May 15, 2016

Good point, nadin.

I had to look up the term dedazos.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_Revolutionary_Party

I do believe the Party establishment chose Hillary years ago. I still don't think Obama particularly likes her. I think he's wary of her, stemming partly from her 2008 ugliness and partly from her clumsy, disastrous rebellions during his presidency (email server, foreign policy blunders).

I also believe the larger establishment (because "party" is most certainly NOT what this is all about) wants Hillary as well, which should be evident to anyone who has viewed her donor list and observed the MSM during this election year.

The establishment absolutely does not want Bernie, because he is here to take on the establishment. There are so many pieces to this, but for one tiny sample, consider Bill Clinton's 1996 Telecom Bill which allowed for even greater concentration and control of the media in the hands of a few humongous corporate monopolies. The heads of those corporations are unimaginably rich and powerful -- and grateful to the Clintons. Bernie, of course, wants to break up the media monopoly so the American people can once again have exposure to a variety of information and opinion. Of course they want to smash him.

So, yes, what Nevada experienced last night was the establishment -- the oligarchy -- exerting control over a political process that threatened to get out of hand, that is, to elect someone the establishment does not want. All the Party minions tore off the mask, and Nevadans got to see the state Democratic Party chair and a U.S. Senator scolding the part of the electorate that did not automatically accept their chosen candidate.

Dedazos.

I smell revolution in the air. I hope it's the peaceful political revolution that the people's candidate has been advocating for the past year. My little old lady self is just a tad intimidated to see it happening, but thank God we have some young, strong, genuine heroes -- smart ones, too -- on our side.

God speed.

May 5, 2016

Best explanation I've heard, thereismore.

Her diehard followers have projected themselves, their struggles, and their suffering onto her, so every criticism, EVERY FACT, is another horrible, unfair attack on one who stands, in their minds, for long-suffering womanhood everywhere. It's similar to what the RCC did with Mary; Hillary has become an archetype of religious figure, in their minds and hearts. I think Mary is sometimes called Our Lady of Perpetual Suffering -- and this name is perfect for what Hill supporters have created with Hillary, as well. OLoPS.

They haven't made this psychological transfer with any other woman, and that is why they are strangely unmoved when we tell them we prefer a different woman, like Elizabeth Warren. Sen. Warren's gender doesn't count in the same way for them. If you support EW or any female, but not Hillary, you are sexist. They see EW only as support staff for Hillary. They are unable to see the profound ideological and ethical differences between EW and HRC, but they are aware of EW's strong standing with Democrats, which they convert into an unspoken endorsement of Hillary. (Entirely ignoring EW's contrasting ideology.)

The identification, the projection, is so profound that, as you brilliantly pointed out, everything that happens to Hill happens to them, as well. Her success is their success. Her victory over that terrible man, Bernie Sanders, is their victory over all the forces of patriarchal evil. It doesn't matter that he has always been a better feminist than Hillary. That's why they call every single criticism of Hillary "rightwing" regardless of the content of the criticism.

With Hill's female supporters, as we've seen here, this projection/identification even comes down to her physical appearance, how she's doing in the female attractiveness department. During debates and speeches, they coo about how she looks, what she's wearing, while completely ignoring what she says. If anyone dares to criticize her physical appearance, they go nuts. It is strictly verboten, an instant alert, surefire hide. Even photos of her that aren't attractive are perceived as unthinkable insults to the goddess. This also explains why so many of her followers, especially females, insist on using a very old photo of her as their avatar -- because in their minds she will always be eternally young and lovely, as they wish they could be. Imagine if Bernie supporters insisted on avatar photos of him as a young man! How bizarre that would be -- yet this is what Hill supporters do.

Her behavior, her dishonesty and lack of ethics, her horrible domestic and foreign policy mistakes, simply don't count; they are not really "her," in their minds. Their goddess, like Mary, is pure. Nothing, not even her own character, her own actions, can touch her.

But there is another group of Hillary supporters, and these are the ones who are either a) on the campaign payroll, b) subdued by her (and possibly the DNC's) political power and influence, and/or c) adherents to the ideology that promotes the corporate takeover of government (replacing democracy), the exploitation of the lower middle and lower classes, and a class society. They are essentially conservative authoritarian. They are not, by any stretch of the imagination, liberal/progressive. They use social issues divisively, as rightwing talk radio does, but turned inside out. So Bernie's supporters, even those of us (a majority, I think, on DU) who are female and feminist, are in their minds, young white sexist males. Bernie's supporters who are PoC (e.g. Nina Turner, Rosario Dawson, Killer Mike, Cornell West, and others) don't count. This is the cynical manipulation of serious social issues.

So there are at least two classic types of Hillary supporter. I hope someday this phenomenon will be recognized, analyzed, and dissected in the media.

One frightening parallel with Trump followers is a strong penchant for blind adherence, blind obedience, to an authoritarian leader. That is dangerous. So with these two, Trump and Hill, we, as a people, are in a precarious position.

May 4, 2016

I'd like to see the nation wake up and acknowledge the progressive movement

a movement that is neither fringe nor unAmerican but firm and principled like the brave man who lit the spark a year ago so that we could all Feel the Bern as we went forth together on this journey.

I'd like to see thousands of working class Americans who want to take this country back from the corporatocracy and return it to the people deliver a firm ultimatum to the bought-and-sold elitists who have co-opted our party and country.

I'd like the sincerity and intensity of our deeply held convictions to strike fear in the hearts of those who grew wealthy and powerful on a rigged system -- including the Democratic nominee, if it isn't Bernie. I'd like them to feel our complete repudiation of the corrupt and undemocratic system that exploits working people and keeps them down. I'd like them to know that our numbers are large and growing and that we will not be stopped.

I'd like to see an eloquent statement of beliefs, grievances and intentions loosely patterned on the Declaration of Independence read aloud at the convention.

I'd like to see some well-known Americans stand courageously alongside us.

I'd like it to be peaceful and orderly with protection for the participants and vigilance against those on the other side would try to turn it into a riot in order to discredit us.

I'd like it to be covered on both social media and the MSM but with much support across all social networks. I'd like support from Anonymous, OWS, and all progressive organizations everywhere.

Thanks for the OP, H2O Man