by the campfire attendees.

Per U and Lattie, said "Sanders had pushed through a city recognition of the Sandinista's, the Soviet-backed guerrillas in Nicaragua."

Soviet -Backed, OK.
CIA terrorists in Nicaragua might have something to do with that. Even Putin sometimes gets it right.
(I have a friend that fought with the Sandistias and I have also a friend that was a CIA agent at that time in Nicarauga)

I have said from the get go this election has always been Hillary's to lose and lose she just might do, to IlDuce.

[Cal Lash]

ON THE FRONT LINES
Today Phoenix lost POLICE OFFICER, David Glasser.
and
Today, the planet lost a REPORTER, Morley Safer.

[Cal Lash]

B Franklin, just for you.
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/05/19/the-clinton-colombia-connection/

AND we may get Il Duce but if not we will get
Agrippina the Older

[Cal Lash]

and speaking of articles, on the Roman empire.
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/02/25/neocon-kagan-endorses-hillary-clinton/

[ross]

Here's a link that addresses the question I had on just what upset people at the Nevada convention.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYaR4X2KDmk

[terry dudas]

Sorry, Jon, it's YOUR racism that blinds you to the real reason Trump is so popular - Trump says what NEEDS to be said on the national stage and his message resonates with millions of voters who feel betrayed and alleanated.
That's it in a nutshell.
I've been telling you about Obama for years: it is not his skin color at all- never was. It's his politics and character. Nothing has changed there except the package has become worse. The country is at a precipice - a very dangerous one.

[Cal lash]

Terry Dude, your Sorry, What for? U cant be in Trumps tent if U go around being Sorry. SORRY is not in Donalds vocabulary. And Jon is a racist? What U been smoking? And there were Millions of people that bought into Gassing millions of other folks. U are right that the country is at a dangerous precipice. Particularly with Folks like the Bundys and other retards on the loose. Even scarier is that soon "white" folks going be a minority unless U can get El Duce to deport everybody not white and build a wall to keep the US white. I am sorry that my Republican party since I was nine has came to where it is today.

[wkg_in_bham]

@RC re "Things will not go that way on the other side. If any party is on the abyss of the Whigs and Free-Soilers, it is the Democrats." It's not as all bad as that. Just like the GOP had to pay the proce for eight years of Bush II, the Dems have/are paying the price for BHO. Barry and has policies may play well in San Fran or Portland - in the rest of the the country he has been almost toxic to the party. A Sanders nomination would just about kill the party.

[sj]

Ross: Thanks for link about Nevada.

[Colleen]

I have been conflicted from the get-go. I understand the argument about women getting bounced the bitch for doing what men do better than most, having started in the computer business in 1979 when the only women were secretaries. I have not trusted Secretary Clinton since Whitewater. She is just another sleazy lawyer in a system that very specifically selects for sleazy lawyers. The power of great writing, at least great political writing, is to help us see things in a different light and change our minds. I was going to write in someone I would actually like to see as president as are many of my friends, and, no, it isn't always Bernie. Sometimes it is Rand Paul or someone else who also has not a bat's chance in hell. In any case, you have changed my mind in a way that the shamers almost made impossible. The Clinton campaign should take you on to write their promotion. Well balanced thoughtful arguments can change peoples' minds. Fear mongering and shaming does not, or at least it doesn't work with me and the people I know. Thank you for changing my mind.

[Cal Lash]

Colleen, I agree with your assessment of Jon's persuasion but other than those other choices U suggested, they really were just wishful thinking. Hillary has been in Harness since birth and was promised by the powers to be that she would be the Democratic nominee, this time. Only the young can upset that path and thats not likely to happen.
So relax and grab a copy of Adbuster but dont forget to vote.

[Cal Lash]

So WKG are you saying the death of the Democratic Party and the GOP would be a bad thing?

[Mombo Number Five]

I propose the current farrago in our two party system is due in large part to the following:

Bush, the village idiot, used the evangelicals to help get himself elected. In the process, he opened the door to them, they came in, made themselves at home and have used the republican platform to advance their Taliban way of life, especially at the state level. The bulk of the "silent majority" of the republican party do not follow the preaching of these religious extremists, thus they go to Trump to inject common sense back into the party.

Hillary, the village Stepford Wife, has chased power and money for as long as she has drawn a breath. Her total sellout to Wall Street alone with her party has the "silent majority" of the party counting on Bernie to bring the party back to the people.

The party apparatchiks and the main stream media cannot see this. They don't want to see this. They refuse to see this.

Thus, the great disconnect.

IMHO

[Cal Lash]

good post Mombo, U sound like Vine Deloria and not speaking with forked toungue.
Very poetic!

[Cal Lash]

The Future:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/make-no-mistake-sanderism_b_10008136.html

[drifter]

Well Rogue, after reading the comments so far you must be happy you're living in Seattle.

Hillary for President!

Kill your welfare queen foreign service retiree editor. He does however provide a public service now as your editor, unlike his former life, so maybe let him live on.

[Greg Hilliard]

I liked what Mombo said, but the Hillary people were more against Obama I. 2008 than Sanders' people are against Hillary. Remember the PUMAs? Hillary will lock up the nomination in California, and Bernie will make his peace with her and heartily endorse her to retain any effectiveness in the Senate.
After Labor Day, no one will be talking about Nevada and the Democrats' split. The question will be how big a margin Hillary will win by. I figure 10 to 12 percent. It would be more, but there are too many people who won't vote for a cu.., um, a woman, just as there were millions who wouldn't vote for a ni... Um, a black man, in 2008.

[wkg_in_bham]

@Cal re : “So WKG are you saying the death of the Democratic Party and the GOP would be a bad thing?” Yes, I think it would be a bad thing. But no, I don’t think the death of either is in the cards. When a party gets clobbered, it forces to do some real soul-searching. I think the
Dems will move to the center and start to develop some talent. Talk about a weak bench; when all you can trot out is Hillary and the Bern speaks for itself.

We left the topic of urban parks somewhat in limbo – I’d like to return to it in some future date. But note the item in ”Progress” menu “City unveils $118 million remake of the deck park.”

[Hattie]

Sanders fans are starting to realize what he is like: he never left the 60s. Someone should tell him that the Vietnam War is over and that we actually trade with them these days.
People who like Hillary don't say so unless they feel they are in safe company. They will go quietly to the polls and vote for her.
I can't get over how much money the Sanders campaign spent. Wow. People sure are gullible.

[Cal lash]

Hattie U R obviously are not a fan of Adbuster.
Who I may have to vote for is one thing. Who I would go to coffee with is another.
Hillary may be the only choice for president. But if U believe she would be a better president tha Sanders, you are not only gullible U seem to be unaquainted with history. The people I know that are for Hillary are very clear and vocal as to why. But it has little to do with her personality but what they think she can accomplish better than the GOP. Personally I think it's a sad time in History that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are the most likley persons to be the next president. At my advanced age and state of poor health I'm still working on a possible move to Uruguay or Portugal.

A side note, the US just murdered more children with their drone assassination program. And OBAMA is not even close to being the Neo-Cons that Hillary or Donald are.

[Rogue Columnist]

WKG writes, "When a party gets clobbered, it forces (it?) to do some real soul-searching."

Really? Every time the GOP has been clobbered, this has been the conventional media wisdom. In fact, the party has merely doubled down on its ideology.

To be fair, this is what happened in some earlier eras. The Hillary haters forget that the Democrats, after the McGovern blowout and then the Thatcher/Reagan "there is no alternative" triumph of neoliberalism, only won the White House was by running relative conservatives. Clinton and Gore were self-labeled "New Democrats," so out of step the old party seemed with the times.

Then WKG writes, "I think the Dems will move to the center..."

What is this center? If Obama has been a leftie, much less a socialist, where's my universal healthcare, free college education, basic universal income and high-speed rail?

After decades of increasingly extreme ascendant conservatism, the "center" has been pushed so far to the right that even the modest, modest departures from the rightist trajectory and all its baggage are decried.

In reality, Obama has much more continuity with the policies of postwar presidents of both parties than not. But today Ike would be considered a commie, as the Birchers at the time labeled him.

[Cal lash]

The Birchers never left they just cloaked up and got more devious. With the exception of Seattle, Portland and California they run West.

[Cal Lash]

I think WKG's "move to the center: is more likely to be a move to the right, AGAIN.
Regardless of who wins between Hillary and Donald.

[Cal Lash]

More proof that Obama is a Capitalist and why Hillary is the Wall Street-Neo-Con, Saudi Araba Oil gopher and is there for anyone else with $$ to throw out in return for taking care of Oligarchy Barons difficulties with the 99 percent. Her main head hunter supports some of the worst greed merchants in the world.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-debbie-wasserman-schultz_us_5740c0cee4b045cc9a713056

[Cal Lash]

Can Hillary put Humpty Dumpty party back together again.
http://billmoyers.com/2015/04/13/radical-agenda-hillary-clinton/

[Maggie Metcalfe]

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/18/the-faux-fracas-in-nevada-how-a-reporters-pack-of-lies-ran-riot-in-the-fact-averse-media/

[Cal Lash]

Clinton vs Trump: ???????
http://www.nytimes.com/1964/09/08/malcolm-x-article-favors-goldwater.html?_r=0

[Cal lash]

Democrats better hope for a big turnout, else the US will look like AZ.

[INPHX]

RC writes:

If Obama has been a leftie, much less a socialist, where's my universal healthcare, free college education, basic universal income and high-speed rail?

If he were emperor, is there any doubt you'd have all those things?

The reason you don't is because a) Obama can't lead b) Congress is still somewhat sane and c) a large proportion of the American population has no interest in those ideas.

[Mombo Number Five]

a) Obama has had to lead since congress abdicated its role to legislate. b) congress has not been "somewhat sane" for over four decades. c) a large proportion of the American population does not have a clue.

[sj]

a) Obama flew to the right like a bat to bugs; b) Congress is bought and paid for, and the people don't call the tune; c) I weep.

[INPHX]

Mombo:

Well, there's little doubt that a large proportion of the American population does not have a clue---

My sense is we'd disagree on which ones.

[Cal lash]

Clueless folks. KKK, FOX news watchers. John Bichers, The Bundys, Soil Bankers. Well U know how it goes. Oh yeah and them folks from Canada that spend 5 months and 29 days in the US. They just hate Trudeau and Obama.

[INPHX]

Cal:

You're generally accurate in your list (not so sure about the soil bankers).

I'd probably add "folks that think California high speed railroad will come in anywhere near original budget or timeline":

http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2016/05/high-speed-rail-gets-a-four-year-delay-000123

[B. Franklin]

So we shouldn't attempt any project that might be delayed or come in over budget?

That pretty much shuts down the Defense Department, doesn't it?

[ross]

Jon,

The link below takes you to an interesting story on Clinton backing down on her promise to debate Sanders ahead of the California Primary. You might want to read this.

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/05/24/clintons-broken-promise-california-debate-called-insult-voters

[ross]

Here's another link about the struggle to control the Dem. Con.

http://www.inquisitr.com/3117407/democratic-primary-dnc-wants-to-change-rules-to-silence-delegates-hillary-clinton-refuses-california-debate/

[jon7190]

I graduated from ASU during the Lattie Coor era. From what I knew of him, I always liked him. I remember that he had been at the University of Vermont, which I almost went to since I went to high school in the Green Mountain state. We lived in the Burlington area, though not the city itself, during Bernie's reign there. I was not very attuned to local politics then, but I was aware that the city had a disheveled Democratic Socialist mayor. It seemed perfectly natural to me given the very liberal political culture there. My perspective was a bit skewed living in the "big" city, as I thought for sure that Dukakis would carry the state in 1988. Bush prevailed because statewide, the traditionally dominent Republicans still held a lot of sway. Not true at all anymore, of course.

I understand why the true believers love Bernie. They will be glad he lost, though, if Hillary wins in November. RC is right. He would be McGovern or Goldwater, or worse. Even against Trump. The other day, Bernie called a Clinton nomination a lesser of two evils situation. Reporter: "Are you calling Hillary evil?" Crickets chirping for an awkwardly long time. Sanders: "No, of course not..."

[wkg in bham]

Regarding the viability of the Dem Party. I started reading “Dark Money” yesterday. I’m just barely into it. It starts by describing a powwow in Palm Springs Cali of the Koch Crowd. They were in a tizzy over the 2008 landslide Dem victory. BHO had very strong coat-tails in 2008. It was an up-ticket and down-ticket creaming. Either “Time” or “Newsweek” had a cover article of something like “GOP RIP”. (I’ll get the exact details and post them later).

With regard to HRC: sooner or latter she’ll finish off Sanders. But it won’t be pretty. She’ll leave the convention with the nomination and a dispirited party. I think it is a feasible thing to say that the HRC campaign is in the ditch. She’s had to call in Bill, Barry and Chelsea to try and gain a little momentum. It’s in vain. The candidate herself that must do the heavy lifting; and she can’t. She has zero charisma Listening to here speak makes my ears hurt.

Here’s something else to consider. Does she have the stamina to handle a tightly contested campaign? I think not. I read “HRC” which was a puff piece that I guess you’d call authorized. But it did dip into thorny issues. One of them was HRC’s health at the latter stages of her stint as Secretary of State. Quite honestly, I don’t think she has the capability to run or serve as President.

[INPHX]

The headline is terribly deceptive but the text is pretty solid:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/26/us/politics/state-department-hillary-clinton-emails.html?_r=0

Ouch.

[wkg in bham]

In Phoenix: thanks for the link. Was interesting. But as Insapundit would say "rules are for little people".

The photograph of HRC was very unflatering. She's really showing her age. (I can say that because I'm a geezer myself.)

I've been dumping of HEC. Let me say a couple of good things about her. 1. She's a working fool. Don't think you can beat her by outworking her. 2. She's very focused and organized. 3. She has extensive ties; both governmental and non-governmental. 4. (and this is a plus in politics) she can be utterly ruthless. You don't want to cross swords with team Clinton.