Gearing up for Politics

Ok, I am feeling energized this morning. And with the primary races heating up, it is now time to pay attention.

Some thoughts before I hit the gym and do some work:

Politics: well, we are seeing some action in the betting lines. Take a look at 13 January and 14 January:



Though Hillary Clinton remains the “overall leader”, her odds of winning the D nomination have worsened from “prohibitive favorite” to “solid favorite” to win the nomination. And yes, that lead to a slight drop in the odds for a Democrat to win the election. Still, the Sanders campaign deserves some credit. They are now only favored in New Hampshire but have a bona fide shot at winning Iowa.

Yes, the Clinton campaign is paying attention and I’ve noticed a change in tone in their e-mail messages:

Ollie —

This week, two new polls came out that show us losing Iowa.

Don’t let it happen. Chip in $38 right now to show you’re not afraid of a fight.

There are three things I want you to know about those numbers:
(1) We always knew this would happen. From day one, Hillary was ready to fight hard in a competitive primary and earn every last vote. Polls always tighten — and nothing is going to change that as we get closer to the caucus.

(2) Polls might fuel our fire, but they don’t affect our strategy. We can’t risk being outworked and conceding this election to the Republicans. We’ll keep knocking doors, making calls, and showing up every single day even more determined to elect Hillary and make a difference for the families she’s fighting for.

(3) Even though Sanders is outspending us on TV, I truly believe we will win Iowa because of what this team is capable of. That means you, Ollie.
Bernie’s counting on momentum to take him across the finish line. Hillary’s counting on you.

Yes, they are starting to take Sanders seriously, as well they should.

I back Clinton but if she can’t put Sanders away in a couple of months or so, she doesn’t deserve to win the nomination.

No, I am not a “feel the Bern” type; I see the Bern Victims as a collection of idealists and wishful thinkers. But IF he wins the nomination, I will vote for him and support his general election campaign. In 2016, I am a “I prefer Hillary but Bern will do” type of guy.

The state of the economy No, it is not GREAT but it is BETTER than it once was. It is sort of like this: people are concerned with a stock market drop. But:


So, what about our Republican friends?

Yes, I have them and some of them absolutely drive me crazy. We discuss the issues: civil liberties. GAy marriage. Religious discrimination. Macro economics. Public investment. AND WE AGREE. Yet they vote Republican?
Basically, there are some who suggest that Republicans are more driven by abstract ideas and Democrats more by the individual issues.

But yeah, I’ll admit it; one some things, I have more in common with my Republican friends than I do my Sanders supporting Democrat ones. This might explain one difference:

But what Clinton suggested in place of a more expansive welfare state illuminates another difference between her politics and Sanders’. Where Sanders tended to focus on inequality and inequality-reducing policies, Clinton focused heavily on increasing opportunity, repeatedly expressing a desire that all Americans be able to realize their “God-given talents,” as she and her husband have. “I have spent a very long time—my entire adult life—looking for ways to even the odds to help people have a chance to get ahead, and, in particular, to find the ways for each child to live up to his or her God-given potential,” Clinton said in her opening remarks, revisiting the idea throughout the debate.

The difference between the two approaches has expansive implications for the American left. A pro-equality platform aims to universalize benefits, so that all people really do have the option to enjoy the same social goods, including education, gainful employment, and family life. An opportunity-focused approach neither intends to reduce inequality per se nor has a clear political apparatus with which to do so. Instead, opportunity-increasing politics aim to increase social mobility without necessarily altering how many people will end up on the top and bottom respectively. The individuals might change, in other words, but the absolute number of destitute versus fabulously wealthy can remain virtually the same.

The bottom line: if things were fair, some people would still fail anyway. I believe in safety nets for those who are hit by horrible luck (lay offs, diseases, accidents, mental illness) and therefore I support stuff like SNAP, unemployment and educational benefits. I believe in a minimum floor for our neighbors and grudgingly acknowledge that a small percentage of people are slackers and moochers …and they’ll continue to be parasites. But I’ll tolerate some of this in order to give those who hunger for success a path upward.


January 14, 2016 - Posted by | hillary clinton, politics, politics/social, social/political | , ,

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: