Now lets win this thing.
Now lets win this thing.
First, I woke up a bit sore. But my not doing long stuff left me with enough time to delay running until 9:40 or so and it went better than last week’s run/walk:
I was just over 12 at just over 1, just over 24 at 2.06, and just over 48 at 4.1; 1:01:30 for the total (11:42 mpm; 11:30 for the final 1.03).
The weather: sunny, breezy ..a bit more than breezy but glorious for March 1.
Yes, my legs and butt were heavy from yesterday’s deadlifts..note that deadlifting hasn’t been hurting my lower back that much. It is mostly butt and legs.
And yesterday I saw the Bradley Men lose a 67-66 hearbreaker when the final .7 seconds left shot rattled out.
It was a game of streaks; Loyola lead by 11 at the half and pushed it to a 13 point lead. Bradley went on a 20-0 run in just over 5 minutes time to take a 7 point lead; LU came back with a 9-0 run to retake the lead. With 3:38 left the game, Loyola lead by 4 and I had no clue as to who would win. It was a physical game..back and forth.
Hell of a ball game.
Later; dinner and conversation with Tracy ended my day.
So what about Elizabeth Warren?
I’ve said many times, I think her political aptitude is low. But I think this really nailed it:
YES…Warren reminds me of the type who would set up yet ANOTHER soul-crushing, time-sucking committee because, say, some student got “misgendered”, etc. Activists love her; the general public: not so much.
Yes, most of her ideas are good; she is absolutely brilliant (not said sarcastically; she really is a top of the line scholar). But that is what she is: a scholar with “woke” sympathies; the kind that would focus on “diversity” statements and goals …while perhaps short-changing the issues affecting the better students. Ugh…
If she were better at winning popular support, I’d overlook that aspect of her and make her my first choice. But she isn’t.
As far as what I DO support, here is my “dream team”:
Either order on the ticket would work for me. Amy really isn’t going to be viable outside certain states, but maybe she takes Bernie to the woodshed in Minnesota?
I posted this on Instagram and Facebook
So far, basic “meat and potatoes” stuff…
and a friend made this for me (my Facebook persona is a goat)
I was so touched…
BTW, some Bernie Bros on my timeline were trying to tell me that Bernie was going to win the Minnesota primary. My goodness, these guys are idiots.
It appears that Amy Klobuchar is focusing her campaign on the smaller Super Tuesday states, especially those with non-diverse populations, in hopes of winning delegates. I also notice that Joe Biden appears to be doing well in some southern states.
Maybe there is a method to this madness: the idea that these candidates…maybe Pete Buttigieg too…are playing to their strengths and are therefore better able to take on Bernie Sanders in said states…maybe even win a few?
Is there some sort of “understanding” here? Our best bet might be to get to a brokered convention where Bernie’s plurality is a narrow one…then perhaps a coalition candidate might be able to get the nod.
Sickening Thought Illinois does not vote until 2 weeks after Super Tuesday (17 March). If Joe is still in the running, that is who gets my vote. But my contingency order is:
But what if none of these are left?
Bloomberg, Sanders and Warren?
Warren: super smart, but a dreadful politician; witness her going after Bloomberg so hard. She has the instincts of a scholar: attack the greatest problem that the country faces. But Bernie is taking a much greater toll on her than Bloomberg. A politician would wonder “what strategy is the best one to get me elected?”
Warren seems intent on being the super policy wonk…not that she is wrong, but she is not POTUS..she is campaigning. This is classic Warren:
She is featuring a policy on marijuana selling? Oh good lord..what percentage of likely voters are discussing THIS at their kitchen tables.
Bloomberg: cool ads..that’s about it.
Sanders: ugh…all he does is yell and frankly his supporters embarrass me. But…does that sound familiar?
Yes, Sanders might get us blown out..annihilated ….and …he …might…be …just…crazy…enough…to…pull…this….off.
So..Warren: better expected value…and I am somewhat more comfortable with most of her supporters… (sanctimonious woke liberal a**holes….but I am used to them) but almost a certain loss.
Sanders: loud, moronic supporters that I’d rather not associate with….but…I feel there is a greater variance with his outcome …he is like the “Hail Mary” pass at the end of close football games. Low percentage, but it might just work. Warren would be like running a short hook route ..higher percentage…greater expected gain..but all but guaranteed to be inadequate.
So, it makes me want to vomit to say this, but between Mike, Elizabeth and Bernie…I might vote Bernie.
I apologize in advance for what will be a rambling post, but I lack the time and energy to write a tight, coherent one.
I saw the Nevada Caucus results. I can read the Super Tuesday forecasts (and South Carolina too).
Amy Klobuchar: I love you and you are still my favorite. But the math looks brutal for you. BUT you are young enough to run in 2024 (after a Trump second term OR after one of our geezers finishes a first term) or even 2028, and the next time, you’ll start with people knowing about you. And you might be a great addition to the D 2020 ticket (Biden/Klobuchar would be a dream come true for me).
Pete Buttigieg: you got your name on the national stage. Win some higher office (Congress? Governor?) and there might be no stopping you. You have talent, brains, courage. I like you too, even if you and Amy throw elbows at each other. But if the math looks brutal for Amy this year, it looks impossible for you, this time.
But the reality is that Bernie Sanders is the front runner for the 2020 D nomination. Period.
I did NOT say the prohibitive favorite.
So what do I not like about Bernie, other than he is a do-nothing windbag who just yells? Well,….I’ll say this. IF, IF, I truly believed that Sanders would beat Trump or had the best chance of beating Trump, I’d start writing him campaign checks, right now. For all of the bluster about this and that….when it comes to actually governing, one D will end up governing more or less the way the other D’s would.
But I don’t believe that.
The pain I am feeling right now is akin to the pain I felt about 4 years ago when it became clear that a promising friendship just wasn’t going to work out.
And Amy…it just isn’t going to work out for 2020, not at the top of the ticket anyway.
Until we meet again…either as Joe’s running mate or in 2024 or 2028, when you’ll have my backing from the get-go..and this time start with a higher profile.
Off to a run..and some work tasks..and then digging into my new Amy Klobuchar book.
Yes, there is a long way to go. But given Bernie’s lead in the polls, the way the Democrats allocate delegates (proportional) and his being one delegate behind Buttigieg in the delegate count, I don’t see how he doesn’t end up with a plurality. That means he is our nominee OR the “plurality winner” doesn’t get the nomination which will mean HUGE division among the Democrats.
And I am not sure I like Bloomberg better than him…my preferences, in order: Klobuchar, Biden, Buttigieg. Can any of them stop the Sanders express?
The silver lining is that Sanders MIGHT win the general..and if I were confident in that, I wouldn’t be nearly as distressed. I just want Trump gone, and my personal preference takes a back seat to getting rid of Trump.
And if Sanders is the one to do it, I’ll start writing campaign checks. In terms of policy, any D will govern in a similar manner to any other D.
I’ve got to get my legs stronger and, at my current age, that probably means running less. But running I will do (shuffle, or whatever you call it; I do enjoy those 5K runs and an occasional half marathon)
pull ups: nice and strong today: 4 sets of 10, one of 8, one of 5
incline bench: 10 x 135, 4 x 150 (hard)
decline bench: 5 x 175 (tough)
dumbbell shoulder press: 7 x 50, 2 sets of 10 x 45
rows: 3 sets of 10 x 115 machine
weightless squats: several sets trying to align the knees and back
goblet squats: 6 x 25, 2 sets of 6 x 70 (second set was easier than the first)
leg presses: (assuming 45 lb. carriage) 10 x 135, 10 x 185 (full range of motion)
back squats: 5 x 45 (pathetic)
head stand and plank
form deadlift: 6 x 189
Romanian deadlift 6 x 189
hex bar deadlift (form) 6 x 203
That finished me off.
Amy is having a good night in New Hampshire; she is solidly in 3’rd and within outside striking distance of 2’nd. Pete is having a good night as well…and poor Joe..not so good. Sanders appears poised to win..albeit narrowly.
So I have some general things to say, based on tweets I’ve seen. I’ll be posting the tweets as a springboard to my comments; in no way am I attacking the author of said tweets.
Ok, this is not good for Biden. BUT the dynamics of the race are just plain weird this year. For one, the winner in each state (Buttigieg and Sanders) are scoring low to mid 20’s. That is hardly dominant.
Second: the constituencies are so divided this year. Sanders, Buttigieg and Klobuchar are doing well with certain types of white voters. The next states are much more diverse. You could well see a different dynamic there; I honestly think that Biden is not out of it. He could still do well in South Carolina and Nevada.
Now I think that Warren is in trouble as she really doesn’t have a natural constituency anymore. This really hurt her:
Now dammit, I LIKE Elizabeth Warren. She is a genius. She is accomplished and a very hard worker. She is principled. But a good politician..one who can win over a public that doesn’t usually think deeply about things..well, that requires some sales/showbiz ability. And Warren just doesn’t have that; she speaks like, well, a professor. She would be dynamite if college faculty were the ones voting. But that is not the electorate. Politics just isn’t her calling.
Now, of course, you are getting activists saying “if you vote for X, Y, or Z we are going home..”
Or “if you like X”, then I know this about you:
Sorry, but I am just sick to death of pandering to this sub-constituency, be they a racial/cultural group, GLBT group, Labor, wokes, feminists, or whatever. If you want to leave the Democrats, go ahead. Seriously, at times I wish *I* had somewhere else to go.
Now about this election: there was a time when platform was more important to me. And that time may come again. But in this polarized climate, one Democrat will probably govern more or less like any other; that will be forced upon them by the obstructionist Republicans and the fact that rural, conservative areas are given wildly disproportionate representation in the Senate.
So my thinking is: which candidate gives us the best chance of winning…IN THE SWING STATES? The Electoral College is what matters.
And it will be hard for the Democrats as the Democrats are horrible campaigners. We don’t understand the public at all..at least beyond our own small sub-constituency which, OF COURSE, should always come first.
A small example:
Twitter liberals are laughing at Trump’s supposed “self-own” as this scene comes from this:
But…IT DOES NOT MATTER. What Trump supporters will pick up on is this weaselly little liberal being intimidated by this Trump loving “tough” biker and that is a POSITIVE to them.
Now isn’t that just precious? I know, she is standing up for moderates..as if “we” (if I am really a moderate) somehow care if Twitter liberals consider us Democrats. My first vote was for Carter in 1980 and I started doing party work (in one degree or another) in 1992. I really do not care about validation from so-called “resisters”; I care nothing about “ratios” and the like. Many of them are on my “mute list” anyway.
Yes, it is true that Warren has surged in the polls..but front runner? Uh..she will probably do well in Iowa and New Hampshire but in terms of national polls: not so fast.
And politically, she is the 6’th least popular senator per constituent approval (via Morning Consult)
Yes, she DOES have some passionate support, especially among educated people. She does have detailed plans on how to implement policies, which are probably sound ..on policy grounds.
But that is not what gets someone elected nor is it what motivates Congress to go along with said plans.
We tend to decide on, well, either emotions or empirical reasoning that takes place in our subconscious ..and then rationalize our choices.
Example: I found myself drawn toward Amy Klobuchar and Corey Booker. Why? My guess: in Booker’s case, he inspired confidence in me for reasons I didn’t quite understand at first. Then I found out: yes, he played football at Stanford…I was reacting to the “team captain” aspect of him. Klobuchar: perhaps she reminded me of my favorite demanding coaches, military officers and graduate school mentors who pushed you.
Uh, no..that is EXACTLY how it works..and in Warren’s case, my fear is that it will work against her in the general election.
My guess: many see Warren and Hillary Clinton as two tough, brilliant, outspoken women who will just take it to those intellectually dull arrogant MANSPLAINERS! That they are indeed different and somewhat on the opposite ends of the D party..well, that is a small detail
(yes, I knew someone who liked both Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton..because both were spunky women)
I think that this gets it right:
Yep. And as someone else pointed out:
I know..the D plans are mostly sound and work in other countries. But it sure APPEARS that we are for: “taking from the high achievers and giving to the chronic underachievers” and that just does not sell well. Yes, I KNOW it isn’t that. But it comes across that way, and …well, our message stinks. Just wagging your finger and calling your opponents heartless racists, sexists and misogynists isn’t going to work.
Explaining why ALL of us benefit might (e. g. more money at the bottom of the economy means more customers for hard working business owners..)
From here. Note: she worked on some serious stuff; these were not post-offices getting named.
Yes, this is pre-Biden entering the race.
Speaking of Joe Biden: I am seeing some heads exploding. Oh, never mind that he was vetted by Obama..he just has a terrible past, I tell you.
Yes, he has weaknesses: age, gaffes, ..and perhaps you just want someone else. But a monster he isn’t.
Speaking of gaffes: this is one of my favorites:
Yes, Hoover was POTUS during the 1929 crash, and there was no TV; it was all radio.