We're on the verge of Christmas, so be ready. Word on the street is that a man in a red suit is intending to commit a home invasion on your place. While you're waiting for that, here's an interesting observation about the election... specifically, the Democratic race.
They suck.
Just kidding. No, I'm not kidding about them sucking, I'm kidding that that was the observation. The real observation is that I'm seeing something that tells me the race just crystallized down to two candidates: Buttguy for moderates and Warren for moderates pretending to be progressives. Seriously.
What brought on this conclusion? The past two days have seen a strange surge in terms of famous people (especially Hollywood types, but others too) endorsing either Buttguy or Warren. It's like a damn broke. The pattern seems to be that white male moderates (and cross-over Republicans) are endorsing Buttguy. This includes Kevin Costner, by the way. At the same time, women and moderate blacks have been backing Warren. Confirming this shift, both Buttguy and Warren were the two targets at the last debate. That means the others see them as the leaders.
This is interesting in several ways. First, it leaves out Biden. I'm not surprised by that actually. For while Biden still leads Buttguy, the momentum is going in Buttguy's direction. Buttguy is rising and the media loves him. He's the one the progressives fear too and they've been smearing him hard, while moderates are rallying around him. At the same time, Biden's support is evaporating, the media does not love him, Obama does not support him and he's made some serious missteps. Letting it be known he would only serve one term is a huge mistake. So it's easy to see Buttguy ascending whereas Biden is fading away. I think this will prove itself in upcoming polls soon enough.
On the other hand, Warren is a strange choice for progressives. They've been slamming her for weeks now as not really progressive. So how can she be their candidate? These are different "progressives." These are fake progressives, like Obama, who have latched onto her because they see her as center left and a woman and that appeals to them. Real progressives have been savaging her for weeks now.
What I think is going on is that desperate moderates have realized that Biden is a dry well, so they have looked for another candidate. The males want Buttguy and are straight up selling him as a moderate who can replace Biden. The females want their female candidate and Warren is the only who doesn't seem nuts. But to keep other women in line, they need to sell her as a progressive rather than moderate (which means "old Democratic party" to women). Hence, she's mislabeled.
If both succeed, and I think they will, the race will come down to Buttguy for moderates and Warren for everyone else. Who wins that? Hard to tell. I don't know that Buttguy can attract old people or blacks like Biden. I don't think he can attract women who are the biggest voting block for Democrats. But the media will push his electability. That is a strong influence. Is it enough? Could be. Democrats are sheep, after all. The problem is: either one will be bad for Democrats. If either wins progressives will vote third party. If Buttguy wins, female turnout will be depressed. If Warren wins, she's perhaps one of the worst campaigners they have and her appeal is elitist; she'll never reach white male workers. Those are all bad things for the Democrats.
Who will win? Buttguy. He's more likable, more electable, and has media support. Will he beat Trump? I don't think so. I think the progressives walk and neither candidate brings back white males.
Thoughts?
They suck.
Just kidding. No, I'm not kidding about them sucking, I'm kidding that that was the observation. The real observation is that I'm seeing something that tells me the race just crystallized down to two candidates: Buttguy for moderates and Warren for moderates pretending to be progressives. Seriously.
What brought on this conclusion? The past two days have seen a strange surge in terms of famous people (especially Hollywood types, but others too) endorsing either Buttguy or Warren. It's like a damn broke. The pattern seems to be that white male moderates (and cross-over Republicans) are endorsing Buttguy. This includes Kevin Costner, by the way. At the same time, women and moderate blacks have been backing Warren. Confirming this shift, both Buttguy and Warren were the two targets at the last debate. That means the others see them as the leaders.
This is interesting in several ways. First, it leaves out Biden. I'm not surprised by that actually. For while Biden still leads Buttguy, the momentum is going in Buttguy's direction. Buttguy is rising and the media loves him. He's the one the progressives fear too and they've been smearing him hard, while moderates are rallying around him. At the same time, Biden's support is evaporating, the media does not love him, Obama does not support him and he's made some serious missteps. Letting it be known he would only serve one term is a huge mistake. So it's easy to see Buttguy ascending whereas Biden is fading away. I think this will prove itself in upcoming polls soon enough.
On the other hand, Warren is a strange choice for progressives. They've been slamming her for weeks now as not really progressive. So how can she be their candidate? These are different "progressives." These are fake progressives, like Obama, who have latched onto her because they see her as center left and a woman and that appeals to them. Real progressives have been savaging her for weeks now.
What I think is going on is that desperate moderates have realized that Biden is a dry well, so they have looked for another candidate. The males want Buttguy and are straight up selling him as a moderate who can replace Biden. The females want their female candidate and Warren is the only who doesn't seem nuts. But to keep other women in line, they need to sell her as a progressive rather than moderate (which means "old Democratic party" to women). Hence, she's mislabeled.
If both succeed, and I think they will, the race will come down to Buttguy for moderates and Warren for everyone else. Who wins that? Hard to tell. I don't know that Buttguy can attract old people or blacks like Biden. I don't think he can attract women who are the biggest voting block for Democrats. But the media will push his electability. That is a strong influence. Is it enough? Could be. Democrats are sheep, after all. The problem is: either one will be bad for Democrats. If either wins progressives will vote third party. If Buttguy wins, female turnout will be depressed. If Warren wins, she's perhaps one of the worst campaigners they have and her appeal is elitist; she'll never reach white male workers. Those are all bad things for the Democrats.
Who will win? Buttguy. He's more likable, more electable, and has media support. Will he beat Trump? I don't think so. I think the progressives walk and neither candidate brings back white males.
Thoughts?
6 comments:
1. Biden's political rise was never predicted by anyone and his demise has been consistently predicted by most pundits and activists.
I'm one of those who didn't anticipate his rise, but I also don't see why he would decline now. I don't think the second term thing is a big deal one way or the other. Voters are looking for someone who can beat Trump in 2020.
2. On a related note, I don't think any of the Dem field can beat Trump, but Trump could beat himself. Reelections are always effectively referendums on presidents. The economy is booming and battlefield bloodshed is minimal so Trump has that going for him, but as with Obama but even moreso Trump lacks message discipline.
Between now and election day Trump and his every shifting coterie of advisers will no doubt spout off about a wide range of groups (whoever the talk radio crowd dislikes) and tease widows who previously thanked them for their kindness about their husbands being in hell and what have you.
3. Speaking of hell, its weird how that evangelical magazine has destroyed itself by opposing Trump. Trump is to evangelicals what Bill Clinton was to feminists, a person whose lifestyle was the antithesis of their beliefs but who is/was beloved because he gave them what they wanted policywise.
4. I think the Saudis killing its low level goons and declaring that nobody high up knew nothing about nothing is about as much justice as the Washington Post could expect for the murder of its reporter. The Saudis have too much utility, money and friends for real justice to reach them. Hopefully the backlash is enough to keep them from making a habit of killing critics outside of Saudi Arabia.
5. Anyway, Merry Christmas!
What I am seeing over here in western PA is that everyone I know is ramping up their support of Trump. Even those who are Dems are pretty intense in their support of him. The Dems are killing themselves all over again and just like last time there's going to be that elitist group that will never understand how that could have happened. They don't get that the Dems in the rust belt are actually more like conservatives and they just can't swallow what the Dems are handing out.
Someone keeps trotting our Hillary wearing a tent. I don’t think she’s going to jump in, but I just can’t dismiss the idea completely.
The anti-Trump Christianity Today article was a bomb lobbed by an outgoing editor. Regard it for what it is.
The difference b/w evangelicals and feminists is that feminists don’t normally preach forgiveness.
Merry Christmas, Anthony.
I think the Saudis are just too important to be reached on an issue like this.
As for Biden, I think the problem for Biden is if someone else appears to be a better choice and Biden has been rather unappealing of late. The one term thing, the incoherence, the lack of any real appeal. On the other hand, Buttguy really has wonder over the media and they've been pushing him hard.
Stacy, I'm seeing that too here. I'm seeing a lot of determination by Trump people and a lot of silence and indifference by working-class liberals. The only leftists who seem excited are the freaks, and they're excited for the wrong reasons -- their own pet peeves. I don't see any wave of pro-Democratic support or even a lot of interest on their side. I think they peeked too soon and exhausted themselves... too many disappointments since.
tryanmax, The Christianity Today article "feels" out of place, if that makes sense. It seems like it came out of the blue and without a group really supporting it. What's more, the response has been uniform and withering. If the left is hoping this is evidence of some weakness in Trump's support, they are wrong.
Feminists do not understand or believe in forgiveness. They are after power and they believe in domination or defeat, nothing else. The evangelicals I know don't seem to think that way at all.
Post a Comment