And They're Off! The Democratic Candidates for 2020

[Florestan]

Extra point if you recognize the literary quote.

Robert Browning.

[ritter]

Extra point if you recognize the literary quote.

Aldous Huxley.

[SimonNZ]

I had to Google it. Despite having read quite a bit of Huxley in my 20s I've still never read Brave New World.

[Florestan]

Aldous Huxley.

I had to Google it. Despite having read quite a bit of Huxley in my 20s I've still never read Brave New World.

It's a paraphrase on a line from Robert Browning's Pippa Passes: God's in his Heaven, all's right with the world.

[JBS]

I had to Google it. Despite having read quite a bit of Huxley in my 20s I've still never read Brave New World.

I am not sure if it stands being read more than once, but it's the sort of book that deserves reading at least once. I actually haven't read much of what Aldous wrote. His grandfather actually had a much more prominent place in my high school curriculum.

[drogulus]

Last night I watched and enjoyed a film called "Hell and High Water", starring Jeff Bridges (he grows increasingly annoying, though).  It was set in Texas and empty towns everything had closed and people lived in poverty.  It struck me that this is and was Trump Heartland.  The bien pensant from Washington and the eastern and western seaboards couldn't care one iota about those people.

     That is a very widespread viewpoint from Trump Heartland, that Blue Zone people should care about their misery more than the politicians Heartlanders elect do. From my own experience of Red wasteland country, people there care very much about how ignored they are. They do feel left behind, looked down on and so forth.

     The economy is heading the same way under Trump as it did under Obama, with the Blue zones increasing their lead over much of Trump Heartland. For entirely practical reasons I think the Blues should learn to care more effectively about Red prosperity than the Reds can about themselves, given their resentment based outlook. As for how Blues feel about Heartland people, it shouldn't matter any more than it matters how Heartland people feel about Blues.


     

[71 dB]

Corporate media is finally acknowedging that Bernie Sanders can win this election. It only took them a year or so. 

[Karl Henning]

Corporate media is finally acknowedging that Bernie Sanders can win this election. It only took them a year or so. 

Merry Christmas!

[Karl Henning]

So now, if I still believe that Bernie has about the same chance as a snowball in hell, you can acknowledge that I'm not "brainwashing by the corporate media."

[SimonNZ]

Corporate media is finally acknowedging that Bernie Sanders can win this election. It only took them a year or so. 

Have you noted a change in reporting in a variety of sources? If so, which?

Or are you repeating something Kyle said and taking it as gospel?

[71 dB]

Have you noted a change in reporting in a variety of sources? If so, which?

Or are you repeating something Kyle said and taking it as gospel?

MSNBC.

https://www.youtube.com/v/T0eVZkK9lzI

Why do you think Kyle (and other progressives for that matter) says these things?

So now, if I still believe that Bernie has about the same chance as a snowball in hell, you can acknowledge that I'm not "brainwashing by the corporate media."

You can think whatever you want, but how do you justify your opinion? Why does Bernie have about the same chance as a snowball in hell? Is it just your feeling or do you have facts to support the claim? Because he has polled consistently high and is currently number 2 nationally? Does that mean only Biden has a change?

[JBS]

1) MSNBC is the most leftward of the major networks.
2) As far as my viewing of the "corporate" media shows any trend, they have always treated Bernie as a serious candidate, and continue to give him the same treatment now.

[71 dB]

1) MSNBC is the most leftward of the major networks.
2) As far as my viewing of the "corporate" media shows any trend, they have always treated Bernie as a serious candidate, and continue to give him the same treatment now.

1) Yep and even they hate Bernie because they are centrists*, far from real left. That's where the Overton Window is --- very right.
2) How positive is the treatment in your opinion? They have been "ignoring" Bernie a lot, but now even they have to admit Bernie is a strong candidate.

* On the left on social issue, but on the center/right on economic issues.

[JBS]

1) Yep and even they hate Bernie because they are centrists*, far from real left. That's where the Overton Window is --- very right.
2) How positive is the treatment in your opinion? They have been "ignoring" Bernie a lot, but now even they have to admit Bernie is a strong candidate.

* On the left on social issue, but on the center/right on economic issues.

They have always treated him as a serious candidate with a solid basis of support.

The rest is useless to discuss with you, given your fantasy that an oligarchic controlled media brainwashes the public into centrism.

[71 dB]

They have always treated him as a serious candidate with a solid basis of support.

Joke of the year... ...this is like saying Trump loves windmills.

The rest is useless to discuss with you, given your fantasy that an oligarchic controlled media brainwashes the public into centrism.

So if the media doesn't brainwash the public into centrism then why in the hell are they against medicare for all? Why in the hell are they for wars? Why do they resist Trump from the right?

[JBS]

Joke of the year... ...this is like saying Trump loves windmills.

If the sources you rely on paint a different picture, then you have yet another instance of how unreliable and inaccurate they are.

So if the media doesn't brainwash the public into centrism then why in the hell are they against medicare for all? Why in the hell are they for wars? Why do they resist Trump from the right?

There are several different things in that paragraph that need separate answers.
1) They are against Medicare for All because Medicare for All, to the extent it implies a single payer system,  is a bad idea.  Medicare for Seniors is a program that doesn't work very well unless you're not sick, and which requires private insurance to cover all the important things, and whose prime achievement is the creation of a large bureaucracy that presides over a system where it is easy to commit fraud to get government money.  There is a large number of people who don't have insurance, and obviously for them any system is better than their current situation.  But for everyone, the vast majority of Americans, switching to such a system would result in a situation where they would be at best no better off, and often worse off.   And they will probably end up paying more for the results, either directly through payments or indirectly through taxes.   Why would anyone support  something that will probably end up leaving them in a worse situation than before?

But in general the reason that the media doesn't brainwash the public into centrism is that for the most part the public started off as centrist.   You don't convert people into something they already are.

2) Most everyone, except the obvious neo-cons,  are actually anti war.   The start of the Iraq War was essentially a blip caused by the aftereffects of 9/11.   That's why any military endeavors since then have to be justified as temporary or not really a military intervention.  And the case for not withdrawing from the place we are now is always a negative one, meaning that the consequences of withdrawal would be worse than the consequences of staying.

3)The conservative never Trump movement is relatively small, and the only thing it shares with the Left is its disgust for Trump and his minions.  They get a lot of airtime because the media gets to claim it is presenting nonLeftist  criticism of Trump.    But the actual American Right is now solidly behind Trump, and the neverTrumpists have little influence.

[71 dB]

CNN's Moment Of Clarity: "Bernie Has A Realistic Shot"

https://www.youtube.com/v/TO2TKCLDuZs

[71 dB]

1) They are against Medicare for All because Medicare for All, to the extent it implies a single payer system,  is a bad idea.  Medicare for Seniors is a program that doesn't work very well unless you're not sick, and which requires private insurance to cover all the important things, and whose prime achievement is the creation of a large bureaucracy that presides over a system where it is easy to commit fraud to get government money.  There is a large number of people who don't have insurance, and obviously for them any system is better than their current situation.  But for everyone, the vast majority of Americans, switching to such a system would result in a situation where they would be at best no better off, and often worse off.   And they will probably end up paying more for the results, either directly through payments or indirectly through taxes.   Why would anyone support  something that will probably end up leaving them in a worse situation than before?

Empirical evidence shows medicare for all is a brilliant idea. Everyone is covered, costs are lower. No medical bankruptcies. No people avoiding doctors. More choice because you can see ANY doctor, not only those in the network. Do you really want to remain an ignoramus? Jesus!

Medicare for all is build on medicare program, but it is MUCH better. It is actually financed properly and includes dental, hearing and vision. Do you really want to remain an ignoramus? Jesus!

[JBS]

Empirical evidence shows medicare for all is a brilliant idea. Everyone is covered, costs are lower. No medical bankruptcies. No people avoiding doctors. Do you really want to remain an ignoramus? Jesus!

Medicare for all is build on medicare program, but it is MUCH better. It is actually financed properly and includes dental, hearing and vision. Do you really want to remain an ignoramus? Jesus!

You are mistaking promises for facts.

[71 dB]

You are mistaking promises for facts.

Those promises are reality elsewhere in the world. They are not reality in the US because of corruption and oligarchy. When do you wake up? Never?