Coming February 6, 2024 . . .
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
Coming February 6, 2024 . . . MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
By Adam Nossiter from Paris @ NYTimes.com, April 25
Whole article reporting that the race has become a much worse version of Melenchon = Bernie and Macron = Hillary. Recommended. Oh and gets into some of the nuances, too.
Comments
Also sounds vaguely familiar somehow:
French Mayor Of Town That Voted For Marine Le Pen Wants To Quit Because Of ‘Assholes’
Daniel Delomez says he regrets using the word.
by artappraiser on Tue, 04/25/2017 - 10:57pm
Not giving Macron an unconditional endorsement seems like normal smart politics. Bernie I think made the mistake of not pushing Clinton more to the left, and she spent the general election courting suburban affluent conservatives instead of courting the working class. Nuances aside, Melenchon understandably wants to avoid Macron now assuming his left flank is covered and just going after Fillionaires. It would have helped Clinton save the swing states if she had shuffled a bit to the left just like it will help Macron get the turnout he needs. So let me edit your first comment - it will be a much
worsebetter version of Melenchon=Bernie and Macron=Hillary.by Obey on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 4:30am
"she spent the general election courting suburban affluent conservatives instead of courting the working class" - more cowbell!!! It's so disheartening when wise people spout so much derived BS. Here's Hillary & team's October speech schedule - you can find other months in the archives. Note all the speeches around PA, OH (affluent conservatives in metro Youngstown, Canton & Steubenville?), Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, North Carolina.... yeah, she had surrogates like Bernie and Bill and Chelsea for much of this. But who was Hillary courting? I remember concerts in Miami to get out the Hispanic vote, in Cleveland to get out the Black vote, Jon Bon Jovi in PA to get out the white working class vote (at least I don't think affluent conservatives listen to him), and a variety of Katie Perry and other female singers to get out both women and millennials. I remember a very impressive ad targeting people with disabled children/family members highlighting both health care & Americans with Disabilities Act, and other issues programming I've since forgotten.
Yes, she did some fundraising with affluent backers during this, but it's not like that she ignored huge swaths of voters. She lost Michigan by 11,000 votes out of 4.5 million cast - would focusing more on white working class voters there have lost her more white suburban voters than blue collars she picked up? Wisconsin down 23,000 out of 2.8 million votes - with progressive hero Russ Feingold going county by county on his own listening tour, thinking he'd have an easy win and still losing - do you really think that besides 20/20 hindsight there was an obvious signal to follow there? Florida 114,000 out of over 9 million votes, North Carolina an impressive 175,000 down out of 4.5 million despite months of publicized voter obstruction.
What was this populist appeal to white voters that was going to counter Florida Cubans being pissed at Obama's trip to Cuba or to counter headlines like:
Obamacare premiums to soar 22% on average - Oct. 24, 2016
Here's an illegal solicitation of $2 million in Kentucky from Chinese sources to
How many other places did this happen that weren't revealed by a sting? Trump may have personally spent less money on his campaign, but how much did Russians, hidden colluding GOP groups and other illegal activities? And yet we're going back down this pithy whine about how she didn't engage the semi-rural white voters more. Well, even if she had spent a month giving talks, it would have mostly been drowned out by Russian-funded disinformation campaign and media-sponsored "both sides do it, so now let's talk about Trump" domination, and a bigger push to stop blacks from voting, and and more hacks & Wikileaks, etc., etc. aside from the general difficulty of how to counter an Obama-led malaise while carrying his Democratic mantle. Hillary never said she was a shoe-in - that was one of the ages-old bogus talking points forever and ever and ever. Yeah, she could have done better, but she was also constantly fighting off unexpected illegal attacks - August and September and October surprised. I hope to hell more concrete undeniable info on the Russian influence on Congress and the FBI and fake news comes out so we can quit this facile "she should have just done better" after-the-fact counseling.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 5:40am
Wow someone hasn't had their morning coffe yet. Yes Peracles, she was a wonderful candidate and I'm sorry to try to learn lessons from her losing to the second worst candidate and campaign in American history. Yes we have the benefit of hindsight, which we should use, imho. Yes there were other factors, like having terrible cybersecurity measures in place, another lesson learned by Macron. And not handling the email scandal better and earlier. Sure, blame the press but Obama himself called the pr handling of it as malpractice. But we deal with all of them and don't just ignore the ones who hurt our preferred candidate's feelings. I was thinking of strategy stuff coming out of the campaign like:
http://time.com/4486321/hillary-clinton-outreach-republican-voters/
Or you think Time was in on the fix and subtly trying to sink her campaign by making it look like this was the overarching strategy while the campaign was secretly trying to signal otherwise.
by Obey on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 6:25am
Another BS remark, thank you so much. As full disclosure, I'm overdosing on coffee rather than abstaining, but better that than the Jim Jones extra-diesel koolaid that seems in plentiful supply.
No, Trump wasn't the "second worst candidate and campaign in American history", as he rolled over every other Republican candidate with 0 problemo.
No, I didn't say Hillary was a "wonderful candidate", as you can see for yourself by re-reading my response if you're not suffering from the shock and pshaw of having your repeat of overly superficial "conventional wisdom" swatted away. I've said a number of times (dozens? perhaps not to 100 yet) that her messaging wasn't simple & to the point enough, but I'm flabbergasted by how a tsunami of illegal and difficult hurdles structural hurdles and heaps of outright media slander along with inheriting a rather uninspiring party performance & reputation, but still stayed competitive and even winning the popular vote - how could this make her the "worst candidate and campaign in American history"?
I remember Michael Dukakis, aka "Snoopy", in his tank. Al Gore answering a question re: what to say to youth with a discourse on retirement lock boxes, Walter Mondale for God's sake, and chatterbox Hubert Humphrey that seemed like he'd hacking NoDoze and got 1 lodged in his sinuses, not to mention Gary Hart's aborted "catch me if you can", John Edwards poverty pimping love-child disaster, Jesse Jackson's "Hymietown" meltdown, Ross Perot's helicopter/doberman freakout, and countless other shitty performances. (Ben Carson? Mike Gravel?)
Perhaps you expect your hyperbole to be taken at face value, or worse, perhaps you even believe this yourself. Me, I don't have to accept such a warped, self-defeating framing, and think that if we're going to reorganize the party, it ain't gonna be with completely screwed up reality challenged summaries as this one.
Here's the thing - Hillary largely won the 3 debates, an outstanding performance - if you're a Democrat. If you're not, she lost. Even though Trump lied, stalked, was incoherent, sounded like he'd been snorting coke...
Besides the oft-quoted protest against the establishment, there was an amazing amount of abandonment of reality last year. Remember when Mitt Romney was bashed mercilessly for saying "folders full of women" along with putting his dog's kennel box on the station wagon roof? That was just 5 years ago, Or when Joe Biden had to quit the race for plagiarizing some college paper? Those were old rules. Now we have a candidate who talks about grabbing pussy, refers to HIspanic immigrants as rapists and thieves, thinks all blacks live in the ghetto, and has a vocabulary of a 2nd-3rd grader, while having a long history of business failures & bankruptcies, lawsuits and can't even show his taxes. And he blew the Republican lineup out of the water, wasn't even close. Blame that on Hillary too?
Next coffee, I'll be back...
[PS - the Poyngreen remark was more creative & insightful, and better grasps the difficulty of our current election / popularity disconnect]
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 7:03am
I just like your list of memories, a sorry bunch, most of them buried very deeply in my brain:
Lockbox is the strongest memory, I think because he said it so many times that there were clips on teevee of him saying it over and over like a robot.
Comes to mind that in other similar cases, some of the damage could be undone when the candidate agreed to appear in person on SNL to show good humor about the actor parodying the disturbing behavior.
by artappraiser on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 7:27am
Ah yes, Gerald Ford who helped launch Chevy Chase's career - do you think his appearance on SNL helped in his battle with Carter, or was it just that pardoning Nixon made him unelectable no matter how many or few pratfalls he took?
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 7:39am
I think it helped make Gerry look hipper, and removed some of the stigma of "stupid klutz", got him more respect, maybe got him a few more votes, but the problem then was it just wasn't cool anymore to vote for a classic Republican in any way, shape or form and people wanted to be cool. That was when the effect of the cultural revolution(s) started kicking in with the public at large. I.E., grannies wearing sneakers and pants, not orthopedic shoes and house dresses.
by artappraiser on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 7:47am
Point taken. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating, though, eh?
by artappraiser on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 6:49am
This usage point Nossiter makes is interesting, the "Republican front"
Since the Republic removed the people from monarchy. The "Republican", to be a good citizen, is to hold their nose and get out and vote strategically for the least objectionable, not use their vote as a protest.
by artappraiser on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 6:58am
Is this so startling? If you think of politics on the old left-right continuum, it seems inconceivable that the far left would knowingly assist the far right, so we conclude that it must be petulance or blind obstinacy driving Mélenchon. But as the article points out, Le Pen and Mélenchon are actually pretty close on a number of issues, most significantly opposition to the EU, and they're not so far apart on social safety net issues. I see the French election as the purest example to date of the new big-small continuum, with pro-globalization technocrats (from left and right) on the big side and anti-globalization populists (from left and right) on the small side.
(Ftr, there's no judgment implied here, just a political observation.)
by Michael Wolraich on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 7:43am
It's just that in our system, when 12 candidates share a stage, they're all largely mimicking & lip syncing to a particular conservative dogma that precludes much differentiation. In France's case, the 4-5 main candidates differed significantly from each other with some overlaps that would never occur in our finely distilled version of democracy.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 7:51am
Sure. All I'm saying is that depending on which axis you use to frame contemporary politics, Mélenchon may be closer to Le Pen than he is to Macron. So it's not so surprising that he would refuse to endorse Macron.
by Michael Wolraich on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 8:14am
His weird and worrying affinity for Putin notwithstanding, I think it's quite unfair to say that Melenchon is closer to Le Pen than to Macron. That is like saying Corbyn is closer to UKIP than to Blairism. Melenchon made a point of not putting Le Pen on the list of voting options. The options he left his supporters were abstention and voting Macron.
by Obey on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 8:20am
I meant closer on the big-small axis. Obviously, they're not closer on the left-right axis. My point was not that he has more affinity with Le Pen than with Macron in a comprehensive sense but that he's closer to her than the old left-right frame suggests.
by Michael Wolraich on Wed, 04/26/2017 - 11:11am
More "sounds familiar":
In France’s Poor Suburbs, Angry Voters May Skip Big Election
By Alissa J. Rubin & Lilia Blaise @ NYTimes.com, APRIL 30
by artappraiser on Sun, 04/30/2017 - 8:14pm
Could it be possible Inès Seddiki's parents worked as hard or harder, faced even worse discrimination, appreciated life and opportunities not available in Tunisia, Morocco or Algeria and complained much less?
by NCD on Mon, 05/01/2017 - 12:12am
This would be the eternal problem of parents wanting a "better life" for their children, otherwise known as being spoiled into thinking life would go easy for them without any effort on their part. No casting of blame on either generation on my part here, it is just the way things often seem to go, just pointing it out.... even though rules of evolution suggest each new generation should keep fighting to adjust to any new environment.....
by artappraiser on Mon, 05/01/2017 - 11:48am
P.S. I am reminded of this story: Ferguson, You Let Us Down, which rmrd posted with that title here.
Where tribalism resulting from geographical segregation leads to a false and self-perpetuating sense of hopelessness and despair. Where complicated strategizing is seen as too much, where if, after protesting/complaining, no savior appears to lead you, you just give in to status quo. If there's a tribe around you for a safety net of sorts, even if it doesn't provide too well, no need to fight the big bad world....
Edit to add: apropos that the author of The Root piece starts with the famous anguished cry of many a climber mom to her kids: this is why we can't have nice things.
by artappraiser on Mon, 05/01/2017 - 2:23pm
Marine Le Pen’s Verbal ‘Violence’ in French Debate Shocks Observers
By Adam Nossiter @ NYTimes.com, May 4
So will the French talking heads be revealed to be as clueless as their American counterparts about who is losing and who is winning and what some voters like to hear and what they consider to b meant literally and what they don't? Etc....
by artappraiser on Thu, 05/04/2017 - 7:34pm
meanwhile, the top French court sez you can't be neutral about your sex :
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/04/world/europe/neutral-sex-gender-france.html
by artappraiser on Thu, 05/04/2017 - 7:40pm