“I hate cynicism. I wipe it from me. I don’t like cynical people. I don’t like cynical movies. Cynicism is very easy. You don’t have to justify it. You don’t have to fight for it.” – Michel Gondry
Bjork – Declare Independence, directed by Gondry:
See also:
Obama extends streak to 10
anonymous_banker’s house
Hillary Journalist vs. Obama supporter
As good as it gets
The Origins of Super Delegates, or
How the Democratic Elite Enacted a Crooked System to Keep Their Kind on Top
1968
The seeds of the current Democratic system of nomination were planted in the ashes of fires and riots of the 1968 convention and election. Entering the cycle, the Democrats were split into four camps. The old guard favorite and residing president, LBJ, was facing falling popularity and poor health, and in March of ’68 he withdrew from the race. His VP, Hubert H. Humphrey, Jr. of Minnesota, then entered the race representing the old-guard machine and boss wing of the Democratic party.
The other two candidates were Eugene McCarthy, running on an anti-war, pro-youth platform, and Robert Kennedy, who represented the pro-Civil Rights platform. The fourth faction were the old school Democrats, aka Dixiecrats.
In 1968, only 13 states held a primary, and HHH decided to focus on the states where the machine still decided the candidate, letting proxies run for him in the primary states. So the primary contest came down to McCarthy and Kennedy, but then Kennedy was shot in CA after winning the primary.
It became obvious as ’68 went on that the primaries were a farce and that the people’s voice meant nothing. The young folks, feeling disenfranchised and angry at the war in Vietnam, descended upon the Chicago convention and riots broke out. But the old guard won, soundly nominating HHH as the Democratic nominee for president.
So a fractured party limped towards November, and until LBJ pulled an October surprise by halting bombing in ‘Nam, HHH was polled at 10% below Nixon. Still that wasn’t enough for the Democrat Humphries, who while getting only .7% less of the popular vote than Nixon, lost the electoral vote by a score of 301 to 191.
1972
The 1968 convention debacle had a residual effect on the Democratic party besides a loss to Nixon: at the 1972 convention, a committee was put together to make recommendations on how to broaden the participation and increase diversity in the nomination process. Senator George McGovern was put in charge of the committee and recommended that the selection process for delegates be put into the open. This led to a majority of states switching to the primary system.
McGovern also became the first nominee under the new system after Edward Muskie, the establishment favorite, became a target of Nixon’s “Dirty Tricks” campaign and was reported crying. Wallace (leader of the Dixiecrat branch of the Democrats) was also had a strong candidacy until he was shot by Aruthur Bremer and became paralyzed.
McGovern’s campaign against Nixon was marred by disaffection from the Democratic elite as well as two media incidents, both involving his running mate Thomas Eagleton. The disaffection from the Democratic bosses was so strong that some even threw their support behind Nixon.
The most famous event was the uncovering of skeletons in Eagleton’s closet, specifically electro-shock ones. At first McGovern joked about it saying that Eagleton would undergo a psyc-exam if the other candidates did too and said he was 1000% behind Eagleton. Then he asked Eagleton to resign.
The first event was when an unnamed Democratic senator was reported by Bob Novak as saying that McGovern was the party of “Amnesty, Abortion and Acid,” and saying that the Roman Catholics would revolt if they knew what McGovern was really about. Humorously enough, in 2007 Novak revealed that Eagleton was the Senator that said it.
McGovern lost in a landslide, with only MA and DC voting for McGovern. This monumental loss was seen as an indictment of the new primary system that also disempowered the elite, and by the 1980 election the DNC had instituted superdelegate reforms. From that point forward, active Democratic politicians and other individuals selected by the DNC would constitute over one fifth of the total vote in the Presidential nomination process.
[tags] superdelegates, democratic primary, nomination process, history of superdelegate system[/tags]
See also: Superdelegates, The Super-Delegates Begin To Balk, More on the Democrat’s SuperDilemma, Shake-ups and Super-delegates, Clinton campaign considering ‘potentially incendiary steps’, The ‘Superdelegates’: Always Intended to be Independent, and Clinton ‘Interested in Acquiring Delegates, Period’.
With there being increasing evidence that [tag]Ron Paul[/tag] is shifting from his Republican Presidential campaign to his reelection campaign for the [tag]House of Representatives[/tag] — essentially dropping out of the Presidential race — the question becomes what to do with all the energy, effort, and money behind Mr. Paul’s spirited run. While I did not agree with a lot of his platform, he showed he was a viable, sincere candidate and, unlike other ‘outsider’ or [tag]independent candidates[/tag] (Nader in 2004 or 2000, Pat Buchanan, Ross Perot, Dennis Kucinich), he proved that he could combine [tag]grassroots support[/tag], galvanize several cross-sections of the population, and have significant fund raising capability. Though it appears he has ruled out running as a third party candidate for the 2008 Presidential election, his campaign shows that there is a tremendous opportunity to establish another [tag]national political party[/tag] in America (and if anything has been made clear by the internal treatment of Paul, Kucinich, and Gravel by the Republican and Democratic party, it’s that the parties want nothing to do with them or public discussions on dissent and policy disagreements).
The question then becomes what could be the basis of a [tag]new third party[/tag] in our current political system?
Now the real question is, when do we get started?
And it’s not Barack Obama or Bill Clinton, it’s John McCain. While it’s starting to appear that McCain has wrapped up the Republican nomination, there has been a noticeable revolt among sectors of the conservative elite against his pending nomination. From the Evangelical right to the anti-Immigrant right, members in and outside of the party have pledged not to vote or support McCain, and Ann Coulter went as far to say she would campaign for Hillary Clinton if she faced John McCain in the general election.
James Dobson: “I am deeply disappointed the Republican Party seems poised to select a nominee who did not support a Constitutional amendment to protect the institution of marriage, voted for embryonic stem cell research to kill nascent human beings, opposed tax cuts that ended the marriage penalty, has little regard for freedom of speech, organized the Gang of 14 to preserve filibusters in judicial hearings, and has a legendary temper and often uses foul and obscene language.
I am convinced Sen. McCain is not a conservative, and in fact, has gone out of his way to stick his thumb in the eyes of those who are. He has sounded at times more like a member of the other party. McCain actually considered leaving the GOP caucus in 2001, and approached John Kerry about being Kerry’s running mate in 2004. McCain also said publicly that Hillary Clinton would make a good president. Given these and many other concerns, a spoonful of sugar does NOT make the medicine go down. I cannot, and will not, vote for Sen. John McCain, as a matter of conscience.
But what a sad and melancholy decision this is for me and many other conservatives. Should Sen. McCain capture the nomination as many assume, I believe this general election will offer the worst choices for president in my lifetime. I certainly can’t vote for Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama based on their virulently anti-family policy positions. If these are the nominees in November, I simply will not cast a ballot for president for the first time in my life. These decisions are my personal views and do not represent the organization with which I am affiliated. They do reflect my deeply held convictions about the institution of the family, about moral and spiritual beliefs, and about the welfare of our country.”
Ann Coulter: “If he’s our candidate, then Hillary’s going to be our girl, Sean [Hannity], because she’s more conservative than he is. I think she would be stronger on the war of terrorism… I absolutely believe that…… I will campaign for her if it’s McCain.”
Rush Limbaugh: “He is going to reach out to Democrats and he is going to enjoy doing it. This is how he will get even at Republicans for South Carolina in 2000.”
Michelle Malkin: “Peddling open-border extremism… he is somebody who does not believe in borders, does not believe the United States is a sovereign country.”
Pat Buchanan: “Here’s a guy who basically says the jobs are never coming back, the illegals are never going home, but we’re going to have a lot more wars.”
Citizen United Political Victory Fund: “John McCain — Surprisingly Liberal”
Tom Delay: “McCain has done more to hurt the Republican party than any elected official I know”
Laura Ingraham: “The pieces of legislation that John McCain became most famous for are all pieces of legislation that he co-authored with liberals.”
Justin Raimondo in the American Conservative: It is impossible to know what is in McCain’s heart. There may be a purely ideological explanation for his changing viewpoint. But what seems to account for his evolution from realism to hopped-up interventionism is nothing more than sheer ambition. This was the case in 1983, when he defied the Reagan administration over sending U.S. soldiers to die at the hands of a Beirut suicide bomber, and in 1999, when the cry went up to take on Slobodan Milosevic. He was positioning himself against his own party, while staking out a distinctive stance independent of the Democrats. It was, in short, an instance of a presidential candidate maneuvering himself to increase his appeal to the electorate—and, most importantly, the media.
And it’s not only the elites picking at McCain’s conservative credentials, it’s the base as well. A Michigan crowd boos and hisses at John McCain on his immigration position:
And it appears others aren’t happy as well:
Also see: John McCain, the Maverick That Never Was by PBH
Dobson And McCain by Andrew Sullivan
Dobson Blasts McCain on Marc Ambinder at the Atlantic
Is The GOP Self-Destructing? by Andrew Sullivan
Not McCain’s Night? at Riehl World View
Whither Limbaugh and Coulter Goest… at Crooks and Liars
Talk Radio Rallies to Romney to Thwart McCain by NewsBlaze
Ann Coulter, displaying the myopic John McCain hate that is filling up the leadership of the conservative movement, declared that she would endorse, campaign, and vote for Hillary Clinton over John McCain. Watch below:
See related: Coulter: I’ll vote for Hillary
Hillary Clinton Watch: More Conservative Than John McCain?
Who is more conservative?
