Hmmm, I wonder...

How do you think the Presidential polls would look at this point if the Democratic primary had finished a month ago like the Republicans? Do you think the presumptive nominees would still be neck and neck? In other words, could the ongoing primary fight be depressing Democratic poll numbers against Trump right now?

Donkeytown Battle

It’s Battle of the Bands in Donkeytown again. 

Local favorites, The Clints are being challenged by a surging, upstart group from Indietown called The Sands. 

While The Clints have spent years slugging it out in local bars building the Donkeytown scene, the exciting sound of The Sands has sparked unexpected enthusiasm nationwide, rallying many new supporters to Donkeytown for the first time.

As always, the residents will decide the winner.

The Clints, stalwarts of the Donkeytown scene, have definitely put in the time, supported lesser-known “down-ticket” bands through the years, and cultivated alliances that have lasted decades. 

But if familiarity breeds contempt, then The Sands still stand a chance since their fresh, exciting sound energizes Donkeytown residents who feel that The Clints have sold out, filling them with zeal not felt since The Bamas first burst on the scene (and won), 8 long years ago.

Both bands are brilliant.  The crowds roar their approval.  Both bands feel they should win.  Their fans passionately make their cases for why their preferred band was better.

If you were a 25-year resident and supporter of the Donkeytown scene, whom would you choose?

           

And would you really be surprised to hear that some residents were biased in favor of the band that’s been supporting their local scene for the last 25 years? 

Would it surprise you to find that the ground game of the band from Indietown was not be as strong as the band with the venerated connections to Donkeytown residents?

If The Clints win because of this, is the competition “rigged?”

Does this mean they “cheated” and “stole” the contest?

Or would they simply be politically reaping what they’ve sewn?

BOBs Berners

I actually lean Sanders, but Bernie or Bust people give me pause. 

Do they really believe the hype? 

Has the 30 year press jihad against Clinton damaged her so much that people will believe any negative thing ever said about her? 

"Hillary was a Goldwater girl!!" Yeah, when she was 17! 

Are we to disregard her last 47 years of work as a Democrat because she was raised in a Republican household and shared her family's views as a teenager? (I don't know about you, but I'm kinda embarrassed about some of the things I thought and did as a high schooler. lol)

"She's racist!!" You can't be serious. 

Did you know that at the same time she was a "Goldwater Girl," her Methodist youth minister taught her about MLK and took her to meet him? Did you know that the issue of Civil Rights was fundamental in her decision to change her party affiliation? 

Have you done any research into her life's work advocating for children, the poor, disadvantaged, and people of color? (School desegregation, SCHIP, etc?) 

And do you seriously think that after helping so many people and in spite of so much negative press, she's only doing it to get rich and powerful? 

Bernie or Busters, please! Aren't there easier ways?? 

Finally, aren't we liberals (Sanders and Clinton supporters) all about standing up for the little guy? 

Isn't defacto Trump support the exact opposite? 

How much privilege does is take to suggest that our society's most vulnerable groups can "suck it" for 4 years of Trump because one doesn't deem Clinton sufficiently pure enough to vote for her?

Yeah, I'd like to vote Bernie too, but why needlessly jeopardize marginalized communities if we can't? Sad!

In Which I Respond to BOBs

The article from the previous post points out many of Sanders' vulnerabilities -- liabilities that less media coverage has allowed to go unnoticed -- including opposing public schools (as well as some somewhat salacious views that I'm sure Trump would have no problem exploiting). 

Has Sanders changed his mind on those things? 

As a public school teacher, I sure hope so! 

If we don't allow politicians to change their minds, what good does it do to politic at all? 

Why try to persuade anybody if it's already a zero sum game? 

Do you think that maybe Clinton's changing her party affiliation due to her exposure to MLK and the Civil Rights movement informs her decision to change her mind in the present? 

Yes, some Sanders supporters are "die hard," but that's what I don't get.  Is being so tribal really a good thing? Doesn't that just allow us to play in a fantasy world where there is One True Hero and all the "others" villains? 

Do Liberals really think the world is so black and white? Aren't we, the Liberals, interested in nuance and shades of grey? 

Does this lizard brain mentality allow for human foibles or does it only facilitate dehumanization of people (even ones on our side) allowing us to call The Others "leeches" and magically granting us the ability to mind read Others' motives and "secret agendas?" 

As I asked before, aren't BOBs purest of pure ideals ultimately going to harm the most vulnerable in our country? 

Isn't that the opposite of Sanders' message and the definition of privilege?

Hillary or Bust?*

We all know that Clinton is a damaged candidate, but she's also resilient, a survivor. And while Sanders obviously hasn't received as much media coverage as some candidates, this has almost certainly helped him avoid the type of scrutiny that Clinton has had to endure for 30+ years. How many of these potential Sanders vulnerabilities have you heard about?

*lol