It’s Not a Bug, Part I

Published by

Clarissa

November 9, 2016

People, it’s not a bug, it’s a feature, so let’s stop treating it as a bug.

We couldn’t deliver a sure thing with Al Gore – he was unlikeable, supercilious, full of himself, couldn’t get people excited, plus the Nader people robbed him of a crucial percentage of votes.

We couldn’t deliver a sure thing with Kerry – he was unlikeable, couldn’t get people excited, plus there was that whole swiftboater scandal that turned people off.
We couldn’t deliver a sure thing with Hillary – she is unlikeable, supercilious, full of herself, couldn’t get people excited, the Stein people robbed her of a crucial percentage of votes, plus there was that email scandal thing.
Notice a pattern?

Every failed election brings out the same tired nitpicking about personalities. It’s always about some imperfection in the candidate’s personality and some tiny mistake by some tiny group.

We’ll keep losing until we recognize that it’s not about any of this little stuff at all. It’s not about finding the perfect candidate. The opponent’s won the trifecta last night with a bunch of super imperfect candidates. If Roy Blunt wins in Missouri, there’s something bigger than personalities that is going on because that fellow’s personality is sure to repulse door knobs off doors.

Last night we suffered a pathetic, humiliating defeat that we can’t afford, that the world can’t afford. Please, just please, let’s not do more of the same and repeat the same tired narratives that led us to this place.

Rate this:

10 responses to “It’s Not a Bug, Part I”

Evelina Anville

November 9, 2016

I have a long answer here but I’m actually too exhausted to type it out. So I will put it to you: what was different about Obama in your opinion?

LikeLike

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  November 9, 2016
  
  The global economic crisis.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
Stringer Bell

November 9, 2016

You wrote about the OJ documentary a few months ago and provided one great insight I had previously missed. You said how traumatized must the african-american community be that they chose to rally around a man who they surely knew committed the murder, and who wanted nothing to do with them. His guilt didn’t matter, all that mattered was a chance to say fuck you to the (white) system.

Maybe that is a way to think about this election. I don’t think Trump supporters (and I’m not talking about the middle-class, affluent whites) didn’t know he was an idiot. They just didn’t care.

https://twitter.com/freddiedeboer/status/796344320655818752

Evelina:

Democrats, Trump, and the Ongoing, Dangerous Refusal to Learn the Lesson of Brexit

“Of course there are fundamental differences between Obama’s version of “change” and Trump’s. But at a high level of generality — which is where these messages are often ingested — both were perceived as outside forces on a mission to tear down corrupt elite structures, while Clinton was perceived as devoted to their fortification. That is the choice made by Democrats — largely happy with status quo authorities, believing in their basic goodness — and any honest attempt by Democrats to find the prime author of last night’s debacle will begin with a large mirror.”

We forget this now, but in 2008 Obama ran on a platform critical of NAFTA. That and the Iraq war vote is how he beat her in the primaries.

LikeLike

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  November 9, 2016
  
  Roy Blunt, people. Roy Blunt. The same people who voted for Trump returned the old timer senator who’s corrupt as a Russian oligarch. Look at the Senate races. Who wants change? Come on.
  
  The very expression “corrupt elite structures” is Trump personified.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. Stringer Bell
    
    November 9, 2016
    
    The presidential race is obviously more high profile. Can’t compare these two races. You see the winds of change on the basis of who wins the presidency, not necessarily some state election. Maybe my local dogcatcher was re-elected for the fourth consecutive term, that doesn’t mean the country as a whole wasn’t looking for a new direction.
    
    “The very expression “corrupt elite structures” is Trump personified.”
    
    I’ll go back to my OJ example. It’s rage, not reason that is driving these forces.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
    1. Clarissa
      
      November 9, 2016
      
      The people who won yesterday are people who want to prolong the status quo. The change is what they don’t like.
      
      I say: maybe we should listen and slow down the change. What was the burning necessity to alienate crowds of people by an aggressive pursuit of transgender toilets or by jailing that ugly ass clerk who didn’t want to issue marriage licenses? What’s the urgency of putting people off by all the snowflake rebellions and speech policings and all that?
      
      They want an old direction, a time when things were understandable.
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
Stringer Bell

November 9, 2016

I’m talking about this:

Do you think the people who delivered Nevada for the Dems were all super-enlightened? The culinary unions probably had many racists in their ranks. But they joined hands with hispanic workers, organized around material objectives, and fucking went to work. Can we abandon the idea that politics should first and foremost be about loving each other?

LikeLike

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  November 9, 2016
  
  I’m all for working with people and not sitting high on a hill and despising everybody from a distance.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
el

November 9, 2016

A bit unconnected question: who will manage Trump’s businesses now? Surely, as a president, he won’t have time for two jobs?

LikeLike

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  November 9, 2016
  
  His children, he said.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply