SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Elvis » Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:39 am

Image
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 6651
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Belligerent Savant » Fri Jun 28, 2019 11:55 am

.

Google search interest:


Image
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 2659
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby JackRiddler » Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:43 pm

BS, the google search interest says little, not with more data, but it's interesting. The graphic shows rankings of five (not 10 or 20) and no absolute numbers. It may or may not be telling that someone bothered to make a graphic so simplistic, as if designed to tell an implicit story.

Here, let me tell an explicit story:

NBC THE APPRENTICE 2020: AMERICAN NOMINEE EDITION

Notes on Round 1, Day 2 and the Google Aftermath

Dated: 27 June 2019


Zen masters, if you turn off the quackers playing analysts on TV and close tabs on the online political gossip sheets, do they keep yapping? It's bad enough the corporate media organized the order of battle through polls that can adjust results thanks to the construct of a "likely voter" set. Or that they made this about personalities in the first place: two years of tedious soap opera punctuated by gladiatorial death matches. There's your democracy.

On game night, corporate wants to hog the time. They use it to promote a whole stable of stars from several news network owned or allied with NBC. They get to open the show with "How are you going to pay for the unicorns?" They throw sternly worded softballs to their favorites of the moment and slap the second tier with gotcha questions. Hey, they're your friends! Chuck and Rachel, like Hepburn and Tracy as treason inquisitors. They get to harangue everyone amiably for 120 minutes, minus the commercials from Pfizer and McDonald's.

But it's never enough. Afterward, they keep at it, explain what your lying eyes and ears really perceived, sort the winners and losers for you. (ONE OF YOU IS IN -- AND ONE OF YOU WILL BE OUT! AUF WIEDERSEHEN!) Never with an agenda in mind, of course. Heaven forfend.

Not too many participating in the show -- as hosts, as candidates on the stage, or as spectators -- are willing to admit that this has always been a kind of Fantasy Football talk-radio crossed with Game of Thrones fandom, and usually ends up having about the same impact on political reality: yours, or the world's. (WHO WON?! WHO'S NEXT?!) This was always true, I say, yet never as obvious. How many will tell you that none of this will change a thing, that is, if you are not also organizing as a popular movement for change that intends to struggle and build and endure beyond and apart from elections? Spoiler alert: At least one of them is saying that clearly, and seems to mean it, while another is believed to mean it.

So, who am I going to tell you "won" last night's Round 1, Day 2? I'm going to tell you there are more important questions, but let's start with the Google search rankings. If nothing else, these show who among the many relative unknowns are being discovered and piquing interest among a larger circle than before. Becoming better known may or may not help them, but it is a prerequisite for getting ahead if your name is not already Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, or Elizabeth Warren (whose arrival at the top recognition level was the most recent).

By the Google search measure, two winners were clear. Tulsi Gabbard exploded to capture 40 percent of searches for candidates' names on the first night, while Kamala Harris was the most searched on the second. Each attracted her peak attention by producing the most dramatic, cathartic scene-stealing of her respective show. For both, this involved the sudden on-air decapitation of an aggressive blowhard. Gabbard's attack on Tim Ryan for wanting to extend the Afghanistan war for a second generation (and for being generally clueless), and Harris' on Biden for his history of working with and praising leading segregationists (and for being generally clueless) were both emotionally genuine and positive highlights. But both moments really stood out for making the respective tall-man targets stagger around like a Marvel movie villain about to yell NOOOOOOOO and turn into dust.

Regarding Harris, however, I must ad the caveat: as phony as Harris otherwise is. Sorry, fans! Truthfully, I have enjoyed the overnight conversion of her and several other long-standing leaders in the corporate donations league-tables into firebreathing trustbusters. There was no doubting the passion in her story of being bussed to school as a child. The attention may cease to do her good, however, once it turns to her record. Gurgling in his blood, the expiring Biden scratched her with his sole poignant line for the night: "I was a public defender, not a prosecutor!" That was a good epitaph for his career, but he had already chiseled a better one into stone with "O, my time is up?" Then falls Caesar! Now we shall see whether Prosecutor Harris' flesh wound develops an infection.

Also interesting: Harris and Kristin Gillibrand were both auditioning for Bernie's Best Friend, the latter with so much enthusiasm that I half expected her to pull out pom-poms: "Give me an M, give me a 4, give me an A, Medicare4All, I wrote Bernie's plan, hooray!" As a potential season champion, Harris was much more reserved, of course. Gillibrand seemed to be pitching more to the hope of a Veep spot and the college students she will need to build an organization, while Harris used her excellent range to speak to the mothers of the world. I counted three parables about a mother and a child in peril, two explicit, one implicit, each truthful in facts and resonance. This is a welcome shift from the usual presidential rhetoric about the implicitly Christian Family Father and Joe Sixpack the Forgotten Man.

But what is a parable, or even the perfectly executed outburst reminding us that real people are not worried about wonkery but food on the table, without a genuinely strong corresponding policy and the intent and means to do it? Gillibrand actually proved more substantive. On questions of Empire, Harris tipped her bellicose hand with a side-comment assaulting the Korean peace process (literally the only good development Trump has involved himself in, even if it was to hog the credit). During the speed-round, in which contestants must name the very first among all the countries that Trump has kicked in the groin that they hope to kiss and make up with once they are Prezident, Gillibrand actually said she would work to restore the Iran deal, because the current situation is so dangerous.

Sanders summed the show up with concision, not that the corporate spinmeisters and freelance cadre of neoliberal meme-ers and me-me-ers are going to be repeating his concluding statement, or paraphrasing it except to distort it and smear him. For the moment, most of the contestants are sounding like him, and even the "yes, buts" from the openly conservative white guys (Mayor Pete foremost among them) concede that Sanders' campaigns have defined the party's policy goals for good reason, that he has helped to revive real issues. And implicitly, this is what he said: they're all talking like him. But who among them is really ready to fight Wall Street, the insurance companies, the military-industrial complex, the pharma conglomerates, the billionaires, and (unnamed but omnipresent) the corporate media? Who really wants to put McConnell's head on a pike and pass a Green New Deal and a real single payer system? Only two who might remotely qualify as serious contenders may also meet this criterion, and of these we ask: Could Sanders, if he somehow won, really do it, with the awesome forces and money that will continue to be deployed against these goals? Only with the organized support of independent movements fighting for the same goals, as he made clear. And does Warren, now that she seems to talk the same way, really mean it?
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15252
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Elvis » Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:47 pm

:mrgreen: I was one of those Marianne Williamson Googlers.
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 6651
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Elvis » Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:21 pm

JackRiddler wrote:Gurgling in his blood, the expiring Biden

:rofl:

The sports show analogy is so right on. The gawdy hall decor, the gladiatorial theme music. I didn't see any commercials on the YouTube stream; Pfizer was a sponsor?

Jack, I'm going to repost your post to the "The Democratic Party, 2019" thread, where we can have the more generalized postgame discussion.
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 6651
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby JackRiddler » Fri Jun 28, 2019 9:29 pm

I realized only now that there was a good reason both Biden and Ryan really were staggering around like fatally wounded Marvel villains during these exchanges, and this, too, was the network's fault (or perhaps intent). Because the "debaters" were lined up in a shallow arc, almost a straight line, during exchanges they could not see their interlocutor properly. So they were weaving to get line of sight.

Non-sarcastic apology:

A reviewer has condemned me for the cheerleader comment. Probably right. Sorry. I thought if Bush was a cheerleader, then I can make fun of someone for having a cheerleading tone, even if she's a woman without being sexist. Of course, she was never a cheerleader, afaik. And I shouldn't use the metaphor, since the stereotype is there anyway and pernicious. Furthermore, given my views, and the discovery I take her more seriously than I'd thought, I should think it's good if she, more than anyone else there, seemed to be backing Sanders (on the off-chance that she somehow doesn't win herself). So for all those reasons I shouldn't make fun of how she sounded to me, or the fact that she was so enthusiastic about M4A. In fact, it's possible it's a real conversion. Maybe not everyone is a faker. She did vote against the 2008 bailout. (As an urban ethnic neurotic type I also have a general problem with perky happy white people, which is another kind of bad baggage. I'm being serious. I need to be better.) And, finally, that comment went over the line past mere cleverness and takes part in the Reality TV soap opera and personalized gladiatorial bullshit I'm supposedly criticizing. Thus, for all these reasons, I retire now to a stint in house arrest.

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15252
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby JackRiddler » Fri Jul 12, 2019 10:26 pm

BILLIONAIRE ENDORSEMENTS FOR SANDERS

(Note: Click on link to see uproarious three-second video)

"There is one unifying thread among both ruling parties’ 1% donor classes — a terrible fear of a Bernie Sanders presidency. They seem to be drawing a clear line in the sand between Sanders and Warren, backed by millions of dollars. The question progressives must ask is why."

WHY? TELL US!

Haim Saban* said: "We love all 23 candidates. No, minus one. I profoundly dislike Bernie Sanders, and you can write it. I don't give a hoot. He's a communist under the cover of being a socialist. He thinks that every billionaire is a crook. He calls us 'the billionaire class.' And he attacks us indiscriminately. 'It's the billionaire class, the bad guys.' This is how communists think. So, 22 are great. One is a disaster zone."

(Source: Hollywood Reporter)

* billionaire donor of the Democratic Party, entertainment mogul known as pro-Israeli extremist.


Watch this video.
https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/statu ... 0647444483
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15252
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Grizzly » Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:58 am

So good, worth seeing again...

Image
If Barthes can forgive me, “What the public wants is the image of passion Justice, not passion Justice itself.”
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 3068
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby JackRiddler » Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:27 pm

Grizzly, you're such a good guy. I just wish you had not done that thing on the other thread.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15252
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby RocketMan » Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:57 am

The only candidate with a proven backbone and principles.

And see the way he immediately points out the corruption of BezosWashPost, beginning at about 3:56.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-I don't like hoodlums.
-That's just a word, Marlowe. We have that kind of world. Two wars gave it to us and we are going to keep it.
User avatar
RocketMan
 
Posts: 2763
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:02 am
Location: By the rivers dark
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby minime » Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:32 am

^^^^^^^ How can anyone watch that video and not vote for/be for Sanders?

Too bad the voting machines are running the election.
User avatar
minime
 
Posts: 1095
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 2:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby RocketMan » Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:41 am

minime » Thu Jul 18, 2019 6:32 pm wrote:^^^^^^^ How can anyone watch that video and not vote for/be for Sanders?

Too bad the voting machines are running the election.


INDEED.

The rest of them are different degrees of shady and/or wishy-washy. And Bernie is fringe establishment, even him, but he's the best shot at the moment.

If the DNC prevails over the masses, Bernie is sidelined AGAIN, and an establishment, right-wing democrat gets to the presidency after Trump's second term (which is highly probable if he goes against anyone else than Bernie)... It's the endgame. If the US state hasn't gone full on authoritarian-fascist by then.
-I don't like hoodlums.
-That's just a word, Marlowe. We have that kind of world. Two wars gave it to us and we are going to keep it.
User avatar
RocketMan
 
Posts: 2763
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:02 am
Location: By the rivers dark
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Elvis » Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:48 am

RocketMan wrote:And see the way he immediately points out the corruption of BezosWashPost, beginning at about 3:56.


And that's where Fred Ryan says, "Before we begin the program, I would like to thank our presenting sponsor — Bank of America."

:wallhead: :starz:
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 6651
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Grizzly » Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:49 am

^^^The show must go on...
If Barthes can forgive me, “What the public wants is the image of passion Justice, not passion Justice itself.”
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 3068
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Harvey » Thu Jul 18, 2019 6:49 pm

All any presidential candidate really has to do is explain this one image. Job done.

The argument at a glance.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
And while we spoke of many things, fools and kings
This he said to me
"The greatest thing
You'll ever learn
Is just to love
And be loved
In return"


Eden Ahbez
User avatar
Harvey
 
Posts: 2158
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (20)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 10 guests