Wednesday, June 05, 2019

Road to the White House: Part Three: The Contenders

JAZZMAN CHRONICLES:  DEFEATING TRUMP. 



A LONG & WINDING ROAD TO THE WHITE HOUSE

A Presidential Election Analysis from Pretenders to Contenders

Part Three:  The Contenders

By Jack Random


In part one of A Long & Winding Road I submitted an analysis of seven pretenders in the race to capture the Democratic nomination for the presidency.  In part two I provided an objective assessment of ten decided underdogs, including one mayor, three governors, one former cabinet member, one former congressman and four current members of the House of Representatives. 

While each of these candidates has a reasonable rationale for running, not one has a reasonable chance of grabbing the top rung.  Most of them will claim a spot on the debate stage in the early going and some certainly have a chance to gain the second spot on the Democratic ticket. 

We have now arrived at the top tier of candidates, the heavyweights, the genuine contenders for the nomination.  It has been said that every member of the United States Senate believes that he or she should be president.  After decades of observation I see no exception to that rule.  Moreover, by definition, every US Senator is qualified for the ascent to the Oval Office, including those who may appear to us as dimwitted fools with their eyes on the brass ring and their hands in the cookie jar.  Fortunately, none in this analysis falls in that category. 

TIER THREE:  THE CONTENDERS

SENATOR ELIZABETH WARREN

“Our country is in a crisis.  The time for small ideas is over.”  [1]

We have entered the twilight zone in the political season where the pitfalls are many and varied.  Some are as absurd as they are deadly.  Trump buried half the field in the 2016 Republican primary with scandalous labels like Lying Ted and Little Marco and Low Energy Jeb.  He was quick to pick up the Pocahontas label and paste it to Elizabeth Warren’s forehead.  She’s as sincere a politician as there is but she’s having a problem with it.  Her family clearly passed down a false rumor that their genetic line included a significant portion of Cherokee blood.  Modern genetic testing revealed that it was an “alternative” fact. 

The honorable Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts is white.  She has very little native blood.  Why is that significant?  It isn’t.  Many families have wrongly claimed native blood based on family legend.  The Cherokees famously intermarried with Scottish immigrants.  In fact, one of their most famous chiefs was John Ross, the son of a Scottish father and a Cherokee mother.  He led the Cherokees during the tragic period of the Trail of Tears.  Our current president has chosen to vilify the Cherokee while embracing Andrew Jackson, the American president who defied the Supreme Court by ordering the relocation of the Cherokee from eastern Tennessee to modern day Oklahoma.  Jackson committed an act of genocide against a people he befriended as a young man.  Few should doubt that Trump would do the same with immigrants from below the border if he were empowered. 

The president has made it clear he sides with Hollywood cowboys and Indian killers like Custer and Colonel John Chivington.  He’s made it more than clear he doesn’t like anyone with skin color lighter than the circles of white surrounding his beady eyes.  Maybe Elizabeth Warren should give him an Indian name:  Wasichu – the Lakota word for greedy whites – comes to mind.  Or maybe White Eyes will do. 

Senator Warren is fundamentally sound on every significant issue and a true believer when it comes to economic justice.  She has a solid proposal for everything under the sun, including cancellation of student debt, universal healthcare, a Green New Deal and a wealth tax to pay for it.  She has a plan to bring down the cost of housing.  She’s as knowledgeable as a Jeopardy champion and as sharp as a razor. 

I must say her age gives me pause.  She will be seventy on the 22nd of June.  I generally scoff at the notion that someone is a “young seventy” but in her case I believe it.  She has as much energy as Draymond Green in the closing minutes of a championship game.  If anyone can hang on to her mental acuity through her mid-seventies it’s her. 

Aside:  For those who say that considering age a factor in choosing a candidate is “ageism” and comparable to other forms of discrimination, I beg to differ.  Unlike race, sex or sexual identity, old age comes to all who are fortunate enough to survive.  The effects of age vary but they often include lapses in memory and cognitive weakness.  President Ronald Reagan suffered from Alzheimer’s in his second term.  It’s an issue. 

SENATOR KAMALA HARRIS

“We need to begin impeachment proceedings.”  [1]

Kamala Harris of California must put up with the same crap Obama had to endure:  Is she black enough?  Or is she black at all?  It turns out her racial mix is Asian Indian and Jamaican but I really don’t care.  For her entire life she has been perceived as a person of color.  Now she has to be black enough?  No.  Because no white person must answer an equivalent question, the question itself is racist.  The question of race is important, however, because the road to the nomination rolls through the South.  Obama was the first to recognize and exploit the advantage of being black in the Democratic Party.  If Harris is not recognized as “black enough” she will yield that advantage to Senator Cory Booker. 

Harris also has an advantage in an earlier California primary.  While the nation’s most populous state has traditionally been rendered irrelevant in presidential primary politics, it’s rescheduling from June to March is critical to the junior California’s senator’s chances. 

Harris does have some explaining to do.  As San Francisco’s district attorney and California’s attorney general she is accused of failing to embrace criminal justice reform.  She was also accused of suppressing a story regarding a lab technician who fabricated evidence and repeatedly stole drugs from her lab.  Six hundred cases were dismissed and a judge found fault with the district attorney’s conduct.  As attorney general she tried to overturn a federal judge’s decision that the death penalty was unconstitutional.  In 2015 she opposed a bill requiring her office to investigate police officer shootings and she refused to support state regulations requiring officers to wear body cameras.  Finally, Harris defended a number of wrongful conviction cases that might have had merit. 

Harris is at her best questioning witnesses before the Senate Judiciary committee.  Her questioning of US attorney general William Barr pierced his armor of self-righteous circumlocution.  She is at her worst defending her record in law enforcement.  She has without doubt moved to the left in her pursuit of higher office. 

SENATOR CORY BOOKER

“This election cannot be about what we’re against.  It must be about what we’re for.”  [1]

Senator Booker of New Jersey seems to be taking a curious tack in the early going.  Like Obama he is pleading for one America and applying to become the Great Uniter.  It looks like an attempt to capture the moderate vote despite taking progressive positions on healthcare (supports Medicare for All – at least in principle) and the Green New Deal.  He is a champion of criminal justice reform and falls on the progressive side of social issues.  As time presses forward all the candidates must favor impeachment.  Booker has not taken the lead on the issue. 

Here’s where the rubber hits the road:  He supports Israel to the detriment of the Palestinians, his position on trade policy is muddled and his foreign policy is no clearer.  Would we remain in Iraq-Syria-Afghanistan under a Booker presidency?  Would we embrace Fair Trade?  Would we unconditionally support Israel as we currently do or would we attempt to be a fair and neutral arbiter? 

Booker has taken a lot of money from the pharmaceutical industry and voted against a bill to allow the purchase of Canadian drugs.  He will have to make amends in triplicate to qualify for a progressive vote.  At this writing, he is rapidly slipping into underdog territory.  He will have to make an impact during the early debates and if he believes appealing to the middle ground will do it he is mistaken. 

SENATOR AMY KLOBUCHAR

“I don’t have money but I have grit.”  [1]

Senator Amy Klobuchar of the northern exposure state of Minnesota has also planted her stake on moderate territory.  She is from the state where a major bridge over the Mississippi River collapsed in 2007.  Accordingly, she is the first and perhaps the only candidate to propose infrastructure as her top budget priority.  Well known for her Midwest pragmatism she advocates an incremental approach to universal healthcare.  She proposes policies to help farmers and rural communities.  She wants to ensure that the Environmental Protection Agency is on the side of the environment.  She proposes a $100 billion dollar plan for mental health treatment with a large portion of that money coming from drug companies for their culpability in the opioid addiction crisis. 

All of her proposals fall safely on moderate ground.  While she does back the Green New Deal voters will have to wonder how much time and resources, political and otherwise, will be left after her infrastructure initiative.  She pointedly does not support Medicare for All or extending free public education from preschool to university. 

Like most Minnesotans Klobuchar is exceptionally nice, humorous and witty.  I don’t believe those nasty reports of her being mean to her staff.  If you can’t get along with Amy Klobuchar you can’t get along with anyone.  The question is:  Is this the year of the moderate?  So far the answer seems to be:  No. 

SENATOR KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND

“Our president is a coward.”  [1]

Senator Gillibrand of New York succeeded Hillary Clinton in that position.  She was supposed to be a Clinton loyalist.  Imagine the shock in the Clinton household when Gillibrand emerged as the spokesperson for the Me Too movement and promptly threw Bill Clinton under the bus along with the suddenly dishonored senator from Minnesota and former Saturday Night Live cast member Al Franken.  Those who consider themselves left of the political divide may have differing opinions on the relative merits of Franken’s dismissal from public life but the lightning speed with which she tossed him aside was dizzying.  Franken fans, including those who support the Me Too movement, may not be so quick to forgive her.  It seemed just a little too opportunistic. 

Gillibrand is relative young at age 52 and her voting record in opposing the Trump administration is the strongest of any US senator.  She votes against the president on 88 percent of votes cast.  Sexual assault and women’s rights are her trademark issues.  She co-sponsored Medicare for All legislation and supports the Green New Deal.  It seems everyone but Nancy Pelosi is now on board with the GND.  She is against Citizens United.  Who isn’t?  She wants public financing of elections.  Who doesn’t?  She supports comprehensive immigration reform and pledges to nominate to the Supreme Court only judges who would uphold Roe V. Wade. 

While she once advocated gun rights she has since embraced strict gun control.  Ay, there’s the rub.  Too many of her positions seem the product of Clintonian triangulation – even her turn against Clinton.  She was once a proud member of the conservative Blue Dog coalition in congress.  Now all her liberal-progressive credentials seem more opportunistic than genuine.  The early polls seem to agree. 

SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS

“We have got to make it clear that when the future of the planet is at stake there is no middle ground.”  [1]

The indefatigable senator from Vermont is running again.  He is a spry 77 years old.  If his stump speech seems familiar it is because he has had little reason to change it.  He wears a badge of consistency and he’s very proud of it. 

Uncle Bernie pretty much defines what a progressive Democrat must be to win the nomination in 2020.  He wants Medicare for All phased in over four years.  He would expand Medicare coverage to include dental, vision and hearing.  He’s for Fair Trade although I’m still waiting for the specifics on what that means.  He wants a substantial boost in the federal minimum wage. He wants the US to be a fair and impartial negotiator in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 

Bernie is curiously moderate on impeachment.  He prefers a cautionary approach.  Along with fellow elder Nancy Pelosi, he tends to believe that impeachment would bolster Trump’s standing.  I don’t think so, Bernie.  If you want to maintain your reputation as the harbinger of the progressive cause, you cannot take the middle ground on impeachment.  It is not enough to say Trump is a pathological liar.  The man broke the law repeatedly and congress would be abrogating its duty if it did not embark on the impeachment path. 

Bernie has revisited the issue of reparations.  Last time around he virtually ceded the South to Hillary when he refused even to consider reparations for slavery.  Let’s not even begin to address the Great Genocide.  Shall we give back the land to its original inhabitants? 

There are many of us who marched in Bernie’s parade four years ago but times have changed.  Bernie’s on the right side of virtually all issues but I’m no longer convinced he’s strong enough on those issues.  He does not seem to get that climate change is paramount and he needs a better answer to substandard living than the federal minimum wage.  When technology replaces cheap foreign labor as the most critical threat to our living standards, shall the federal government serve as the employer of last resort?  Shall we guarantee a living wage to all? 

Finally, there is the matter of age.  How long can Bernie last?  If he does make a run at it, he had better choose a young progressive as his VP.  I can only wish him well. 

FORMER VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN

“I’m not Bernie Sanders.  I don’t think 500 billionaires are the reason we’re in trouble.”  [2]

It’s already happening.  That new car scent has worn off and all the dents and scratches and mechanical flaws are coming to the fore.  When you have been in public life as long as Joe Biden has you’re bound to have a few skeletons in the closet. 

As chair of the Senate Judiciary committee, Biden allowed the Republicans to run over Anita Hill with a bulldozer.  He failed to call witnesses who could have backed up her story.  With a silent Ted Kennedy next to him, he enabled the ascent of Clarence Thomas to the highest court in the land.  That’s a ghost that will not go away. 

Old Joe is like the uncle whose off-color jokes, sexist remarks and inappropriate hugs are ignored because, well, that’s just the way he is. 

As hard as it may be to explain his past with regard to women, it is harder to justify his sponsorship of Bill Clinton’s 1994 Crime Bill.  His current apologetic tone notwithstanding, he boasted during a 2007 presidential debate that the Clinton crime bill was originally the Biden crime bill.  For the uninformed the Clinton Crime Bill more than any other single factor was responsible for the mass incarceration of predominantly black and Hispanic Americans. 

Yes, folks, he was proud of putting those darkies away before he was ashamed of it.  After all, it was a different time.  The minorities were less of a factor in national elections and few of them bothered to vote. 

I really hate beating up on the old boy.  It feels a little like elder abuse.  If you think his rivals will overlook the myriad misstatements and misdeeds in Biden’s closet you are mistaken.  It all comes out on the long and winding road. 

If we pretend the past did not exist the present is problematic enough.  Biden skipped the California Democratic presidential forum because he knew what awaited him.  California progressives are not satisfied with old Joe’s homilies.  Elizabeth Warren has a policy for every issue; Joe Biden has a platitude. 

It’s not his fault.  Old Joe is 76.  At 76 he should be at home with the grandkids and great grandkids.  He should be spinning stories at Thanksgiving dinner.  He should be working on spreadsheets for heart healthy diets.  He should be taking daily walks with the dog.  He should be fishing or playing golf or bowling or whatever he is inclined to do at 76.  Get a solid rocking chair and write your memoirs.  Your time for politicking is past. 


So there it is:  A rundown of 23 candidates for the Democratic nomination for president, including seven genuine contenders.  It is not a very satisfying exercise.  It is a process of elimination and it is far more difficult than it should be.  Every candidate has shortcomings.  Every candidate has virtues.  Every candidate must jump through the traditional hoops, pander to the traditional parties and somehow distinguish his or her self from every other candidate. 

At this early stage any one of the contenders can win.  The question for me is:  Whom do we want to win?  My criteria are somewhat at variance with the Democratic Party.  The party seems to be obsessed with the odds of beating Trump.  No one would like to see Trump walk into the sunset more than me but I believe the obsession with data match-ups, critical states and key demographics is going about it the wrong way. 

Doug Johnson Hatlem put it this way:  “This ‘ideological spectrum analysis’ is a junk science rooted in the flawed assumption that the electorate is basically polarized along party lines and that candidates compete for centrists who identify as independents. This view of independents as centrists to be wooed has been debunked over and over and over but persists anyway.  Presidents McCain, Romney, and Hillary Clinton roundly approve of this confusion!”  [3]

Every time the Democrats try to play it cute they end up with a John Kerry playing up his war record instead of his credentials as a peace candidate.  They end up with an Al Gore pretending he never heard of the environment.  They end up with a Hillary Clinton because it’s her turn and it’s time for a woman.  They end up with a Joe Biden because he knows how to talk to these working folks.  It’s not so much how to talk to them, Joe, it’s what you have to say. 

The Democrats have a way of finding a way to lose and it’s always worse to lose when you run someone you don’t really believe in.  We may despise Donald Trump but his people are devoted to him.  More than anything else, the Democrats need someone who believes passionately in a cause.  The last thing they need is someone who wants to work both sides of the aisle. 

I would prefer a candidate who is relatively young, vibrant, confident and knowledgeable.  I want someone who can own a room with his or her presence.  I want someone who is not afraid and will stand up for progressive ideals.  I want someone who doesn’t shudder at the dreaded S word.  The moment I see a candidate backing off or trying to mollify the other side I turn off. 

I wish Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio were running.  I would have liked to see him become the working class candidate I believe he could have become.  Maybe he just didn’t have it in him.  Maybe he’s a family man and no one would wish a presidential campaign on any family.  In any case he is not running and so we’re left with what we have. 

At this early, early stage, keeping in mind that it can certainly change, I’ve run all the data through my processor and arrived at one candidate:  Senator Elizabeth Warren.  Yes, she’s old but she’s not as old as Bernie or Joe and she’s got all the other qualities.  She knows the facts and she’s worked out the policies.  She’s confident, energetic and has the ability to command attention.  Ultimately, the key factor is that she refuses to back down. 

When Trump comes at her with “Pocahontas” I’d like to see her come back with:  “Yes, Mr. Trump, I’m Pocahontas and you’re a billionaire.” 

Enough said. 

Jazz.

1. California Democratic Party State Convention, June 1, 2019.

2. “Joe Biden Clarifies He’s No Bernie Sanders” by John Queally.  Common Dreams, May 9, 2018. 

3. “Electability is Real – Unless Married with the Junk Science of Ideological Spectrum Analysis” by Doug Johnson Hatlem.  Counterpunch, February 20, 2019.

3. “The 2020 Presidential Race: A Cheat Sheet” by David A. Graham.  The Atlantic, April 9, 2019.

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. 

Monday, May 20, 2019

Road to the White House: Part Two: The Underdogs

--> JAZZMAN CHRONICLES:  DEFEATING TRUMP. 




A LONG & WINDING ROAD TO THE WHITE HOUSE

A Presidential Election Analysis from Pretenders to Contenders

Part Two:  The Underdogs

By Jack Random


In part one of A Long and Winding Road I discussed the prospects and substance of seven announced candidates for president under the banner of the Democratic Party.  I pronounced them pretenders though they represent sincere issues and segments of the electorate.  They included former US Senator Mike Gravel, Florida Mayor Wayne Messam, author Marianne Williamson, entrepreneur Andrew Yang, billionaire investor Tom Steyer, Starbucks CEO Howard Schulz and Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg. 

Of the seven, only Mayor Pete has gained traction in the early campaign.  By virtue of money raised and excitement generated he has earned a prominent place on the Democratic stage of presidential hopefuls.  While I respect the mayor for his eloquence and intellect, I stand by my pronouncement that he is in fact a pretender.  On the long and winding road to the White House he will be forced to admit that one does not jump from Midwest mayor to commander-in-chief in a single bound. 

At a time when Democrats are obsessed with electability, the odds of any pretender advancing to the White House are less than hitting a trifecta on three 100-1 underdogs at the Kentucky Derby.  Supporters of Mayor Pete and the others will peel off to other candidates as the campaign progresses. 

I know the counterpoint:  The current occupant of the Oval Office skipped all electoral offices and went straight to the presidency.  To which I reply:  Exactly.  He was not qualified for president and it shows in everything he does, says or tweets.  He is being played and outplayed on the international stage by China, North Korea, Israel and Russia.  He has weakened NATO and alienated our traditional allies.  We are extremely fortunate that his actions or inactions have not yet led to an absolute and irreversible catastrophe – unless we consider climate change.  If we make it through the rest of Trump’s term, let’s not press our luck. 

The next level of candidacy includes those technically qualified to run for the highest office in the land.  Some have made a name for themselves on cable television for their opposition to Trump in the Russia Gate hearings or the Immigrant Child-Parent separation scandal.  Others attracted the national spotlight in their previous campaigns – most notably Beto O’Rourke.  Not coincidentally, most of them are or were members of the House of Representatives.  The only member of the lower chamber of congress ever to be elected president was James Garfield in 1880.  It was not a memorable presidency. 

TIER TWO:  THE UNDERDOGS.

FORMER CONGRESSMAN BETO O’ROURKE

Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke represented the sixteenth congressional district of Texas for six years before challenging Lying Ted Cruz to represent Texas in the United States Senate.  He captured the nationwide interest of liberal Democrats and raised an extraordinary amount of money in a losing campaign.  O’Rourke announced early his intention to run for the White House and immediately launched his impression of James Dean in Rebel without A Cause.  Recently he decided to stake his claim as the Green candidate by announcing a five trillion dollar plan to combat climate change.  That is serious money.  He plans to raise it by restructuring the tax code. 

I like Beto.  He’s as good as it gets for Texas Democrats.  It’s a shame he could not knock off the man nobody but his mother likes – and even she’s not sure.  There’s still time to take aim at Republican Senator John Cornyn in the upcoming election.  Want to make an impact, Beto?  Take another shot at the senate.  That’s where the balance of power resides. 

CONGRESSMAN ERIC SWALWELL

Swalwell of California possesses the same All-American athletic look that John Edwards once parlayed into contender’s status on the presidential stage.  Like Edwards, he is well spoken and can be charming.  Unlike Edwards, he is not and has never been a United States Senator.  He has not in fact run for a statewide election. 

Swalwell serves on the Intelligence and Judiciary committees.  He has frequently appeared on cable news programs where he has launched spirited attacks against the most corrupt president since Warren G. Harding of Teapot Dome infamy.  Oddly enough, Representative Swalwell has chosen gun control as his key issue.  It makes me wonder why impeachment is not his central theme.  It makes me wonder if his handlers have informed him that impeachment is not a winner.  It’s too bad.  Impeachment is where his passion lies.  He has made his reputation on impeachment.  Who will take up the issue if not Swalwell? 

CONGRESSMAN TIM RYAN

The 45-year-old Ohio representative has gained some notoriety in his effort to challenge the leadership of Speaker Nancy Pelosi.  In the vacuum left when Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown decided not to run, Ryan considers himself the labor candidate.  The party definitely needs a labor candidate but Ryan has a marked tendency to pull back on every issue in an effort to stake out the middle ground.  He must believe – as moderates do – that it makes him appear more reasonable when in fact it makes him appear weak and without honest conviction.  Take it from the Hillary Clinton campaign: we don’t need another triangulator – especially when it comes to labor. 

Like so many before him, Ryan laments the loss of US manufacturing and the related decline of the American middle class but his solutions fall lamentably short.  Just how would you bring back manufacturing?  Tariffs and trade wars?  Spell it out.  Just how would you fight back robotics and automation?  Would you advocate the government as an employer of last resort?  I think not.  I believe you are afraid of the S word and will backtrack at its mere utterance. 

The American economic system has embraced elements of socialism since well before Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal:  the prohibition of indentured servitude and child labor, the forty-hour work week, safe working conditions, labor unions and the right to organize, Medicare and Social Security.  Anyone who is afraid of the S word need not apply for the presidency in 2020. 

We really do need specifics.  It is not sufficient to be from Ohio.  You have to have real solutions. 

FORMER CONGRESSMAN JOHN DELANEY

The former representative from Maryland is yet another candidate hoping to catch fire from the middle ground.  Let me run through just a handful of reasons a moderate cannot and should not win the nomination:  Climate catastrophes, mass shootings, runaway technology, income inequality, climate change and climate change. 

Delaney supports Free Trade – including Fast Track legislation and the Trans Pacific Partnership.  He believes Trump’s trade war with China is representative of Fair Trade.  He is wrong.  Fair Trade requires representation of labor and labor interests.  Trump may be the most anti-labor president in history. 

JFK didn’t say we want our children to dream of going to the moon someday; he said we would go to the moon by the end of the decade.  The nation desperately needs someone with the same urgency on climate change.  It will not come from the middle ground. 

CONGRESSWOMAN TULSI GABBARD

The nation’s first Samoan American and Hindu member of congress, Tulsi Gabbard represents the second congressional district of Hawaii.  Gabbard is a leader of the movement to stop supporting the Saudi slaughter in Yemen.  A veteran of the tragic war in Iraq, she strongly opposes the nation’s reckless entanglements in the Middle East.  She opposes military intervention in Venezuela.  She endorsed Bernie Sanders in the last presidential election and falls in line with Bernie’s politics.  She wants Medicare for All and supports the Green New Deal.  Anyone who does not should switch parties. 

Gabbard has attracted controversy in her interactions with PM Narendra Modi of India and Bashar al Assad of Syria.  Much ado about nothing.  She does not endorse either leader.  She is a Fair Trade advocate and a leading opponent of American imperialism.  She stood with the Standing Rock warriors against the Dakota Access Pipeline.  If you take those stands, you will be criticized. 

There is a lot to like in the young representative from Hawaii.  She is seemingly fearless and speaks out whenever she perceives wrongdoing.  She deserves the support of all Sanders supporters who want someone younger – myself included.  If she secures a place on the debate stage she will be heard and I for one will stand and applaud. 

GOVERNOR JAY INSLEE

“Inslee is the only candidate in the race who is treating climate change the way that science says climate change should be treated: not as one issue among many, but as the overriding emergency of our age.” – Ezra Klein, Vox 5/13/19. 

The Green Governor of the state of Washington was the first to step forward and proclaim climate change as the central issue of the 2020 presidential election – Beto O’Rourke was the second.  He is of course right.  All politicians like to talk about our children and grandchildren, our legacy and our posterity.  Few politicians match their policies to their rhetoric. 

The naysayers of Global Warming proclaim that the whole Climate Catastrophe scare is a hoax perpetrated by a cabal of elites determined to reconstitute the planet under their control.  These clever conspiracy theorists have captured the precise opposite of the truth.  What is the truth?  That a cabal of elites have perpetrated the lie that global warming is a hoax to protect their interests until the last drop of oil and the last block of coal are spent. 

Governor Inslee is out to prove that the Green New Deal is not only environmentally but also economically sound.  Under his leadership Washington has pushed through legislation on clean energy, energy efficient buildings, electric vehicles and efficiency standards.  He tried and failed to pass a carbon tax. 

Inslee correctly points out that placing Climate Change on a long – or even short – list of priorities virtually assures that nothing of substance will prevail.  Obama never got past health care – or rather, health insurance reform – and Trump has failed to accomplish anything after tax cuts for the elite. 

Yes, I wish the governor had more style but he has substance.  At this early stage in the process those who are inclined should contribute to the cause of getting his message on the debate stage. 

FORMER HUD SECRETARY JULIAN CASTRO

The former mayor of San Antonio, Texas, is the only candidate of Hispanic descent with even a remote chance of making it to the final stage.  Castro served as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in the Obama administration. 

Castro is well spoken with an appealing immigrant back story but his campaign hit the road in low gear and has hardly picked up speed.  He seems to be making his stand on education with a promise of free preschool through four years of college.  Castro also promises to recommit the nation to the Paris Climate Accord and submit a plan for universal healthcare on day one of his presidency.  So there’s that. 

The trouble is the candidate hit the stage without a message.  Maybe he thought it would be sufficient to be the only Hispanic/Latino of substance.  Some years it would be sufficient but not this year.  There are too many candidates and too many issues of immediacy for identity politics to once again prevail. 

For the life of me, I can’t understand why these Texas Democrats don’t take aim at the senate.  I’ll say it again:  That’s where the action is and if by chance Castro or O’Rourke should prevail the pathway to the White House would open like a bouquet of roses on a sunny spring morning. 

MAYOR BILL DE BLASIO

With approximately 22 official candidates already in the race, the first question that arises with the addition of NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio is why?  Does he fill some fundamental need that is as yet missing from the field?  The mayor’s signature issue is income inequality – an issue that is amply covered by presidential heavyweights Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.  He is uniquely positioned to attack fellow New Yorker Donald Trump and wasted no time in calling him out with the nickname Con Don.  I would recommend Don the Con if only because it sounds better.  Trump fired back with the accusation that De Blasio is the “worst mayor in the history of New York City.”  That was it. 

Come on, Donald.  You can do better than that, can’t you?  It seems he won’t take the mayor serious until he secures a place on the debate stage. 

In many ways de Blasio is an appealing candidate.  His family is multi-racial and multi-cultural.  He has instituted universal free preschool in America’s main metropolis.  He put a stop to the city’s “stop and frisk” law that targeted minorities and blatantly violated the constitution. 

Unfortunately New York continues to have a number of serious problems, including dilapidated public housing, homelessness and deficiencies in America’s most advanced and neglected subway system.  The mayor counters that much of what is wrong with New York is attributable to policies in Washington.  Good point. 

His popularity in the city has held in the low forties and most NYC voters – 76% according to Quinnipiac University – do not want him to run for president.  Given those numbers and the crowded Democratic field, it’s a little difficult to understand why he feels compelled to throw his hat in. 

GOVERNOR JOHN HICKENLOOPER

The governor of swing state Colorado, Hickenlooper has felt for a very long time that the nation needs a moderate and the Democratic Party needs someone from landlocked America.  He considers himself a pragmatist who knows how to get things done.  Unfortunately, that’s the same line every moderate gives and there’s no reason to believe that a Colorado governor would do any better than a former Illinois senator.  Believe it or not, Barack Obama was a moderate who tried to work both sides of the aisle.  We all know how that turned out.  Sorry, Gov, the Republic has never had a four-syllable president.  You’re not likely to be the first. 

At risk of sounding like a recording on continuous loop, Republican Senator Cory Gardner is up for re-election in 2020.  Take him on, governor.  Work on both sides of the aisle from the majority in the US Senate. 

GOVERNOR STEVE BULLOCK

Governor Bullock of Missouri is yet another Middle America moderate.  I don’t know why every Middle America moderate thinks he or she should be president – or maybe I do.  Bullock, Hickenlooper and others are stuck in the old way of thinking: that the political divide is all about ideology.  I believe that once held great validity but not any more.  Many of the policies advocated by yesterday’s Democrats, from trade policy to first amendment rights, would find themselves more comfortable in the Republican Party.  Democrats are being held to a new standard:  Voters want their candidates to stand up and be counted.  They want a presidential candidate who will take on Trump and his minions.  The moderates do not fit the bill. 


This concludes my review of the underdogs.  Each of them is qualified for high office and each has something to bring to the forum.  Unfortunately, too many of them add little to the debate.  The question for the second tier candidates is:  How long can they last? 

Most of these candidates are not really running for the presidency but rather for the vice presidency.  That race is wide open.  The consolation is that some will gain favorable name recognition for future pursuits. 

Jazz. 

JACK RANDOM IS THE AUTHOR OF THE JAZZMAN CHRONICLES AND FOUNDER OF CROW DOG PRESS.  HIS NOVELS INCLUDE HARD TIMES: THE WRATH OF AN ANGRY GOD AND PAWNS TO PLAYERS: THE CHESS TRILOGY – THE STAIRWAY SCANDAL, A MATCH FOR THE WHITE HOUSE AND THE PUTIN GAMBIT. 

Wednesday, May 08, 2019

Road to the White House: Part One: The Pretenders.

JAZZMAN CHRONICLES:  DEFEATING TRUMP.




A LONG & WINDING ROAD TO THE WHITE HOUSE

A 2020 Presidential Election Analysis from Pretenders to Contenders

Part One:  The Pretenders

By Jack Random



Having been engaged in the political debate for decades, it is both frustrating and infuriating to be subjected to the same specious pragmatic argument every four years.  Individuals that I hold in high regard and whose ideological principals are harmonious with my own, present the case with a straight face and in all sincerity as if on cue from the Democratic Party talking points. 

The argument holds that the Party cannot nominate a true progressive because he or she will lose the general election.  The same message can be applied to all third party or independent candidates in perpetuity.  We must all tow to the centerline where we will almost inevitably be smashed by the big rig of true believers on the right. 

The argument is particularly galling this time around because last time around it was used to nominate Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders despite the stone cold fact that all the energy of the progressive left belonged to Bernie and all the doubt belonged to Hillary. 

It was not just the fact that Hillary didn’t show up in the critical rustbelt states in the weeks before Election Day; it was the fact that she didn’t have anything to say to the working people of the lost industrial middle class.  They would turn to the neophyte Donald J. Trump in a protest against the duplicity of corporate Democrats – and why not?  No one could have done a better job at playing to Trump’s hand than Hillary did.  And yes, Bernie would have beaten Trump and left him bruised, battered and exposed to face the legal fallout of his campaign in the Southern District of New York. 

Now we are faced with a broad and growing field of individuals – qualified or not – lining up for their chance to bring down The Great Con.  Most of them have borrowed from Bernie’s playbook:  Medicare for all, a living wage, fair trade or something like it, access to higher education, humane immigration policies, a transition to a green energy base and a promise of non-intervention in civil wars abroad.  Still, the mainstream media portray Bernie and friends as radical leftists while the political class continues to pretend that the mythical middle ground is the Shangri-La of presidential politics. 

The mainstream of the Democratic Party base is Bernie Sanders.  The mainstream of true progressives is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  The Party operatives stuck with the Clintons where they now find themselves sinking in the quicksand of yesterday’s politics.  Those of us with no viable alternative moved on a long, long time ago.  We never wanted a return to the Clinton years.  What we want now is a government that recognizes the challenges of the new and the next generations.  Moderation has become a code word for corporate domination.  The massive multi-national corporations that finance traditional politicians on both sides of the aisle have proven beyond all doubt that they are ready, willing and eager to sell us all down the river for the almighty profit margin. 

No one really likes a moderate.  A moderate is someone who doesn’t have the courage of his or her conviction.  A moderate is a weasel in the smiling mask of an insurance salesman.  A moderate doesn’t know where she’s been or where he’s going.  Despite all his flamboyance, Donald Trump is a moderate pretending to be extreme.  He is extreme on race and immigration but there it stops.  Even there he has no conviction.  It is all braggadocio.  It is all Clintonian triangulation.  It is all calculated to win, baby, win. 

Okay.  Let us concede that Barrack Obama was a moderate politician that many Democrats and progressives remember with warm affection.  He was portrayed as a leftist by both the opposition and an accommodating media but he never lived up to the label.  Had he been the man he was advertised to be, he would have delivered a hell of a lot more and better than Obamacare.  He would have delivered more and better than a Lilly Ledbetter Act limited to federal employees.  He would have delivered as promised the right to organize in the workplace.  He would have decisively ended the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and limited our engagement in Syria to humanitarian assistance.  He would have created an international economic alliance with the power to replace drones and missiles with targeted economic sanctions. 

Obama is the past and the Clintons are ancient history.  The times demand that we elect a bold new leader to take the reins of a progressive government.  The times demand that America lead the world in a bold new and green direction.  The times demand that we cast off once and for all the debilitating barbarity, isolationism and narcissism of Donald J. Trump. 

We need a president that is not afraid to take a stand. 

It has become clear in recent weeks that (a) every politician of age believes he or she is qualified to take up residency on Pennsylvania Avenue and (b) it is never too early to begin the long and winding road to the White House. 

Likewise, it is never too early to begin our analysis of the candidates and to initiate the inevitable process of elimination. 

TIER ONE:  THE PRETENDERS. 

Don’t get me wrong:  I love the pretenders.  The pretenders have nothing to lose and something to gain.  They represent causes.  They lay it on the line.  They tend to be uncompromised.  They have no need to roll out trial balloons or test the waters.  What you see is what you get. 

Every presidential election attracts any number of pretenders.  Past elections have given us the pizza man, the flat tax joker, the sleepy-eyed brain surgeon and Carly “the CEO” Fiorina.  None had a reasonable chance to become the party nominee but they did gain notoriety, book deals or invitations to social events.  They gained one of the most valued commodities in business or politics: name recognition. 

MAYOR PETE BUTTIGIEG

This year’s pretenders include most notably the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, Peter Buttigieg – that’s Boot-Edge-Edge.  There is no denying the mayor’s eloquence or intellectual prowess.  He’s a Rhodes scholar and a Harvard graduate.  He is also the only openly gay candidate in the Democratic field.  I applaud his candidacy.  His rebuttal to the openly bigoted views of vice president Mike Pence is brilliant and refreshing. 

He is also smart enough to know that a mayor of South Bend, Indiana, is not qualified for the highest office in the land.  He lacks experience in foreign policy.  He has no practical knowledge of the inside workings of Washington D.C.  Still, his candidacy forces the Democratic field to embrace the civil rights of gay and transsexual communities.  He has a powerful voice and will be heard at the Democratic National Convention and beyond. 

CEO HOWARD SCHULTZ

With apologies to Joe DiMaggio, Mr. Coffee stepped into the race with the same argument that former NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg trots out every four years.  He is convinced that America is yearning for a middle-of-the-road moderate and that both major parties have drifted to ideological extremes.  He is wrong on both accounts.  What really concerns Schultz is protecting his own interests.  He is a proud member of the one percent club and he doesn’t want to pay proportionately higher taxes.  Sorry, Howard, wrong party. 

BILLIONAIRE TOM STEYER 

To his credit, Steyer jumped on the impeachment wagon before it had wheels.  To those who agree with him that alone is an admirable resume.  The fact that he amassed his fortune as the manager of a hedge fund is an effective antidote.  A San Francisco Democrat with liberal credentials and deep pockets, Steyer threatened to run for US Senator before backing out and he has done the same with the presidency – twice.  Let’s take him at his word:  He’s not running “at this time.”  Translation:  His impeachment campaign has not made a mark in the polls. 

Here’s an idea for all those billionaire progressives:  Fund green communities and industries in Montana, Wyoming, Arizona and throughout the Midwest.  Establish residency there and run for Governor or the US Senate.  We have reached a point where two or three senate seats could have a greater impact than winning the White House. 

HIGH TECH ENTREPRENEUR ANDREW YANG

A big brain with a big idea, Andrew Yang epitomizes the candidate who runs to publicize and gather support for a concept.  That concept is a universal basic income.  Yang read Martin Ford’s Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future.  It is a poignant warning of a not-so-distant future where robots and robotics take the bulk of jobs from industrial workers to white-collar professionals.  For years advocates of Fair Trade have opposed the inevitable job exportation of Free Trade policies.  For decades opponents of Fair Trade have fallen back on the argument that technology will take those middle class jobs in any case.  Now that time has finally arrived.  Yang proposes an answer:  a basic universal income by right of birth and citizenship.  Here’s another solution: the government as an employer of last resort.  Shades of socialism?  Sure.  Why not?  Would you prefer mass unemployment?  The Mother of all Depressions?  It’s coming and like global warming it’s coming fast.  And it doesn’t care if you believe it or not. 

AUTHOR MARIANNE WILLIAMSON

An adherent of the spiritual teachings of A Course in Miracles, Williamson is the best-selling author of inspirational books.  She wishes to awaken the spiritual culture of America to the realities of the democratic process.  Williamson is a true believer and a genuine good deed doer so I will not doubt her intentions or cast aspersions on her character.  She is not running for president but if she can awaken a segment of the non-voting majority to engage the political process, she deserves our heartfelt appreciation. 

MAYOR WAYNE MESSAM 

The black mayor of Miramar, Florida, Mr. Messam is the first member of his family born in the United States.  He is the son of Jamaican immigrants.  His father worked in the sugar cane fields of Glades, Florida.  He is running to highlight the plight of immigrants in Trump’s America.  He advocates gun control, expanded healthcare, a woman’s right to choose, progressive taxation and climate change initiatives.  He knows the issues and would make a solid candidate for congress. 

FORMER SENATOR MIKE GRAVEL 

At age 88 and technically qualified for the presidency, former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel is voluntarily being used by a trio of young tech-savvy libertarians to shake up the race.  Gravel stands against imperialism and demands democratic reform – both discussions worth having and ones that may or may not come up in his absence.  The campaign is refreshingly candid about his chances.  They don’t want the White House.  They want a place on the stage.  To attain that goal they must gain a one percent in three national polls or donations from 65,000 individuals with at least 200 donors in twenty different states.  If they make it the DNC will raise the stakes. 

This completes the current crop of presidential pretenders who have managed to gain some notice because of their status and/or financial resources.  In some ways they represent the best of American democracy.  They bring sincere and pressing issues to light.  They press when more traditional candidates would back down.  Some may well go on to great accomplishments in the political arena.  Others will boost sales and attendance on upcoming book tours.  But none will be president in this cycle. 

Jazz. 

JACK RANDOM IS THE AUTHOR OF THE JAZZMAN CHRONICLES AND FOUNDER OF CROW DOG PRESS.  HIS NOVELS INCLUDE PAWNS TO PLAYERS: THE CHESS TRILOGY. 

Saturday, April 27, 2019

Everybody Loves Old Joe (until he runs)

JAZZMAN CHRONICLES:  TRUMP DAZE.  





OLD WHITE MEN

Everybody Loves Old Joe

By Jack Random



Despite my approximate seven percent Native American bloodline by way of the Great Oklahoma Land Rush and the Dust Bowl migration to Central California, I am what I appear to be:  an old white man.  I am neither proud nor ashamed of that identification.  It is what it is. 

I am not proud to be old though it beats the alternative.  I am not proud to be white though I am grateful I did not have to endure the pains of discrimination that so many of my darker complexioned peers did.  I am not proud to be a man though I am fortunate I did not have to suffer the indignity of sexual bias and intimidation that women have experienced. 

All of this brings me to the latest entry in the Democratic presidential sweepstakes:  Old Joe Biden.  Everybody loves Joe.  Just listen to all the old white men on television giving testament to Old Joe’s character.  Listen to them proclaim the same old ode to moderation that they deliver every four years:  Only Joe can win the White House.  Only Joe knows how to talk to the working stiffs in Middle America.  Only Joe can avoid the stinging charge of socialism. 

Everybody loves Joe until he actually runs for the presidency.  Now we begin to see the dark side of Old Joe, the borderline racist-sexist shadow of his past policies:  His failure to stand up for Anita Hill as he chaired the committee that systematically assassinated her character, his advocacy of the infamous Clinton Crime Bill that resulted in the mass incarceration of minorities and his hand in creating the Free Trade mandate. 

Old Joe aint quite what he appears to be when you look a little closer. 

Don’t get me wrong.  I like Old Joe.  No.  I really do.  He reminds me of my father who was one of the most progressive men of his generation.  He meant no harm when he used phrases like: a credit to his race.  He regarded women much as men of his age did. 

Old Joe is like my father.  He didn’t mean any harm.  He really didn’t.  And maybe his vulnerability in these areas would make him a great president for women and minorities by way of compensation.  Nevertheless, Democrats must ask themselves if they really want a candidate with some of the same character flaws as the sitting president. 

When it all comes down, like all the other old white men, I don’t believe that age, race or gender should disqualify anyone from the presidency.  Being an old white man, however, I do believe that age becomes a factor in the way we think, the way we act and the way we respond to criticism.  As much as we want him to do well, Joe aint gonna make it down this road unscathed and neither is Bernie.  It’s a long hard road and one that both Joe and Bernie have traveled before.  Take it from one who has traveled this nation by air, rail, highway and thumb, the road gets rougher and winds in ways we don’t even remember. 

I recall Ronald Reagan musing on the long and winding road to nowhere in his presidential debate with Walter Mondale.  In an actor’s vernacular, he “went up.”  His mind abandoned him mid-thought.  Yet we the people re-elected him.  Later, he would feign hard-of-hearing while wife Nancy whispered what to say in his ear.  Later still, he would admit guilt in the Iran-Contra affair with one of the strangest statements ever enunciated in the Oval Office before Trump:  “A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages.  My heart and my best intentions tell me that’s true but the facts and evidence tell me it’s not.”  Translation:  I lost control of my presidency.  We would learn that Reagan suffered from Alzheimer’s disease. 

Ronald Reagan was 73 years old when elected to a second term.  Joe Biden will be 77 in November.  Bernie Sanders will be 78 in September.  Elizabeth Warren is a relatively youthful 69 and will turn seventy in June.

Chris Matthews, the elder statesman of MSNBC, is 73 years of age.  Pundit and former Governor of Pennsylvania Ed Rendell is 75.  Respectfully, it is time for the old white guys to step down and make way for the young, the vibrant and the innovative. 

Matthews believes that the charge of socialism will skewer any Democrat who advocates universal Medicare.  He speaks for a generation past – a generation that depends on Medicare.  Rendell is sure that only Old Joe can take back the Rust Belt from Donald Trump but Biden has no more or better answers to the loss of industrial jobs than Hillary did.

Old white guys like Old Joe.  I’m with the young people.  I still like Bernie.  But if I’m being honest, having watched the CNN town hall forums, age marked Bernie in a way that it did not four years ago.  By comparison, Elizabeth Warren appeared youthful and vibrant.  It’s not that he lacked energy and passion but his answers seemed a little pat and he was not as quick to respond to criticisms as he once was. 

Age like death comes for us all and it leaves an indelible mark. 

I believe in my soul it is time for the old white guys to step aside.  It is time for someone younger and more in touch with technology to carry the torch.  It is time for a candidate who is not afraid of words like “socialism” and has the courage to stand up for policies that align with principle. 

I will not be supporting Bernie Sanders this time around – not because he is a socialist but because he is too old.  Frankly, Bernie is not a socialist.  He does not advocate abolishing free enterprise or private property.  He only wants to moderate capitalism a with healthy dose of social medicine, including universal healthcare, a decent safety net, a higher minimum wage and progressive taxation.  If only Bernie were younger I would not hesitate to support him as the mainstream progressive candidate. 

It goes without saying that I will not support Joe Biden.  He’s had his day.  Let others speak of his shortcomings.  He is too old to be president. 

I have not eliminated Elizabeth Warren though her age is certainly a concern.  Her policies are breaking new ground.  Her two percent tax on the super rich makes a lot of sense.  She is the enemy of the elite and is well positioned to expose Donald Trump as the spoiled elitist he really is.  Her proposal for rolling back student debt is bold.  Her stands on impeachment, breaking up the Tech giants and Medicare for All are direct and uncompromised.  She strongly supports the Green New Deal – the minimum we should expect from any candidate for president.  She also has the ghost of Pocahontas but nobody really cares. 

Of the younger women, Senator Amy Klobuchar stood out at the town hall meetings for her knowledge of the issues and her specific policy proposals.  I don’t buy her dodge on impeachment: she believes that senators must be neutral because they would serve as the jury.  I believe that presidential candidates must have the courage to say where they stand.  She advocates a public option on healthcare insurance, mental health parity, targeted loan forgiveness for student debt and supports the Green New Deal.  She wants Big Pharma to pay for the drug treatment needed to counter the epidemic of addiction they created.  There is a lot to like here but she needs the passion of Bernie. 

Senator Kamala Harris seems to have a pattern of coming on strong and then backing away from issues she perceives as controversial.  Too often she fell back on the phrase:  “Let’s have that conversation.”  Translation:  She’s not ready to commit. 

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand lost me when she was so quick to throw her colleague Senator Al Franken under the bus.  He was guilty of very bad taste – even for a comedian – but he did not deserve summary execution of his political career. 

Senator Cory Booker was somehow omitted from the town halls – perhaps replaced by Mayor Pete Buttigieg.  Booker has a problem in his ties to the pharmaceutical industry.  Mayor Pete is a brilliant man – too brilliant to believe he is actually running for president. 

There are of course a lot of other candidates and we’ve got a long way to go.  At this juncture, like most Americans, I am nowhere near committing.  The only decision I’ve made is:  It aint Old Joe and it aint Old Bernie.  Not this time. 

Jazz. 

JACK RANDOM IS THE AUTHOR OF THE JAZZMAN CHRONICLES AND NUMEROUS NOVELS, INCLUDING PAWNS TO PLAYERS: THE CHESS TRILOGY.  HIS COMMENTARIES HAVE APPEARED AT DISSIDENT VOICE AND COUNTERPUNCH.