UPDATE
New York Times polls shows likely
Democratic caucus-goers, 25 percent, pick Sanders as their first choice in next
month’s caucuses. That gives Sanders a 7-point lead over his closest
competitor, former South Bend (Ind.) Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who is at 18 percent,
roughly tied for second place with former Vice President Joe Biden at 17
percent and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts at 14 percent. Sen. Amy
Klobuchar of Minnesota is in fifth place, at 8 percent, the only other
candidate above the low single digits.
New York Times Endorses Amy Klobuchar or Elizabeth Warren
On the Democratic side, an essential debate is underway between two visions that may define the future of the party and perhaps the nation. Some in the party view President Trump as an aberration and believe that a return to a more sensible America is possible. Then there are those who believe that President Trump was the product of political and economic systems so rotten that they must be replaced.
At the dawn of 2020, some of the most compelling ideas are not emerging from the center, but from the left wing of the Democratic Party. That’s a testament to the effectiveness of the case that Bernie Sanders and Senator Warren have made about what ails the country. We worry about ideological rigidity and overreach, and we’d certainly push back on specific policy proposals
But we are also struck by how much more effectively their messages have matched the moment.
Ms. Warren’s path to the nomination is challenging, but not hard to envision. The four front-runners are bunched together both in national polls and surveys in states holding the first votes, so small shifts in voter sentiment can have an outsize influence this early in the campaign. There are plenty of progressives who are hungry for major change but may harbor lingering concerns about a messenger as divisive as Mr. Sanders. At the same time, some moderate Democratic primary voters see Ms. Warren as someone who speaks to their concerns about inequality and corruption. Her earlier leaps in the polls suggest she can attract more of both.
The lack of a single, powerful moderate voice in this Democratic race is the strongest evidence of a divided party.
Good news, then, that Amy Klobuchar has emerged as a standard-bearer for the Democratic center. Her vision goes beyond the incremental. Given the polarization in Washington and beyond, the best chance to enact many progressive plans could be under a Klobuchar administration.
My initial impressions of the NYTimes endorsement:
ReplyDelete1. They don't think Biden has much chance. Didn't spend much time on him. He is too old.
2. They think the progressives have a good chance of winning the Democratic nomination; they much prefer Warren to Sanders. They hope this might give her some momentum.
3. They would really rather have a centrist that would make slow progress, and Klobuchar is their best bet, but an unlikely bet. Maybe the endorsement will get her out ahead of the centrist pack.
My initial impressions:
ReplyDelete1. Why are they doing this? If Klobuchar and Warren are both out by the July convention, will the Times graciously endorse their third choice? Or their two second choices? Or their third and fourth choice? Or what?
2. The editorial sounds less like an endorsement and more like the old candy jingle: "Sometimes you feel like a nut. Sometimes you don’t. Almond Joy has nuts; Mounds don’t." Klobuchar is an Mounds; Warren is Almond Joy. The Times usually prefers Mounds, it says, but maybe this time is different.
3. I can think, just sitting here, of four scenarios under which the Republican candidate is not Donald J. Trump. There are eight months in which one could happen. In which case, the editorial is pure mush.
It is an anyone but Bernie endorsement. Progressives you should choose Warren, but Democrats you should get behind Klobuchar who has a better chance of implementing some mildly progressive ideas.
DeleteHahaha! "Sometimes you feel like a nut ..."
DeleteYes, I agree with Jack that this is an any anyone but Bernie (and I'll add anyone but Joe) endorsement.
I think Bernie is the more attractive of the two progressives (unless you count Yang). Warren's manic style that borders on hysteria rubs me the wrong way. The way she played coy about the cost of Medicare For All--which Bernie had to explain for her in one debate--made me feel that she would not do well in an honest debate with Trump. How hard is it to say that she believes you'll pay more in taxes, but that will be offset by paying zero for medical care?
Both Warren and Bernie seem to be proving that old stereotype that if there are two leftists in a room full of enemies, they'll turn on each other.
Another problem that I see with Warren is that she has a habit of taking the bait if someone tries to get under her skin. Trump is a typical playground bully in that if he senses a weak spot that's where he will keep poking. Case in point, the Pocahontas thing. Warren admitted that claiming native heritage was a mistake, and that it sprang from one of those family legends. She apologized, and at that point should have shrugged her shoulders and moved on. Instead she did the DNA test. And of course Trump welched on his bet and kept needling her.
DeleteAnd lately she has gotten into a hassle with Bernie because he claims he doesn't remember saying that a woman couldn't win. Maybe he was lying, maybe not. But she said, "Did, too!" And he said "Did, not!" And so on and so forth.
Trump will get her off on a tangent when she needs to stay focused.
I think Tom is right that it's way too premature for the NYT to be making endorsements. About the 4 ways in which Trump might not be the R candidate; let me guess: impeachment, 25th amendment, death or serious illness, or he decides to resign. Amiright? I think they are all outside chances, but stranger things have happened.
About the D candidate, let the people decide.
Katherine, Close. I don't expect anything from the 25th Amendment as long as he can Tweet for himself. I did, however, include in my thinking the old adage about the politician who would win unless he was found in bed with a dead Boy Scout or a live Girl Scout. If he and a bimbo, maybe even from the Cabinet were caught with his pants and her glasses off, the base might melt away.
DeleteKatherine, yes, Warren might get nettled, though I think she can probably offer pretty good retorts--of that's what we want in a presidential debate.
DeleteI honestly think the Democratic candidate would do well to decline "debates" with Trump in favor of fielding questions from conservative thinkers and commentators like William Krystol, George Will, George Conway, etc., who have already rejected Trump as a nut case.
Let Trump tweet and have fits in his own sandbox, and isolate him from the larger conversation.
Tom, I think the addage refers to a dead girl or a live boy. I doubt either would make any difference to the True Deplorables.
Jean, good idea about fielding questions from the so-done-with-Trump conservatives. Because the Dems need them, or at least need them not to decide Trump would be the lesser of two evils.
DeleteJean. Yeah.I noticed I had switched the sexes. But I figured I had been tacky enough already it would be better not to issue a correction. I do disagree, though, about the deplorables being willing to forgive current failings. Not if they are egregious enough. They can always tell themselves that the president backslid but repented. But if he gets caught now in front of everybody, they will know they have been kidding themselves.
DeleteTwo, no, three comments about the NY Times editorial board endorsement(s):
ReplyDelete1. tldr, at least beyond the first 10-15 paragraphs. That's a symptom; see #4 below (it turns out I have four points to make).
2. One of the daily enewsletters that landed in my inbox this morning - it happened to be a conservative one, but I don't think this particular point is ideological - noted that this (these) is (are) the endorsement(s), not of the newspaper, but of the newspaper's editorial board. I've read similar stuff in the past about newspaper endorsements - that the paper's official endorsements are not made by the editorial board but the big boss (publisher? owner?)
3. An endorsement of two opponents is silly. And it's contradictory. It's like walking into a voting booth and casting half a ballot for Carter and half a ballot for Reagan. When you endorse someone, you pick a lane. You don't get to pick two lanes - that just earns you a moving violation and a roadside sobriety test.
4. Seems the NY Times editorial board isn't united. Maybe that's liberalism in small these days. A united editorial board could have made its case in about 1/5 of the column inches.
Donald Trump divided the GOP, then he divided the country. Now he's apparently dividing liberal institutions. The rest of the world awaits.
Great analysis, especially
DeleteWhen you endorse someone, you pick a lane. You don't get to pick two lanes - that just earns you a moving violation and a roadside sobriety test.
I definitely agree about picking a lane.
DeleteBut I have written editorials for three newspaper groups, and I never heard any indication of whom the publisher liked before an endorsement. Usually it isn't hard to guess. I do remember one endorsement (for a lower level office) when the publisher stuck his head in my door and said, "I bet you think I am ticked off about that, but I'm not. I just didn't think you guys had it in you." Whatever that meant.
The NYT editorial board was divided, hence the split endorsement. We issued similar endorsements of local/state candidates at a newspaper I worked for, giving reasons why we were split. Readers liked it. I suppose in a smaller local paper it helps residents feel that that editors have balance.
DeleteWhat the board seems to be divided on is not so much the candidate as the mood of the country. That tells me that, despite dispatching reporters to interview everyone wearing a baseball cap or a tattoo of Mother between the Appalachians and the Kansas River, Mr. Jones still hasn't the faintest idea of what's happening in flyover country.
DeleteTom, I have lived in flyover country my whole life, and I don't have the faintest idea what's happening here. How can a bunch of East Coasters figure it out?
DeleteOutside of southern Michigan, residents have always feared black people and Indian tribes, and there have always been isolated pockets of inbred rural weirdos (northern hillbillies).
But generally this was a good place to live, owing to the niceness of our Canadian immigrants, even if the weather and people were a bit chilly.
Lately, the racists and weirdos seem to be worse, possibly because of the demise of good blue-collar jobs that brought them into contact with more diverse people and had a civilizing effect. I also blame the rise in popularity of country and western music. You go to the local cafe these days, and you might as well be in West Virginny. They even serve grits now, a dish that was heretofore confined to towns on the Indiana-Ohio border.
More Canadians, please! Bring butter tarts.
I also blame the rise in popularity of country and western music. You go to the local cafe these days, and you might as well be in West Virginny.
ReplyDeleteCould you elaborate on this? I am currently watching the "Country Music" mini-series on DVD; got half way through last weekend.
We must be watching the same thing, though I refuse to pay to listen to it, so we're watching it on Saturday reruns on PBS.
DeleteThis music tends to be sentimental--often crossing the line into bathos--about blind loyalty to family, Jesus, and nationalism. Other popular themes are about fighting to keep your man or woman, or getting violent revenge for perceived insults. And, of course, cheatin' and drinkin'.
The music lends itself to singers with a limited vocal range, and can be played on three chords. It is predictably in 4/4 time. (There are exceptions, of course.)
The "cleverest" song lyrics rely on obvious word play ("you ain't woman enough to take my man") and hackneyed imagery ("hear the lonesome whipoorwill"). Some devolve into muddled syntax ( "I'm proud to be an American where at least I know I'm free").
There is a strain of country and western music that offers more complex vocal harmonies (Sons of the Pioneers). Bluegrass and Western swing showcase instrumental accomplishment and improvisation. However, these are not generally the songs one hears on Classic Country stations.
I realize that many similar complaints could be leveled at all types of popular music, but C&W, in my view, is pitched at the lowest common denominator in terms of theme, poetry, and musical style. There is little that elevates.
A steady diet of this stuff leads to wearing cowboy hats and flying Confederate flags, common sights in Michigan, where we have never been cowboys, and where our ancestors died to preserve the Union. The ubiquity of C&W music has eroded our heritage as Yankee Midwesterners, replacing regional music like Motown, ushering in culinary atrocities like grits, and fostering a tolerance for the worst sorts of right-wing fervor.
I really like some artists, think Alison Krauss or Nickel Creek. But there is a certain type of sing-songy nasal whine that hasn't changed in 50 years, only the lyrics change, that kind I'm not crazy about.
DeleteJean,
DeleteThere seems to be a lot of perversion of religion in country music.
The emphasis upon nostalgia, the good ole days, when things were better. Of course like Trumps “make America great again’ this nostalgia seems to ignore all the things that were not so good.
The double standards. Its o.k. to go out partying , drinking, etc. on Saturday night so long as you sober up enough to be in church on Sunday morning because of course Jesus has forgiven everything.
The exultation of idyllic family life, and idyllic love even at the same time the person is tied up in pursuing success, competing with others, and being unfaithful. This seems to have played itself out in the lives of the performers as well as in their music.
How commercial values dominate everything. I did not know that WLS in Chicago stood for world’s largest store, i.e. Sears. How many stations were really built to market a specific business. The most bizarre was the quack doctor in Kansas or someplace nearby who performed goat testicle replacement therapy. His whole station was built about selling himself. When he was finally run out of the medical profession, he went to the other side of the Mexican border where he could build a station to blast clear across the continent without federal government regulation. And the country stars followed him there.
I grew up in the steel towns of the south of Pittsburgh. There was ethnic culture among the older generations. I knew of the Wheeling Jamboree. My aunt’s husband did play guitar and went to a local “barn”. A remember a few popular C&W songs. But not much of that was played on the Pittsburg radio stations. By the time I was in graduate school I was a public radio, classical music fan, and resented it when I traveled too far from cities and could not get a local public radio station.
I am doing the series mainly because I was never interested in County music. I find the attempt to identify the roots of American culture in folk music or African-American music something that completely ignores my roots in Catholicism and its various ethnic incarnations. I don’t identify with WASP culture either high or low. I tend to be suspicious of both.
Jean, "Hear that lonesome whipoorwill; he sounds too blue to fly" was written by the same Hank Willliams (in all known halls of fame) who wrote songs good enough for Tony Bennett to sing. He even wrote the hit (on pop charts) song that Homer & Jethro (of WLS)parodied as:
Delete"Your liver may be warm, but you have got a cold, cold heart."
Jethro (Burns) went on to appear often on Prairie Home Companion after Homer died.
I think some of the commentators here have been perhaps influenced by Steve Goodman's country song that became "perfect" after he wrote a verse about Mom getting out of prison, coming home on a train and him, drunk, meeting her in the rain at the station in a pickup truck. Very funny. But hardly doing justice to the Carter Family, Williams, Ernest Tubb, Bill Monroe, Loretta Lynn, Dolly Parton Willie Nelson and Waylon Jennings, whose "MacArthur Park can and should be heard (I've won bets on this) at:
ttps://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Macarthur+park+revisited
And, if you prefer something a little more uptown, remember that the beloved Woody Guthrie ("This Land Is Your Land") was as country as it gets, and Minnesota Bob Dylan got a lot of his early inspiration in country. And neither Guthrie nor Dylan sang "hillbillly."
Katherine, I liked Allison Krauss enough to swap a spare June Christie "Something Cool" CD for one of hers.
I like jazz, show tunes and classical and some rock, albeit nothing after the Jefferson Airplane became the Jefferson Starship. And Sen. Marsha Blackburn, of Nashville, is no relation. (She is from Mississippi anyway.)
Jack, the Lord in His C/W music incarnation is unrecognizeable to me, too, though I am not Catholic by birth and have Scots-Irish-Welsh heritage, supposedly where all that music came from.
DeleteTom, I am not a music lover in my elder years. I used to sing well enough to do a couple of paid coffee house gigs in high school. But now, more often than not, the sensation is one of sound blaring at me. Or a few bars get stuck in my head in a way that is unpleasant and makes me lose focus. Going to The Boy's jazz concerts nearly drives me mad.
I mentioned this to my doctor, actually, and she told me that the simplest remedy is to "quit listening to music if it hurts." So I have.
FWIW, I'm also not much of a country music fan, although I do think Alison Krauss is wonderful. Like Jack, I grew up in an industrial town where country music was not "native". In the places I happened to grow up (in Michigan and Illinois), white workers from the South moved north, looking for factory jobs, just like black workers from the South had done 1-2 generations earlier, and the white workers brought country music with them. That's my amateur sociological explanation.
DeleteAnd at the risk of committing heresy: I'm also not much of a fan of Ken Burns documentaries. I enjoyed the Civil War series that came out eons ago. The Prohibition series was pretty good. Other than that, those series don't do much for me. In my little world, the series on National Parks is a bye-word for unstimulating content.
Caused a commotion in our building and in our family! So I said a lot of things I won't repeat here. But how about this:
ReplyDeleteTHE NYTimes has resigned itself to the re-election of Trumpiscle and wants to show that two women can get their endorsement even if they're not going to win. I am happy to see Amy K. getting a nod. In the meantime, check out Paul Krugman's attack on Bernie & Co. in todays (1/21) paper.
Finally, this notice today from the NYT: "Our distributor will no long deliver papers on Saturday[!!!] Saturday will now get delivered with Sunday..."
Duh! Find another distributor! Or maybe we should cancel.
It appears to me that the "papers" want their readers to go paperless. (That gets rid of all "the independent contractors" who deliver them and whom a President Warren or Sanders would force them to classify as employees, with benefits.) Then, of course, they will up the price for the paperless papers. Saturday news on Sunday is a perversion of every cry of "Extra!" ever uttered, and as phony as the "breaking news" TV babblers are always touting as they introduce a story that happened eight hours earlier, and go to their "exclusive" interview with someone who was on another network yesterday and will be on a third network tomorrow morning.
DeleteOne of our boys had a paper route for awhile. But I would guess that it's been 15 years or so since I've seen a kid out delivering papers. It's adults who have routes now, some of whom have disabilities of one sort and another. And that is even drying up now, because like Tom said, people are going paperless. We did.
DeleteMargaret, now I'm curious, tell us more about the commotion.
I did find the Paul Krugman piece. In fact I found five Paul Krugman articles about Bernie. I gather he's not a fan.
After studiously ignoring Bernie the establishment media (confronted with the failure of Biden to unite the Democratic establishment behind his candidacy, and the failure of Warren to take over control of the progressive) are trying to prevent Sanders from winning.
DeleteSanders has the great advantage of the small scale contributors. I don't have to do anything to support him other than every few weeks respond to his daily e-mails for funding.
Beyond that he founded the grass roots organization, Our Revolution, which has been organizing around local candidates and issues here in Ohio among many other places. They are having a statewide meeting in Columbus the coming weekend.
My sense locally is that Warren as a woman candidate has a lot of enthusiasm among young women. She may still overtake Sanders and win the progressive side of the part. Maybe the Times endorsement will help, maybe some early victories will give her momentum.
I listen to the Commonweal podcast this morning in which they interviewed Eugene McCarraher on The Enchantments of Mammon. David Bentley Hart who is also very critical of capitalism has a thumbs up review of the book. McCarraher endorsed Bernie on the podcast.
Is Commonweal moving in the direction of being critical of capitalism? and more favorable to Democratic reform candidates?
A far as I am concerned, Biden and Sanders both age out and so are not ideal. Both would be in their 80s by the end of their first term. I was not half the man at 80 that I was at 78. I just don't want to go there.
DeleteOur Fearless Leader is 73. I just don't want to go there, either, for a second term. His age is the least of his problems. Even Biden or Sanders not at their best would be better than that. Time will tell who is our alternative. I would add that a half-hearted vote counts just as much as an enthusiastic one.
DeleteKatherine, re commotion: As far as I know there is one registered Republican in our building of 65 apartments. That tells you about the political environment.
DeleteMy good friend and neighbor is a Warren (and/or Bernie) fan. She told me last week she had heard that the Times was going to announce its endorsement on some puffy TV thing they do (turned out to be a documentary [edited]of the editorial staffs interviews with the Dem candidates). I doubted she'd heard right, but she had. I said it was far too early, etc.,etc.
On Monday when the endorsement appeared on the editorial page, I was shocked and sent her a note saying, the NYTimes was surrepticiously plumping for Trump by endorsing TWO candidates, Klobuchar and Warren. Kind of a joke. But let's face it the Trump presidency is a major economic boon to the Times (and the WashPost). Kind of a joke!
In our household, Mr. Calm very carefully ran through all the reasons why the editorial endoresment was not ridiculous, but based on the argument that the Dems were divided by moderate/progressive impulses, and it made sense for them to endorse one of each. I thought there argument against Biden and Sanders was ageist (even though I'm in that territory age-wise, and I wouldn't vote for me); the argument against Buttgieg and Bloomberg where superficial (especially since half the Times staff must be Buttgieg's age mates, and none of them have very gotten 11,000 votes).
Finally, everyone agreed to disagree and we went out to eat lunch. That was the commotion, which mostly reflects my deep,deep disappointment with the New York Times becoming such a shoddy newspaper. Amen!
Sorry for the typos!
DeleteI am *so* bummed about the impending demise of the Saturday editions of newspapers. Saturday morning is the one day of the week I actually have time to sit down and really read the newspaper. Well, not all Saturdays but some.
DeleteThe other thing about the Saturday paper is that bad political and economic news is released on Friday evenings, specifically to make sure it lands in the relatively little-watched Saturday news cycles. Saturday newspapers are required reading for current events!
Hold off Jim! I've checked with my neighbors! No one else got it. So....the Times is pis*** at me for being a critical reader, OR this was fake (though it certainly looked real, etc. etc. I did write to the "HELP!" link about this but haven't heard back. Will keep you posted.
DeleteAnd yes, the virtue of the Saturday paper is that half of Sunday...books, real estate, metropolitan etc. comes with the Saturday paper so there's time to get in a couple of laps.
The NYTimes was delivered on Saturday, and there have been several apologies from the HELP! robot. I am of the view that the algorithm went berserk.
DeleteIf Bernie gets the nomination, there will be no need for an election. Just hand it to Trump and forget the expense. Bernie is NOT a Democrat. Anyone who calls himself a socialist of any stripe will turn off a significant portion of the electorate to the point of guaranteeing defeat.
ReplyDeleteThe Democrats, of which I have been a life-long member, now has way too many of its share of "nuts."
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteJimmy Mac, But are the nuts?
ReplyDelete-- the ones who want to plunge ahead and (re)create the Great Society to make it greater?
-- Or the ones who think they should nominate someone who is nice and willing to meet half way with people who think tax cuts for the 1 percent pay for themselves, and who expect to work across the aisle --"Democrats and Republicans alike," as Bob Michel used to say -- with Addison M. McConnell?
The people I see on Facebook who are pitching a fit about socialism are still conflating it with communism. They think socialism is a stalking horse for totalitarianism. They especially think of it as being anti-religion.
DeleteWe say we have a two-party system, but I can think of at least 6 parties within those two parties. It's no wonder we we have trouble arriving at a consensus.
DeleteYou can't encourage (only the Congress creates) any kind of society if you can't get elected. As of October 2017, Gallup polling found that 31% of Americans identified as Democrat, 24% identified as Republican, and 42% as Independent. I suspect that a large number of so-called Independents are really Republicans at heart, but can't bide what the Republican party has become. It's not the "Bernie bros" or the uber left who will persuade those Independents to vote against Trump. Waving the socialist meme in their faces might cause the loony left to wet its collective pants in excitement, but not the rest of the voting public. The object is to DEFEAT TRUMP! Once that happens then the task of persuading Congress and the voting public to see one's point of view will begin. No defeat of Trump; no "Great Society redux."
DeleteYeah, I get it. How many judges did Obama get confirmed?
DeleteHow many judges that Obama proposed would Moscow Mitch even allow to be considered? You can't persuade someone who swore on day one not to work with you: https://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/obama-nominations-blocked-senate-judges-217589. Unless the Senate flips in 2020, whoever the Democratic president will be will find the same problem, even if he is a white male.
DeleteI suppose someone could argue that, in endorsing two candidates, the NYT is highlighting the left-moderate divide in the Democratic Party.
ReplyDeleteHere's an interesting article on Bernie Sanders' foreign policy positions, which have evolved since he became a candidate. If some find his economic ideas scary, his foreign policy ones seem pretty mainstream.
ReplyDeleteThe New York Times poll in Iowa is not good news for their Editorial endorsements. Their two candidates placed 4th and 5th in the running. Maybe their endorsement will turn things around for their candidates?
ReplyDeleteWhy is Sanders surging? Because he has a strong grassroots network from 2016. They have made five million phone calls and are now increasing the goal to ten million. Sanders supporters are not only organizing for the Ohio primary, they are sending people to Iowa.
The underside of Sanders' fan base:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/27/us/politics/bernie-sanders-internet-supporters-2020.html
SNIP:
Since the start of Mr. Sanders’s first presidential campaign in 2016, his colossal online support base has been by turns a source of peerless strength and perpetual aggravation — envied and caricatured by rivals who covet such loyalty, feared by Democrats who have faced harassment from his followers, and alternately cherished and gently scolded by the candidate himself."
"Some progressive activists who declined to back Mr. Sanders have begun traveling with private security after incurring online harassment. Several well-known feminist writers said they had received death threats. A state party chairwoman changed her phone number. A Portland lawyer saw her business rating tumble on an online review site after tussling with Sanders supporters on Twitter."
"
Yes, read this story this morning. The behavior reminds me of the AOC's chief of staff who took liberties with her opinions. He got canned, but this sounds a lot like Trumpism on the left....
DeleteThree facts about Sanders:
ReplyDelete1. He is NOT a Democrat.
2. I am 79 and I KNOW that he is too old for the job.
3. This country will NOT vote for someone who calls himself a Socialist, no matter how he clarifies the term.
I have always been curious about how he got to be considered a Democrat. Anyone know the story?
Delete