US Politics: What it Takes (is sabotage)

[lokisnow]

So I've been reading What it Takes, by Richard Ben Cramer, and over-fitting aside, I could see the 2016 race shaping up similar to the 1988 one. A brutal fight on the out party side, and a less bruising fight from two heavyweight veterans who are both "due" on the in-party side.

But, and granted I'm only 40% of the way done with the book, I don't think Biden can pull off the Bush and win the nomination, not because he can't beat Clinton, I think I could. No, it's because he can't beat Biden. Whatever you think of his gaffes or past or 'plagiarism' the real problem is that Biden believes his own mythology, but doesn't really have the distance or self-awareness to see that most of the time he's fooling himself so convincingly that everyone else just goes along.

And that would also suggest that it's a young, up and coming governer that's going to be the standard bearer for the republicans. Chris Christie lines up nicely for the moderate/conservative-esque Dukakis, though I wouldn't rule Scott Walker out yet.

Also interesting is just how similar Dukakis and Bill Clinton are in their political biographies. Both working class kids who went to great schools, got elected governer really really young, got voted out, then got reelected governer again and had smashing success in their second/third terms.

***

Regarding the last few posts, here's Rachel Maddow's post on the attempts by congressional Republicans to Sabotage the Law of the United States.

http://maddowblog.ms...ning-looks-like

what are we referring to? Several -- by my count, seven -- specific efforts.

Andrew Sullivan also posted about the Republican Sabotage attempts referred to in the last posts of the previous thread.

In this instance, Republicans want to Sabotage the country by refusing to fund the operation of the government, and are eagerly looking forward to an opportunity in the fall to Murder the United States (worth pointing out, John McCain doesn't want to be a murderer, but plenty of Republicans have been talking about how much they want to kill the country.

http://dish.andrewsu...-and-saboteurs/

the GOP in the House is effectively threatening to sabotage the economy and the government’s fiscal stability to cut off its funding. What do they intend to do about tens of millions of people without insurance (or more than ten million people living in this country without papers)? Not a single thing – except bromides against big g0vernment that could have been uttered (and were) in the 1980s.

Whatever else this is, it is emphatically not an opposition party in a democratic system.

It is a nullification party, unable to pass anything itself but endless, fruitless repeals of the ACA, incapable of supporting immigration reform as well as health reform, eager to deny the president even his own executive officials, and abusing the filibuster to make any kind of progress in addressing what few deny are real problems. This is a protest movement – not a democratic opposition. It’s acting out, not opposing.

And its only rationale is to drag this president down

[Guest Raidne]

Oh look! A new thread!

Well let me take the opportunity to answer Greguh's poignant question and repeat the breaking news that the Mom, Dad, 8 yr old daughter, and 4 yr old son of the trapped family George Zimmerman helped rescue from their overturned SUV yesterday are all unbelievably not black. Seriously, they're not even Mexicans or Hmong or of any disfavored facial identity. I'm with you SG - somebody get this guy a publicist and hook him with some life-saving opportunities that White Liberal Upper Middle Class Americans can get behind. Personally, if I can be totally serial for a minute you guys, I don't really want to hear about bad stuff that happens to anyone who isn't "less fortunate" [than me] because that really kills the whole point of myopically focusing on the Other race or economic status of the victim in order to bolster my own sense of psychological security. This is why I really hate it when those news stories insist on quoting that black neighbor of Zimmerman's who keeps saying that Zimmerman was following a black male teenager because two black male teenagers had burglarized half a dozen houses over the last month. Fuck that, I don't want to live in a world where a guy follows a black teenager meeting the description of a burglar, the teenager thinks he's being stalked and harassed because of his race, and pointless life-threatening and life-ending fights break out.

Right SG? We just really want to live in a world where black kids are shot by racists because they're black, because we're not black, no matter what the facts indicate (not that it's stopping us from empathasizing with the President's comments about what it's like to grow up black in America, because we're sensitive like that). So let's stick with that. So Zimmerman rescued white people. Just proves he's a [half-Mexican] racist, doesn't it. Told you so.

[The Mountain That Flies]

I'm afraid I don't know "What it Takes", but is seems to me (and has seemed for quite a while) that Obama sorely needs a counter-measure to the Republican strategy of sabotage. They've been using one or another variant of this tactic since Obama first came into office, though obviously with varying degrees of effectiveness.

Simply put, the Republicans aren't playing by the rules Obama tried to lay out, so he needs to alter them. In his initial run in 2007-08, he made tremendous use of grass-roots style campaigning synched with social networking, smart phone connections, and other new inventions. This tactic was then used by Republicans, and especially the Tea Party, in organizing their resistance to Obama, and it's safe to say the two sides are relatively equal now in this field.

However, Obama missed a big opportunity when he didn't keep his (and the Democrats) machine intact and use it to organize local pressure on his republican challengers. I realize he didn't want to take a strong-arm approach, feeling that compromises could be reached, but it was very obvious early on Republicans weren't going to play ball with him, and he didn't respond hard enough. By keeping his various volunteers and community organizers from '08 active at a local/congressional level, Obama could have effectively sabotaged that saboteurs. While this stinks of being under-handed and going back on his promises of moderate middle-ground governance, being naive very rarely makes for effective leadership. And the fact is, by not striking back, he let the Republicans build their sabotage strategy more and more, causing the government to appear broken, which then only furthered the Republican anti-government message.

You're right to say 2016 will be a brutal battle amongst Republicans, as 2012 proved there are deep divides between moderate conservatives and hard-liners. Chris Christie's leadership during Hurricane Sandy bolstered his national image, but Scott Walker has a more overtly conservative pedigree, and Christie loves bucking the party leadership. Truthfully, Nikki Haley from South Carolina would be a better canidate than either of them, since she fixed much of her state's debt, cleaned up SC's political image after her predecessor's resignation, and is an Indian-American woman. Unfortunately that last fact, while a tremendous draw for female and minority voters, is the exact reason she won't get it, as God-forbid Republicans be progressive.

Amongst the Democrats, it's important to remember Biden is 70 years old, and has been at an exhausting job for eight years. Bush Sr. was admittedly 64 when he followed Reagan, but I'd question whether Biden will have the stamina for a full run. Hilary, meanwhile, is five years younger and has had a bit of retirement to re-coup her energies. And if they did face off, Hilary soundly beat Biden in '08, and left her job with higher approval ratings than Biden or Obama.

[Reny of Storms End]

Oh look! A new thread!

Well let me take the opportunity to answer Greguh's poignant question and repeat the breaking news that the Mom, Dad, 8 yr old daughter, and 4 yr old son of the trapped family George Zimmerman helped rescue from their overturned SUV yesterday are all unbelievably not black. Seriously, they're not even Mexicans or Hmong or of any disfavored facial identity. I'm with you SG - somebody get this guy a publicist and hook him with some life-saving opportunities that White Liberal Upper Middle Class Americans can get behind. Personally, if I can be totally serial for a minute you guys, I don't really want to hear about bad stuff that happens to anyone who isn't "less fortunate" [than me] because that really kills the whole point of myopically focusing on the Other race or economic status of the victim in order to bolster my own sense of psychological security. This is why I really hate it when those news stories insist on quoting that black neighbor of Zimmerman's who keeps saying that Zimmerman was following a black male teenager because two black male teenagers had burglarized half a dozen houses over the last month. Fuck that, I don't want to live in a world where a guy follows a black teenager meeting the description of a burglar, the teenager thinks he's being stalked and harassed because of his race, and pointless life-threatening and life-ending fights break out.

Right SG? We just really want to live in a world where black kids are shot by racists because they're black, because we're not black, no matter what the facts indicate (not that it's stopping us from empathasizing with the President's comments about what it's like to grow up black in America, because we're sensitive like that). So let's stick with that. So Zimmerman rescued white people. Just proves he's a [half-Mexican] racist, doesn't it. Told you so.

I think you took the opportunity to answer SG's question in the last thread.

[Sci-2]

I can't see Biden beating Hilary in the primaries.

He's just not popular enough in my opinion within the Democratic party, and last I heard Hilary was polling really well even in the South?

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

The Republicans are going to end up just like they did last time. With a clown car full of crazy people and one or two guys who manage to be not-100%-crazy but completely unlikable. Rand Paul will pull some, but not nearly as much as he needs of his Dad's constituency, and in the end everyone will suppress their gag reflex long enough to choose between Rubio and Christie.

The Democrats will have 2 or 3 serious but severely unlikable people with ideas that make 1/3 of the country actively sick, 1/3 somewhat uncomfortable, and the remaining third insanely optimistic. One of them will then win the election by virtue of being not a Republican, and completely betray their constituency (again) who will make excuses for the next 4-8 years about how it's still somehow George W. Bush/Congress' fault.

The Libertarians will probably take 2.5% of the vote this time by virtue of Republicans and Democrats being evil assholes who actively hate civil liberties. but completely betray their principles again by nominating yet another wash-out who couldn't hack it in the Republican party. That 2.5% will then be decried forever on Fox News as costing the republicans the White House as though that's a bad thing. No other network will mention it at all and will continue pretending that Libertarians don't exist, or if they do they are actually Tea Party idiots.

The Greens will nominate a complete loon whose support for something stupid like a national gluten-free program or public unschooling or something will relegate them to even less consideration than the libertarians.

[Robin Of House Hill]

The Republicans are going to end up just like they did last time. With a clown car full of crazy people and one or two guys who manage to be not-100%-crazy but completely unlikable.

I sure hope you're right. Otherwise they might win.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

TGU,

So, if I find an armed burglar in my house I should have to attempt to retreat before attempting to defend my children?

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

Scot,

If you have the option of getting your children out of the house safely without killing someone, isn't that the best choice to make? Why would you support homicide being the first option instead of the last?

Because when you enter someone's home against their wishes you have broken rule number absolute fucking one of being a member of a group of people larger than one.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

TGU,

A quick exit is not possible from my home. It's too small to be able to run without being heard. With a "duty to retreat" enshrined in law its possible I see jail time because I live in a small ranch style home. I don't like violence being the first option but there are situations were it is. I do not relish the prospect of having to defend my actions in a system where the "duty to retreat" exists.

[Shryke]

Oh look! A new thread!

Well let me take the opportunity to answer Greguh's poignant question and repeat the breaking news that the Mom, Dad, 8 yr old daughter, and 4 yr old son of the trapped family George Zimmerman helped rescue from their overturned SUV yesterday are all unbelievably not black. Seriously, they're not even Mexicans or Hmong or of any disfavored facial identity. I'm with you SG - somebody get this guy a publicist and hook him with some life-saving opportunities that White Liberal Upper Middle Class Americans can get behind. Personally, if I can be totally serial for a minute you guys, I don't really want to hear about bad stuff that happens to anyone who isn't "less fortunate" [than me] because that really kills the whole point of myopically focusing on the Other race or economic status of the victim in order to bolster my own sense of psychological security. This is why I really hate it when those news stories insist on quoting that black neighbor of Zimmerman's who keeps saying that Zimmerman was following a black male teenager because two black male teenagers had burglarized half a dozen houses over the last month. Fuck that, I don't want to live in a world where a guy follows a black teenager meeting the description of a burglar, the teenager thinks he's being stalked and harassed because of his race, and pointless life-threatening and life-ending fights break out.

Right SG? We just really want to live in a world where black kids are shot by racists because they're black, because we're not black, no matter what the facts indicate (not that it's stopping us from empathasizing with the President's comments about what it's like to grow up black in America, because we're sensitive like that). So let's stick with that. So Zimmerman rescued white people. Just proves he's a [half-Mexican] racist, doesn't it. Told you so.

Wow, and this bullshit is if anything even less relevant in this thread. Why'd you bring it back? I though Kouran could pick his own fights.

[Ormond]

So Zimmerman rescued white people. Just proves he's a [half-Mexican] racist, doesn't it. Told you so.

I am sympathetic to your position, but my nitpicky mind forces me to point out that George Zimmerman is "half-Peruvian", not "half-Mexican".

[lokisnow]

However, Obama missed a big opportunity when he didn't keep his (and the Democrats) machine intact and use it to organize local pressure on his republican challengers. I realize he didn't want to take a strong-arm approach, feeling that compromises could be reached, but it was very obvious early on Republicans weren't going to play ball with him, and he didn't respond hard enough. By keeping his various volunteers and community organizers from '08 active at a local/congressional level, Obama could have effectively sabotaged that saboteurs. While this stinks of being under-handed and going back on his promises of moderate middle-ground governance, being naive very rarely makes for effective leadership. And the fact is, by not striking back, he let the Republicans build their sabotage strategy more and more, causing the government to appear broken, which then only furthered the Republican anti-government message.

I really could not believe that Obama and his apparatus just completely dismantled and disappeared after November 2008. He just completely ignored the grassroots until he had to run for reelection. Hell it would have helped if he'd mobilized his base to support his issues in 2009 and 10, but it was just a complete retreat into bubble land. And yeah they accomplished quite a bit thanks to a lack of divided government but it was such a total failure to defend and expand his outreach efforts from the election. I was stunned, I thought that Obama would transform the machinery to refocus on midterm elections and instead he just shuttered it until his own reelection required him to start it up again, a complete betrayal, party wise.

You're right to say 2016 will be a brutal battle amongst Republicans, as 2012 proved there are deep divides between moderate conservatives and hard-liners. Chris Christie's leadership during Hurricane Sandy bolstered his national image, but Scott Walker has a more overtly conservative pedigree, and Christie loves bucking the party leadership. Truthfully, Nikki Haley from South Carolina would be a better canidate than either of them, since she fixed much of her state's debt, cleaned up SC's political image after her predecessor's resignation, and is an Indian-American woman. Unfortunately that last fact, while a tremendous draw for female and minority voters, is the exact reason she won't get it, as God-forbid Republicans be progressive.

Amongst the Democrats, it's important to remember Biden is 70 years old, and has been at an exhausting job for eight years. Bush Sr. was admittedly 64 when he followed Reagan, but I'd question whether Biden will have the stamina for a full run. Hilary, meanwhile, is five years younger and has had a bit of retirement to re-coup her energies. And if they did face off, Hilary soundly beat Biden in '08, and left her job with higher approval ratings than Biden or Obama.

I think Clinton will beat Biden for the same reason that Bush beat Dole: Clinton has all the high-dollar party backers in her pocket, and Biden will never be able to overcome that advantage.

as for being 70. pshaw. even the onion knows better: http://www.theonion.com/articles/shirtless-biden-washes-trans-am-in-white-house-dri,2718/

;)

My favorite Biden moment from the book What it Takes, so far, is just after Biden has a huge success at a union rally in Iowa, he thinks:

In fact, Joe didn’t know exactly how it happened, or what the connect was. What always occurred to him ... what he felt when it happened in a room ... was a tingle of fear. He hoped to God that what they understood was what he was trying to say, because he could feel their need coming back at him, and their willingness to be led—he just had to pray they got it right! If they didn’t ... well, God only knew what someone could do with them. ... That’s what always scared Joe: If I can do this to these folks, what happens if someone comes along who can really SING?

Cramer, Richard Ben (2011-08-02). What It Takes: The Way to the White House (p. 368). Open Road Integrated Media LLC. Kindle Edition.

Considering Joe's destiny with Obama in 2008, I guess he found out what happens when someone comes along who can really SING.

***

Interestingly, Chris Christie was not selected to be Romney's running mate because he wouldn't quit the governship to do so, and if he didn't it would have adversely affected Romney's fundraising.

This also indicates that Chris Christie will either have to pull a Sarah Palin, and resign his governorship, or he'll have to decline to run in 2016, because there is no way that he can run as a sitting Governor in the way that Dukakis did.

http://www.salon.com/2013/07/22/christie_may_be_forced_to_quit_as_governor/

In his new book, Balz provides additional background on the Romney-Christie talks, reporting that Romney raised the issue directly with Christie and asked him if he’d be willing to resign his office in order to join the GOP ticket. Christie, according to Balz, laughed at the question, apparently not realizing at first that Romney was serious. As Balz tells it:

“A Romney adviser said the campaign never found an adequate solution to the pay-to-play rule as it might affect sitting governors running for president or vice president. They came away convinced that the rule will have a potentially significant effect on sitting governors who decide to seek the presidency in the future.”

Christie, of course, isn’t the only sitting governor in the 2016 mix. But for several reasons the bond and investment adviser rules affect him more than any other would-be candidate:

• New Jersey’s governorship is the most powerful in the nation. Christie enjoys broad authority over appointments, which makes it easy to tie him to decisions involving bond underwriters and investment advisers. For instance, he appoints a majority of the members of the board that oversees bond deals. Other governors aren’t as exposed. As ProPublica’s Jake Bernstein reported last year, New York’s Andrew Cuomo, a potential candidate for the Democratic nomination in ’16, comes from a “sole trustee” state where an elected comptroller has power over the state’s pension funds.
  
• New Jersey also has the most strict pay-to-play laws in the country, with the state doubling the penalties prescribed by the SEC for any firms violating its prohibitions. There are additional penalties imposed at the municipal level.
  
• Christie is particularly popular with exactly the type of donor most likely to be affected by the SEC rules: Wall Street executives.
  

It’s enough to raise the question of whether Christie, whose second term wouldn’t expire until January 2018, might decide that staying on as governor is more trouble than it’s worth if he opts to seek the presidency

[Guy Kilmore]

I really wish George Zimmerman stuff had its own thread, so I can promptly ignore it. The Sniping on both sides of this is getting childish, which is sad because it is coming from boarders who usually have interesting stuff to read.

[Sci-2]

I was stunned, I thought that Obama would transform the machinery to refocus on midterm elections and instead he just shuttered it until his own reelection required him to start it up again, a complete betrayal, party wise.

My understanding was that Obama's machinery was folded into the Dems management system and it quickly disintegrated there. I think it was a Rolling Stone article that described the details, will see if it's online.

[Trebla]

I am sympathetic to your position, but my nitpicky mind forces me to point out that George Zimmerman is "half-Peruvian", not "half-Mexican".

They are all the same aren't they??? ;)

[Galactus]

I'm sorry, now I've got "

" stuck in my head.

... That was all.

[ThinkerX]

Oh sheesh.

Whatever happened to Chelsea Clinton vs Jeb Bush (Bush III) ?

Think about it. No records to attack. Blank slates willing to be filled. And best of all, solidly linked in with the existing oligarchs.

[The Mountain That Flies]

My understanding was that Obama's machinery was folded into the Dems management system and it quickly disintegrated there. I think it was a Rolling Stone article that described the details, will see if it's online.

This is correct. Basically, Howard Dean became head of the DNC in 2005, and since he had pioneered many 21st century grassroots techniques in his 2004 presidential run, it was easy for Obama and eventually the Democratic machine to follow his lead.

Unfortunately, Dean was forced out of his position soon after Obama won. Dean had a long-standing rivalry with Obama's first Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel, who wielded his influence to push Dean out. Tim Kaine, at the time governor of Virginia, took over since he was a successful Democratic in a conservative state (which everyone thought would be helpful towards solidifying the gains made in '08). However, Kaine had six months left as governor, and by the time he took properly assumed his DNC duties, the pieces of the machine had fallen to the wayside. Furthermore, Kaine is an old-school politician, and while I love the man for what he did for my home state, he wasn't prepared to pick up where Dean left off.

So, if you want to look for a specific person to blame for Obama & Co. not transforming what they had into an even more powerful weapon, look no further than Rahm Emmanuel. He's a career political insider who rode Obama's popularity during his first few years in office, then quit to become mayor of Chicago. There are obviously a lot of other things that went into the lax use of Obama's campaign tools, but Emmanuel and the change-over in leadership at the DNC was a major factor.

[Shryke]

And here we go for more from everyone's favourite band of morons:

Setting the stage for a fall showdown over raising the nation’s debt ceiling, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, renewed on Tuesday his insistence that “we're not going to raise the debt ceiling without real cuts in spending. It's as simple as that.”

As President Barack Obama readies a series of speeches later this week setting the parameters for this fall’s fight over government spending, the top House Republican said his position remained unchanged.

“I believe the so-called Boehner Rule is the right formula for getting that done,” he later added, referring to the eponymous rule matching new debt authority with spending cuts

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/23/19638174-boehner-no-debt-ceiling-increase-without-spending-cuts?lite

Dear god, Obama needs to force this issue and end the utter fucking stupidity of the US budgeting system.