‘The Great Bernie Bust’

Daniel Lazare has an interesting piece, published last Wednesday [March 18, 2020], at Black Agenda Report. And it is worth posting at this blog’s topic.

Here is the link:

The Great Bernie Bust

Other Interests

Progressives Chat is a blog site in which the topics are usually on politics. Over the last two and a half years, since September 2017, I have published a number of topics outside politics. But, sometimes the purpose of doing that is because of having to come up with a topic for each time I schedule a new blog topic/thread for people to comment. There can be times in which I don’t easily come up with a topic.

In the blog topic “‘To be, or not to be’…Divided!” two forum posters—obviously frustrated by what has played out (so far) in the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries—wrote of feeling ready to move on from following so closely some U.S. politics. That they each could use a break. Well, this moved me to go ahead and come up with a blog topic outside of politics.

I have other interests, in addition to politics, and this is one.

I have a hobby of playing the Nintendo game Animal Crossing. And, on the Nintendo Switch system, will mark the release today [Friday, March 20, 2020] of its new installment, Animal Crossing: New Horizons. It is a game that inspires creativity. And, unlike many other games, it is not cynical or violent. I will include a video below.

If any reader of Progressives Chat wants to mention any of his or her hobby, or any other interests, outside of politics…go right ahead.

Realigning Theories On Party Realignments

Two videos—one from two years ago; one from a few days ago—touch on the possibilities of realigning the two major United States political parties—the Republican and Democratic parties.

It has to do with the coalitions. It has to do with how they are changing. It has to do with a heightened awareness of realignments possibly developing, for what may be becoming, in each political party.

The first video is “A Discussion Of the Two Party System In America,” by Garland Nixon, which was published to YouTube on April 24, 2018. (Nixon cohosts Sputnik News Radio’s Fault Lines, which livestreams on YouTube Monday–Friday from 07:00–10:00 a.m. ET.)

The second video is “#DemExit: How to Successfully build a 3rd Party,” by Kim Iversen, which was published to YouTube on March 11, 2020. (It was posted to YouTube just hours after the March 10, 2020 Democratic presidential primaries.)

‘Fear Pervades Black Politics…’ … ‘The Corporations and Their Media Strangled Bernie…’ … Coronavirus Prompts School Cancellations

Glen Ford wrote a very observant and thoughtful piece on how Blacks are handling their primaries votes in the Democratic presidential primaries.

Here is the link:

Fear Pervades Black Politics, and Makes Us Agents of Our Own Oppression

✦ ✦ ✦ ✦ ✦

I also recommend this piece, also written by Glen Ford, published to Black Agenda Report on Thursday [March 12, 2020] following the March 10, 2020 Democratic presidential primaries.

The Corporations and Their Media Strangled Bernie, and Older Black Voters Tied the Knot

✦ ✦ ✦ ✦ ✦

Coronavirus Prompts School Cancellations

I am sure we are all following this pandemic of Coronavirus.

I want everyone to be safe.

Yesterday, my state’s governor, Gretchen Whitmer (D–Michigan), made it official: All applicable statewide K–12 schools, in Michigan, will be closed for the next three weeks.

This is very important when considering, for example, Michigan ranks as the No. 10 most-populous state in the nation. (Also a Top 10 populous state is Michigan’s neighboring state, No. 7 Ohio.)

I will leave a following link to a report from Detroit Free Press as well a 20-minute video, below, from WXYZ–TV, Ch. 7, the ABC affiliate in Detroit, Michigan.

Link:

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer: All Michigan K-12 schools must close until April 5

I am not sure how many states have made the move. I came across reports that this is also applicable in states Washington, Ohio, and Maryland.

If any reader of Progressives Chat wants to add anything to this…please do.

‘To be, or not to be’…Divided!

I was recently participating in a discussion forum on politics which included a comment by a member who is loyal to the Democratic Party. That person said the Republicans are the ones who are screwed. This is mainly talking electoral politics. Rather generally. Rather loosely. With much focus on the current year, 2020. And I disagree.

I decided to look at entrance and exit polls from presidential primaries with both 2016 and 2020.

The 2016 United States presidential election was a Republican pickup for Donald Trump. Here in 2020, there are not any entrance and exit polls in states, thus far played out, because Trump does not have viable primary challengers. As of Friday, March 6, 2020, Trump’s percentage of votes by participating primaries voters is at 93 percent. (Source: Wikipedia — “2020 Republican Party presidential primaries”.)

One way I can tell there is divide is with the margins spread between the two opposite-end voting-age demographics in entrance and exit polls.

The voting-age groups commonly get recorded as follows: 17–29 (in some primaries) or 18–29 (you have to be 18 on Election Day); 30–44; 45–64; and 65+.

The 65+ voting-age group is first carried by Republicans in general elections.

The 18–29 voting-age group is first carried by Democrats in general elections.

(The in-between voting-age groups, in general elections, are more likely to come closer to aligning with a given presidential election’s national outcome.)

The Democrats like to brag they won the U.S. Popular Vote, for U.S. President, in every election but 2004 between 1992 to 2016. Since this is true, it is also understandable. In 2004, losing nominee John Kerry carried only one voting-age group nationwide: 18–29 voters gave him a margin of +9 while he lost by –2.46. So, they gave him 11 to 12 points more support than what he received nationwide.

The 2008 losing Republican nominee was John McCain. His party was electorally brought down with the two-term presidency of George W. Bush. (Due to the Bush presidency, and a trajectory going against the incumbent party, the tide of history was against the GOP in that particular year.) 2008 Democratic presidential pickup winner Barack Obama nationally flipped the 30–44 and 45–64 voting-age groups while he overperformed those 18–29, up an additional 25 points and with a national margin of +34. For McCain, he held 65+ voters by +8, up from 2004 Bush’s margin of +5, and 15 to 16 points more support than what he received nationwide. (McCain went up, rather than down, partly because Kerry did better than Obama with 65+ voters in No. 2 populous state Texas.)

The 2016 Republican presidential primaries, up to this point in 2020 (that is, the four states from February and those from Super Tuesday the first week of March), were a lot healthier for eventual nominee Donald Trump.

I am referring to the margins spread between how a party’s eventual nominee performed with both opposite-end voting-age groups. (Think of it as: a uniter or a divider.)

Trump performed stronger with 65+ primaries voters in 9 out of 10 states in which there were entrance polls and exit polls of both 17–29 or 18–29 vs. 65+ voters.

Count a state, North Carolina, that was part of the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries on Super Tuesday, and Trump performed stronger in 10 out of 11 states with voters 65+.

On the Democratic side, the eventual 2016 presidential nominee was Hillary Clinton. She needed to perform better with 17–29 or 18–29 vs. 65+ voters. In 13 states in which the entrance and exit polls reports included both opposite-end voting-age groups, Clinton won the youngest age group better than the oldest age group in zero [0] states.

Here in 2020, with the Democratic presidential primaries still in progress, there have been 14 states in which entrance polls and exit polls reported 17–29 or 18–29 vs. 65+ voters. And, so far, we have a similar picture from four years ago. The perceived frontrunner, Joe Biden, performs better not with the youngest but the oldest voting-age group. He has performed better than Bernie Sanders with the youngest voters in zero [0] of the states. (There have been 16 states which have participated. Colorado and Oklahoma did not have exit polls apparently sufficient enough to report how the youngest age group voted.)

I went ahead and compared the margins spreads.

I first started with the winning political party from 2016.


2016 Republican Presidential Primaries—Donald Trump (pickup winner in the general election)

• Iowa (02.01.2016): 7 points between Trump’s margins spread—in a state won by Ted Cruz—with voters 65+ (a margin of –1) vs. 17–29 (a margin of –8)
• New Hampshire (02.09.2016): 9 points
• South Carolina (02.20.2016): 10 points
• Nevada (02.23.2016): 34 points
— Super Tuesday (03.01.2016) —
• Alabama: 13 points
• Alaska: —
• Arkansas: 1 point
• Colorado: —
• Georgia: 1 point
• Massachusetts: —
• Minnesota: —
• North Dakota: —
• Oklahoma: —
• Tennessee: 15 points
• Texas: 25 points (compared only to Ted Cruz, who won his home state; Trump who finished third with voters 18–29)
• Vermont: —
• Virginia: 13 points
• Wyoming: —

Math: 117 cumulative points, divided by 10 applicable states, with an average margins spread of 11.70 points.

Bonus: In 2020, the Democrats held contests in four states—California, Maine, North Carolina, and Utah—that were on Super Tuesday but not on that same day from 2016. There were exit polls in the Tar Heel State.

• North Carolina: 22 points.

Another Round of Math: 139 cumulative points, divided by 11 applicable combined states, with an average margins spread of 12.63 points.



2016 Democratic Presidential Primaries—Hillary Clinton (general-election nominee vs. runner-up Bernie Sanders)

• Iowa (02.01.2016): 113 points between Clinton (having won voters 65+ by +50 percentage points) vs. Sanders (having won voters 17–29 by +68 percentage points)
• New Hampshire (02.09.2016): 76 points
• Nevada (02.20.2016): 118 points
• South Carolina (02.27.2016): 85 points
— Super Tuesday (03.01.2016) —
• Alabama: 60 points
• Arkansas: 81 points
• Colorado: —
• Georgia: 69 points
• Massachusetts: 50 points
• Minnesota: —
• Oklahoma: 82 points
• Tennessee: 86 points
• Texas: 94 points
• Vermont: 36 points
• Virginia: 109 points

Math: 1,059 cumulative points, divided by 13 applicable states, with an average margins spread of 81.46 points.

Bonus: In 2020, the Democrats held contests in four states—California, Maine, North Carolina, and Utah—that were on Super Tuesday but not on that same day from 2016. There were exit polls in the Tar Heel State.

• North Carolina: 83 points.

Another Round of Math: 1,142 cumulative points, divided by 14 applicable combined states, with an average margins spread of 81.57 points.



2020 Democratic Presidential Primaries—Pending (65+-preferred Joe Biden vs. 17–29/18–29-preferred Bernie Sanders)

• Iowa (02.03.2020): 74 points
• New Hampshire (02.11.2020): 59 points
• Nevada (02.22.2020): 72 points
• South Carolina (02.29.2020): 70 points
— Super Tuesday (03.03.2020) —
• Alabama: 88 points
• California: 74 points
• Colorado: —
• Maine: 86 points
• Massachusetts: 61 points
• North Carolina: 83 points
• Oklahoma: —
• Tennessee: 86 points
• Texas: 72 points
• Utah: —
• Vermont: 58 points
• Virginia: 98 points

Math: 1,074 cumulative points, divided by 14 applicable states, with an average margins spread of 76.71 points.



A difference between 2016 and 2020 is that the Democrats had more than two people affecting the overall numbers in the February 2020 contests. Four years earlier, it was an immediate two-person race. But, overall, a similar picture.

The level of the margins spread—between voters in the youngest and the oldest voting-age groups—is striking.

Republicans, in 2016, and they don’t have to worry here in 2020, were and are not divided.

Democrats, from 2016, and again so far here in 2020, are divided.

This deserves a follow-up question.

Which of these two major political parties is likely to win at the presidential level here in 2020?

If one wants to get an early-enough start, I would place my bet on Team Red.

Summary: There is an ideological divide in the Democratic Party. The opposite-end voting-age groups do not agree on what and who they want for leadership. This is not favorable for the party’s hopes, and whatever efforts, to win back the presidency of the United States here in 2020.

Looking Toward the Future: The 2020 Democratic presidential nomination looks better for Joe Biden over Bernie Sanders. Just as it was the case in 2016 with Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders. But, a political party cannot continue having these types of election cycles with respect for their primaries unless there becomes a realignment. That the 65+ voters become the Democrats’ No. 1 voting-age base in general elections. To pull that off, that would require the Republicans to counter-realign their political party and see 17–29 (primaries) or 18–29 become their No. 1 voting-age base in general elections.

Conclusion: The Democrats will—as was the line in the 2011 Oscar-nominated film Moneyball—“Adapt or die.” This means, while the current battle between the opposite-end voting-age groups is being won by voters 65+, natural order will also show they will be the ones who will be sooner dying off. (Think, after Elections 2008 and 2012, how Democrats were loving the racial demographics showing Whites nationally in decline with their size of the vote, for the U.S. Popular Vote, in presidential elections. In 2004, they were 77 percent. In 2008, they were 74 percent. In 2012, they were 72 percent. In 2016, they were 70 percent. In 2020, they may reduce down to 69 percent.) Well, both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden may be good, thanks to 65+ for preventing Bernie Sanders in 2016 and 2020, but the trajectory has it the 65+ voters will die off while those 29 or younger in 2016, then 2020, will continue to emerge in 2024. They are not getting more conservative. Those 65+—a coalition which was there for Bill Clinton having unseated George Bush in 1992 (when they were 36 or 37 or older)—is not going to prevent the historic tide of history. Those 29 and younger, who will vote in the general election on November 3, 2020, were born late-1990 and afterward. A good number—in the millions—were born after Election 1992. (That will be the case with all 29 and younger in 2024.) Thanks to the reality of their lives, which are very different from the 1992 Clinton coalition, they have developed differently in their overall viewpoints. Their experience is much different. They are much more on the left. They are not into the Clinton vision of the Democratic Party. So, the “Democratic Party” will change if they are wanting to not become the 21st-century version of the Whig Party.

Response to Super Tuesday

The results of Super Tuesday, this past Tuesday [March 3, 2020], felt orchestrated by the Democratic Party Establishment—very much involving 44th U.S. president Barack Obama—for the purpose of effectively ending the run of Vermont U.S. senator Bernie Sanders.

I will vote the nomination to Sanders from my home state Michigan. I hope he wins it. At the same time, I do not want to predict. Michigan is on the schedule next Tuesday [March 10].

I am not going to sugarcoat anything. This is setting up the nomination for 47th U.S. vice president Joe Biden of Delaware. My theory is that it is not so much the establishment wants Biden. They do. What they have been wanting most is for any candidate who fits their mold. That can be Biden, Michael Bloomberg, Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, whoever. None of this about unseating Trump. It is about preventing the actual left from potentially reaching meaningful power. And this is coming from a so-called political party that is commonly considered the one which is on the left.

The role Massachusetts U.S. senator Elizabeth Warren (who dropped out of the race on Thursday, March 5) has played in all this has been described by Jamarl Thomas as a “stalking horse.” I think that is accurate. I followed the Super Tuesday primaries coverage on “Political Vigilante Super Tuesday Livestream with Graham Elwood & Ron Placone.” In a livestream lasting 4 hours and 5 minutes, my comment on Warren was read at the mark of 3 hours and 58 minutes. “I like the mask coming off the faces of Elizabeth Warren. (And Adam Green.) Since 2016, we keep learning more and more of Warren.”

I have come across plenty of comments by the actual progressives I trust. (I applaud Tim Black. He essentially says, keep fighting! He is right. I may continue to donate to the campaign of Bernie Sanders.) Much of the Super Tuesday comments have focused on what Bernie Sanders may have been able to do that he did not do. But, what needs to be kept in mind is looking at this from the position of a corrupt political establishment. They receive their orders by their owners—the people who fund them. Their owners do not want the system, which benefits them, being changed. So, the corporate Democratic Party Establishment wants and needs compliant voters. The corrupt, corporate, Democratic Party Establishment—along with all their allies—wants you, quite possibly a compliant voter, to “Vote Blue No Matter Who.” I also think it is important to recognize certain people. Some of them, like Progressive Change Campaign Committee’s Adam Green, are frauds. (I think his devotion to Warren is a part of an overall scam with the Democratic Party Establishment. I am guessing it has to do with money going into PCCC.) Some, like those who think Joe Biden is electable, and who claim that defeating/unseating Trump is their No. 1 priority, may not be keen observers of historic voting patterns—meaning, what unseats an incumbent U.S. president—and some may be blowing hot air. (In other words: Although they provide a lot of lip service, you realize they are not serious.) And I consider the possibility that some of these voters are corrupt-minded. Of those to whom this is applicable—they’re in a con job. This is party why I intend to laugh at, and dismiss, all continued and future pleas by Democratic Loyalists to “Vote Blue No Matter Who.”

If the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination goes to anybody but Bernie Sanders or Tulsi Gabbard, I will not comply. (I don’t mean to phrase that as the likely scenario.) In fact, I will not “Vote Blue” in any general-election race. (I like this. My home state, Michigan, is now a bellwether state.) I will vote. I will not refrain from participating by voting. But, I will make sure no Democratic candidate—incumbent or otherwise—receives a votes by me. (I vote in person. I always check my ballot before submitting.) I am, given their current form, rejecting this so-called political party. In fact, I have reached a point in which—should it be Donald Trump vs. Joe Biden—I would prefer to vote to re-elect the 45th U.S. president. (That is, if I had a gun pointed at my head, I would have no problem making that choice. I do not want Biden elected.) I also prefer, in the 2020 U.S. Senate election from Michigan that will likely pair Republican John James (nominated in 2018) against corporatist Democratic incumbent Gary Peters, the challenger to prevail. (That is, if I had a gun pointed to my head, I would have no problem making that choice. I do not want Peters re-elected.) I also would prefer, in light of all this, to never again vote in a general election for anyone who has a “D” after his/her name. I have reached the conclusion that this so-called political party is a sham.

We will see how the rest of the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries plays out. (They are scheduled until early-June.) In the meantime, I will change my plans for Progressives Chat. I was going to schedule blog topics for every Tuesday and Saturday—dealing with scheduled primaries and caucuses which fall on those days—but now I don’t want to do that. I prefer to not dedicate blog topics to what looks very much like yet another rigged presidential nomination. Readers’ comments may address them as they play out. I will return to a normal pattern of blog topics that are not merely about U.S. electoral politics but are with respect to whatever issue I address and publish. Progressives Chat will return to the usual two-days-per-week schedule on Mondays and Fridays. This begins today and continues regularly on Monday [March 9].

Super Tuesday 2020

This blog is being posted on Super Tuesday, March 3, 2020.

Three of the nation’s Top 10 populous states—California, Texas, and North Carolina—are on the schedule.

With the recent exits of Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar, whose home state Minnesota is also on the schedule, I am among those who suspect this is collusion of corporate Democratic Party Establishment candidates for one of their own, former U.S. vice president Joe Biden.

No matter what happens, I have a good sense what I will do.

Coming Up: I will be voting in the primaries, and for Bernie Sanders, next Tuesday, March 10, from my home state Michigan.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

Relating to this blog topic is an interview published to YouTube on Monday [March 2] between Empire Files host Abby Martin and her guest, Status Coup’s Jordan Chariton.