71 Comments

You are 100% correct, Bill. I certainly didn't vote for Biden in 2020 because I wanted him to unleash a proxy war against Russia and waste tens of billions of dollars on weapons to kill and maim. Who gives a damn about whether Ukraine is a member of NATO? Does it make any difference in the lives of ordinary working men and women in the USA? That money should have been spent on combating climate change, increasing the federal minimum wage, free higher education, student debt relief, free child care, etc. Instead, Biden has shown himself to be an unrepentant Cold Warrior, stuck forever in a world where the US intervenes all over the world as it sees fit in order to protect its interests, no matter what. And in the process, Biden has brought the world to the brink of nuclear annihilation. Every 4 years we are told we have to vote for the Democrat to prevent the far right from taking power, and every time we are betrayed. A vote for Biden is a vote for permanent war.

Expand full comment

Preach it.

I'm under no illusion that Trump wouldn't have gone to war with Russia too, but our current situation with Biden is beyond ridiculous/sad/futile/name your negative adjective.

It's not just our tax dollars. It's about humanity! I'd like to think if Americans knew they were supporting a regime that terrorized eastern Ukrainians, things would change. If Americans knew that eastern Ukrainians do NOT want to be part of Ukraine...

It seems the only people who want this war are Biden, his moron advisors, and the US Congress and Senate.

Never again can we let ourselves be fooled by the establishment's lies. No more voting Democrat or Republican. Let's make them pay.

Expand full comment

It's like the old joke. They said if I voted for Goldwater we'd get a 10-year war in Vietnam. And they were right. I voted for Goldwater and that's exactly what we got.

Expand full comment

The logic being used against you is the prefect way to snuff out change through intimidation. Dennis has asked how you know what you are getting with (fill in the blank). The issue is that we know very well what we have been getting from both parties and we want to change that. Trump came out of nowhere out of the desperation of those who rejected the pack of Republican contenders for a wild card. We know from experience with Hillary/Bernie and are seeing presently how the DP quite blatantly undercuts anyone who might threaten Biden from within the party. It is a machine. At one time the country had several city machines in operation and all of them are gone because reformers showed how corrupt they were and the public responded. If those who rule can count on discouraging third party votes then those who rule can falsely say they have a mandate to continue things as they are. Small things can grow.

No vote that is FOR someone is wasted. It is a positive vote as all votes would be if we had a wide field to choose from. We know that Trump did nothing to change the basic operation of the machine. Voting for Biden to keep Trump out is a negative vote, a wasted vote for anyone who reads BV and wants something different.

Expand full comment

Yes. Well put, Clif.

Expand full comment

This is one of the few cases when I feel fortunate to live in god awful, monster ridden tennessee ... I can vote for whoever I want knowing that my vote does not count any time except for the local council member and a periodic state legislature. Those are the only elections I truly have to pay attention to. So when friends confront me about supporting Marianne in the primary and then Cornell in the general I can just say that my vote didn't matter so I can just do my research, take it seriously and vote FOR someone and not against someone.

Expand full comment

I hear you.

The DNC:

*earless*

*mindless*

Expand full comment

Amen Bill you hit the nail on the head. Further more why would I vote to re-elect a senile corporate warmongering tool that has got us in a war with one nuclear power and is pushing for war with another nuclear power? Trump is a nightmare but I doubt he would have us in a war with Russia.

Expand full comment

Your friend: "We know Biden isn’t perfect. He leaves much to be desired, notably in obvious signs of his mental and physical decline. But we also know Trump is a monster."

May I just offer my opinion that your friend is clearly an idiot, and for more than one reason. Perhaps the most important is that we DON'T know that Trump is a monster, at least, if this is to be interpreted as being something categorically more awful (or more evil) than Joe Biden. ("Biden isn't perfect"? THAT is supposed to be what we know??? I maintain that you would have to be an idiot to assert THAT to be the extent of your knowledge). The best reason to vote for Cornel West or some third-party alternative—or to vote for no one—is that (for different reasons) neither Trump nor Biden meets the very, very (!) low bar that would make him worthy of election (echoing the usual situation in US presidential elections). There's also the fact that your friend pretends to know that the two duopoly-party candidates will be Donald Trump and Joe Biden. I think that there's a good chance that neither of them will be a major-party candidate (especially since there are so many other awful people to choose from in both parties and both Trump and Biden would be very "iffy" contenders). This pretense of your friend also certifies him (or her—but I guess that it's "him") as an idiot. Third, the mere use by your friend of this reasoning likewise certified him or her as an idiot (even though for some reason Noam Chomsky is similarly befuddled). This is the reasoning that has been used in every US presidential election that I can remember (and I turned 80 this year), and the fact that the party bosses know (and they DO know it!) that people regularly reason like this—Alex's "old joke"—is the single most entrenched obstacle to keeping in power the people perceived, on each occasion, by a majority of the voters to be the "lesser of two evils". The (supposed) lesser of two evils is not what we need as the chief executive of the government of the United States (or anywhere else), but the parties can get away with running anyone—no matter how much of a "monster" (naturally, whomever they run are all routinely represented by the opponent party as "New Hitlers")—as long as they think that he can be perceived by their captive electorates as somehow a tad less awful than the other party's candidate. Whether the relevant party is right or wrong in this nefarious judgment, what the electorate winds up with is someone unacceptable. So, Mr Astore, since I believe that you are no idiot, I think that you should get yourself some different friends, and I advise you to vote—if you decide to vote for anyone at all—for someone other than either the Democratic- or Republican-party candidate, whoever those candidates may turn out to be, because that will REALLY be to "throw away your vote"!

Expand full comment

Yes, I agree.

Expand full comment

You know Bill, that I emphatically disagree. Voting for a goofy Professor, who has probably not managed more than 6-ivory tower fellow academics in his life, and furthermore running as 3rd party candidate, is for this Engineer and scientist a lack of critical thinking! That he can become a viable candidate is delusional. You know that he will be lucky to get <2.0% of the popular vote assuming he even survives the primaries!

Sure, you cling on to the meme that you have voted your conscience, but I steadfastly maintain you are wasting your vote. Cutting of your nose despite your face. An expression used to describe a needlessly self-destructive overreaction to a problem.

With all the shenanigans of the DNC, FBI and DOJ to eliminate Trump by a corrupt Judicary; everybody in America, except diehard Demorats, is revolted. They will be flocking to vote for Trump. Dumb as you think the US people are, one thing they detest is dirty pool. Trump will win by a landslide, and no amount of funny business by the vote counters will be able to overturn the will of the people.

That Trump is monster is on the same level as Russia, Russia, Russia! It won't work.

Take care. No worries as we say down under.

Expand full comment

Dennis, I'm just casting my vote in accordance with my beliefs. I'm not cutting off my nose to spite my face.

Expand full comment

Yes Bill, I know you keep maintaining that ad nauseum. But I keep maintaining you will achieve exactly nothing. As George Carlin says, you might as well stay home. We need to agree to disagree. The most basic logic tells me that I am right.

Expand full comment

Simple logic tells me I'm right!

I can't get the candidate I want to win if I vote for candidates I want to lose.

Expand full comment

Sheer obstinacy* is not going to achieve anything Bill, my friend.

*the quality of being unreasonably determined, especially to act in a particular way and not to change at all, despite what all the evidence shows.

As for logic, your premises are false. Prove me wrong.

Expand full comment

Dennis, I consistently voted for D's, campaigned / volunteered for some, donated, etc., over about 4 decades;. but after yet one more string of broken promises, new wars, a rigged nomination, the beginning of an era of effective McCarthyism, Russiagate and betrayals of just about every notion of democratic principles, and after looking around at the status of the Earth and humanity, I realized that all I had really accomplished was the enabling of all those conditions I was trying to head off. Greater control by the oligarchy, which now owned both sides of the aisle. A steady abandonment of the working and middle classes; the further concentration of wealth at the very top. More blatant and aggressive imperialism, war spending and destruction of the biosphere. And the end of any organized opposition to any of that.

Yes, I did that every time I gave my dollars and vote to the lesser of perceived evils instead of giving my energy and dollars to those whose values, principles and agenda more closely matched my own.

There was 'Hope and Change" Obama, who ran against that never satisfied warrior John McCain. i chose Obama. By the time he ran against Romney, of course I no longer had any 'hope' except for blunting the slide into oligarchy. Mr. Nobel Peace prize then signed off on a trillion-dollar upgrade to our nuclear arsenal.

Then there was Clinton v Trump. It was hard to accept the reality that someone of Trump's stunted psychological development could actually be liked enough for people to nominate him for their Party. He was clearly a loose cannon, and would be an embarrassment. Yet I could not bring myself to vote for the woman who cackled "We came, we saw, he died" at the beheading of Qadaffi , whom the neocons wanted ousted because he wanted to create an alternative to the petro-dollar for the Arab world;. She also had chided Obama, no peacenik he, for refusing to set up no-fly zone in Syria, which experts warned could very well spark a shooting war with Russia.

How could I vote for either her or Trump?

The other thing that became clear was that the Democrats had one, and only one strategy when it came to elections: run against the other guys. Show everyone how bad the other team is, and sometimes, show the voters that you're just as good (or even better when it comes to being tough on the poor ('end welfare as we know it' - B. Clinton), on crime;, or on the bogey-men in Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela,, Nicaragua, Cuba, etc. It was also obvious that there would ALWAYS be a greater evil on the other side, and the Dems were going to use that fear and cudgel (Vote Blue No Matter Who) every time. They had nothing else to run on except it.

Another thing I concluded . Everytime I was persuaded by the LOTE argument instead of giving my support to someone with shared values but minimal chance of winning, I failed to help move that needle forward. I recall how many people said, of 2016, that they greatly preferred Sanders' and his platform over HRC; but they believed the pundits who said Sanders would have no chance in the general. So they gave their nomination vote to HRC. (Those of us who were paying more attention knew that Sanders would have likely beat Trump pretty handily, as the polls for a year or longer had made clear.). At any rate, this is what happens when people, motivated by fear, vote against their interests

So no, I will never again vote against my own values and interests. Either there is a candidate to whom I can in honesty give my vote and support, or I pass.

Thankfully, there are still people of principle and occasionally they find their way onto a ballot. I happily gave a vote to Jill Stein. You will call it a wasted vote; but I'd say my vote would have been wasted if I gave it to someone whose entire history was in opposition to my interests.

Expand full comment

Roger my friend, I beg you to revisit the bogus meme that Trump has a stunted psychological development, and is clearly a loose cannon, and an embarrassment. Thats as bogus as Russia, Russia, Russia. Even my left-to- the-eyeballs feminist doctor daughters stutter when I mention that the misogynist Trump had more women in his top administrative positions than any President in history! LOL

In the 2020 election, if one can trust the vote counters, which is as we all know is extremely debatable, 70-million cast votes for Trump. The walking corpse got only 4-million more.

With all the recent shenanigans of the DNC, FBI and DOJ to eliminate Trump by a corrupt Judicary; everybody in America, except diehard Democrats, is revolted. As I said, dumb as you think the US people are, one thing they detest is dirty pool. There will unarguably be a huge number flocking to vote for Trump. People that have not voted before, and disaffected Democrats.

And if you put the two parties' platforms side by side, Trump's anti-war, screw the status quo platform is going to have a much bigger appeal since Biden and the corrupt Democrats woke platform has obviously destroyed America. And the abject failure of the dethrone Putin gig is up. People are tired of having the Democrats cheering leading that scam.

And with Bidens bribes inevitably going to be exposed, and his son's crimes being clearly swept under the rug, the revulsion is only going to get worse. Biden could even be impeached. And Kamala Harris has a snowball's chance in hell. And looking at the shit and drug needle littered streets in woke California , nobody wants that. Gavin Newson is a non-starter. Sadly, RFK Jrs anti-status quo platform is too extreme for establishment lefties. The Williamson gal - not a chance. So who else is there that is "progressive? And I use the term advisably? Hitlery- people have had enough of the screeching woman.

The Green Party, as it's always been, is a minor player. Anathema to most Americans

You better get ready for a Trump Presidency. It's as obvious as the nose on your face. People vote with their wallets. Trump has no Republican challengers. He can't lose.

Fail to take the sows ear and do your best to make it a silk purse at your peril. He is America's only slim chance to, dare I say it, make America maybe not great again, but at least have a slim chance of not imploding and going down the gurgler.

That's the reality that is inevitable. You better start getting behind Trump if you want to see any of your desires met. The Democrats can no longer win by claiming the other side sucks. That game is over.

It's TRUMP 2024. Betcha' my next Social Security check! LOL

Expand full comment

Dennis, thanks for your perspective on this. I'll try to keep my reply as brief as possible.

Re. vote counters: I can't speak for all those people in all those different jurisdictions, but I've known more than a few and get the impression that they are typical of those best examples of 'public servants'. As to the technologies involved, I'm a strong proponent of mail-in ballots, given that they enable & encourage more participation. I was, however, very early on concerned with the potential hack-ability of the electronic voting machines such as sold by Diebold. I don't think there was any malfeasance in their manufacture, but I had been concerned about the potential for introducing malware / corrupted code. I don't know if that's been completely fixed but can't imagine that security hasn't been improved. As for the public officials in charge: I will give benefit of the doubt though I know the potential is always there for someone to use position to partisan advantage.

As for Trump: his lacks when it comes to personal psychological development are routinely illustrated in his language. In perhaps every single communication, his focus is on his greatness, his ability, his superiority, etc. He appears to lack any empathy for or even respect for other humans- which is common to those who are so self-absorbed. Everything is cast in the context of HIM. That he has a "Trump Tower" is symbolic. He can't think of himself in any other way other than exalted.

Some will look at such things as the opposite; as proof that he is supremely confident and therefore qualified. I see a person who is especially unfit for public service.

That said, he certainly did seem to recognize, very early on, the malfeasance and out-of-control nature of the Deep State- or that part that is the unelected group of leaders and influencers in the security/surveillance establishment. Too, without commenting on his motives, his instincts about developing better relations with Russia and others (as preferred to spending so much on war) was certainly more desirable than, say, the war-mongering Clinton, or Biden.

But was he anti-war or pro-peace generally? Hard to say, as he gave in without any resistance to some of the Deep-State's provocations, continued to grow the defense authorizations, appointed neocon war hawk Pompeo, pulled out of the INF (no doubt at Bolton's urging), sought war with Iran and ended the Iran nuclear agreement, etc. Perhaps he was just willing to give in on some of the neocons' predilections. Equally likely, he just lacked any real understanding or a cohesive set of principles.

At any rate, that kind of inconsistency illustrates one or both of two things: he was inconsistent in applying any principles (if he had any), and had bad judgment (as illustrated in choosing Pompeo and others),

I suspect that in the case of relations with Russia, he was motivated most by his business interests. 'Make money and not war' - that sort of thing. As he had no business interests in Iran, nor in Venezuela, etc., he was more amenable to open conflict. They had socialistic leanings, after all.

Was he a better choice than Biden or Clinton? I can't argue that point as their are good arguments to be made against either. I'll let others decide. i do think on the question of foreign policy, we know Biden and Clinton are hawks and committed defenders of Empire.

As for a re-run of Biden: We agree that he is a horrid person and puppet as a President; and his steadily increasing cognitive problems should disqualify him.

In fact, even though the Dem establishment has gone all-in on Biden over this past year, I see signs that lead me to now expect they will pull him out of the race, and put up another puppet. I see the corporate media outliers now openly trashing him and I think with all his well-covered, almost viral videos of fumbled addresses and gaffes, along with extremely low favorability ratings, they know he's extremely weak.

I think the establishment went with him early because: a) he's quite reliably their champion on their issues (American hegemony, spending on security state, corporate desires, etc.) and b) he's just a figurehead - compliant to those really running the Ship of State, happy to sign & be the Front man.

But both of those qualities are easily transferrable to any other of their stuffed suits. A Gavin Newsome, or any of a dozen other familiar names would do.

Lastly let me say, Dennis, that EVEN IF I thought that Biden or one of the other Dems was better than Trump on any of the issues, it would not matter to me because it won't be enough to save this nation much less the planet. Recall that I noted in my earlier comment the perilous position we're in as a result of the steady spiral down the toilet represented by the status quo positions.

Take Climate destabiilization. The Dems (with a few exceptions like Manchin) are nowhere near as bad as the GOP. thought leaders. At least the D's don't (for the most part) deny fossil fuels' causation of the emergency.

The trouble is, they are content to make tiny improvements here and there- the ones that don't cause the profiting industries too much concern; but nothing they're doing or have advocated or considered is enough to change course in time to prevent the major world of hurt that is coming. This country, and the planet as a whole, are failing even the modest (too small) commitments made at the Paris Accords; we're not at all on track to fulfill any of our commitments, and the problems are accelerating towards complete climate chaos and with it, challenges that will make life unbearable for very many. The geopolitically destabilizing effect of mass migrations alone will lead to other problems not yet considered by any. And here is Biden, talking a good game, then approving vast new fossil fuel projects that experts say may spell, "game over" for civilization.

As for the other existential threat of nuclear war, the D's have now become just as nuts as the R's... the D's have actually tried to best the R's whether in 'defense' spending, creating conflicts with Russia and China and the rest of the globe.

So what does it matter if the R's manage to push us all over that climatic tipping point a few weeks or months sooner than the D's? What does it matter which Party is in the White House with a finger on the nuclear Armageddon trigger?

Yes, the Green Party has been a minor player, held back in part by the active undermining, legally, by the D's; and in part by their lack of strong organizational building. But, having been on the inside of the DP (I was twice a candidate at County level), and seeing the nature of the Party at that time, and having failed to ever mount enough interest among fellow progressives to try to take over the Party, I've given up any semblance of hope that the Party can be reformed enough to make it a true alternative to the GOP. And so all my electoral energy will go to helping get things like Ranked Choice Voting, and a people-representing third party better able to compete.

Expand full comment

Well said. Bravo.

Expand full comment

Yeah, your usual good post Roger. As an Engineer, I always admire your ability to present your thoughts in an orderly fashion. Something that gets me annoyed trying to listen to Cornell West with his rambling all the over place talks. I always think that is typical of people without a "proper" STEM education. My wife always said I was a STEMS snob. Folks schooled in the arts just are not taught to be orderly. I had terrible times with my high school daughters helping them with their mathematics. Trying to teach them the art of laying the equations in the "proper" manner. "Oh Dad, what does it matter as long as we get the right answer! Stop being so anal retentive!" LOL And of course, teaching them to fly our Cessna 182, I struggled to teach them that there was only ONE way to operate the airplane. By the book! Not like an imaginative artist. I think I will put a splash over here, or over here, or over here! Aaaaaah!

And to this day, as 45-year-old doctors, I am appalled at their writing skills. Emails and texts just disgusting! Luckily, with the advent of computers, that is not such a problem anymore, but back in the day....oh dear!

Anyway, I can't disagree with any of your points - except I am not as critical of Orange Man as you, Bill, Jeff, and Denise are. Despite his narcissistic personality, Trump is effective. TDS does not let lefties give him credit for what he achieved in his 1st term. Which was a helluva lot more than the empty suit Obama. (I'm already hearing my sparring partner Jeff -" and what was it exactly Dennis that Corporal Bone Spurs achieved? LOL)

Ever seen a leader who is not a narcissist? Were George Patton, Lee Iacocca, Dwight Eisenhower and Vince Lombardi narcissistic? Sure they were. Billy Martin the irascible little man, head coach of the NY Yankees, with his foul temper, got great results leading such egomaniacs like Reggie Jackson for instance. And pissed a lot of people off along the way. Even the powerful George Steinbrenner, who was signing his checks! I guess that's how I see Trump.

And I think Trump, seeing how he got resisted and foiled on everything by the Deep State in his 1st term, and learning how the Swamp works, will get a lot more of his goals accomplished in his 2nd term. In this respect, I think a Cornel West would just be toast and railroaded!

Is Trump really anti-war, wants to make friends with Putin, and wants to treat China in a more rational way with Fair Trade, not Free Trade? I give him the credit of the doubt and say yes - and agree more with his platform than with that of any other candidate -except maybe that of the unelectable RFKjr. (that's another subject)

And think we both agree that all the D candidates are no more than cardboard cutouts. Phony progressives, and too woke for me. And the country needs change from wokeness.

The Greens - like "socialists", the label "Green" in the US, and in NZ, sadly mean a goofy extremist tree hugger. Disqualifying.

And my running argument with our esteemed author, looking at 150-years of history, I still think voting 3rd party is wasting your vote, or even worse in a tight race.

So by process of elimination, we are left with Orange Man. Hence while my post is not as long and eloquent as yours Roger, respectfully I do something you didn't. I picked my winner. For me, there is no alternative to Trump if you want to correct the US's course, even by a few degrees, in the immediate future. Him losing will eliminate any chance of the preventing the USA, and the planet, going further down the drain. I like to think I am pragmatic

EDIT: this Engineer is very pro-nuclear electricity generation to solve our future energy needs. It's detractors just emotional. And, as you may know, in NZ that is just anathema. Even to the extent of not allowing nuclear naval vessels in our waters. Way over the top in my opinion.

Expand full comment

Rather thought you would . . .

Expand full comment

biden or who so ever is in charge just tried to pull off a repeat of the 1963 diem coup….

what kind of progressive would vote for that….

Expand full comment

All these types of complaints seem to operate from the same false premise, namely that there is a substantive difference between either major party or either major party candidate. Biden just offered the latest proof that this simply is not so. He has acted exactly the way one would think he would act based upon a nearly spotless 50-year record as a tool for the corporatist state and the war industry.

His record, in spite of the tonal differences is not much different than Trump's. On issues such as domestic spending, military spending, trade policy, and even immigration there is what I call an excremental continuity from administration to administration. All the "differences" are just marginal issues and so much noise.

So, you are spot on in putting the onus where it belongs, on the rancid similarities between the candidates. I always point out that the lesser of two evils is...evil. Peace.

Expand full comment

Hey Bill: Pass this on to Your friend urging You to and explaining why You should hold Your nose ~ and keep a barf bag handy ~ and vote for Biden, as opposed to anybody else. In the simplest terms: Because a vote for Biden is a vote AGAINST Trump; and a vote for anybody but Biden is effectively a vote FOR Trump.

This is a piece i wrote back in July, 2004 that exposes the then-favorite Myth and Legend that Ralph Nader cost Al Gore Election2000 for the absolute, abject Lie that it was then, and still is today. To the contrary, it explains exactly how and why Gore cost Nader Election2000…:

CONTRA MICHAEL MOORE: Resurrecting The Biggest Lie of Election 2000

It’s no secret that Michael Moore is a Kerry Regime Insider Wannabe. So, it was no surprise when he turned the MoveOn.org June 28, 2004 live webcast about his new movie FAHRENHEIT 9/11 into a Kerry Love-Fest. But when he attacked Ralph Nader, he went a bridge too far.

In so doing, he resurrected once again The Biggest Lie About Election 2000: that Ralph Nader, the Green Party, and the people who voted for Nader cost Al Gore and the Democrats the election, and are thus directly responsible for all the evil unleashed by the Cheney White House on the planet and on this nation, in general, and on liberals, progressives, and the victims they champion, in particular.

As uncomfortable as I know it is for Michael and the rest of these people, let us consider one simple, incontestable FACT first. Who was it that said “facts are such unpleasant things”?

IF YOU TOOK EVERY VOTE THAT NADER GOT IN EITHER TENNESSEE (GORE’S HOME STATE) OR ARKANSAS (CLINTON’S HOME STATE), AND GAVE THEM TO GORE, GORE WOULD HAVE STILL LOST THEM BOTH. THIS WOULD MAKE HIM THE ONLY CANDIDATE IN HISTORY TO LOSE THE STATE OF HIS OWN PARTY’S INCUMBENT PRESIDENT, AND ONLY THE SECOND CANDIDATE IN HISTORY (AFTER MCGOVERN IN 1972) TO LOSE HIS OWN STATE. IF GORE HAD WON EITHER OF THOSE TWO STATES -- HIS OWN HOME STATE OR THE STATE OF HIS BOSS AND TITULAR HEAD OF HIS OWN PARTY -- GORE WOULD HAVE WON THE ELECTION, REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENED IN FLORIDA.

To ignore this FACT and to instead focus blame for Gore’s loss on Nader and the people who voted for him in Florida is to deny an uncomfortable but deniable reality. However, if Michael and his gang want to focus on Florida, then consider another, final, simple, incontestable FACT.

The Gore challenge to the election results in Florida deserved -- and in fact looks like it was intended -- to fail. Instead of demanding a STATEWIDE recount, the Gore braintrust chose only to demand recounts in those areas they thought they would win. But even more important than that, the Gore folks apparently had neither the balls or brains to challenge the legality of the removal of more than 50,000 voters from the registered voters lists.

Then let’s consider another simple, incontestable fact.

Because liberals, progressives, and radicals did not have the balls to vote their conscience, but instead voted for what they thought was a sure-fire way to win, GORE COST NADER THE ELECTION.

Because these people voted for one of the biggest thugs, liars, hypocrites, and thieves in Washington DC, they turned their backs on the ONLY true liberal, progressive, and radical in the campaign…the ONLY candidate with a life history consistent with true alleged Democratic, liberal, and progressive values, principles, and ideals.

And, they got what they voted for. And what they deserved.

How is that?

My guess is that it was understood by all concerned that the Clinton/Gore wing of The Party had had its time in power (eight years to be exact), and that they had accomplished what they had been sent there to do: keep the Sanctions Going in Iraq; facilitate globalization (on whose watch did NAFTA, GATT, and the WTO come into being?); facilitate the corporatization of medical care in the U.S.; de-regulate the media and communications industry; start letting people learn more and more about the evils of fundamentalist, radical Muslim terrorism; continue the tradition of un-declared, un-challenged, un-controlled War (Yugoslavia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc etc etc); run a couple of 9.11 dress rehearsals (WTC bombing, Oklahoma City bombing); normalize post-Tiananmen Square relations with crypto-capitalistic Communist China; and piss off enough people with a President dumb enough to get caught getting a blowjob in the Oval Office from a woman young enough to be his daughter and then get caught lying about it. But how else could something like MoveOn.org be spawned?

And that it was thus now time for the other guys in The Party to have their time at the helm, and to continue The Long March. You know….. The 8-On-8-Off Deal: “you guys take the Executive Branch for eight years and get your fair share of the loot, and then we’ll take it for our eight and our fair share.”

Thus, while The Cheney Regime has accomplished just about everything that they were sent there to do (except perhaps to more totally and effectively rape, pillage, and plunder the U.S. Treasury), it’s unlikely that Kerry is anything more than a dutifully sacrificial Burning Bunny in the tradition of Bob Dole and Walter Mondale.

In any event, Michael Moore should stick to movie making, and leave the King-Making to people who have a lot more experience and expertise than he does in that realm.

###

Expand full comment

Following your lead, Jeff:

Biden needs to get out of the race. He's only a spoiler for the candidate who should win: Cornel West.

Expand full comment

i’m sorry, Bill; but i find it impossible to equate Cornel West with Ralph Nader.

At least when it comes to real action and accomplishments in the real world ~ far, far removed from academia and the circles that intellectuals hang out in ~ that was [and still is] of measurable benefit to a substantial number of Americans. Compared to Nader, what has Professor West actually done in that real world that has been of any actual, real benefit to any Americans?

And even if West did somehow get elected President, where is he going to find and get the support in Congress that he will need and must have if anything he wants to do is to actually get done?

i have said it before and i will say it again: The best thing that could happen to this nation and indeed the entire planet is for both Biden and Trump to drop stone-cold dead.

Expand full comment

So Jeff, if both Biden and Trump drop stone-cold dead.

What's then is going to be the best thing that could happen to this nation and indeed the entire planet? Your plan please?

My turn to use your tactic and to ask you a question eh!

Expand full comment

The best thing that would happen if Trump and Biden dropped dead would be that they are dead, and America and the Planet could get on with the business of trying to survive without all the Bullshit of at least those two Dictator-For-Life Wannabes. Of course, there are many more just like them, just waiting in the wings to step in and take their places.

Expand full comment

Come on Bill - you have got to be kidding me! The goofy professor is going to be anathema to people who shower after work, not before. American's revulsion with ivory tower academic blowhards is legendary. How many ivory tower institutions has he quit? Harvard University, Yale University, Union Theological Seminary, Princeton University, Dartmouth College, Pepperdine University. And just the fact he went to the "Frenchie" University of Paris immediately disqualifies him to all red-blooded Americans. Tack on the "socialist" label and he is toast.

The guy only appeals to fellow academics. And a lot of them are not too impressed. Five Princeton faculty members, led by professor of molecular biology Jacques Robert Fresco, said they looked with "strong disfavor upon his characterization" of Summers (West's boss at Harvard) and that "such an analogy carries innuendoes and implications ... that many on the Princeton faculty find highly inappropriate, indeed repugnant and intolerable."

And his rambling speeches put folks to sleep. Nobody is interested in a philosophy lesson on Richard Rorty's neopragmatism! At the risk of being an anti-intellectual, I think the guy is a joke. He will get his 5-minutes of fame on all the lefty TV programs and crawl back into the woodwork of the next ivory tower that is gullible enough to take him to impress gullible young kids. Until they finally tire of him and he moves on. Ask Harvard how getting rid of him works out? The man's CV is a mess!

And of course, if he ever gets to the Swamp, he will be skinned alive! To deny he is not a spoiler is La La land stuff.

Expand full comment

I'm not sure that's true, Dennis.

Recall that Barack Obama, another professor whose middle name is Hussein, won a lot of votes from the working classes in 2008. Of course, he screwed them over, but that's not their fault.

I've heard Cornel West talk. He knows how to talk to regular folk. He's not going to give them philosophy lessons on Rory and neopragmatism.

Let's not paint blue-collar workers as uninterested in the ideas of someone like West. Or RFK Jr.

Expand full comment

Bill, I've said it before, and will say it again.

If on the 0.01% chance Cornell West becomes President.

All his fancy "talk to regular folks" will achieve is at best Obama 2.0

Lots of Hope. And zero Change. Worse than Obama even.

I remember Obama was blowing us all away with his great "talking to regular folk".

We were sucked in and to our regret, the first thing he did was cave in and failed to get us the promised Single Payer Healthcare. Being conned by the medical Industry and big Insurance to adopt a half-ass Republican Plan - by Mitt Romney was it? And his tenure went downhill from there.

West is a side show. Bred and Circuses for the folks who shower before work.

I've heard him talk as well. And I know all the American folk in the non-academic world that I worked with in 14-states, will be heading to the bar after 15-minutes. He lives in a World that does not exist for average Americans. Every week getting a fat paycheck and healthcare whatever he does - right or wrong. If a hard hat construction worker screws up - someone could get killed. If an ivory tower professor screws up - who cares!

He reminds me of those hot shot know-it-all Professors in the Enginering Department at the University of Washington who were going to come onto one our jobs and show us the proper way to execute a 1,000cyd concrete pour. Showing up in dress shoes, and obviously never handled a shovel in their life, and gone by lunchtime if it started to rain! The real workers getting a great old laugh!

Now RFK jr - that's a whole other ball game. Unlike West, Kennedy has worked in the real world, earning his fame and fortune fighting big pharma.

Expand full comment

I have my own example of the difference between book learning and real World learning. We had to perform some concrete post-tensioning on a big job in Alaska. I was assigned, as the white collar diploma'd Engineer, to manage it. I studied up all the literature for weeks becoming a post-tensioning "expert". Running all sorts of highfalutin mathematical calculations.

Flying up to Anchorage with all my notes, slide-rule, and fancy calculations. And quickly discovering to my embarrassment I did not have a clue how to work the hydraulic pumps and the 100ton jacks, or even how to post-tension! I had to call down to Seattle and get Kenny, the grizzled old high school drop-out pile buck, to fly up and do the job. That was a humbling lesson I will not forget. This is what I think Cornell West will be facing every day in the swamp. He will be like I was, equally clueless.

Expand full comment

Do You have a source on all this "insider" information, Dennis?

Expand full comment

Wikipedia is your friend Jeff.

Hardly "insider" information my sarcastic friend.

And readily available on many YouTube videos - which you refuse to watch.

Expand full comment

So why don't You give attribution, Dennis? Instead of presenting that information as something that You know as fact?

Expand full comment

This is my own composition jeff.

No attribution required.

Gleamed from lots of sources.

Expand full comment

If they actually cared about winning our votes, they would quit putting up corporate war mongering candidates that many progressives simply are not going to vote for. From at least the 2016 election on, they've done nothing but give progressives the middle finger. As one of those progressives I'm more than happy to return the favor and let the chips fall where they may.

Expand full comment

I don't know about Cornell West, but I do know about both Biden and Trump and it's hard for me to fathom how, out of 330+ million citizens, we wound up with two of the worst possible choices imaginable.

Years ago I proposed that we reform our election process and instead of holding elections, we simply select our "leaders" the same way we select jurors , i.e., by random draw from all the citizens in the country.

Go ahead. laugh. But I challenge you to explain how it would make our situation any worse than it is. (And look at all the money we would save. Plus, it would get rid of the political parties. )

Expand full comment

"Meanwhile, military budgets continue to soar as the Biden administration postures for a new Cold War with Russia and China."

I'm not sure they're posturing for a "cold" war. There appear to be too many Dr. Strangelove clones at the helm of the ship.

Expand full comment

It’s a sad state of affairs for our country when the only choice is between a bumbling fool with dementia and an egotistical obnoxious jerk. That’s the best we can do? We’ve become a laughing stock for the rest of the world. Voting is a waste of time. We lose either way. I can’t in good conscience vote for either one. There’s no longer integrity in our process.

Expand full comment

I meant no primary debates - sorry my fault, I should have said it better. It is arrogant of Biden to refuse primary debates, and I still think we need another candidate to, of nothing else, debate Cornell . If there are no debates, the majority of voters will have no idea who is out there on the ticket. The majority of voters are used to having debates,; too many don't read papers, and whatever TV they watch for news ,like the news papers, will not give accurate accounts of candidates' platform or background - it will be propaganda for the networks or paper's idiology. At least with debates we would get to see and hear the candidates' own words and responses to questions.

Expand full comment

First of all Bill, thanks for giving us a substantive list of Biden's failings which I will send to my friends and family. But I note that few of the comments on your essay mention the US appalling foreign policy which is definitely worse under Biden than it was under Trump, which isn't saying much. But voting for Biden means voting for more of his (or the deep state's) urge to go to war with china, and I'm certainly not going to do that and I can't comprehend how any sane person would want to vote for a man who never means what he says and clearly plans to go to war with either Russia or China or both.

I keep hoping a liberal democrat will step forward to announce (s)he's running - maybe Jay Inslee who has done a creditable job in Washington state and does indeed know how to deal with the instruments of government, which, as someone pointed out, Cornell West does not. I like Cornell West and his ideas but I also know that he hasn't a chance in hell to get elected, - he's the wrong age, the wrong color for too many people (lets be honest here) his aura of college professor is not going to go well in too many parts of the country. We need someone else to step in and challenge Biden.

And what is this thing about not having a primary??!! How come no one talks about it - how come they shrug and let Biden get away with that? How come you don't talk about it, Bill? Please do! I think it is frighteningly ARROGANT to simply announce you aren't going to do primaries. Maybe it's the DNC idea to save old Joe from displaying his senility, but are we going to let him get away with it without a major dispute?? If nothing else, we need at least one or two more people to step forward and say they are running. It can't be that hard - look at the strange bunch of Republicans who have done it. We need a candidate that not only is one who's ideas we can vote for, but we need one who can WIN! I'm looking at Inslee as a possible (Warren doesn't seem to want to step up). Does anyone have a better suggestion?

Expand full comment

There will be primaries, but the DNC has said there will be no primary debates. I have written about this.

The fix is in for Biden, of course.

Expand full comment

There isn't a SINGLE, SOLITARY Democrat with the foreign policy, pro-peace credentials that fit that description...except RFK, Jr.

Name one.

Expand full comment

And even RFK Jr. has bent the knee to Israel.

Expand full comment

Oh, I don't support RFKJ. I haven't voted for a Duopoly candidate since Mondale. The Democratic Party cannot be changed from within. And as far as Israel is concerned, he's no different from any other candidate who thinks he or she might have a shot at being elected.

Expand full comment