What’s Going on, USA?


Today Mitt Romney is set to call out Donald Trump as a phony, and urged Republicans to grab this “moment of choosing” to shift the party back to the path of traditional Republican ideals.  Meanwhile Bernie Sanders, stung on super Tuesday, continues to excite young Millennials who often show as much disdain for Hillary Clinton as they do for Donald Trump.   This political cycle is not playing out as people predicted, confusing and alarming the political class.   Journalists and comedians, however, have hit pay dirt!

So what’s going on, America?  Why do things seem so topsy-turvy in politico-land?  There’s been a lot on Trump, so let’s start with Sanders.   I remember hearing about him back in 1990 as he ran for Congress in Vermont strongly opposing the build up to the Iraq War.   As his career continued he was talked about as a “socialist” or “leftist” who reflected ideas outside the political mainstream – a maverick.  The idea he would be a serious contender for the Presidency never entered my mind, he was too far out there.

So why has he captured the hearts and minds of not only Millennials, but many Democrats who fear that the establishment has sold out to big money?    Perhaps foremost is the belief that wealth is increasingly flowing disproportionately too the very wealthy, weakening the middle class.  Though the “occupy Wall Street” movement fizzled, the arguments, statistics and frustration that gave rise to it have not gone away.  There is reason to be skeptical of a system whose greed brought the global economy to its knees in 2008 – with both the Clinton and Bush administrations taking deregulating Wall Street in a way that made that possible.


Today Mitt Romney came out with some of the harshest criticism yet of Trump. Yet will the attack harm or hurt the GOP front runner?

With the Cold War over, fear of socialism is obsolete.   The label doesn’t conjure up visions of communist parades. Indeed, Sanders views are mainstream in Europe.   He’d be a center-left politician in Germany, a country that is an economic powerhouse with the Socialists sharing power in government.  His views aren’t dangerous, even if one doesn’t consider them feasible.  Beyond that, Hillary’s been around a long time, has been constantly attacked by the GOP, and seems to represent the politics of the past rather than of the future.  Sanders may be five years older than she is, but his message is fresh.

Yet it’s more: Sanders supporters often have a kind of messianic zeal to their cause, including a real dislike of Hillary.   Many say they’d never support Clinton, some believing that Trump would be better than Hillary because he’d at least break with old practices.

Trump supporters, on the other hand, are driven more by nationalism, and a sense of loss – that the America they remember isn’t the America they experience now.   They want a strong leader who can cut through special interests and entrenched elites to bring fundamental change – to make America great again, as he puts it.   He speaks to those alienated by the cultural and demographic changes in past decades, who think America is broken and need a Bonapartist figure to put things right.

Hillary Rodham Clinton

To many Sanders supporters Hillary is bought and paid for by Wall Street and represents the very kind of politics they want to end; it’s no surprise many will not vote for her.

Just as Clinton cannot count on Sanders supporters to swing to her camp, Trump’s fans are not likely to support anyone else from the GOP, especially if it comes from an establishment coup meant to wrestle power away from primary voters intro the hands of the those behind closed doors.

I think both movements reflect something fundamental: politics is not what it used to be.  Barack Obama’s rise, challenging Hillary and then easily beating once popular John McCain was the first sign of this change.   The election of a black man named Barack Hussein Obama would have been unthinkable thirty years ago; it would not have happened if the demographics of the country were the same now as they were in the 1980s.

Then came the tea party – a reaction to the “strangeness” of Obama that swept conservatives into power in Congress in 2010, and whose stalwarts often now make up the Trump base.   They weren’t so much ideologically conservative as culturally alienated.  From gay marriage to Rudy Guiliani being appalled by Beyonce’s performance at half time at the Super Bowl, they feel that nefarious forces are turning the country into something different, something strange.


While most people loved Beyonce’s super bowl performance, FOX pundits and especially Rudy Guiliani growled that it wasn’t “wholesome.”

So Sanders supporters represent the new, progressive, 21st Century objection to the politics of old, while Trumps’s reflect the nostalgic embrace of fading cultural values.  Each see the political elite as the enemy, out of touch with reality playing their own power games.

I believe this is a watershed year.   The Republicans see that their approach of the last decade has failed; they need a new message to connect with voters.  Democrats need to recognize that the support Bill Clinton got from Wall Street in the 90s – which at that time made him appear a responsible Democrat – now gets associated with an economy that increasingly favors the already rich and powerful.  Both parties are dragging twentieth century ideas into a very different twenty first century. Trump and Sanders are making that painfully obvious to party leaders.


  1. #1 by Gunta on March 3, 2016 - 15:39

    Go Bernie! 😀 Trump scares the crap out of me, but I’d have to hold my nose to vote for Hillary. Hoping I don’t have to make that choice. Then again, I’m not counting out the establishment tricks and machinations on either side. The thing I find amusing is that the GOP is having a much harder time taming their front runner than the DNC. If it didn’t involve the folks who will be running the country for the next number of years, it would be hilarious.

  2. #2 by susaninflorida on March 3, 2016 - 16:00

    I certainly hope that the Bernie fans will vote for Hillary if Hillary wins the nomination.

    I heard the other day that all the TARP money was repaid one way or another. I just tried to confirm that and found this quote in a Rolling Stone article:

    “To listen to the bankers and their allies in Washington tell it, you’d think the bailout was the best thing to hit the American economy since the invention of the assembly line. Not only did it prevent another Great Depression, we’ve been told, but the money has all been paid back, and the government even made a profit. No harm, no foul – right? Wrong.”

    I got bored with the article BUT scanning it, I don’t think they denied that the money was paid back. I think the wrong part is to the question: “No harm, no foul–right?”

    I think it is articles like the one in Rolling Stone that has people wanting to elect Bernie. Bernie feels and speaks to their outrage.

    BUT…what IF these are the facts:
    All the Tarp money was paid back.
    If the Tarp had not been enacted, there would have been a depression like the 1930’s.
    Bailing out individual mortgage holders would not have helped the economy.
    The money “sitting” as the article puts it in the Federal Reserve is due to regulations that the banks had to increase their reserves, ie have more assets.

    Hillary needs to speak to that outrage that is expressed in the Rolling Stone article. Yes? No?

    I am outraged that dividends and capital gains are taxed at lower rates than the working wage.
    I am outraged about predatory lending.
    Why doesn’t Hillary address those things? According to the article at the below link, Hillary is still suggesting that dividends and capital gains have lower rates than the working wage. I don’t get it.


  3. #3 by lbwoodgate on March 3, 2016 - 21:32

    Not sure exactly who said it first but it seems to be true – Democracy is messy. It’s been an ongoing process from day one. Just when it looks like it’s going to capsize it rebounds. But not sure that’s a constant we can rely on much longer

  4. #4 by List of X on March 4, 2016 - 01:19

    I’m not surprised that Sanders’ supporters have more messianic zeal than Clinton’s – Hillary is basically promising to keep doing what Obama has been doing for the last 8 years, and the only new and exciting thing about her is that she’d be the first female president. Other than that, she’s positioning herself as the pragmatist and realist in the Democratic primary, and it’s not easy to get excited about pragmatism and realism.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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: