3 ms·

>It's one reporter's take on current events. Where "one reporter" was once Secretary of Labor.

vinceguidry 11y ago
Fine, whatever. It's still bad analysis. He makes sweeping conclusions built on little but a smattering of incoherent facts. He's pandering to an audience.
- narag 11y ago
  There's something different this time, though. I have paid some attention to the last three or four of your primaries and there has always been a guy in the role that Sanders is playing now. Sanders still seems to have a chance after a handful of states. That's a change for sure. And the explanation seems plausible. Unless you think Sanders is charismatic leader, worshipped by the masses, it must be a change in the voters part.
  - vinceguidry 11y ago
    Sure, something's different. It's the nature of politics. The game is changing. This guy makes the argument that America has changed. It hasn't. Still the same ole' 'Murica. What's changed is social media. Everybody gets excited over their pet independent candidate every single election. But now these indies can get their issues taken seriously by end-running establishment control over the news cycle. The media creates the perception of who is winning and who is losing. Politicians trick the media into giving them coverage. They can build momentum by building awareness. Voters can only choose who they're aware of, for the reasons the media gives them. American voters are only a fraction of the population, only a quarter of Americans vote. Three quarters of Americans don't care enough about politics to cast a vote. I'm one of them. This 4 year endeavor to place someone in the most powerful office in the world better resembles a bush-league pro wrestling circuit than anything like Serious Business. But that's not even the strangest part. The strange part is that this is how it's been running for decades. Sanders is not worshipped by the masses. He's merely running a flashier campaign than Hillary, so we see him more in the media. Ditto for Trump. America is the same, it's politics that's changing. I'd prefer Hillary over Trump or Sanders, but any of them would do a decent job. Trump's basically a liberal anyway, if you look at his positions over time, he actually looks fairly reasonable. I'd prefer Hillary because she'd be able to actually get things done with Congress.
    - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
      > I'd prefer Hillary because she'd be able to actually get things done with Congress. No chance. Not with Congress the way it is now, and run by Republicans. Neither will Sanders.
      - vinceguidry 11y ago
        They said that about Obama, but he still got shit done. The Repubs can't obstruct forever, and the Dems have learned how to deal with those tactics. The weird thing out our democracy is, it's getting more democratic, even with pathetic turnout, the public exerts more of an influence on the news cycle, and that drives the political agenda.
        dragonwriter 11y ago
        > They said that about Obama, but he still got shit done. Mostly in the first half-term, with a Democratic Congressional majority -- his signature legislative accomplishments (Affordable Care Act, ARRA) were achieved then. > The weird thing out our democracy is, it's getting more democratic No, its not. > even with pathetic turnout, the public exerts more of an influence on the news cycle, and that drives the political agenda. There's a number of forces steering things in between there, assuring that the impact that the news cycle has (because of the spin on the events, even if the public exerts more influence on which events get attention -- which is a dubious proposition, I think) reflects a fairly narrow set of biases held by the powerful. There doesn't seem to be any evidence that the substantive policy output of the political system is becoming better aligned with the strength of views in the public, such that the net effect of any of this would be "more democratic."
      - dragonwriter 11y ago
        > No chance. Not with Congress the way it is now, and run by Republicans. Neither will Sanders. 100% of the House and 1/3 of the Senate is up for election at the same time as the President. There's no particularly strong reason to believe that the next Congress must look like the current Congress.
    - 11y ago

Fine, whatever. It's still bad analysis. He makes sweeping conclusions built on little but a smattering of incoherent facts. He's pandering to an audience.

narag 11y ago
There's something different this time, though. I have paid some attention to the last three or four of your primaries and there has always been a guy in the role that Sanders is playing now. Sanders still seems to have a chance after a handful of states. That's a change for sure. And the explanation seems plausible. Unless you think Sanders is charismatic leader, worshipped by the masses, it must be a change in the voters part.
- vinceguidry 11y ago
  Sure, something's different. It's the nature of politics. The game is changing. This guy makes the argument that America has changed. It hasn't. Still the same ole' 'Murica. What's changed is social media. Everybody gets excited over their pet independent candidate every single election. But now these indies can get their issues taken seriously by end-running establishment control over the news cycle. The media creates the perception of who is winning and who is losing. Politicians trick the media into giving them coverage. They can build momentum by building awareness. Voters can only choose who they're aware of, for the reasons the media gives them. American voters are only a fraction of the population, only a quarter of Americans vote. Three quarters of Americans don't care enough about politics to cast a vote. I'm one of them. This 4 year endeavor to place someone in the most powerful office in the world better resembles a bush-league pro wrestling circuit than anything like Serious Business. But that's not even the strangest part. The strange part is that this is how it's been running for decades. Sanders is not worshipped by the masses. He's merely running a flashier campaign than Hillary, so we see him more in the media. Ditto for Trump. America is the same, it's politics that's changing. I'd prefer Hillary over Trump or Sanders, but any of them would do a decent job. Trump's basically a liberal anyway, if you look at his positions over time, he actually looks fairly reasonable. I'd prefer Hillary because she'd be able to actually get things done with Congress.
  - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
    > I'd prefer Hillary because she'd be able to actually get things done with Congress. No chance. Not with Congress the way it is now, and run by Republicans. Neither will Sanders.
    - vinceguidry 11y ago
      They said that about Obama, but he still got shit done. The Repubs can't obstruct forever, and the Dems have learned how to deal with those tactics. The weird thing out our democracy is, it's getting more democratic, even with pathetic turnout, the public exerts more of an influence on the news cycle, and that drives the political agenda.
      - dragonwriter 11y ago
        > They said that about Obama, but he still got shit done. Mostly in the first half-term, with a Democratic Congressional majority -- his signature legislative accomplishments (Affordable Care Act, ARRA) were achieved then. > The weird thing out our democracy is, it's getting more democratic No, its not. > even with pathetic turnout, the public exerts more of an influence on the news cycle, and that drives the political agenda. There's a number of forces steering things in between there, assuring that the impact that the news cycle has (because of the spin on the events, even if the public exerts more influence on which events get attention -- which is a dubious proposition, I think) reflects a fairly narrow set of biases held by the powerful. There doesn't seem to be any evidence that the substantive policy output of the political system is becoming better aligned with the strength of views in the public, such that the net effect of any of this would be "more democratic."
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      > No chance. Not with Congress the way it is now, and run by Republicans. Neither will Sanders. 100% of the House and 1/3 of the Senate is up for election at the same time as the President. There's no particularly strong reason to believe that the next Congress must look like the current Congress.
  - 11y ago