Tag: Bernie Sanders

Categories
Politics Politics Beat Blog

New Hampshire: Some Impressions

CREDIT: JB

SALEM, N.H. —

JB

A New Hampshire snowplow tries to make the world safe for democracy.

The Republicans

Yes, before it’s all over on Tuesday night, Donald J. Trump will no doubt play a significant character role in my soon-to-be-published chronicle of the New Hampshire primary (scheduled for the Flyer issue of February 18), just as he has in so much national media coverage of the presidential-election season to date.

I plan to check out his last major rally in Manchester on Monday night, primary eve, and that should allow me to hazard some sort of serious eyewitness take on The Donald.
JB

New Jersy Governor Christie (aka Brom Bones) loomed menadingly over media onlookers (and Marco Rubio) at Saturday’s debate.

But for all the polls that still have Trump way ahead of his GOP rivals — by something like 20 points, at last reckoning — I wouldn’t be surprised if he ends up suffering another major embarrassment like that which befell him in his second-place finish to Ted Cruz in Iowa last week.

So far I’ve only seen him in action in Saturday night’s debate of the remaining Republican contenders in Bedford, and, in all honesty, it was difficult to see Trump as a major figure in that event, or , for that matter, retrospectively over the course of the debates and cattle-call forums to date. More about that in the aforesaid February 18 issue.

Front-runner Trump may still be (at least in New Hampshire and possibly, tenuously elsewhere), but, up until Saturday night’s debate, I thought there was a fair chance of his being overtaken in New Hampshire by Florida Senator Marco Rubio, who entered this last week of the primary on a roll, after finishing third in the Iowa caucuses and coming close there to catching Trump for the silver.
JB

Jeb Bush (like all the governors) is trying to make a point of his administrative know-how while he still can.

But that was before Rubio and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie did their impromptu version, at the weekend debate, of a well-known Washington Irving short story, the one in which schoolmaster Ichabod Crane has been dazzling everybody as a fine young dandy until village bully Brom Bones, played in this case by Chris Christie, runs him right off the reservation.

Maybe that’s overstated as a comparison to the verbal pummeling Christie, obviously desperate to keep his own diminishing hopes as a suitor alive, gave to Rubio on the score of the latter’s talking points, rote-sounding to the point of self-parody, but it was pretty brutal. A thought: anybody who went to high school in New Jersey with Christie and fancied the same girl that he did was ipso facto risking a serious ass-kicking.

But there was a serious point to the mayhem, which Christie duly made. And that was that the GOP field’s three governors — Christie, John Kasich of Ohio, and Jeb Bush of Florida — were all seasoned in actual administration rather than in the kind of parliamentary fencing that both Rubio and Cruz were skillful at.
JB

Marco Rubio threw a Super Bowl Party for his voters.

It remains to be seen, in fact, whether New Hampshire becomes a turning point in how actual voters see the matter. Up to now the gubernatorial types have been puffing hard trying to stay within hailing distance, not only of the two 
clever young Senators, but also of such untutored originals as Trump and Dr.Ben Carson.

Kasich inevitably talks a good civics-class game in public, and, after attending a Bush town hall on Sunday morning, I found myself more impressed with his comprehensiveness than I had expected to be (hey, he even acknowledged the reality of man-made climate change, albeit somewhat left-handedly in response to an attendee’s question).

The guvs are running out of time, however, and should probably all step it up, a la Christie. It should be said that Bush’s SuperPac, Right to Rise, has been running expensive and vigorous ad campaigns against Rubio and anyone else perceived as standing between Bush and the voters he wants —but who so far haven’t wanted him.

The Democrats

Now, this one’s a real doozy — a bona fide one-on-one contest between a crafty and experienced pragmatist, Hillary Clinton, and an inspiring ideologue…nay, a revolutionary, Bernie Sanders. There is little  JB

In give-and-take sessions, Hillary Clinton can be persuasive, even charming.

doubt that New Hampshire is Bernie’s, but real (if somewhat diminishing) doubt that the energies he has tapped are enough to be a concern to Hillary elsewhere as the primary season wears on.

The Democrats should really take heart that they have two candidates with significant followings, and that Thursday night’s debate between the two of them, beginning with such blazing dissonance, should have ended on a note of genuine mutual respect.

When I saw Bernie at a rally at Great Bay Community College at Portsmouth on Sunday, it was precisely what I expected — an overflow crowd not only composed of today’s youth (lots of them) but one significantly leavened by graying ex-hippies from another time.

Pundits keep comparing Vermont Senator Sanders to the charismatic Obama of 2008 or even, in his populist appeal, to Trump. But he is neither an inspiring New Thing like the former nor an exciting celebrity scofflaw like the latter. He is a bona fide revolutionary with 
JB

Bernie and friends at Portsmouth: This about says it.

a program that is authentically Socialist — free college, state-supported medical care for everybody, guaranteed living wage for all workers, sticking it to the too-big-to-fail corporations.

A program of reform that attacks economic inequality directly and isn’t, like so much liberalism of the present, siphoned off into purely social issues, a la what Marcuse called repressive desublimation. (Although Bernie endorses the social issues, too.)

Still, Hillary’s IOUs and a skill-set that shines through in extended give-and-take sessions like one I witnessed at New England College in Henniker are built for the long haul. We’ll see.

The Weather Factor

JB

Ted Cruz drew big in a blizzard. Here he’s either being stroked or being hectored. (Both things happen to him.)

Like Iowans, the residents of New Hampshire understand their importance in the quadrennial screening process for would-be American presidents — a task which culminates in mid-winter — and they are downright intrepid in dealing with the elements.

Take the massive turn-out for right-wing poster boy Cruz in Salem on Friday night — a moonless sub-freezing night with iced-over streets and several feet of freshly fallen snow for the town’s fleet of snowplows to contend against. Parking at this and all other events was hard to come by.

Monday is everybody’s last shot at making good here, and some of the Republicans may not go any further. More about that later. And, btw, this visit to the New Hampshire primary is my seventh rodeo (1992 was my first.) It never gets old.

Categories
Opinion The Last Word

New Year’s Revolution

CREDIT: Jhansen2 | Dreamstime.com

Jhansen2 | Dreamstime.com

The Bern

If Bernie Sanders can somehow win the Democratic nomination, and Donald Trump is chosen as the GOP presidentialApprentice reality show contestant, it will be interesting to see an election between a socialist and a fascist.

Of course, most voters don’t know the difference between a Social Democrat and a Marxist, but I give extra points to anyone who knows who Marx is, and I don’t mean Groucho. Since the term “socialism” is often associated with the Soviet Union, or those evil European countries where they just give away their health care like that, any candidate running under that label already has two strikes against them right away. Sort of like being born with a name like Barack Hussein Obama. Socialism means major industries are owned by the government rather than by corporations or individuals. Social Democrat means someone really liberal who may soon be the front-runner of a major political party that is scared guano-less to use that term.

Discerning readers know that the United States began using socialism as soon as they set up the Pony Express. All governmental functions used for the public good are socialistic, except for all that free stuff the Democrats give away at election time like Obamaphones and abortions.

I guess nothing’s ironic any longer, but on the Republican side, Marco Rubio is giving away calculators, and Jeb Bush is sending out to a “select universe of influencers, donors, and core supporters,” digital video players with a 15-minute film called, The Jeb Story. Actually, the slickly produced videos were shipped out by Bush’s Super-Pac, Right to Rise USA, which sounds more like a Cialis commercial than the name of a slush fund. But that’s not socialistic. That’s just tiny bribes to the billionaire seraphim of the GOP.

Every time I hear an update on the gangsta cowboy vigilantes up in Oregon, I’m reminded of socialism. These armed protectors of the Constitution and their nitwit anti-bird militia don’t like government? Cut the power, the water, and WiFi, so they can’t upload any more pleas for Mountain Dew, then block the access roads and wait for the next blizzard. They even have the gall to ask that snacks and underwear be sent through the U.S. mail. Let them sit there through February, and they’ll be begging for a little socialism.

Fascism is defined as an authoritarian, right-wing system of government, led by a despot, an autocracy, or a “strong man,” and characterized by racism, xenophobia, and ultra nationalism. Speaking of Donald Trump, he trotted out the Vampira of the tea party, Sarah Palin, to endorse his candidacy during a campaign rally. She gave a long, incoherent soliloquy that was so bizarre, it inspired Tina Fey to come back for an SNL encore.

After listening to 20 minutes of Palin’s brain droppings, Trump’s expression said, “Wrap that shit up, G,” but his mouth said, “She’s really a special person.” After the Vaudeville show concluded, Trump said he would “love” to put Palin in his cabinet if elected. That should disqualify him on the spot, but nothing slows the Trump Blitzkrieg — not even the shrieking witch from Wasilla. The unemployed, half-term governor is like herpes. It’s always there just under the surface, and just when you think it’s gone, it comes back with a vengeance. In this case, her vengeance was directed at the GOP “establishment” who mocked her last time around.

Trump then announced to another rabid mob that his minions were so loyal, “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose voters.” For a second, I thought this might be the equivalent of John Lennon’s “We’re more popular than Jesus” quote. It could have been worse. He might have said, “If Ivanka weren’t my daughter, perhaps I’d be dating her.”

I’m having a heart vs. head dilemma this election. I agree with most of Bernie Sanders’ positions, but I know in advance that he’ll be compared to Mao Zedong. I think Hillary is electable, but I’ve come down with a severe relapse of Clinton Fatigue. I knew it when she was slipping in the polls and brought out the Clinton attack machine. Even Chelsea was schlepped out of her new $10.4 million Manhattan apartment to tell lies about Sanders’ proposals and explain how he would be horrible for the working man. Suddenly, I remembered Bob Dylan’s lyrics, “What price do you have to pay to get out of going through all these things twice?”

I want my country back, too — the one promised by LBJ, Martin Luther King, and the Great Society. The country that once declared war on poverty instead of drugs. I want a country that passes legislation like the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, where voting is encouraged rather than suppressed. We’re just one election and two Supreme Court Justices away, and I’m beginning to “feel the Bern.” Call him whatever you want, Sanders would be the most revolutionary president since FDR. If you really wanted to shake up our broken political system, who better than an elderly, Jewish Socialist? You could do worse.

Categories
Opinion Viewpoint

Bern Unit

CREDIT: wsj.com

wsj.com

Because American voters are political ignoramuses, Senator Bernie Sanders found it necessary to take the stage at Georgetown University last month to explain what socialism and democratic socialism are. The point being that too many Democratic primary voters plan to cast their ballots for Hillary Clinton, not because they like her or her ideas, but worry that a self-declared socialist (or democratic socialist) won’t be able to beat the Republican nominee in the general election.

I have to wonder whether an electorate that knows nothing about socialism is qualified to vote at all. And remember: These are Democratic primary voters. One shivers in fear at the colossal dumbness on the Republican right, where climate-change denialism is normative, Ronald Reagan was brilliant, and Tea Party marchers carry signs demanding “government get out of my Medicaid.”

Socialism, Marx and Engels explained, is the transitional economic system between laissez-faire capitalism and communism. Communism being an ideal utopian state that will only become possible after the rise of a New Man (and Woman) whose total commitment to communitarian ideals over individualistic concerns allows the state to wither away and people to rule themselves in small collectives. This true ideal communism, Marxists believe, is centuries away at best.

In contemporary politics, Communist Party rule in nations like the Soviet Union and China led to confusion, especially in the West. Neither the Soviet nor the Chinese Communist Parties ever claimed to have achieved true communism. These communist parties govern self-declared socialist states, not communist ones. It was, after all, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

When Sanders calls himself a socialist, he’s drawing upon a tradition of Western European electoral politics in which socialist principles live alongside free-market capitalist ones. For Sanders and the hundreds of millions of citizens of the nations of Europe and their post-colonial progeny (Canada, Australia, many African countries), democratic socialism is a system that looks a lot like the United States of America.

In the ur-democratic socialist nations of Norway, Denmark, and Sweden, citizens’ elected representatives propose and vote on laws — just like here.

There is no state economy. There are, as in the U.S., small private businesses and giant corporations. 

So what makes them socialist? Government regulations and the social safety net. Government agencies tell power companies, for example, how much they may pollute the air and set the minimum wage. There is, as in all capitalist societies, poverty. But the government mitigates its effects with welfare and unemployment benefits. Social security for retirees and free or subsidized health care make things easier when times are tough.

The United States is a democratic socialist country, albeit a lame one. Senator Sanders wants less lameness.

The New York Times summarized Sanders’ speech: “He wanted an America where people could work 40 hours a week and not live in poverty, and that such a society would require new government entitlements like free public colleges, Medicare-for-all health insurance, a $15 minimum wage, $1 trillion in public works projects to create jobs, and mandatory [paid] parental leave.”

These benefits are standard in almost every other technologically advanced nation on earth, as well as many developing countries. Democratic socialism? It’s like that old dishwashing liquid ad: You’re soaking in it.

As far as I know, Sanders hasn’t emphasized the quality of public education in his campaign. But something is, no pun intended, radically wrong when so few Americans understand basic political and economic terms — especially when they apply to the political and economic system under which they themselves live.

By global standards, Sanders’ campaign is calling for weak socialist tea. In most European countries, all colleges are free or charge nominal fees. Socialized medicine, in which your doctor is a government employee and there’s no such thing as a big for-profit hospital corporation, is the international norm. Paid leave? Obviously. And most governments recognize the importance of public infrastructure, and not relying on the private sector to provide every job.

There can only be one reason Americans don’t know this stuff: They’re idiots. Their schools made them that way as kids. Media propaganda keeps them that way as adults.

Categories
Opinion Viewpoint

The Buck Passes on Obama’s Economy

Senator Bernie Sanders

In the GOP primary race, the economy is the dog that has not barked. Given low unemployment, low gas prices, and low inflation, it is easy to understand the GOP’s silence. The current unemployment rate is 5.1 percent, the lowest since April 2008.

Under President Obama’s stewardship, the economy has added over 7 million private sector jobs. The Dow Jones has more than doubled, and the NASDAQ has more than tripled. The president has exceeded every promise for speedy economic recovery made by his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, in the 2012 campaign.

But now Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders is drawing crowds with harsh indictments of the American economic system as unfair to the poor, the working class, and the middle class. Sanders recently described the nation as having a “rigged economy, designed by the wealthiest people in this country to benefit the wealthiest people in this country at the expense of everybody else.”

His criticism echoes that of Senator Elizabeth Warren who has blasted erstwhile Obama economic officials such as Larry Summers and Tim Geithner for being too cozy with the Wall Street banks they were supposed to be regulating.

Unions have for decades been suffering from declining membership and declining leverage at the bargaining table. That was before the president beat them and their Democratic supporters in Congress on the trade deal in question, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). He stood with the Chamber of Commerce and the GOP majority in Congress to win approval for fast-track authority pertaining to TPP.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Sanders, and other top Democrats give Obama credit for leading the nation’s steady economic growth after the 2008 recession. But, as with the unions, their current focus is on income inequality and stagnant wages.

“The defining economic challenge of our time is clear,” Clinton, the Democratic front-runner, said in July. “We must raise incomes for hard-working Americans so they can afford a middle-class life.”

The president, however, prefers to emphasize how the nation has recovered from an extraordinarily deep recession, pointing out the errors of his past Republican critics. In a recent speech to the Business Roundtable, the president focused on those Republican criticisms, not the new carping from Democrats.

‘”Seven years ago today was one of the worst days in the history of our economy,” he said, going on to note that in September 2008 “stocks had suffered their worst loss since 9/11, businesses would go bankrupt, millions of Americans would lose their jobs and their homes, and our economy would reach the brink of collapse.”

Obama then offered a contrasting picture of the current economy:

“Here’s where we are today,” the president said. “Businesses have created more than 13 million new jobs over the past 66 months — the longest streak of job growth on record. The unemployment rate is lower than it’s been in over seven years. There are more job openings right now than at any time in our history. Housing has bounced back. Household wealth is higher than it was before the recession.”

Obama’s victory lap might also include a mention that this year’s Republican candidates have no answer for income inequality. In fact, with the exception of Donald Trump, the current Republican candidates consistently call for tax cuts for the rich that would worsen inequality by widening the wealth gap.

These are facts. They are powerful ammunition for any Democrat who wants to run on the strength of the Obama economic record in 2016. But as debates begin next month among the Democrats, you can expect that consultants will be advising the candidates that they need to distance themselves from Obama because of stagnant wages and income inequality.

In light of the actual economic facts, perhaps a winning message for Democrats would be to promise to continue and improve on the president’s record by dealing with stagnant wages as they seek “Obama’s third term.” Yet, even among Democratic candidates, that seems to be too much to ask.

My advice for President Obama? Just bite your tongue, and let it go. A fair reading of history will show the economy came back to life on your watch.

Juan Williams is an author and political analyst for Fox News Channel.