About Last Night: Leaving New Hampshire Edition

Avatar

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has since lived and traveled around the world several times over. Though frequently writing about politics out of a sense of duty and love of country, most of the time he would prefer discussions on history, culture, occasionally nerding on aviation, and his amateur foodie tendencies. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter @four4thefire and his writing website Yonderandhome.com

Related Post Roulette

62 Responses

  1. Avatar North
    Ignored
    says:

    I’m sorry Jay, Yang was a good fellow but he was a long shot.

    Obviously, as an Amy fan, I’m pretty pleased about her showing but Andrew is spot on in his observation that she had an enormous challenge ahead of her to try and build on her expectations beating showing.

    With Pete as my #2 choice and also showing extremely well in NH you’d think I’d be happy but apprehension is gnawing at me. NH is showing that Uncle Bernie is consolidating his support but he and Warren together still account for well under half the votes. It’s far more likely that Warren will drop out than the moderates which could leave Bernie with a consolidated plurality in his lane while the moderates split up the Democratic majority among them.

    And then there’s Bloomberg to screw things up even more; damn him.

    My mental electoral map suggests Bernies chances are improving which is pretty dismaying for me. I wouldn’t be nuts enough to predict a Corbyn style route but I think Bernie is a damned risky bet if you want to win and even if he does eke out a general victory he sure as hell won’t help in the Senate.Report

    • Avatar Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      Yang came out and said “yeah, we’ve got no way to get the nomination… it wouldn’t be fair of me to ask for donations and volunteers when there’s no way to get the nomination.”

      Immediately demonstrating that he has an integrity and an intelligence unmatched by pretty much everybody else in the field.

      Let’s hope he runs again. Perennially. Or, you know, goes for congress somewhere.Report

      • Avatar DensityDuck
        Ignored
        says:

        like I said elsewhere, Yang would be an absolutely awesome Secretary Of Commerce. Although he’d probably be like that guy in SimCity: “You cannot cut funding for transit! You will regret this.”Report

        • Avatar Philip H
          Ignored
          says:

          Well transit funds sit in Transportation not Commerce . . . . so he could rightly say that all day long as Secretary of Commerce. He’d be my boss several layer sup at that point, and I”d love to work for him as opposed to our current secretary.Report

      • Avatar North
        Ignored
        says:

        I very much hope he does go for congress or other public service positions. The party is lucky to have him.Report

      • Avatar dragonfrog
        Ignored
        says:

        Integrity anyway.

        Others are surely just as aware of their lack of prospects, but hoping for horsetradesies in exchange for their dropping out and endorsing another candidate.

        Does that make them more intelligent than Yang? Less? Or just more opportunistic?Report

    • Avatar LeeEsq
      Ignored
      says:

      Out of all the people who are running for the Democratic nominee, Klobuchar is the person whose appeal I understand the least. She is literally the no candidate. Her policy offerings are literally nothing beyond competent administration. She is everything that Sanders supporters accused Clinton of being bout entirely accurate.Not only that but she seems to take delight in her “I offer you nothing and we can’t have nice things” stance. Its like reliving Bill Clinton’s politics but with pessimism rather than optimism.Report

      • Avatar Jaybird
        Ignored
        says:

        I agree with this 100% if it’s about Buttigeig.

        Klobuchar strikes me as “Clinton without the spices” and there is an audience for that sort of thing… expecially given Clinton’s spices.Report

      • Avatar Stillwater
        Ignored
        says:

        Klobuchar is the person whose appeal I understand the least.

        She’s competent, realistic, decent, and can win Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.

        Democrats are in love with aspirational candidates and (therefore) confuse *lies* with serious policy proposals. Warren, for example, has a bunch of plans which won’t ever – EVER – get out of committee, let alone to the floor for a House vote, let alone passed by the Senate. Everyone except her supporters realize this. Same for Bernie and *his* supporters.Report

      • Avatar North
        Ignored
        says:

        In this era competent administration and the prospect of electorally hammering Trump and his party like a drum across the midwest is a really appealing prospect. She’s neither a political newborn like Buttigieg nor is she ancient like Biden. She’s not an ancient and delusional like Bernie and she’s not made the brutal missteps that Warren has.
        The Democratic Primary Voters really want to win and Klobuchar offers very good odds of this.

        Finally, Klobuchar’s appeal only fails to make sense if one thinks that Hillary Clinton lost in 2016 on policy arguments rather than the reality which is that Hillary Clinton lost because of a triple hit combo of A) being Hillary Clinton who the GOP has spent 20 years vilifying, B) Making a series of bad campaigning errors and C) suffering a series of unprecedented interventions in the election from various actors, primarily and most egregiously being from Comey’s idiotic and unjustified intervention weeks before the election.
        So if you keep centrist liberal policies from the Obama era and add in some moderate liberal improvements slightly leftward and don’t be HRC with her baggage and errors and you have a pretty decent winning combo.

        Unless you’re waiting for Bernie’s revolution of course. The Berniacs want the revolution. Klobuchar isn’t going to deliver a revolution- that’s another thing people like about her.Report

      • Avatar Brandon Berg
        Ignored
        says:

        Her policy offerings are literally nothing beyond competent administration.

        Sold! Given that all the other candidates’ policy offerings are hot garbage, competent administration and nothing else sounds amazing.Report

    • Avatar Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      What does Klobuchar offer to any voter under 55 and/or any voter who is not economically secure? During one of the last pre-Iowa debates she made a point about how there is going to be a shortage of nursing assistants. I think she gave a five figure number. The problem is that this point was made during a question on student debt and college tuition affordability. What she neglected to say is that nursing assistants make very little money, work long hours, and generally do not have great benefits. There was a strong implication of “Millennials and Generation Z, you will just need to suck it.” If she discussed unionization during that point, it would have been better.

      Obama in 2008 was Yes, we can. Klobuchar in 2020 seems to be “Hell no, we can’t.” Again, I will crawl over broken glass to vote for her but Bloomberg of all people seems to be running a more progressive campaign than Klobuchar.Report

      • Avatar Stillwater
        Ignored
        says:

        What does Klobuchar offer to any voter under 55 and/or any voter who is not economically secure?

        You mean she hasn’t offered to cancel their student loan debt or eliminate college tuition or institute Single Payer in the first 100 days? Ahh, good point.Report

      • Avatar North
        Ignored
        says:

        Look, when young people talk about student debt and college affordability they envision poor pitiable people like them getting helped out. That’s great for them and obviously they like the thoughts of it. But when just about anyone else hears about student debt relief they envision a cohort that’s mostly from the wealthy strata of society and is poised to get even more wealthy getting a big wealth transfer from poorer people. That isn’t appealing at all.

        Add in that addressing college affordability without addressing the issue of college administration means injecting cash directly into a pulsing sprawling pustule of administrative bloat that works hand in glove with the most shrill left-socio-Calvinist woke actors that even most liberals can’t stand and the prospect becomes downright toxic.

        So yeah, it’s not as simple and popular as we liberals would like it to be. And Amy recognizes that. Compared to Bernie who promises that the revolution will deliver you the moon Amy’s offer of competent incremental liberal improvement feels like weak tea. But I’ll take a cup of hot weak tea over an imaginary glass of bourbon in my mind any day.

        And yes, I will crawl over broken glass to vote for Bernie if he gets the nod.Report

        • Avatar greginak
          Ignored
          says:

          Yeah, policy merits aside, student loan forgiveness is horrendous politics. I could right a dozen conservo attacks on it. And the policy merits aren’t all that great.Report

          • Avatar Jaybird
            Ignored
            says:

            I’d say that whether you can write a dozen conservo attacks on it is a lot less interesting than if you could write two or three progresso attacks on it.

            Because “conservatives will oppose this” is a fairly universal critique. You can see it for stuff that they support under Trump that they opposed under Obama.Report

            • Avatar greginak
              Ignored
              says:

              The con attacks i could think of would actually be substantive before even getting into the emotive attacks.

              Stuff they support under trump they opposed under O?????Report

              • Avatar Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Deficit Spending? The very idea of Executive Orders? That’s without using google.

                Do you need me to google specific things? I will, I suppose… I just didn’t think that “conservatives are hypocrites about the Executive Branch” was that controversial an insight.Report

              • Avatar greginak
                Ignored
                says:

                Deficit spending would be one of the bull squat attacks from R’s. So would EO’s. Hasn’t the issue over DS and EO’s been exactly what you do with them as opposed to the concept in general. Tax breaks to rich people leading to high deficits is bad; deficits to fund counter cyclical spending in near depressions is good.Report

              • Avatar Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Okay?

                I still think that whether you can come up with conservative attacks against a particular policy (even substantive ones!) are less interesting than if you can up with progressive ones.

                Certainly within the context of which democratic nominee’s policies are the easiest to sell.Report

              • Avatar greginak
                Ignored
                says:

                It isnt’ the easiest to sell outside of the people who already like it. Are you for it? It is legal to just agree with someone or state your own preferences.

                One prog view, which i endorse, is that it’s a poor expenditure since a lot of it goes to relatively affluent people. If we are going to spend money it should either be on everybody or focus first on the neediest.

                I’m guessing this wouldn’t couint as a prog argument but the gov shouldn’t’ bail out everybody who made bad loan choices. What is the proper official classification of that point?Report

              • Avatar Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                I’m one of those “let people get rid of the debt as part of the bankruptcy process” people.

                It strikes me as the simplest solution and has protections against moral hazard baked in.Report

              • Avatar DensityDuck
                Ignored
                says:

                “The con attacks i could think of would actually be substantive ”

                But why do you think we should care what a bunch of asshole racists who hate people people think?Report

              • Avatar greginak
                Ignored
                says:

                I didnt’ say that now did i nor do i support the sentiment. I would help if waited until people said horrible things before you just assume they will. If you are against student loan forgiveness then maybe we agree on that.Report

          • Avatar North
            Ignored
            says:

            Yeah, it plays just god(ess?) awfully with the genuinely poor, the old and the middle class. Frankly the only people it plays well for are current college students and college grads- who happen to be very vocal and visible online but are not a gigantic voting bloc in meat-space.Report

        • Avatar Stillwater
          Ignored
          says:

          Good comment North.Report

  2. Avatar DensityDuck
    Ignored
    says:

    The tweet I liked about Bernie “having trouble”:

    “Spider-Man took out the Green Goblin no problem! How come he’s taking so long with the Sinister Six?”

    ******

    Also, whenever we drove through New Hampshire to visit my folks, we saw multiple billboards for Tulsi Gabbard. She ended up barely beating Yang, and that guy just quit, so.Report

    • Avatar Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      One of the phenomena that is doing a great job of being simultaneously under-and-oversold is the fact that Bernie Sanders was the One Reasonable Not Clinton vote last time around.

      And so, of freakin’ *COURSE* he won New Hampshire last time around. He wasn’t Clinton! Of course he came within spitting distance of causing a contested convention. He wasn’t Clinton!

      And so now there are a ton of Not Clintons to vote for. Pick any Not Clinton at your leisure. You’re not limited to Grampa Nutball.Report

  3. Avatar Aaron David
    Ignored
    says:

    I saw a PETE! sign in the neighborhood, just a couple blocks away from my house. First one, lets see if their will be more. What is interesting is SuperDemocratGirl down the street hasn’t been putting anything up lately. Of course, when she ran for County Commisioner last go-round she got beating like the proverbial step child (and as someone who fills both requirments, I am all to familier with those beatings) in the year my county went 2A sancuary, one whole hour south of Portland. The only Bernie signs I see locally are at the countryside farmers markets, usually the bigger, commercial ones. No Amy signs yet, but I will keep my eyes peeled in the college town when I go see my wife. Lots of Trump signs once you leave the hood, even a few in the college town down the road.

    I am very curious to see how this thing plays out locally.Report

  4. Avatar Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    1. I will give this to political twitter, they predictably saw that Biden’s polling was a mirage based on name recognition. According to Chait, Biden has never finished higher than 4th in any primary during his various attempts at the Presidency. Somehow his defeat in 2008, got him promoted to VP and he was a good VP for Obama. Biden was too senior for anyone to tell him no but not senior enough to get a lot of endorsements.

    2. Chait is also concerned that the Bernie storm is going to lead to a McGovern or Mondale style defeat. I am not certain based on polling and a lot of Chait’s hyperventilation is because he thinks Bernie is too far to the left and he admits it. If Bernie gets the nomination, I am going to crawl over glass to vote for him. Same with any other Democratic nominee. That being said, I don’t thin Chait’s predicition is true. The demographics of the voting public are very different than 1972, 1984, or even 2008. Plus Trump is massively unpopular and seems to be going back to not helping himself because of his authoritarian rage.

    3. Poor Warren. My very small solace is that Bill Clinton apparently did not win any primaries or caucuses until March in 1992’s primary cycle. This is a small solace. She is probably not going to be the nominee.

    4. College-educated women apparently fled to Klobuchar and Buttigieg in New Hampshire. I still don’t get the appeal of Klobuchar. She seems to be the candidate of “No we can’t have nice things.” Proposing lowering eligibility on Medicare to 55 is good but I hate the fact that the United States is seemingly a country where if you are under 55, no one pitches anything to you. Sanders and Warren at least are more robust in their policy proposals for all Americans. Even when it came to student debt relief, Klobuchar began talking about how we need more nursing assistants and home health aides and ignored the fact that those jobs pay poorly with bad conditions and long hours. Her whole view seems to be that late Generation Xers and Millennials just need to suck it up with worse jobs, less pay, and fewer benefits. But if she is the nominee, I will crawl over broken glass to vote for her.

    4. Bloomberg appears to be playing a very smart ground game. I like his environmentalism. Plus I think he can get under Trump’s skin easily as an actual self-made billionaire. I am not enthused because of his previous contempt for the Democratic Party. I wonder how many Bloomberg-curious voters are attracted to him because of his wealth and his ability to go after the right-wing dark money machine. Political twitter is sputtering at him right now.

    5. Steyer is apparently polling at 18-19 percent. What is up with that?Report

    • Avatar Andrew Donaldson
      Ignored
      says:

      2. I’m on record that there will not be any “landslides” regardless, so I agree with you here. Could a Trump re-election scenarios be wider electoral college win than 2016 against Bernie? It very well could, but there will be no landslides, although whoever wins by more than one point will claim it to be so.

      5. Steyer is befuddling, and I’m interested to see if that number disappears with Bloomberg, or eats into Mike’s efforts. It’s just weird, you would think they can’t inhabit the same electoral space, but Steyer shouldn’t be that high anyway. Interesting to watch.Report

      • Avatar North
        Ignored
        says:

        They’re both rich guys trying to buy the nomination so they technically occupy the same ‘lane’ if you will: voters who can be influenced by purchased advertising and purchased advocacy.Report

        • Avatar DensityDuck
          Ignored
          says:

          or maybe not to buy the nomination, but to buy a big enough piece that they can argue they ought to have a space in the administration of whoever *does* end up winning…Report

          • Avatar North
            Ignored
            says:

            Yes it could be an influence play too. But I question their reasoning if it is. They’re draining votes off moderate candidates and if they enable Bernie to take the nod with his plurality of the votes units behind him while the moderate majority splinters then they’ll buy no influence at all.

            My own guess is that the various grifters and sycophants in Bloomberg and Steyers’ orbits are simply playing both of them to drain money out of them into the sycophants pockets.Report

          • Avatar George Turner
            Ignored
            says:

            I don’t see any of the billionaires angling for a spot in someone else’s administration, as that would be a personal step down for them. They own their own mansions and helicopters and aren’t likely to volunteer to punch a time clock as someone else’s “employee.”

            Secondly, they’ve got so much money that they could get one of those special envoy type jobs without going through the pain, cost, and potential humiliation of running for President.

            There is, however, a chance that their plan B is to throw their weight around at the convention so they can essentially pick who the candidate is going to be, regardless of what Democratic voters want.Report

      • Avatar Michael Cain
        Ignored
        says:

        Steyer is pouring money into ads in NV and SC. Bloomberg is not. We’ll find out on Super Tuesday, when they go head to head. Thumbing through the FiveThirtyEight polling charts, it looks like Steyer disappears on March 3.Report

    • Avatar LeeEsq
      Ignored
      says:

      The best you can say about Klobuchar is that she is being honest about what can be accomplished within the constraints of American politics. The problem is that she seems to like this way too much. I was less enthused about Warren than others, mainly because I think too many of her supporters adopted a Saint Warren of Arc stance that they accuse Sanders supporters of having, rightly, without realizing it.

      I agree with you on Bloomberg. He is the only one taking Trump on directly at this point. This strategy might work for him. It shows him as supremely confident he will win the nomination and be the one that takes Trump down. He is basically running as anti-Trump. A billionaire that will get things done, loves immigrants, etc.Report

      • Avatar Stillwater
        Ignored
        says:

        I was less enthused about Warren than others, mainly because I think too many of her supporters adopted a…

        It still astounds me to hear people admit they support/oppose a candidate based on how that candidates supporters behave. Absolutely bizarre.Report

      • Avatar North
        Ignored
        says:

        Well, allegedly, Bloomberg claims he’ll continue his barrage against Trump regardless of whether he wins the nomination or not. It is a really unusual strategy.

        Klobuchar is cheerful about making do with the reality we have not the one we’d like to imagine. I like that about her and I prefer it to Bernie’s constant sullen anger that reality doesn’t deliver the socialist revolution each morning with his paper.Report

  5. Avatar LTL FTC
    Ignored
    says:

    How about the rise of the KlobMob? If Butteigeig and Biden don’t consolidate the center lane, is she the Kasich or the (Bill) Clinton in this scenario?

    Speaking of Clinton, Slate ran a post-Mortem of the Warren campaign today. Personal theory: Warren’s major collapse took place right after she went after Bernie for allegedly saying a woman couldn’t win. The slow and steady rise of Klobuchar, earned by a series of solid debate performances, tells us something.

    Democrats aren’t worried about electability of women by others, or are they overwhelmingly sexist (or suffering from internalized sexism). What people don’t like about Hillary is the same thing they don’t like about Warren: entitlement mixed with special pleading and the idea that no excuse is good enough for failing to fall in line. Warren’s media surrogates, who often also were Hillary’s, destroyed her.

    I don’t exactly have hot dish running through my veins at the moment, but for me it’s Klobuchar over Bernie, Warren and Biden in a second.Report

    • Avatar Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      Are you talking about Jordan Weismann’s piece? I thought the major point was trying to thread the needle between Sanders’ universal healthcare supporters and professionals who like her wonkiness.Report

      • Avatar LTL FTC
        Ignored
        says:

        Weismann chalked it up to sexism and bungling healthcare. Her most woke stuff outside using her own gender as a sword and shield – pronouns in the Twitter bio, promising a trans child veto over the Secretary of Education nominee, using “Latinx” with a straight face – all kinda flew under the radar, I think.

        True, active wokes are probably under 5% of the general population, probably 10% of Democrats. What they lack in numbers they make up for in owning the chokepoints of cultural production.Report

  6. Avatar Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    One thing that shows up that does succeed at irritating the ever-living crap out of me: Check out this headline. What’s missing?

    Report

  7. Avatar Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    The only political account on Twitter worth following shares his thoughts. Click on through to read the thread but here’s as good a starting place as any:

    And if you just want the gist, it’s him dealing with the questions before The Party (meaning the apparatus) that exist now. The main choice, he says, is “to go with a decent but flawed forward-looking bet, or a protest vote wash.”

    There are upsides to both.
    There are downsides to both.Report

    • Avatar George Turner
      Ignored
      says:

      I wonder who’s enjoying the chaotic Democratic primary race more, Trump or Hillary? I can just picture her watching a panel of panicked CNN analysts, then tossing some more bat wings into her cauldron, with dank fumes of schadenfreude wafting toward the ceiling as she cackles maniacally . ^_^Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *