High stakes in 2016

by | Feb 7, 2016 | 2016 Elections, Democrats, National Politics | 4 comments

Thomas Jefferson was George Washington’s Secretary of State. James Madison ran the State Department under Jefferson. So with Monroe under Madison and John Quincy Adams under Monroe. Powell and Rice are light years more popular than their fellow Bushies. Clearly, the role of foreign minister has a certain hold on the American People.

It was this prestige that made proto-candidate Clinton look like a titan. Representing the United States created an image of her as an apolitical leadership figure, a woman cast in marble. But politics ironically “humanizes” people. When she left the misty kingdoms of Foggy Bottom, her reputation was bound to reset–into the ultra-controversial figure she’s been for a generation.

Yet many if not most Democrats seem to be strolling into this election with the same wan assurance, or else indifference, that they evinced before Hillary re-entered the partisan theater. This is a fatal misjudgment. The fact is the stakes of this election are as high as of any race in memory.

There are two major reasons for this. First, we are at significant risk of losing. Donald Trump and Ted Cruz are indeed brewing electoral catastrophes. But Marco Rubio is a major threat. According to the RCP average, Rubio leads Hillary Clinton by basically the same margin that Clinton leads Trump. And the differential is widening. As readers know all too well, Art Pope is not stupid; there is a reason he’s funding Rubio.

And a Rubio Administration would be more hostile to working people than any since Grover Cleveland’s. A favorite of the hedge fund crowd, he would abolish Dodd-Frank outright. The ACA would be gone in an instant, replaced by something that’d weaken healthcare protections for all who can’t afford boutique medicine. His tax plan is ludicrously regressive. As for what would happen to social insurance, consider this: Paul Ryan himself is Speaker of the House. This is to say nothing of the fact that Rubio is an absolutist opponent of Choice and a RFRA enthusiast.

For these reasons, alarm bells need to be ringing loud and clear in Democratic circles. We need to invest the same energy into electing Hillary Clinton–or Bernie Sanders, if he should win–that we gave to Obama for America. We need to make a concrete case that we will provide more jobs, better healthcare and a generally greater quality of life than the GOP.  Those arguments happen to be true, and they are what can bring the voters to our side.

In short, we need to stop kicking back and waiting for a GOP meltdown. Think about it: Do you want to bet the future of the republic on the success of Donald Trump?

4 Comments

  1. Russell S. Day (@Transcendian)

    You wonderfully started with historical evidence. Deflation has been spoken. Economic events could give us Trump or Rubio.
    I’ve demanded that Elizabeth Warren run with Bernie Sanders from right now if personalities are to triumph. It is serious business and without Warren with Sanders what nation could we have? It is supposed to protect and educate at the least. Then it is meant to support and serve the people.
    Should the Clintons be back in the White House, or a Republican win our world will be some sort of theocratic oligarchy in great danger from within and without. Figured into world perceptions of our real enemies reactions to a Sanders Elizabeth Presidency, or Clintons again, or Trump, what world order and wars come up?
    Our allies, have we treated our allies well? What do these allies intend to do with the foreigners with Islam more to them than nations which they use thinking always of the infidel as a fool.
    The UN was asked to rewrite the Declaration of Human Rights by Saudi Arabia to not give more rights to women than they wanted them to have.
    The American people will really be screwed when world wide the middle classes know our currency is weak. How about Canada and Britain? We are supposed to be in it together.
    In it together.
    The starkest images of Wage Slavery were of the suicides of Foxcomm, who I believe were, and still do make screens and things for I Phones.
    The great historian Barbara Tuchman endorsed adoption of a Parliamentary form of government now, instead of the Presidential Electoral Democratic System.
    It is why I am encouraging people to write in Transcendian if they don’t like either candidate, we will find someone if the Party wins, is my thinking.

  2. cosmicjanitor

    Your patriotic flourish notwithstanding, Hillary Clinton is a liar, a scoundrel and a warmonger – as was her husband, who I mistakenly voted for in the belief that he was a true democratic populist. Bill Clinton past NAFTA after campaigning that he would never do such a thing to the auto workers of America – NAFTA was the job killing precursor of the present TPP/TISA/TTIP bundled trade agreements, which if ratified will give the Western Central Banks absolute control over all western governments, as well as the rule of law; Bill Clinton further conspired with Germany to dismantle the Yugoslav Republic in order to move NATO eastward into the Balkans to encircle and replace Russia as the major European energy supplier; and he unleashed the criminality of the too-big-to-fail banks by rescinding the Glass/Steagall Act – which resulted in the 2008 collapse of the global economy, the US. economy and which, through the Fed’s QE I/II&III to save these very same banks, exploded the US. debt to 19 trillion dollars – all of which the Fed collects interest on. Hillary is a fraud who will do as much damage, if not perhaps even more, than her husband, boy George Bush, Obama or Rubio, because she is also a staunch banking establishment insider for which party affiliation means nothing. Though not perfect by any means, Bernie Sanders is our only hope if we wish to prevent the banking establishment/MIC concocted GWOT from escalating into WWIII, because we stand at this very moment on the precipice of the Western Central Banks’ push for economic, as well as nuclear, Armageddon.

    • Joshua Berkov

      There is one reason, if for no other, that we Democrats need to support whomever is the nominee of our party. The Supreme Court. The next president will most likely have a chance to fill at least two vacancies on the high court. I don’t know about you, but I would prefer not to see anymore judges in the mold of Sam Alito confirmed to the bench.

      But getting to the main point of your response, Hillary Clinton is certainly not the transformative figure that Bernie Sanders would be or that we all thought Obama would be back in 2008, but she’s not without her strengths either. She is still a more honorable figure than any of her potential GOP opponents, and she really does have the experience to be commander in chief. Listen to the way she is able to talk about the issues that have come up in the debates. No other candidate in either party is able to discuss these issues with the level of knowledge and understanding that she so clearly demonstrates. You may not like her, but we could do a whole lot worse.

    • Sanderson Alumnus

      Bernie Sanders is a Socialist. He will get trounced in a general election. If he is truly the only hope, I suggest getting used to the cold Canadian winters you’re going to be living in when you move there before next January.

Related Posts

GET UPDATES

Get the latest posts from PoliticsNC delivered right to your inbox!

You have Successfully Subscribed!