Mainstreet is experiencing a reality check. Mainstreet thought the primaries were about Mainstreet choosing the people who get to run for President of the United States in the General Election. But now Mainstreet is waking up to reality, perhaps for the first time in modern electoral history. The primaries aren't intended to be about Mainstreet choosing anyone, but about the Parties choosing their nominee from among a slate of anointed candidates. Some of the Mainstreeters are a little pissed. They feel as though they've been misled. On the other hand, the regular process is coming off without a hitch for the Democrats. But the Republicans have a big problem. None of their Party's anointed candidates is going to make it through the Republican primaries! The Republicans, the ones in charge, don't like any of the choices left to them by their adopted family members. But is it any wonder that the Republicans have ended up in painful tenesmus? Of course not! Those who work hardest for their Party and raise the most money for the Party's coffer have traditionally controlled the rules and the final slate of candidates -- Oops, something seems to have gone badly wrong! The money raising process of the Republican Party has somehow utterly failed to assure that Party control remains vested in the upper 1% of the socioeconomic spectrum. For lack of a better term, we can call this 1% the "natural Republicans." That is to say those that would logically belong to the Republican Party. But 1% of voters can't elect anyone. Therefore the natural Republicans have raised a big tent. They hoisted a sign that says "Get Government off Your Back -- Join the Republicans, Pay Low Taxes". (This is an astonishingly ironic message, because there is more than a little truth in noting that the natural Republicans, i.e., the 1%, is the government!) The natural Republicans' open invitation to join them under the Big Tent is nothing remotely resembling an invitation to their usual black tie affairs. In their desperation to keep their bought-and-paid-for government working day and night bolstering their off shore accounts, they have, as it turns out, ineptly invited a rag tag army of voters to come under the big tent. But really! What else should they have expected after shouting out such an appealing message to the YouTube conspiracy crowd? Their collected army of tent-dwelling misanthropes have little in common except for suspicion of liberal, ivory tower fools and the government; the government that's coming to take their guns and bullet proof vests; the government that wants to control their lives; the government that brought down the twin towers and murdered Kennedy; the government that says it's OK to murder fetuses for body parts; the government that lies to them, steals their money and gives it to worthless, lazy, raping immigrants and the "for profit", "privately owned, "secret" Fed that refuses to reveal M3, stole German gold, and is destroying our money by forcing us off the gold standard. The various sub groups of the rag tag army have been very effectively nurtured and lied to with the purpose of welding them into a voting block, a voting block that will, it is hoped, do the bidding of the natural Republicans. But have the natural Republicans created a demon of their own design?* The components of their rag-tag army of potential voters actually have little in common beyond their general suspicions and a fairly widespread attraction to anarcho-capitalism, without acknowledging laissez faire's disastrous defects. They also appear to be somewhat bound together by a tendency to refer to themselves as libertarians, but without the slightest knowledge of libertarian political philosophy. Needless to say, this rag-tag army is, as a necessary condition, entirely oblivious to having been thoroughly had by the 1%! And now, in this current, bizarre election cycle, the curses of the 1% placed upon their own rag-tag army of would be voters, are, like chickens, coming home to roost! It is comical to see Mitch McConnell gobbling out his message to the Republican tent dwellers, which can be very loosely translated as, "there may be a surprise in your future". Will our Senate turkey be able to hold out the rain he has helped bring down upon himself and his employers by simply papering over the hole in the roof? I doubt it. On the other hand it is business as usual in the Democratic party. The anointed candidate is currently in no danger of losing the nomination to a generally more popular challenger. House rules pertain, and the Party faithful are in control of the nominating process. While national polls indicate that the anointed Democrat candidate will not run as strong as her challenger would have, she will still run strong enough to defeat the opposition. What we don't know, and have no way to know, is whether the Senate gobbler had something particular in mind when he said "there may be a surprise in your future". If he did, that could change the election calculus. Though the control of government by the 1%, the natural Republicans if you will, is to be somewhat loosened by the upcoming general election, the 1% can take heart in the knowledge that someone who plays by rules will still be in charge. Welcome to business as usual. Welcome back to the White House future President Clinton II. It will be July in Monaco once again. ____________________ *borrowed from the title of Richard Bookstaber's brilliant explanation of the October '87 crash and the perils of financial innovation. His title seemed equally apropos here.
Nice spin but you analyse with typical leftist blinders. why do you have to use such slanted analysis... when not acknowledge the truth like the vanity fair article I link to below. 1. far from rag tag the republican base (teaparty) is the most educated.. Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated than the general public, and are no more or less afraid of falling into a lower socioeconomic class, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.html?_r=0 2. anarcho-capitalism that complete bullshit. we want local govt not a bloated non responsive expensive high taxing - liberty stealing federal govt. 3. laissez faire - its govt inteference in the markets that typically prove disastrous. We don't even have free trade anymore. How the hell could you be indicting laissez faire economics. Its not practiced. According to historical legend, the phrase stems from a meeting in about 1681 between the powerful French finance minister Jean-Baptiste Colbert and a group of French businessmen led by a certain M. Le Gendre. When the eager mercantilist minister asked how the French state could be of service to the merchants and help promote their commerce, Le Gendre replied simply "Laissez-nous faire" ("Let us do [what we want to do]").[2] 4. Why Democrats Are Becoming the Party of the 1 Percent http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/04/why-democrats-are-becoming-the-party-of-the-1-percent In a world of Trumpism and Clintonism, Democrats would become the party of globalist-minded elites, both economic and cultural, while Republicans would become the party of the working class. Democrats would win backing from those who support expanded trade and immigration, while Republicans would win the support of those who prefer less of both. Erstwhile neocons would go over to Democrats (as they arealready promising to do), while doves and isolationists would stick with Republicans. Democrats would remain culturally liberal, while Republicans would remain culturally conservative. The combination of super-rich Democrats and poor Democrats would exacerbate internal party tensions, but the party would probably resort to forms of appeasement that are already in use. To their rich constituents, Democrats offer more trade, more immigration, and general globalism. To their non-rich constituents, they offer the promise of social justice, which critics might call identity politics. That’s one reason why Democrats have devoted so much attention to issues such as transgender rights, sexual assault on campus, racial disparities in criminal justice, and immigration reform. The causes may be worthy—and they attract sincere advocates—but politically they’re also useful. They don’t bother rich people.
Thanks for your comments , Jem. I largely agree with the Vanity article, but not entirely of course. Really old line wealth is largely Democrat. But these folks, at least in my experience, understand the dangers of extreme wealth distribution. I am using the label "1%" figuratively here for the wealthy in the Republican party who have never studied French or Russian history. I consider the Tea Party to epitomize "Rag-Tag" , as I do all of the other YouTube conspiracy lunatics.
I'm pleased to note that the two Trillion plus in the Social Security Trust Fund should be safe from the threat of Wall Street for at least another four years.
The democrats learned their lesson in 1972 when they got their collective heads handed to them nominating George McGovern. The party establishment got themselves back together after that debacle and said never again. The unwashed masses will be told their vote counts, but the establishment will do the picking has been the dirty little secret ever since. Having an idiot base helps them keep running this scam. It's almost as bad as the stupid republican voter who actually still believes the constitution means something. Add them together and the general population is about as dumb as a rock when it comes to how this criminally corrupt system actually works. I guess it's easier to live the fantasy rather than confront the reality.
I think you are wrong. I grew up in Greenwich Ct... old line wealth was not mostly democrat. Old line wealth was socially guarded, and dressed conservatively / preppy. Sure there was some wall street democrat money and a little bit of pre silcon valley san francisco money that was democrat... but old line wealth was republican. They were the rockefeller liberal elite wing of the Republican party and were the types to take pride in their french and history. I went to school with their kids. they took french in high school for no good reason...at the time. Many used to look down wall street types as Nouveau riche. It used to be bankers were dems and the oil and business guys were republicans. The rag tagers were the Kennedys and peanut farmers followed by clintons.
The difference between now and then is the internet. Easy to put McGovern and Goldwater back in the box. In today's world? Not so much. Mainstream media lost control of the narrative and their ability to brainwash. Fuck this shitty corrupt system and all the old rich fucks parasitically feeding off America. They can all go to hell Warm regards
and in the hands of the people I know, that info on the internet can be a dangerous thing the goal of our education system should be to make everybody smart enough to watch tv we are losing too many good minds to the internet
Particularly if they don't surf the web, but "dive" the web. That is, they deeply read the sites they agree with, and quickly leave the sites they don't.