I see this claim of his as more wishful thinking than reality based.
"Hey, Democrats, stop gloating — your party is imploding right before your eyes, too
The enduring lesson of Campaign 2016 for Democrats is that the center cannot hold."
http://www.salon.com/2016/04/14/hey_democrats_stop_gloating_your_party_is_imploding_right_before_your_eyes_too/
"Hey, Democrats, stop gloating — your party is imploding right before your eyes, too
The enduring lesson of Campaign 2016 for Democrats is that the center cannot hold."
http://www.salon.com/2016/04/14/hey_democrats_stop_gloating_your_party_is_imploding_right_before_your_eyes_too/
The party is not imploding. The GOP is imploding as it was unable to stop Trump from taking it over. The Dems are not imploding: they successfully stopped the Bern. The party decided. And it decided it wants Hillary Clinton.
The party includes not just the delegates, activists, and party officials, but you and I, the rank and file Democrats who discuss these issues on social media. The party is me, you, African-American pundits like Jonathan Capehart, Jamil Smith, liberal wonks like Paul Krugman and Jonathan Chait.
We haven't imploded. Now as to the center not being able to hold: this time it has. Now the future is another question, to be sure. Only time will tell. But for 2016, we at least see that the Dems are a much more healthy party than the GOP.
Can the party take advantage though? Or will it in the future, succumb, as Almond hopes?
"The Republicans no doubt face a brutal convention, in which they must either nominate an unpopular candidate or incur the wrath of the masses by handpicking an establishment figure."
"But the Democrats already face a kind of inverse dilemma. Barring a miracle, they will nominate an establishment candidate who is at best tepidly supported, and at worst reviled, by those who have rallied behind her insurgent foe, Bernie Sanders."
"The Berners are not the heart and soul of the Democratic party as has been proven. Most of the Berners either don't normally vote, have never voted before, or at best have little allegiance to the party."
Hillary doesn't need the Bernie Coalition to win the Presidency as she has the Obama Coalition.
What I will grant is that in the future the party has some headwinds to contend with.
1. The white millennials. They have gone 70 or 80 percent for The Bern. The heart and soul of the party, though aren't millennials. For the time being then this is not a worry. However, what happens in the next 10 to 20 years?
What would it take to win over the millennials in the long term? I think the issue comes down to this: economic insecurity.
They face the problem of high tuition, college debt, and then when they are up to debt to their eyeballs, they can't get a decent paying job.
In general, economic insecurity is the reason for all the recent political dysfunction both on the Left and the Right.
2. Black Lives Matter. Hillary's base of support is, of course, the African American and Latino vote. If not for people of color, especially black folks, she would not be where she is now.
The black millennials who are the base of BLM, never went for The Bern in the numbers that their white cousins have. Some black millennials have felt The Bern, but nowhere near, the supermajority numbers of white millennials.
The black millennials are a wildcard going forward. They seem unlikely to join forces with the white millennials but as we saw from the recent confrontation with BLM and Bill Clinton, there are some BLM activists who just refuse to give the Clintons any sort of a benefit of the doubt.
Bill Clinton had already apologized for aspects of his bill, I agree, it would have been much better for him not to have tried to defend the word 'superpredator', but as a human being, who would do a great job having people screaming in your face, calling you a war criminal and holding up signs that your wife is a murderer?
BLM as a group have not been impressed by Sanders in particular either. What you see is a real pessimism about the entire electoral process.
Many of the BLM activists see their role as criticizing public officials but never seeking elected office themselves. After the Bill Clinton confrontation, some urge blacks not to vote at all.
This message won't be meaningful for anyone over 30 or 35, but it shows how different this generation is from the older civil rights black generation who believe the vote is sacred.
The main power of the vote some BLM activists believe in is the power not to vote all-to withhold their vote.
This will have no impact for the time being. But in the longer term-10 to 20 years out-it could be a concern for Democrats if older black voters die and are replaced by younger non voters.
But things can chance a lot in 10 to 20 years. With more economic security and some strong criminal justice reform, things could change a lot.
At this point, it's not clear to me how strongly most young black millennials identify with BLM. Time will tell where it goes.
I consider it a good think that one high profile member of BLM, Deray Mckesson, is at least giving government a shot rather than just being a critic.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/can-deray-mckesson-turn-330000-twitter-followers-into-20000-votes/
The party includes not just the delegates, activists, and party officials, but you and I, the rank and file Democrats who discuss these issues on social media. The party is me, you, African-American pundits like Jonathan Capehart, Jamil Smith, liberal wonks like Paul Krugman and Jonathan Chait.
We haven't imploded. Now as to the center not being able to hold: this time it has. Now the future is another question, to be sure. Only time will tell. But for 2016, we at least see that the Dems are a much more healthy party than the GOP.
Can the party take advantage though? Or will it in the future, succumb, as Almond hopes?
"The Republicans no doubt face a brutal convention, in which they must either nominate an unpopular candidate or incur the wrath of the masses by handpicking an establishment figure."
"But the Democrats already face a kind of inverse dilemma. Barring a miracle, they will nominate an establishment candidate who is at best tepidly supported, and at worst reviled, by those who have rallied behind her insurgent foe, Bernie Sanders."
"The Berners are not the heart and soul of the Democratic party as has been proven. Most of the Berners either don't normally vote, have never voted before, or at best have little allegiance to the party."
Hillary doesn't need the Bernie Coalition to win the Presidency as she has the Obama Coalition.
What I will grant is that in the future the party has some headwinds to contend with.
1. The white millennials. They have gone 70 or 80 percent for The Bern. The heart and soul of the party, though aren't millennials. For the time being then this is not a worry. However, what happens in the next 10 to 20 years?
What would it take to win over the millennials in the long term? I think the issue comes down to this: economic insecurity.
They face the problem of high tuition, college debt, and then when they are up to debt to their eyeballs, they can't get a decent paying job.
In general, economic insecurity is the reason for all the recent political dysfunction both on the Left and the Right.
2. Black Lives Matter. Hillary's base of support is, of course, the African American and Latino vote. If not for people of color, especially black folks, she would not be where she is now.
The black millennials who are the base of BLM, never went for The Bern in the numbers that their white cousins have. Some black millennials have felt The Bern, but nowhere near, the supermajority numbers of white millennials.
The black millennials are a wildcard going forward. They seem unlikely to join forces with the white millennials but as we saw from the recent confrontation with BLM and Bill Clinton, there are some BLM activists who just refuse to give the Clintons any sort of a benefit of the doubt.
Bill Clinton had already apologized for aspects of his bill, I agree, it would have been much better for him not to have tried to defend the word 'superpredator', but as a human being, who would do a great job having people screaming in your face, calling you a war criminal and holding up signs that your wife is a murderer?
BLM as a group have not been impressed by Sanders in particular either. What you see is a real pessimism about the entire electoral process.
Many of the BLM activists see their role as criticizing public officials but never seeking elected office themselves. After the Bill Clinton confrontation, some urge blacks not to vote at all.
This message won't be meaningful for anyone over 30 or 35, but it shows how different this generation is from the older civil rights black generation who believe the vote is sacred.
The main power of the vote some BLM activists believe in is the power not to vote all-to withhold their vote.
This will have no impact for the time being. But in the longer term-10 to 20 years out-it could be a concern for Democrats if older black voters die and are replaced by younger non voters.
But things can chance a lot in 10 to 20 years. With more economic security and some strong criminal justice reform, things could change a lot.
At this point, it's not clear to me how strongly most young black millennials identify with BLM. Time will tell where it goes.
I consider it a good think that one high profile member of BLM, Deray Mckesson, is at least giving government a shot rather than just being a critic.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/can-deray-mckesson-turn-330000-twitter-followers-into-20000-votes/
No comments:
Post a Comment