j reacts to the potential in co-opting trump's movement for the left

those of us on the left have a lot of experience with these people at alter-globalization events. they're cops.

trump runs an election about overturning free trade. the same agents show up.

there's no mystery about what's happening. it's absolutely consistent.

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

--

should the left re-evaluate it's approach to trump?

again: i'll never endorse him. i'll endorse non-voting. which is passive, but equivalent.

but, the reality is that trump is no less of a potential ally than clinton. it just depends on the issue. maybe. i don't actually believe that clinton is an advocate of anybody: not gay people, not black people - nobody. she works for the banks, and that's it. but, you could make the argument that clinton is better on those kinds of things [you should expect similar supreme court nominees as the ones you got from obama], but trump is better on trade.

the truth is that trump is drawing attention to trade issues on the left in ways that sanders or stein never could. he's raising awareness. call him a useful idiot [even if you have to abuse the language], but if he can mainline opposition to free trade then he's doing the left a massive favour.

so, instead of falling into these divide and conquer lines and kneejerking in conflict? go to the trump rallies. talk to people. empathize on trade. but, then maybe talk a little about health care. a little about taxes. start from that point of agreement and try and build on it.

the smart approach is to try to co-opt this, not to try and shut it down.

19-03-2016: winding down editing push forward & final comments on the democratic primary

tracks worked on in this vlog:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1

j reacts to trump getting the math, and how it reflects on cruz not getting it

"TRUMP: Well, I think if I'm a few short and I have, you know, 1,200 or if I have 1,100 and somebody else is at 300 or 400 or 500, which is very likely going to be the case, uh, and if I'm a little bit short -- and one of the reasons was we had so many candidates. I mean we started off with 17 candidates. And it came down to, you know, finally, it's down to three, frankly. But, you know, there are so many candidates, so it's very hard to get over that number. It's very unfair, in a way. But because of the fact that there's so many candidates and so many candidates are grabbing delegates. Now, here's what I say, because -- and now they're out. And now they're out. So I think I will get over that number. I think I may get over that number fairly easily."

are you taking notes, ted?

do you want this guy (cruz) making tactical decisions?

he can't even figure out a prisoner's dilemma. he'll be challenging putin to an arm wrestling contest.

"no, dmitri and sergei need to stay home. this is mano a mano. no 2 out of 3 bullshit, either. winner gets iran.".

dude shouldn't be running for president, he should be enrolling in a course in introductory game theory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ati5L6gn4jI

in the long run, trump will help the left more than sanders. it's a less appealing option, though.

i'm still not convinced that he survives this process. i may be over-exaggerating.

sanders is actually trying to save capitalism from itself. but, trump may very well succeed in destroying it.

j reacts to the democratic party nomination process (final analysis) (section 2)

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history_lesson/2000/10/was_nixon_robbed.html

illinois results

clinton: 1017006 (51%)
sanders: 982017 (49%)
difference: 34989

cook county results

clinton: 617612  (54%)
sanders: 525000 (46%)
difference: 92612

rest of illinois results

clinton: 399394  (47%)
sanders: 457017 (53%)
difference: 57623

---

michigan results

clinton:  576795 (48%)
sanders: 595222 (50%)
difference: 18427

wayne county results

clinton: 163886  (60%)
sanders: 104999 (38%)
difference: 58887

rest of michigan results

clinton: 412909  (46%)
sanders: 490223 (54%)
difference: 77314

he overpowered it in michigan with brute force turnout, the only strategy possible, but couldn't in illinois.

the importance of stressing turnout to the sanders campaign should really be apparent.

shit hillary said vol 4

“If there is a way to structure some kind of constitutional restrictions that take into account the life of the mother and her health, then I am open to that, but I have yet to see the Republicans willing to actually do that, and that would be an area where if they included health, you could see constitutional action."