|
Edited on Tue Feb-20-07 05:00 PM by PATRICK
to pre-primary days of yore. Without an actual vote being counted, candidates who harness all the trappings, the dough, the endorsements who realize that none of this gives them any guarantee but handicapping and manipulation by the MSM and many power players do themselves actual harm in trying to "win" these favored judgments. Already Hillary and Obama show the classic signs of trying to own the bridge so much that they can't straddle or move across the divide to the actual votes in the actual primaries. And where is the grass roots fervor, the new zeal that propelled Dean at this stage against the big money and the MSM? Surrendered as per usual by the usual system.
The danger in this game is that money and support vanishes like the wind- for Democrats especially, depending on what happens when these mammoth circuses arrive at the first voting booth. Part of the chaos in states moving their primary dates are could be seen as a visceral panic, dissatisfaction or distrust(even by top candidates who dread getting trashed by Iowa and New Hampshire!). This spells turmoil at a fundamental level which does not bode well for a somnolent two candidate easy choice, great unity winner. Underneath that turmoil is what probably the two top candidates, by tradition, are hamstrung in reaching- the deeply scarred Dem voter psyche from having been cheated horribly twice before with "great" unity and safe candidates who triumphed FOR the system which did not produce.
It may be in smoke and flimflam of the money and press and primary confusion that the dull establishment can field another losing or unnecessarily weak bigshot or that this time it will fall apart like it does when the GOP is stabbing it in the back and picking its pocket.
This is why Gore, Edwards, or Clark or some other does have a chance, because there is no upstart Dean to isolate and destroy along with the grass roots hopes. The grass roots are likely unmoved and unenthusiastic under the general assault by the established news and political game and are more intent on picking a winner based solely this time on the cold merits of the most appeal and least negatives who can bluntly cut the crap and win something besides the earliest cover of Newsweek. This time the candidate least likely ever to convince voters with this underlying sentiment is Hillary. This "frontrunner" blocks the real selections much more than Joe L. could ever do. This is making a mess of the real will of the primary voters- who unfortunately this time, by bitter education, are right about what they are looking for. One can only hope that their will can make itself known through the polling, the debates, the spin, the useless punditry, before the chaos of the primaries readjust reality for the blindly ambitious dancers of the pre-game show.
Last time there were co-equal heavyweights with Dean throwing a huge counter challenge. Kerry was set to be the designated favored guy with Joe L. as the fond hope of the GOP to screw things up for us and at least keep the Dems from going populist or wake up in general. Clark came in as another surprise quality choice but screwed by having only the same conventional establishment props in restricted enough amounts to strangle his chances. So there was realistically Kerry, Edwards, Clark and Dean. Kerry self-destructed early partly from his own misjudgments and mostly from the voter unease at having someone stiff and northern(the cold appraisal factor that has to be more frantic in 2008). Dean was like the polar opposite, igniting fervent support and a new system challenge(almost tapping into the fed up response) yet creating anxiety not just in the establishment but among voters who wanted a lot of what the establishment also wanted- a safe strong winner. The rightness of Kucinich, the charisma of Edwards, the crisp newness of Clark in retrospect got lost in what swiftly became a Kerry Dean decisive war in the early primaries. It was, in fact, a mess- though it looked like a success to most Dem voters and relieved party pros.
Until we got robbed again.
Now the establishment, including many past warhorses and discredited, untimely loser advisers, are at it again, hoping without a Dean in the forefront that no one will notice. The MSM has almost engineered an Obama/Hillary faux drama that will scar both polar opposites and give the impression of choice or the discouragement of Dem voters who might find to their horror- after only a couple weeks into the voting season- that the least preferred candidate is the "winner they must rally around.
The real people's choices-so far- are thus: Edwards, Clark, Obama, Gore and not at all in that order nor exclusive should a popular choice earn an enthused consensus spot. Hillary, Kucinich, Richardson and others all have admiration and committed followings. Note: in this discussion I am not talking about who would be the best president with the best policies. That refined squabble is what distracts us from the primeval scream of the Dem voters. Again, what is helping defeat the people's choice is what is worst about the primary system and American elections in general. Big money, big media, big bosses. The goal of all those unholy three(by their very ingrained and proved nature) is to saddle the electorate with the gamiest choice, the safest status quo and someone who can give the GOP- NOT the Democrats- their biggest hope. So we are right to worry, not about the voters, but about the game that conspires against them.
This is not to disparage the Dems playing- or trapped within- this hostile game(do some even know how hopelessly compromised they are?) or attribute dark complicity or personal shortcomings that are endemic to this season. This is only about the nerve-wracking self-produced crisis that our own party offers as an obstacle to hope while trying to believe it is otherwise. Trust the people, really. Since we are the ones who will die en masse from the choices that terrible establishment failures have been forcing upon us.
|