Category: political challengers

ideological culture political challengers

Mistaken Misogyny

Tulsi Gabbard, shadow, silhouette, misogyny,

Are Democratic Party women … misogynists?

Last week, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren dropped out of the presidential race after coming in third in her home state and faring no better in any of the first 18 state primaries and caucuses.

“Warren seemed to be the ideal candidate,” informed Erin Templeton, a Dean at Converse College, in The Guardian, but, as the headline explained, “there was only one problem … she was a woman.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi attributed “a certain element of misogyny” to the senator’s defeat.

“For the second time in four years, an exceptionally qualified female candidate lost to her male counterparts — some objectively far less qualified,” argued Ella Nilsen and Li Zhou at Vox.

“Sexism was a big factor in Warren’s loss,” they asserted, concluding: “America apparently isn’t ready for a woman president — at least not yet.”

Yet, it was Democrats, not all Americans, who voted for two white men instead of her. And women constitute a clear majority of Democratic voters.

“She’s female,” Annie Linskey and Amy Wang chorused in The Washington Post, identifying the factor “many believe contributed significantly to her loss.”

Noting that Warren’s “departure came just days after another prominent female senator, Amy Klobuchar, dropped out,” they neglected to discuss why Klobuchar endorsed former Vice-President Joe Biden, a man, and not her homogametic comrade, Senator Warren.

The biggest problem with doling out verbal recriminations against people who did not vote for Warren?

If everything is sexism, nothing is sexism.

Which only makes it harder to fight actual sexism … as the Democratic National Committee changes the rules to keep the only remaining woman in the race, Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, off the debate stage.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags misogyny, Tulsi Gabbard, women

political challengers

Running Interference

foreign interference, Canada, Bernie Sanders, elections,

When rumor of “Russian interference” in the 2016 presidential election hit the news, my first thought was: electronic/computerized voting machines — they are known to be insecure, easy to rig.

But when it turned out that folks at CNN and MSNBC were hyperventilating about a very clumsy ad campaign on social media, designed to seed discord more than secure an election for any particular candidate, I rolled my eyes.

I also remembered that the Steele Dossier underpinning the whole bizarre “Russia hacked our elections!” investigation was itself an example of foreign state and private actors seeking to “hack our elections.”

Long story short: when we talk about “hacking elections,” we should worry about compromised vote-counting systems, not Facebook ads.

Maybe that’s why when I read “These Canadians can’t vote in U.S. elections, but they’re campaigning for Bernie Sanders” I didn’t panic, I chuckled.

And maybe raised an eyebrow.

My generally ho-hum reaction is the result of my trust in the American people. The voters are in charge, in the end. Sure, young Canadian communists and communitarians and the like cannot vote here, but they sure wish to influence the election.

Interference?

No. Even if they are unwise, and not citizens, let them express their values.

Hey: maybe one reason I am “soft” on “foreign interference in our elections” is that “interfering” in elections is just a nasty way of describing what I do when I petition in Oklahoma or Colorado to help enable citizens to decide an issue, or join a march against totalitarianism in Hong Kong.

The struggle for freedom is worldwide.

Dare to interfere.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags Bernie Sanders, Canada, elections, foreign interference

national politics & policies political challengers

The Superdelegate Zombie Apocalypse

Post author By Redactor
Post date February 26, 2020
2 Comments on The Superdelegate Zombie Apocalypse

Back in 2016, this commentary was perhaps the first howl in the political wilderness against the unfairness of the Democratic Party’s use of “superdelegates” — office holders and party officials who by party rules automatically serve as unelected but voting delegates at the national convention … which chooses the presidential nominee.

Four years ago, the superdelegates, who account for roughly 15 percent of the total delegate vote, favored Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders by an incredible 97 to 3 percent.

Fast forward to 2020 and Dems have made what DNC Chair Tom Perez called “historic” changes to this ‘super-delegation’ — now referred to as “automatic” delegates. These non-elected insiders may not vote on the first ballot.

That’s a big deal.

But with so many candidates still in the contest, and those contests front-loaded — next week’s Super Tuesday features primaries in 14 states, including populous California and Texas — it appears unlikely that any candidate will garner a majority of delegates on the first ballot.

And next come the superdelegates.

And, again, they are likely to hurt the Vermont senator.

“Sanders … could win the most pledged delegates — those allocated on the basis of votes during the marathon Democratic primaries,” explains The Guardian, “but be swindled, at the last, by the Democratic party elite.”

That is not all. “DNC members discuss rules change to stop Sanders at convention,” reads a recent Politico headline.

Reporting from the “sidelines of a DNC executive committee meeting,” Politico discloses discussions regarding “the possibility of a policy reversal to ensure that so-called superdelegates can vote on the first ballot at the party’s national convention.”

Democratic process does not appear to be the Democrats’ strong suit.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags Democrat, primary elections, superdelegate, zombie

national politics & policies political challengers

The Mandela Effect

People have been known to plagiarize college term papers. Even a few political speeches have been surreptitiously copied and brazenly re-orated without proper attribution. But you can’t plagiarize getting arrested, can you?

Not really. What you can do is lie about being arrested — just make it up out of whole cloth.

That may be what former Vice-President and once-upon-a-time Democratic Party presidential front-runner Joe Biden has been doing in recent days “as he confronts challenging political headwinds,” following fourth and fifth place finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire, respectively — though he came in (a distant) second in Nevada over the weekend.

“I had the great honor of meeting [Nelson Mandela],” Biden told a South Carolina crowd last week. “I had the great honor of being arrested with our U.N. ambassador on the streets of Soweto trying to get to see [Mandela] on Robbens Island.”

“No, I was never arrested,” U.N. Ambassador at that time, Andrew Young, now 87, told The New York Times, “and I don’t think he was, either.”

Back in 1977, Mr. Biden was Senator Biden from Delaware. Methinks the arrest of a U.S. Senator by a foreign government might spark at least a single news story. Be informed: “A check of available news accounts by The New York Times turned up no references to an arrest.”

The Times also notes that Biden “did not mention it in his 2007 memoir when writing about a 1970s trip to South Africa.”

Plagiarism sunk Biden’s 1988 presidential campaign. This time out, the politician’s gaffes, bouts of bizarre truculence, and age-related physical failings have hampered his quest. Add to all that, now, the apparent fact that Joe can’t even get arrested.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

N.B. The upshot of the Biden candidacy may amount to nothing more than an increased interest in “the Mandela Effect.”

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags Joe Biden, Nelson Mandela, plagiarism

ideological culture political challengers too much government

The C‑Word Emerges

“We’re not going to throw out capitalism,” declared Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire former New York City mayor now seeking the Democratic Party’s nomination for president.

“Other countries tried that. It was called communism and it just didn’t work.”

Bloomberg was responding to a question by MSNBC’s Hallie Jackson at Wednesday night’s Las Vegas debate regarding his thoughts on Sen. Bernie Sanders’ proposal to “require all large companies to turn over up to 20 percent of their ownership to employees over time.”

“Let’s talk about democratic socialism, Mr. Bloomberg,” countered Sanders. “Not communism — that’s a cheap shot!”

But is it?

The Vermont Senator has a long history of offering effusive praise for repressive socialist and communist regimes, including the Soviet Union, Cuba, and Nicaragua. After lauding the late Fidel Castro for providing healthcare and education and “totally transform[ing] the society” — while ignoring Castro’s complete disregard for human rights — Bernie judiciously added, “Not to say that Fidel Castro or Cuba are perfect, they are certainly not.”

Sanders has also called for “public ownership of the major means of production.” Unlike Karl Marx, I guess Bernie doesn’t sweat the small stuff.

“What a wonderful country we have. The best-known socialist in the country,” offered Bloomberg, referring to Sanders, “happens to be a millionaire with three houses!

“What did I miss?”

Asserting a need for a second residence, the Vermont senator replied, “Well, you missed that I work in Washington.”

“That’s the first problem,” Bloomberg interjected.

The first of many.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Photo by Gage Skidmore

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags Bernie Sanders, Communism, socialism

ideological culture political challengers

Madame Guillotine

A Maine woman running for the U.S. Senate has chosen for her campaign logo the guillotine.

Yes, she calls herself a ‘democratic socialist.’ Well, on Twitter it is ‘DemSoc.’

Her name …

No, start again. On the campaign Twitter page the candidate’s “preferred pronouns” are listed as “they/them.” So, their name is Bre, and they proudly promoted the new logo on February 5th: “I was gonna wait until tomorrow to show off these beauties, but Trump got acquitted and I feel like folks could use something to look forward to.”

But … why?

For my part, the blood running in the streets was my least favorite part of the French Revolution, and I would, uh, downplay it, no matter how murderous I might ever feel.

You know, were I a DemSoc.

Upon being challenged with its most famous historical use, she had a … politic … response: “I’m aware of the French Revolution, and how the story ends. A guillotine t‑shirt reminds others about it in hopes that we’ll all be motivated to address the very serious problems with our government before a similarly violent uprising becomes inevitable.”

When asked who it was for, she replied, “More of a ‘what.’ The guillotine is for the plutocratic & kleptocratic norms that have undermined our democratic process. We have to develop ways to subvert the stranglehold of wealth on our government. There will not be a more convenient revolution. The symbol is a reminder.”

I wonder what she would say if her rivals chose as campaign logos the hangman’s noose and the electric chair.

But hey, her, er, their guillotine is attractive, and, because it lacks a drop of red, emphasizes the ‘democratic’ part of ‘democratic socialism’ … by hiding the blood.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing