Monday Open Thread [6.27.16]
Trump's new slogan: "Make America British Again" pic.twitter.com/IA2yoImR36
— ✯bennydiego✯ (@bennydiego) June 27, 2016
A Guardian reader wonders if David Cameron outsmarted the Brexiters. You see, during the campaign, Cameron had said that if Leave won, he would activate Article 50 of the EU Charter immediately, the day after the vote, to start the process. But guess what he did instead. He delayed, saying that the next Prime Minister the Conservative Party chooses should take that action. Take it away, Guardian commenter:
The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: Will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50? Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?
Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneuvered and check-mated. If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over – Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession … broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.
The delay by Cameron also makes all the ramifications of Brexit clear: market turmoil, recession, Scottish independence, Irish unification. So not only has David Cameron forced the leaders of the Brexit campaign to take ownership of the consequences, he also gave the UK time to consider whether they really want to do it. It’s both a Fuck You and a Here, Let Me Help You Out With That. Very British.
Having a hard time telling the Game of Thrones tweets from the collapse of the United Kingdom tweets.
— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) June 27, 2016
Politico: “With the convention less than a month away, Politico contacted more than 50 prominent governors, senators, and House members to gauge their interest in speaking. Only a few said they were open to it — and everyone else said they either weren’t planning on it, didn’t want to, weren’t going to Cleveland at all, or simply didn’t respond.”
“The widespread lack of interest, Republicans say, boils down to one thing: the growing consensus that it’s best to steer clear of Trump.”
Trend:
> ABC/WaPo: Clinton +12
> IPSOS: HC +10
> ARG: HC +9
> CBS/NYT: HC +7
> Bloomberg: HC +12
> NBC/WSJ: HC +5
> Monmouth: HC +8— Matt Mackowiak (@MattMackowiak) June 27, 2016
New York Times: “The court issued liberal decisions in 56 percent of cases so far this term, according to a widely accepted standard developed by political scientists that considers signed decisions in argued cases. The share is only slightly lower than in the 2014-15 term, which had the highest share of liberal decisions since the court led by Chief Justice Earl Warren in the 1950s and 1960s.”
Love this pic.twitter.com/RAQf2hMJYT
— Adam Parkhomenko (@AdamParkhomenko) June 26, 2016
The first First Lady to march in a gay pride parade in the 90’s, and the first Presidential candidate to march in a gay pride parade in the 10’s. As a digression, what do we call the first decade of the 21st Century? The Aughts? The 2000’s? And this decade? The Tens? The Teens?
“We have a candidate who doesn’t need to figure out what’s going on in order to say what he wants to do.” — Trump adviser Paul Manafort, in an interview on Meet the Press.
.@BarneyFrank on the time he marched in NYC's gay pride parade with the First Lady of the United States in 2000.https://t.co/G1b5cUV0pJ
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) June 25, 2016
NATIONAL–PRESIDENT–Washington Post-ABC News—Clinton 51, Trump 39
“Roughly two in three Americans say they think Trump is unqualified to lead the nation; are anxious about the idea of him as president; believe his comments about women, minorities and Muslims show an unfair bias; and see his attacks on a federal judge because of his Mexican American heritage as racist.”
NATIONAL–PRESIDENT–NBC News/Wall Street Journal—Clinton 46, Trump 41
This is brutal for Trump and should have him worried about an embarrassing romp in November.https://t.co/YOdrC6lqh7 pic.twitter.com/O1hmMBBiT9
— andrew kaczynski (@BuzzFeedAndrew) June 26, 2016
Peter Beinart at the Atlantic:
The second reason to doubt that Brexit is prologue for Trump is the role of nationalism. The campaign to leave the EU successfully tapped into a fear that Britain was ceding its identity to foreigners, both the bureaucrats in Brussels and the immigrants who were flocking to British shores. Trump, with his “America First” slogan, is making a similar case. As he said last week, “Our country lost its way when we stopped putting the American people really first. We got here because we switched from a policy of Americanism—focusing on what’s good for America’s middle class—to a policy of globalism.”
For Trump, however, nationalism is a harder argument to make. The U.S. may have entered unpopular trade deals (deals that Clinton now claims to oppose, too), but it hasn’t surrendered nearly as much sovereignty to international institutions as has the U.K. What’s more, the United States, more than Britain, sees itself as a nation of immigrants. So when Trump says he’ll protect Americans against Mexican and Muslims, Democrats can respond that those immigrants are Americans, too. Pro-E.U. politicians couldn’t speak the same way about the Polish plumbers and Syrian refugees that the pro-Brexit campaign demonized.
The language is telling. In Britain, the “Remain” camp’s slogan was “Britain Stronger in Europe.” Hillary Clinton’s current slogan, by contrast, is “We’re stronger together.” The struggle over Brexit was a struggle between nationalism and internationalism. The struggle between Trump and Clinton is a struggle between different kinds of nationalism. It’s less about America’s relationship with the world than about who is really an American. That’s why Trump will lose a substantial number of voters who agree with him about NAFTA and Iraq. They may agree that the United States should pull back militarily and economically but they will never agree that Gonzalo Curiel and Barack Obama aren’t real Americans.
Pres. Obama's approval rating rises to 56% in new @ABC News/WaPo poll, up 5 points https://t.co/ImRKmJdaIy pic.twitter.com/o7CKyZZRjL
— ABC News (@ABC) June 26, 2016
To all the evil conservatives and the purist progressives who hate Obama, suck it.
Aaron Blake reports at the Fix that “…We have some bad news for the Trump campaign. Sanders supporters aren’t just rallying around Clinton; they’re doing it rather quickly. And it’s a big reason Clinton just extended her lead over Trump into the double digits, 51 percent to 39 percent…A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that Sanders backers, who polls have shown were reluctant to jump over to Clinton and even flirted with supporting Trump, are coming home faster than we might have expected.”
At this point, they only Bernie or Busters left are those who voted for Nader… in 2008. They will never come home because they never lived here.
The Huffington Posts’s Earl Ofari Hutchinson makes a strong case for Clinton picking Elizabeth Warren for her running mate: “Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren is Hillary’s best bet for VP. Why? Despite the relentless lampooning, ridiculing and name-calling of Trump, and the smug writing of his political obituary, the election will be a close run up. The big GOP donors and handlers, the hate driven passion to beat Hillary, Trump’s skilled fear mongering and pander to bigotry, the never-ending media fawn over him, and GOP dominance in the majority of the state’s legislatures and state houses will insure that…The fatal mistake is to assume that simply painting and then writing off Trump as a kook will be enough to scare millions to storm the polls to defeat him. Clinton’s campaign is a political textbook study in business like organization, precision, and professionalism. But it’s not a campaign of passion…Its passion that pushes people, especially young people, and minorities, out the door and to the polls on Election Day. These voters made the White House a wrap for Obama in 2008 and 2012. But Clinton is not Obama, and in the handful of swing states that will decide the election, the numbers and turnout will mean everything.”
I SO hope it’s Warren, and/or anyone not named Tim Kaine. Warren has already demonstrated that she can put the heat on Trump while Clinton pursues a more presidential path. Also, pretty much all the millenials will be motivated to vote if Warren is on the ticket. Warren’s presence could help make the difference in tight races up and down the ballot. Other than Sanders, who shouldn’t be the VP candidate, no other possible candidate could draw crowds like Warren.
Hillary in Ohio today:
“This is not a time for half measures. […] We’ve got to go big and we’ve got to go bold. ”
WTF? I thought the winning message was incremental pragmatism, and her agenda is full of half-measures. Is this a flip-flop. or just empty words?
For the “Pure Progressives”, or the ‘Pure Bloods’ to use a Harry Potter reference, it will be classified as empty words, simple pandering to the weak-minded get-alongs that have destroyed the promise of the Democratic Party (channeling my inner DG there)…
For others, the Mud Blood Democracts (Harry Potter ref), hopefully it’ll be taken as an actual shift in policy and thinking…
And for a smaller population, they will choose to recognize it as the promises of a candidate, which remain vastly different than the realities which the elected official may be able to deliver.
These days, “going bold” means “not giving in to xenophobic nationalism and national self-harm in order to hurt “them”. Basic human civility is now a radical agenda.
England are out of Europe!…..Iceland remain.
Hodgson resigns.
Great day for Iceland. Nation of 340,000 knockout England and advance to quarterfinals. Of course the real performance of the day was my Azzurri. Strong like a fucking bull. Un mito… Una storia. .. Una realtà. Forza Italia!
If Uncle Roy is out, who’s on the FA shortlist, do you think? Scuttlebutt at the pub today says… Ryan Giggs. With the special one in at Old Trafford Giggsy needs a new gig.
My choice would probably be Harry Redknapp, who arguably should have had the job to begin with.
David Moyes comes to mind, as well as one of my favorites, Mick McCarthy, who is at Ipswich Town in the championship right now……Sam Allardyce?
It doesn’t necessarily have to be a manager from the UK. Has Jose Mourinho finalized his contract at Man United?
Old ‘arry past his prime. All my mates from England would rather disband the side than see Redknapp boss. He may have been passed over, but that was his only shot I think.
Mourinho is going to United and that’s that.
I like the others, especially McCarthy and Fat Sam, but then you get into the same old routine. Basically throw of bunch of British manager’s names in a hat and pick one at random.
I think Moyes, after the United disaster as Mr Alex’s heir-apparent, needs to manage successfully at top club level before getting a national job.
Bottom line, England is, as usual, properly screwed. The only other name bandied about yesterday was from the pub’s Merseyside contingent. They, of course, back King Kenny. Dalglish is a sentimental favourite…
Only other option is a foreigner, Sven took the side to a World Cup quarterfinal but nobody liked him. Fabio Capello was, well, too Italian. And with the Brexit and all…
Áfram Ísland! (Go Iceland!)
I love seeing the crooked old white male CEO’s from the financial industry testify in the senate when she asks them questions. I’m thinking the VP spot may give her even more opportunity unless Clinton tells her otherwise?
I have mixed emotions on Warren being VP. I really don’t want to lose her in the Senate, and I can’t stand thinking about all the crap that will come with two women on the ticket – even tho I absolutely love the idea!
That said, if Warren accepts the position, Hillary won’t “tell her otherwise”. Seriously, these discussions will be had prior to Warren accepting, so if she accepts then she is okay with the terms. And the idea that Clinton would chose Warren only to silence her signature issue is nuts. Come on, guys. Think this through.
I think the thinking is, by some, that Clinton is so dishonest, (and apparently warren so naive) that whatever Clinton promises Warren to get her to join the ticket, will be thrown out on Jan 21st. I dont particularly think this way, but I can see disaffected anti-Clinton people really buying into that.
The same way Obama was gonna take guns…. just wait! I know it’s been 7 years. this is the year Clinton shows her TRUE colors!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LOL, Ben!
I have a problem with turning these two smart, accomplished women into caricatures. It does both of them a YUGE disservice. Yeah, I hear ya. But… people that go with this script are denying reality and only trying to justify their beliefs. They like Warren, so if she does this they’ll have to create a narrative that lessens her intelligence.
Ok, this morning the Sussex council is voting on a zoning entitlement change for an out of state high desnity developer in the Inland Bays drainage basin off rt 24 on 123 acres. The inland bays are a state wide resource and must be protected on the state level. This will only happen if people in NCC start letting their legislators know that DE inland bays are a state wide resource that require state level protection. Please think about where you live!!
@mouse: People have been pointing out for at least 40 years that overdevelopment at the beach and around the bay would destroy the resource that brought the development in the first place. It hasn’t worked yet, and the execrable Rich Collins even got himself elected to the GA (thanks to Sneaky Pete, who gave D’s a rep (Adkins) who set the pattern for the later Trump campaign.
At some point people start to look around and ask, “Why did we move here?”
This Digby piece might explain for Bernie supporters why Hillary supporters were so incensed by our attacks from her left. GOP special-ops forces were seeding social media with attacks from her left.
http://www.salon.com/2016/06/28/donald_trumps_new_losing_strategy_no_democrats_wont_fall_for_his_dirty_tricks_against_hillary/
Which is why DD was calling people Republican dupes for being to the left of Hillary.
The entire strategy, however, was predicated on “the base” disliking a too-centrist candidate, and their example of this was Romney.
The strategy was always doomed to failure because, while Romney had no core group of loyalists outside of fellow Mormons, Hillary has tens of millions of loyal feminists. Plus Trump is so despised that I expect dead people to vote in 2016, even without the help of political bosses. People hate him so much they’ll rise from the grave to vote against him.
I’m going to start lobbying legislators and writing editorials to see if I can get some focus on the issue. It sickens me to see these multinational POS real estate development companies endlessly build expensive beige plastic generic houses for cheapskate out of state retirees to escape taxes. Few if any working people in sussex county could afford these ugly abominations, so the benefit is very limited
@a re: Digby piece. One of the reasons that Clinton supporters may have been so incensed by those attacks, is that left is supposed to be smarter than to fall for those tricks. The second, and more probable, is that Clinton has been vilified for over 20 years by the right, because of her husband, herself, and whatever else someone wanted to throw against the wall to see if it stuck. So when it started coming from the left, it was seen as a betrayal because even if the Clintons were centrists they supported many of the Democratic ideals, especially down ticket races. So 20 years of the right’s BS and now her own side started piling on.
Point of order. Just because some GOP ratfuckers say that Clinton is chummy with banks doesn’t mean Clinton isn’t chummy with banks.
Carry on.
@p “I have mixed emotions on Warren being VP. I really don’t want to lose her in the Senate”
The VP serves in the Senate. I’m sure the Dems could be creative with committee assignments, if they wanted to be.
I posted up links to a few placed (NYT) who were reporting on the GOP effort to get the left to take up their Clinton Derangement Syndrome. And I noted how specifically similar the charges against Hillary seemed to those made 20 years ago. It’s a pretty big ding in the reputation of being part of the Reality Based Community.
I get that there were Republicans who wanted Sanders to do well. I understand that a few naive Sanders supporters could have been baited into using old GOP talking points. Were all Sander supporters so naive? Of course not. Did the naive ones have any real impact? I doubt it. Clinton won didn’t she? She is clobbering Trump in recent polls, isn’t she.
All this anti-Bernie triumphalism is is really disgusting. We are all on the same team after all.
Are you sure about that, Jason?
Very disappointing.
lol. great timing. :/
I know! I was surprised, too!
Sander’s juice is waning fast. Warren is the new face of the progressive wing and most of us are happy to see her take up the mantel. If he actually cares about his platform, he’ll do what needs to be done (he already said he is voting her Clinton). If not, i’ll be the first to say I made a mistake in ever backing him.
Jason, yes we are all on the same team. Which is why I have not gone after Bernie with the vengeance you know I am capable of during this “concession” period. That said, and with apologies to those who like him and/or support him, Bernie’s moment has passed. He has waited too long to endorse. And with Warren on Team Clinton and perhaps even the next Vice President, she doesn’t have to pay attention to Bernie anymore. A Bernie endorsement know is worthless.
^ yeah. at this point, anyone left holding out will never vote for Clinton and will just call him a sell-out for endorsing.
I think he should stay exactly how he is. be a true “loyal opposition”. I want to see the left hold Clinton accountable for all the promises she has made and all the ones yet to come. He can advocate for her win, while at the same time pushing his agenda.
@p “Very disappointing.”
I’m sure he’ll make it right during his convention speech. Until then, he’s STI.
The most upsetting thing about Sanders’ interview is the claim that she has not been championing the little guy. All of her many earnest efforts go unmarked by Sanders, as if only he could do them.
What ever are you going to do, LE when you cant come up with cute insults for Sanders anymore?
You’re like that soldier after WW2 who refused to believe the fight was over.