In politics, the "conventional wisdom" may be neither conventional nor wisdom. Discuss.

[merrily]

Last edited Fri Sep 4, 2015, 12:24 PM - Edit history (2)

Last night, as on other nights, MSNBC's Chris Hayes was gushing about Trump (as usual, mentioning Sanders only in passing and only to dismiss him). Part of "the gush" was to put down Carson, who has been gaining on Trump, by opining that Carson would be no competition for Hillary--not the eventual Democratic nominee, mind you, but Hillary.

Shouted Hayes, with that faux "sports fan in the stands" enthusiasm style that both Hayes and Maddow have worn out: "It's like what people said about Dean in 2004: 'I don't care what you think about this guy, he can't possibly win against George W. Bush.'" As Hayes repeated this pro-Democratic establishment meme from decade past, Hayes seemed totally oblivious to the fact that Kerry had not won against George W. Bush.

This is the trouble with political predictions made too early and things we only imagine. They don't even have to make sense. Those whom we assume know political shit can just say anything and pretend it's indisputable. Not only that the claim is indisputable, but so is everything implied by the claim: "This guy (who is firing up voters) can't possibly win against George W. Bush. (Implied: But the guy the establishment is pushing for President shall win.)

We will never know if Howard Dean could have won against George W. Bush. But we do know Kerry could not win against George W. Bush. And that is the problem with "conventional political wisdom:" It's a great deal more political establishment propaganda than it is conventional political wisdom.

In 2003-04, the attack on the World Trade Center was incredibly fresh in the minds of Americans--IMO, kept so quite deliberately. Americans had already seen an attack on the WTC in 1993. The 1993 bombing of the WTC had been treated as a crime that had occurred in New York City. Arrests had been made. However, in 2001, the attack was treated like an act of war against the United States by another sovereign nation, a casus belli, akin to the bombing of Pearl Harbor by the nation of Japan--the War on Terror. And, as we all recall, the "War" was used to pass the Patriot Act, an unprecedented and unconstitutional--even by Republican SCOTUS standards--law. The "War" was also used to institute periodic "terror" alerts that some Americans came to mock cynically. Release to the public of vetted videos from Bin Laden coincided with the 2004 Presidential campaign.

Americans have never, in all their history, voted a war time incumbent CIC out of office and Americans had not, in modern times, ever been attacked on USA soil (bearing in mind that Pearl Harbor was not, when attacked, either within a state of the United States or "soil&quot . In 2003-04, whether the attack on the World Trade Center would be the last of such attacks was still highly uncertain. Fear and uncertainty were both still quite palpable, not to mention the combination of patriotism and jingoism that kicks in after an attack.

At the time, I heard a bus driver, who was also the son of the owner of the bus company, say, "He (Bush) is the only one who knows where each of those guys (terrorists) is." Not true at all, but also said as though it were indisputable--and, as far as I know, taken as true by everyone on the bus who expressed agreement with the driver. (Obviously, i did not agree, but I did remain silent).

In any event, the odds that ANYone was going to defeat CIC George W. Bush in 2004 were massive, just as the odds against defeating war time incumbent Nixon were massive in 1972. Democrats knew this BEFORE they even had a nominee. And no one did defeat Nixon or Bush. However, 11 years later, and in the mind of a smart man like Chris Hayes, it still makes sense to assume that Howard Dean should not have been the nominee of the Democratic Party in 2004--and Kerry should have--because Dean could not have beaten George W. Bush and Kerry could have. Why? Because that was the "conventional wisdom" political meme sold in 2004 to keep Dean out of the race; and, as best I can tell, Hayes apparently has not examined it since, else why cite is so exuberantly as a reason for us not to consider Carson as a serious candidate for the Republican nomination?

Could Dean have defeated George W. Bush? Maybe not, but I don't know. No one knows, just as no one knows what imaginary President Gore would have done after 911. Supposedly, Gore would never have attacked Afghanistan or invaded Iraq. I have heard that said and read it repeatedly since 2001, as though it were indisputable. Really? President Clinton did not go to war over the 1993 attack on the WTC, but he did bomb Iraq--supposedly to rid Iraq of WMD--and Hillary Clinton voted for the use of military force against both Afghanistan and Iraq, as did 2004 nominee Kerry, as did Biden, another name currently being bandied about for POTUS. But, we know, just as sure as we know that the sun rises in the East, that imaginary President Gore would not have gone to war over 911. Why?

It's conventional political wisdom, just as it has somehow become conventional political wisdom that centrist Mondale lost to incumbent Reagan solely or largely because centrist Mondale was a liberal. We also "know' that centrist Carter lost to Reagan solely because then liberal Kennedy had attempted to primary Carter. But the beauty of predictions made way too early in a primary and hypothetical conclusions about imaginary and/or dead Presidents is that you can say anything and no one can disprove it (or prove it).

Trouble is, I don't think any of those bits of conventional political wisdom stands up to even superficial examination. At the very least, dozens of other valid political "lessons" could have been drawn from the primaries and elections of 1972 and 1980, like "Do vet your VP well," or "If you're running against a war time incumbent Republican CIC, you'd best run a VERY compelling, dynamic, charismatic Democrat who really excites voters--and even then, realize he may well lose because...war-time incumbent."

But, the conventional political wisdom, every time, was "Not toeing the establishment line will mean certain loss at the polls in November and the end of the world as we know it;" and the party line is "Avoid democratic things, like primaries, especially Presidential primaries, and, above all, make the establishment candidate your nominee."


http://www.democraticunderground.com/12776532 (Bush, Clinton, Clinton Bush - Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iraq) (My apologies to the Beach Boys for being one Iraq bombing short of a proper R & R beat. But, who knows, if all goes as the establishment want, maybe I can add another by 2016?)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12778825 (This ain't 1972.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12778872 (Candidate Reagan)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12778873 (1976-1980: the Carter Mondale years)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12779277 (Candidate Mondale)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12776064 (Does the Party discourage primaries and, if so, how realistic is populist reform?)


And now, my dears, the conventional political wisdom--coming at you from BOTH Fox News and MSNBC-- is that Hillary Clinton is (again) the inevitable Democratic Presidential nominee; Bernie Damn Sanders cannot possibly--and should not--become the Democratic nominee because he cannot possibly defeat a single one of the clowns in the clown bus; and--but only from MSNBC--Hillary Clinton not only can, but shall, handily defeat every single one of said clowns, even if almost 65% of Americans who hold a precious, blood-bought franchise no longer care enough about politicians to exercise it and today's news.

My general political advice: When a bit of "indisputable" conventional political "wisdom" is being dunned into you, especially when both Republicans and Democrats are doing the dunning simultaneously, know that it at least may be a totally bullshit establishment meme that, by definition, is not good for average Americans, and re-examine the hell out of that fucker.

My specific political advice for 2016 (aside from working off your bottoms NOW)--and I bet all you clever uns have seen this one coming since the subject line:

[azmom]

1. K&r

[Enthusiast]

2. Kicked and recommended to the Max!

[merrily]

5. Thanks to the max.

[hedda_foil]

3. Wow,merrily, you can write, girl! You can write!

This is a really fantastic piece. I hope everyone reads it recs It.

[merrily]

4. Why, thank you so much!

[leftcoastmountains]

6. Amazing article! Very thoughtly written!

A lot of work and determination on your part!!! I have shared
with a few people.

[merrily]

8. Thanks so much leftcoastmountains.

I have been enjoying the things that you post.

[Cheese Sandwich]

7. You knocked it out of the park with this

And that is the problem with "conventional political wisdom:" It's a great deal more political establishment propaganda than it is conventional political wisdom.

Yep, so-called conventional wisdom is really a bunch of dumb memes designed to protect power for those who have it.

[merrily]

9. Thank you so much.

[Demeter]

10. Kerry couldn't win against Karl Rove's Vote Flipping software

but after seeing him in action as SoS, I think we dodged a bullet, there. True, we got hit by a thermonuclear "W"arhead, instead, but...

[merrily]

11. The 2004 election was before I even knew the DLC existed. I had not been

paying close attention to politics. Pretty much all I knew of Kerry was that (1) He was my adopted state's favorite Democratic son; and (2) videos of him testifying before Congress and speechifying against the Vietnam War, etc. Being a pacifist and a lifelong Democrat (though then registered as an Indie), that was enough to make me strongly for him. And, of course, I wanted Bush out of office in the worst way.

But then, Kerry began campaigning. He'd interrupt his own sentences, then he'd interrupt the interruption, then interrupt that until I not only could not remember where he started, I could not care. I just wanted to hit my head against a wall until the pain stopped.

If someone held a gun to my head and asked me to diagram his sentences, I would have dropped to my knees and begged for the bullet, even if I actually knew how to diagram a sentence (which I don't). He did the same thing during debates. What had happened to the forceful, compelling speaker from the videos?

He never fought back against the Swiftboating video or excoriated the media for all its free airings. (One one airing was purchased.) There was the windsurfing photo and wearing camo hunting. There was the vote for the Iraq War, followed by the vote against the first funding bill. There was a lifetime that seemed to have been lived with the apparent goal of ending up in the White House, as did that other JFK from Massachusetts. There was the revelation that he was half Jewish, after decades of allowing Massachusetts to assume he was Irish and to speak about him in his presence as though he were Irish, including during the annual St. Patrick's Day breakfast, which is yooge deal in Massachusetts for politicians.

Of course, I still voted for him over Bush. Stood on line for hours, some of it in pouring rain.

But, I would never bet the deed to my home that he lost only because of vote flipping machines.