In 2008, Hillary Clinton was forced to accept and support Barack Obama’s nomination for the presidency, something that everyone thought she had locked up.
Obama, a young, African-American, came from nowhere to challenge the presumptive Democratic candidate for the nomination and he won. Obama had little political experience and had not done anything to get the attention of the voters before he declared his candidacy.
The question that plagued me was, “which people with the power and money are supporting this man?” Certainly, in this day and age, running for the office of president without millions of dollars backing you would be an exercise in futility.
Let us consider that Obama’s kindness and gentleness, over the past 7+ years, with Wall Street and the weapons and war industries (military/industrial complex), might help us understand where some of his support came from.
After being frustrated in 2008, Hillary decided to throw her hat in the ring for the 2016 election. Again, everyone accepted the fact that she was a shoo-in for the nomination. Everyone was preparing for her coronation ceremony. But, once again, a surprise candidate, Bernie Sanders, declared his candidacy.
Claiming, during his political career, to being an independent and accepting the label of “socialist,” Bernie drew the attention of the left or progressives in the Democratic Party. His speeches were filled with progressive domestic agendas and goals which caught the imagination of the disenfranchised public. His gatherings were drawing 20- to 30-thousand enthusiastic people. Young people and even older people, who had never actively participated in politics, were now engaged and joining the Democratic Party.
Bernie’s candidacy was unexpectedly proving to be more successful than anticipated. It was time for the party hierarchy to step in and ensure that Bernie does not get the nomination. The super-delegates were in place to neutralize any effort Bernie made to gather the majority popular vote.
Bernie Sanders helped make the primary process interesting. But one cannot appreciate his value without evaluating what the last year would have been like if Hillary’s candidacy was not contested and the Republicans offered no one more interesting than Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz.
With all the excitement about Bernie’s progressive program, let’s look at who he is and who he has been for the past 30 years. Although he has claimed to be an independent, Sanders has caucused with the Democratic Party for most of his career.
Sanders did, as he often claimed, vote against the Iraq invasion but then subsequently voted to fund the very same war. Bernie has, over the years, voted to fund every military action undertaken by the U.S.
He has provided unquestioning support for Israel and has voted numerous times to provide them with military aid and $3.5 billion per year, despite Israel’s continued occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. During the summer of 2014, Bernie voted for a supplementary shipment of weapons and arms to Israel while they were in the process of using these weapons to slaughter Palestinian citizens and destroying schools and hospitals in Gaza.
During a recent interview, Bernie Sanders made it perfectly clear that he supports the use of drones and the KILL LIST. What is this list? Every Tuesday morning, Obama and his advisors meet to draw up a list of people that they have determined present an imminent danger to the U.S. and place them on this list to be targeted for assassination. This list can include American citizens. Those targeted are assassinated without being charged with a crime and without being given a trial to determine their innocence or guilt.
Does Bernie Sanders still impress you as a “progressive”?
However, the man who made the process really entertaining was Donald Trump. While Sanders stimulated interest on the left, Trump did the same for those on the right.
Trump gave a voice and legitimacy to those racists and white supremacists who had been closeted away for years. His rhetoric was harsh and insulting. Trump was successful in alienating women, people of Mexican descent as well as other Latinos, Muslims, African-Americans, and those who pursued a gay lifestyle. Trump would not hesitate to threaten physically those who disagreed with him. His rhetoric was so extreme that many people, including those in the Republican Party, distanced themselves from him.
He went out of his way to thank the nation’s police for their fine work, despite the rage among the populace regarding the continuous shootings and killings by police of unarmed, primarily Black males.
The only group that he seemed to appeal to were white males.
Still, the Donald continued to win primary after primary and finally became the presumptive Republican presidential candidate. The more support he got the more outrageous was his rhetoric.
So, while Bernie Sanders stimulated interest among the disaffected left, Donald Trump did the same for the disaffected right.
We have reached that point where Bernie has conceded the candidacy to Hillary and promise to unite his supporters with hers so that they can prevent this danger to mankind, Donald Trump, from becoming president.
Donald, on the other hand, has been so outrageous, he has frightened most of the electorate, many of whom will vote for Hillary to prevent him from sitting in the Oval Office.
One has to wonder whether or not Trump was serious in his quest for the presidency. How could one be serious and then go out of his way to insult and alienate more than half the voting public?
Let me present another possibility in this whole seemingly scripted electoral season. Hillary Clinton is not very well liked by a majority of the people. To ensure and guarantee her ascendency to the White House and avoid another 2008, Bernie Sanders is allowed to play the “sheep dog,” the candidate who will mobilize the left wing of the party and eventually turn them over to Hillary. This is something that has already been actualized with Bernie stating that the Democrats will have to join forces to keep Trump from being elected and if he does not win the nomination, he will support Hillary, the anti-Christ.
Then there is Donald, the abuser, whose rhetoric has frightened a large number of voters, including Republicans, who will likely vote for Hillary in order to prevent a Trump victory.
Between Bernie’s presence and Donald’s presence, Hillary looks like the next president of the U.S. Could the dynamics have played out any more conveniently for her? Both Bernie and the Donald appear to have guaranteed that despite her unpopularity, most of the electorate will vote for her out of fear of Trump.
To quote the infamous Donald Trump, “The whole thing is rigged.” Think about it.
In conclusion I would like to say that participating in U.S. corporate sponsored elections is nothing more than political masturbation.
GOD BLESS AMERIKA!!!
Dave Alpert has masters degrees in social work, educational administration, and psychology. He spent his career working with troubled inner city adolescents.
RSS
Was the fix in?
Posted on June 29, 2016 by Dave Alpert
In 2008, Hillary Clinton was forced to accept and support Barack Obama’s nomination for the presidency, something that everyone thought she had locked up.
Obama, a young, African-American, came from nowhere to challenge the presumptive Democratic candidate for the nomination and he won. Obama had little political experience and had not done anything to get the attention of the voters before he declared his candidacy.
The question that plagued me was, “which people with the power and money are supporting this man?” Certainly, in this day and age, running for the office of president without millions of dollars backing you would be an exercise in futility.
Let us consider that Obama’s kindness and gentleness, over the past 7+ years, with Wall Street and the weapons and war industries (military/industrial complex), might help us understand where some of his support came from.
After being frustrated in 2008, Hillary decided to throw her hat in the ring for the 2016 election. Again, everyone accepted the fact that she was a shoo-in for the nomination. Everyone was preparing for her coronation ceremony. But, once again, a surprise candidate, Bernie Sanders, declared his candidacy.
Claiming, during his political career, to being an independent and accepting the label of “socialist,” Bernie drew the attention of the left or progressives in the Democratic Party. His speeches were filled with progressive domestic agendas and goals which caught the imagination of the disenfranchised public. His gatherings were drawing 20- to 30-thousand enthusiastic people. Young people and even older people, who had never actively participated in politics, were now engaged and joining the Democratic Party.
Bernie’s candidacy was unexpectedly proving to be more successful than anticipated. It was time for the party hierarchy to step in and ensure that Bernie does not get the nomination. The super-delegates were in place to neutralize any effort Bernie made to gather the majority popular vote.
Bernie Sanders helped make the primary process interesting. But one cannot appreciate his value without evaluating what the last year would have been like if Hillary’s candidacy was not contested and the Republicans offered no one more interesting than Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz.
With all the excitement about Bernie’s progressive program, let’s look at who he is and who he has been for the past 30 years. Although he has claimed to be an independent, Sanders has caucused with the Democratic Party for most of his career.
Sanders did, as he often claimed, vote against the Iraq invasion but then subsequently voted to fund the very same war. Bernie has, over the years, voted to fund every military action undertaken by the U.S.
He has provided unquestioning support for Israel and has voted numerous times to provide them with military aid and $3.5 billion per year, despite Israel’s continued occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. During the summer of 2014, Bernie voted for a supplementary shipment of weapons and arms to Israel while they were in the process of using these weapons to slaughter Palestinian citizens and destroying schools and hospitals in Gaza.
During a recent interview, Bernie Sanders made it perfectly clear that he supports the use of drones and the KILL LIST. What is this list? Every Tuesday morning, Obama and his advisors meet to draw up a list of people that they have determined present an imminent danger to the U.S. and place them on this list to be targeted for assassination. This list can include American citizens. Those targeted are assassinated without being charged with a crime and without being given a trial to determine their innocence or guilt.
Does Bernie Sanders still impress you as a “progressive”?
However, the man who made the process really entertaining was Donald Trump. While Sanders stimulated interest on the left, Trump did the same for those on the right.
Trump gave a voice and legitimacy to those racists and white supremacists who had been closeted away for years. His rhetoric was harsh and insulting. Trump was successful in alienating women, people of Mexican descent as well as other Latinos, Muslims, African-Americans, and those who pursued a gay lifestyle. Trump would not hesitate to threaten physically those who disagreed with him. His rhetoric was so extreme that many people, including those in the Republican Party, distanced themselves from him.
He went out of his way to thank the nation’s police for their fine work, despite the rage among the populace regarding the continuous shootings and killings by police of unarmed, primarily Black males.
The only group that he seemed to appeal to were white males.
Still, the Donald continued to win primary after primary and finally became the presumptive Republican presidential candidate. The more support he got the more outrageous was his rhetoric.
So, while Bernie Sanders stimulated interest among the disaffected left, Donald Trump did the same for the disaffected right.
We have reached that point where Bernie has conceded the candidacy to Hillary and promise to unite his supporters with hers so that they can prevent this danger to mankind, Donald Trump, from becoming president.
Donald, on the other hand, has been so outrageous, he has frightened most of the electorate, many of whom will vote for Hillary to prevent him from sitting in the Oval Office.
One has to wonder whether or not Trump was serious in his quest for the presidency. How could one be serious and then go out of his way to insult and alienate more than half the voting public?
Let me present another possibility in this whole seemingly scripted electoral season. Hillary Clinton is not very well liked by a majority of the people. To ensure and guarantee her ascendency to the White House and avoid another 2008, Bernie Sanders is allowed to play the “sheep dog,” the candidate who will mobilize the left wing of the party and eventually turn them over to Hillary. This is something that has already been actualized with Bernie stating that the Democrats will have to join forces to keep Trump from being elected and if he does not win the nomination, he will support Hillary, the anti-Christ.
Then there is Donald, the abuser, whose rhetoric has frightened a large number of voters, including Republicans, who will likely vote for Hillary in order to prevent a Trump victory.
Between Bernie’s presence and Donald’s presence, Hillary looks like the next president of the U.S. Could the dynamics have played out any more conveniently for her? Both Bernie and the Donald appear to have guaranteed that despite her unpopularity, most of the electorate will vote for her out of fear of Trump.
To quote the infamous Donald Trump, “The whole thing is rigged.” Think about it.
In conclusion I would like to say that participating in U.S. corporate sponsored elections is nothing more than political masturbation.
GOD BLESS AMERIKA!!!
Dave Alpert has masters degrees in social work, educational administration, and psychology. He spent his career working with troubled inner city adolescents.