How do you sell elite rule to a 99% electorate? Well, don’t run somebody like Hillary Clinton, a lackluster campaigner with
more 1% baggage than the Louis Vuitton stock room.
There aren’t many politicians who can look you in the eye
and say “I work for the bankers…but I care about you” and get away with
it.
Obama could. Clinton
couldn’t. Now that Obama’s termed out,
the search is on for the telegenic candidate who checks the intersectional
boxes but knows on what side the world’s bread is buttered.
My bets are on Kamala Harris as the intersectional
box-checking, globalist friendly, appealing candidate now being groomed for a
presidential run. Sooner rather than
later, I’d think.
Judging by Emmanuel Macron, a handsome youngster can be transformed
into a president even with a slim resume. Best thing is to get ‘em out in front of the
voters while they’re young and fresh, and before they’ve had to accumulate too
much of a track record of 1% accommodation.
That’s the Obama lesson.
He came from nowhere and became President. Hillary came from somewhere and went nowhere.
It’s an interesting data point in the evolution of American
politics that the Democrats doing what the Republicans used to do: find a charismatic
front person who is also a tabula rasa to generate electoral mass appeal for
elitist policies.
The key task, and one I’m guessing Democratic strategists
have devoted a lot of effort to cracking, is how to convert the perceptual
framing from “99% v. 1%” to “degraded lumpen v. the quintessence of America”.
Democratic Party liberalism pretty relies on meritocratic
technocratic model to make the elite rule pill easier to swallow: the best and
the brightest are recognized by an enlightened electorate and handed the keys
to the America-mobile.
The people who don’t vote for Team Demlib are *ahem*
unenlightened: low information voters, bigots, oh, what’s a good word? How about…Deplorables!
So what should we call Demlibs? The wise? The The woke? How about…the Adorables?
This framing lets Demlibs dodge the slam that they are venal
politicians feasting on the nutritious swill slopped in front of their snouts by
globalist billionaires; or, for the Marxy-inclined critic, that they callow
bourgeoisie sucking up to the capitalist class for profit and protection.
Sweeping issues of political interest or class interest
under the rug does raise some awkward questions, though!
Dems are pretty much in the situation of saying, we’re out
here absorbing billions in campaign funding and promoting globalist centrist
polices because…
…because…
Um, because we care so much about humanity we can’t bear to
do otherwise!
We’re not creatures of class, ambition, or interest!
That must be it! Noblesse oblige!
This is an indispensable piece of framing for a political
movement that might otherwise be convincingly portrayed as tools of the 1%.
It’s an easier line to sell with a young, sexy, and savvy
candidate.
Obama played that role quite well as president, but not, in
my opinion, so well since then, with the whole fracasso of sabotaging the Trump
presidency with the anti-Russia horcruxes and then signing a $60 million book
deal and shouldering up to the public speaking trough with the Clintons with a
$400,000 gig and for that matter helping out with “Hillary a la Francais”
centrist Emmanuel Macron’s presidential campaign.
Takeaway: get the pretty people in front of the voters
before they turn ugly.
The future
belongs to the young!
5 comments:
Putin deserves a mention.
He was basically the Macron to Yeltsin's Hollande.
$25 billion settlement is more that anyone else got out of the banks.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-senate-harris-banks-20161016-snap-story.html
assam career
assam career
assam career/
assam career/
assam career
assam career/
assam career
assam career/
assam career
assam career
assam career
assam career
assam career
assam career
assam career/
assam career
Post a Comment