Showing posts with label Presidential Debates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Presidential Debates. Show all posts

Sunday, January 19, 2020

The Progressive Divide: Warren Vs. Sanders


LONG & WINDING ROAD TO THE WHITE HOUSE




THE NOTORIOUS PROGRESSIVE DIVIDE

By Jack Random



On January 14 of the new year 2020 six candidates took the stage in the last Democratic presidential debate before the Iowa caucus.  In the absence of Andrew Yang, it was the first all-white debate.  It seems the African American vote has gone all in for Joe Biden. 

Objectively, neither I nor anyone else will ever fully understand why black voters overwhelmingly prefer Biden over Cory Booker or Kamala Harris but the margins leave no doubt.  If Biden prevails and becomes the Democratic nominee he will owe it all to former President Barack Obama. 

For me the most poignant moment in an evening only slightly more entertaining than a constant drone was when moderator Abby Phillip of CNN pointedly asked of former Mayor Pete Buttigieg:  Is it possible that black voters have gotten to know you and have simply decided to choose another candidate?

It was clear from the mayor’s expression he was stung by the question.  It rang true despite the candidate’s claims that blacks in his town support him.  It did not help his cause that Ms. Phillip is a black woman.  The mayor was stung again later in the debate by the same moderator who noted that his healthcare plan would automatically enroll individuals who do not want insurance. 

Buttigieg is a master of the old debate ploy used to avoid any answers that might not serve his interest:  deflect and pivot.  After witnessing the practice a few dozen times it becomes obvious even to his most ardent supporters. 

Mayor Pete’s performance was flat in keeping with a presumed non-aggression pact among the moderates.  He is competing with Biden and Amy Klobuchar but all three refused to engage.  It is in a sense understandable with Buttigieg.  He is counting on Biden to stumble.  It is not understandable with Klobuchar.  She sits in a distant third and desperately needed to pick up ground before the impeachment trial took her and her fellow senators off the campaign trail. 

With Biden the bar has been set so low he could take third place in a second grade speech contest and the press would call it a triumph.  I understand that the senator overcame stuttering as a child.  I get that his age is catching up to him.  But we should never elect a president out of sympathy. 

The fireworks of the night belonged to the progressive candidates:  Senator Elizabeth Warren vs. Senator Bernie Sanders.  Until recently it was considered logical for these two to eventually unite their followers against a decidedly more moderate field.  Warren and Sanders stand for universal healthcare in the form of Medicare for All.  They are both antiwar and believe that military spending should be substantially cut to make way for progressive programs and a Green New Deal.  Both are solid supporters of taxing the elite to improve the lives of common citizens.  Both are pro labor and believers in Fair Trade.  While there are differences in policy and emphasis, their commonalities are far greater than what separates them. 

In what should have been a non-issue, one largely contrived by CNN, the two senators engaged on whether or not Sanders told Warren that a woman could not win the presidency in a conversation that took place in 2018.  Warren said he did.  Sanders said he did not.  Since it was a private conversation we can presume it was not meant for public consumption.  That Warren made it so is questionable in itself.  She persisted to the point of confronting Sanders on stage after the debated ended.  Refusing to shake his hand she said:  “I think you called me a liar on national TV.” 

When it was picked up by a hot mike and broadcast on CNN it became clear Warren wanted a confrontation.  Both Sanders and Warren being honorable individuals, one would have assumed the incident was a misunderstanding.  It is not beyond question that a 76 year-old man and a 68 year-old woman might misinterpret a remark. 

Now it has become a critical issue dividing the progressive front of the Democratic Party.  Now it becomes an issue that could damage both candidates and open the door to yet another Democratic compromise, probably in the form of old Joe Biden, that will likely lose the White House.  From a progressive point of view that would be a disaster. 

Those who have observed electoral politics over time recognize a pattern.  The guardians of the left are notorious for attacking their own. 

Sanders’ supporters are certainly intense.  In their zeal to boost their candidate they played the cards they had.  They argued what many think but rarely express:  That a woman would be less likely to win against Trump.  I don’t believe that.  Maybe they don’t believe it either.  Hillary Clinton lost not because she was a woman but because she was weak on trade policy, because she came with a ton of political baggage and because her weaknesses played to Trump’s electoral college favor. 

Elizabeth Warren has made a stand and in so doing she has forced us to do the same.  We can stand with Warren or we can stand with Bernie.  We can no longer hold out for one or the other to win the progressive mantle. 

As one who has defended Warren against what I considered unreasonable attacks, I can no longer stand by her.  Bernie’s been with us far too long to believe now that he is anything less than honorable.  Bernie was quick to call a coup a coup in Bolivia.  Warren floundered.  Bernie took the lead in condemning the unwarranted and ill-advised assassination of Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani.  Warren wasted time taking the standard mainstream line condemning the victim.  That she eventually found her way to Bernie’s reasoned opposition is commendable but Bernie was already there. 

Strange there was so little discussion of Soleimani’s assassination.  Strange there was no mention of the events in Bolivia or subsequent events in Venezuela.  On matters of foreign policy, military spending and congressional authorization to engage war in foreign lands, Bernie was clearly the best informed and the most principled. 

Warren slips to a distant second on my list of progressive preference.  She needs to back off her attack on Bernie.  Unfortunately, it does not appear that she will. 

It occurred to me in observing this debate that there was very little to engage the curious or challenge the public mind.  Tom Steyer, the newcomer to presidential debates, repeatedly looked into the camera and delivered his prepared appeal.  It did little to persuade.  Steyer may be a good man.  He may have the nation’s best interest at heart.  But he has offered no compelling reason to believe that he is the man to lead the nation in a new direction.  Others can take the lead on climate change and no one believes that term limits is the solution to our problems. 

At least billionaire Mike Bloomberg has held public office.  Neither Steyer nor Bloomberg has managed to make the case that there is anything greater than personal ambition behind their candidacies.  There are far better ways to spend their money and there are far better candidates for their causes.

We have moved on.  The preliminary debates are over.  The senators have been called back to Washington to serve as jurors in the trial of the president.  The strange ritual of the Iowa caucus begins in a few short weeks on February 3rd.  After that: New Hampshire February 11th. 

Then the schedule slips into overdrive.  On February 22nd Nevada will introduce racial minorities, including a significant Hispanic community, into the race.  On February 29th South Carolina will introduce African Americans. 

The whole contest should pretty much be decided by March 3rd when California votes along with thirteen other states.  Past that date there will be no pretenders. 

At this juncture, the most likely scenario is that Joe Biden wins the nomination and loses the White House.  I don’t like it but there it is.  On the other hand, anything can happen. 

Jazz. 

Jack Random is the author of the Jazzman Chronicles and Hard Times: The Wrath of an Angry God. 

Saturday, June 29, 2019

1ST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES: KAMALA RISING!

JAZZMAN CHRONICLES:  DEFEATING TRUMP.


A LONG AND WINDING ROAD TO THE WHITE HOUSE

FIRST ROUND PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES

Kamala Rising!

By Jack Random


It is often said that presidential debates are not as important as the hype would have them; that a debate at the end of June has no bearing on the end result.  To some extent that may be true but it is also true that candidates are made or broken by the early debates.  It is also true that no other single event has greater significance than a candidate’s first appearance on the presidential debate stage. 

Readers may remember when Rick Perry, then governor of Texas, took himself out of presidential contention by calling for the abolition of three federal agencies but could only recall two of them.  Oops.  In one of the most ironic and revealing moves of the Trump presidency, Perry now serves at the helm of that forgotten agency:  the Department of Energy. 

The pitfalls are many, the rewards are great and the one who prevails will rise to become leader of the free world. 

NIGHT ONE:  WARREN HOLDS FIRM

THE CANDIDATES:  BILL DE BLASIO, TIM RYAN, JULIAN CASTRO, CORY BOOKER, ELIZABETH WARREN, BETO O’ROURKE, AMY KLOBUCHAR, TULSI GABBARD, JAY INSLEE, JOHN DELANEY. 

The first debate in the current season did not produce a Rick Perry moment but they absolutely revealed a great deal about the candidates on stage.  Senator Elizabeth Warren secured her place as a policy guru.  Senator Cory Booker, former Representative Beto O’Rourke and former HUD Secretary Julian Castro competed in the category of Best Foreign Language.  Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii held her ground as the conscience of a party that seems to have forgotten the critical lessons of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Bill de Blasio inserted himself into issues without seeming to play the bully.  Despite a few one-liners Senator Amy Klobuchar failed to capture the kind of attention she needed to gain ground in the polls.  The same holds true for the Green Governor Jay Inslee who seemed determined to emphasize his knowledge outside of protecting the planet. 

To the extent that anyone won the first night of the first round of debates it was Julian Castro.  He pushed hard on immigration and made Beto O’Rourke appear uninformed.  He also won the Spanish speaking debate by virtue of the fact that he is Hispanic. 

Congressman Tim Ryan of Ohio reminded us why Senator Sherrod Brown should be on stage when he talked about the Democrats needing to be the party of the working people.  He lost us when he argued for a continued presence in Afghanistan.  His gaff led to a shining moment by Representative Gabbard who had to remind him that the longest standing war in American history is an absolute disaster.  She had to remind him that the Taliban was not responsible for the 9-11 attack.  Al Qaeda was.  Had she more time she might have reminded the uninformed congressman that the Taliban offered to hand over the Al Qaeda suspects to an impartial tribunal but the Bush administration refused. 

Tulsi Gabbard stood alone through this exchange and that should worry all of us who spent more than a decade fighting the disastrous and ill-conceived wars in the Middle East.  At a time when President Trump is threatening war with Iran every candidate on stage should have rallied to Gabbard’s side instead of remaining politely silently.  Hopefully the candidates who emerge from this process will find their antiwar voices.  If not they will find a great many potential supporters peeling away from the Democratic Party. 

It was patently unfair of the moderators to ask Gabbard to defend her already retracted position on LGBTQ rights.  She has a stronger record on these civil rights issues than Cory Booker who strangely attacked her for not including transsexuals in her response.  She was not asked about transsexuals and Booker should know better.  Too often he seems a voice in search of a cause. 

Nearly every candidate on the stage Wednesday night demonstrated why he or she needed to be there.  Elizabeth Warren is clearly the most knowledgeable candidate not only on economic issues but on all issues.  She is the leading female contender representing the progressive wing of the party.  Castro is the only Hispanic candidate and the strongest voice on immigration.  De Blasio is an uncompromised liberal with nothing to lose.  Inslee is the Green candidate.  Beto has staked ground as the viable alternative to Inslee as the Green candidate and the man who might stand a chance in Texas.  Booker is a powerful voice on criminal justice.  Klobuchar is the reasoned moderate who knows how to talk to Republicans.  Gabbard is a veteran of the Iraq War and the strongest voice against going to war again. 

That leaves only two:  Congressman Tim Ryan and former Congressman John Delaney.  The former distinguished himself as not ready for prime time on foreign policy and the latter wins the Dead Man award (1) as a man who speaks a lot, says nothing.  Delaney interrupted at every opportunity and consistently failed to deliver poignant remarks. 

At this juncture, Ryan and Delaney are out.  Because Beto stumbled, Inslee remains alive but should stick to climate change as much as humanly possible.  De Blasio stays where he was: hanging on by a thread.  Klobuchar and Booker get a pass but they still need to distinguish themselves from the field.  Warren holds strong.  Castro and Gabbard rise in the hearts and minds of their respective constituencies. 

NIGHT TWO: KAMALA RISING

THE CANDIDATES:  MARIANNE WILLIAMSON, JOHN HICKENLOOPER, ANDREW YANG, PETE BUTTIGIEG, JOE BIDEN, BERNIE SANDERS, KAMALA HARRIS, KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, MICHAEL BENNET AND ERIC SWALWELL

We all want to be charitable.  It is kind to say that former Vice President and frontrunner Joe Biden could not keep up with the competition.  He began his performance with checklist answers delivered at a rapid clip and eventually broke down into a semi-incoherent ramble. 

As the only African American on the stage, Senator Kamala Harris took aim at old Joe’s rationale for working with the Old South’s segregationists and his stern opposition to bussing as a remedy to segregation.  He could not have known that one of the dark skinned children who benefited from bussing was Kamala Harris.  Harris took him down softly but he is unlikely to regain his unbeatable status.          

The rest of the field offered interesting insights and solid rationales for their candidacies but none made a move that will register in next week’s polls.  Bernie was Bernie and I love him for it but he has not evolved and others have caught up to him. 

Marianne Williamson is unlikely to sustain her place among legitimate candidates but we should be grateful for her insight into how the Democrats will beat Donald Trump.  Essentially, Trump operates out of fear and his opposition must counter with love.  It is an oversimplification but there is fundamental truth in it.  The Republicans have long been perceived as the Daddy party and the Democrats are the Mommy party.  Poor old dad has been doing a bum job lately.  It’s time to give mom a try. 

Mayor Pete distinguished himself once again for his sharp mind and speaking ability.  His response to criticism regarding the racial makeup of his police department was however inadequate.  He said simply:  “I didn’t get the job done.”  The mayor needs to take care of business in his own back yard before he moves on to the highest office in the land. 

Andrew Yang demonstrated he is a man of substance.  He deserves a place in the next government and his ideas warrant serious consideration. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand staked ground as the candidate representing women’s issues.  She was forceful, knowledgeable and well spoken.  Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper has assumed the role of attacking Bernie for not cowering when confronted with the dreaded “S” word.  It may do a little damage to Bernie but it will not carry Hickenlooper to the next tier.  Colorado Senator Michael Bennet appeared to be a nice man and a solid Democrat who simply does not have the charisma to advance to the White House.  Representative Eric Swalwell laid claim to represent the next generation, goading old Joe to hand over the torch but he pushed too hard like a rambunctious teenager.  His issue of gun control will stick but he must wait for a better opportunity to advance. 

In the end the only candidate to significantly advance her cause is the junior senator from the state of California.  She has learned on the trail.  She connects.  She has proven to be a determined opponent and Joe Biden felt the sting of her jab.  She broke through the cacophony of white noise while the others drifted. 

Kamala rises.  Now she must sustain her momentum. 

Jazz.

1.  The character Nobody in the 1995 film Dead Man, directed by Jim Jarmusch and starring Johnny Depp. Music by Neil Young. 

JACK RANDOM IS THE AUTHOR OF THE JAZZMAN CHRONICLES AND THE FOUNDER OF CROW DOG PRESS. HIS COMMENTARIES HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED AT DISSIDENT VOICE AND COUNTERPUNCH.