With a commanding victory on Saturday, Mr. Biden made a compelling case that he is the Democrat best positioned to head off the nomination of Bernie Sanders, the democratic socialist senator whom centrists fear would doom the party this fall.I'm very interested in the substance, but first, let's talk about grammar. Whom... would doom?! The rhyme is bad enough — whom... doom... — but how can writers at this level not know how to figure out when "whom" is right?! You can take "centrists fear" out of that clause and see that it's obviously wrong to say "the democratic socialist senator whom... would doom the party...." You can also make the mistake easy to see by writing it with different punctuation: "the democratic socialist senator whom — centrists fear — would doom the party this fall." You need "who," because it's the subject of the verb "doom." Bernie isn't doomed. Bernie is doing the dooming. According to those centrists who are doing the fearing.
Anyway... after the South Carolina primary, it's possible that the fearers of socialism and doom will all suddenly get behind Joe Biden. Whatever messages Super Tuesday voters have been hearing up until now, forget about it. This is serious! Either you like Bernie or you'd better embrace old Joe.
[Biden] is convinced that he has done enough to demonstrate his dominance with a core Democratic constituency and affirm his argument that no one is better suited to take on President Trump.... But for all his undeniable success on Saturday, Mr. Biden remains hamstrung on two fronts: by several competitors still disinclined to stand down, even if they siphon crucial non-Sanders votes, and by a campaign organization that party officials have described as jarringly thin in many of the states that will vote on Tuesday....If a mad dash toward Biden is really the only way to save the Democratic Party, Obama should break his silence and endorse him before Super Tuesday. But I don't think he will, because I think centrists also fear that Biden would doom the party this fall. Why would Obama stake his reputation on that?
Why would Michael R. Bloomberg step aside, before the states he is contesting have even voted, with hundreds of millions of dollars already sunk into his bid and a conviction that he is the man for the job? What do Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar owe Mr. Biden, whom they each dusted in New Hampshire (and, in Mr. Buttigieg’s case, in Iowa), where the voters who spend the most time with their candidates decided that the former vice president could not be trusted to defeat President Trump?
পোস্টগুলি
১৩২টি মন্তব্য:
Listen fat, whom the gods would destroy they first let win South Carolina, and I'm proud to be your choice and your nominee for the presidency!
Thank you voters! Thank you West Virginia!
Centrists fear him. That's the fool-the-eye analysis that gives them the objective case.
What horrible sloppy writing in that piece. The metaphors —all old, all overused— are running wild. How can you be “hamstrung” on “two fronts”? If you, Prof. A, were to parse the rest of the “analysis” as closely as you did the “who/whom” solecism, you’d be at it through Super Tuesday.
I'm very interested in the substance, but first, let's talk about grammar. Whom... would doom?! The rhyme is bad enough — whom... doom... — but how can writers at this level not know how to figure out when "whom" is right?!
The Old Grey Mare just ain’t what she used to be.
"The suspect, whom police said was last seen running away, ..." is the most common use of "whom" in on-air radio news reports.
Historically Obama's support and endorsement are not helpful to the cause or person they are given to.
Biden's win yesterday seems to me to be a dead cat bounce.
It's a long time until the Presidential election in November, an eon in political reckoning. Unforeseen events will occur.
Wilbur is not breathing easy about this yet.
soon, the NYTs will ONLY be in haiku
the news media
Used to be proper grammar
now have free form verse
"because I think centrists also fear that Biden would doom the party this fall"
Bernie as the rock; Joe as the hard place.
someone posted here last night.
"Finally Someone got a majority!"
Wrongo Maryloo
Even in his Gimme state; with All the forces on earth pushing for him...
Jo Biden couldn't even get a Majority
not of Voters
not of Democrats
not Even of Democrat Primary voters (48.45%)
I for one look forward to the new twitter-friendly emoji-textspeak edition of the Times.
I 🤩 🐦📰 -- 👏!
"How can you be “hamstrung” on “two fronts”?"
The left leg and the right leg?
"Mr. Biden remains hamstrung on two fronts:" ... Honey, its more than 2.
You don’t need “who” in that sentence: “Bernie Sanders, the democratic socialist senator centrists fear would doom the party this fall.”
And the fear about dooming the party relates to losing House and Senate races, not losing the Presidency.
Since we are doing grammar here, I submit that the writers of the NYT piece appear ignorant of the inflections given to the verb “spend.” The past tense is “spent.” See: “ What do Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar owe Mr. Biden, whom they each dusted in New Hampshire (and, in Mr. Buttigieg’s case, in Iowa), where the voters who spend the most time with their...”
The NYet itself is a joke, but the reportering team of "Flegenheimer & Glueck" is a self-writing joke.
What reputation?? Every day that Donald Trump fixes the messes that Obama created....Obama's presidency evaporates a little bit more. Obama's administration SPIED on Donald Trump and when the real truth comes out...hopefully people in that administration will be going to prison where they all belong.
Since we are doing grammar here, I submit that the writers of the NYT piece appear ignorant of the inflections given to the verb “spend.” The past tense is “spent.” See: “ What do Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar owe Mr. Biden, whom they each dusted in New Hampshire (and, in Mr. Buttigieg’s case, in Iowa), where the voters who spend the most time with their...”
In old movies about newspapers, there is often a crusty character known as "copy editor". Are there no longer anyone whom holds that postition at NYT and WaPo?
The suspect, at whom the police flung epithets as he was last seen running away, is on the loose.
Present.
That crusty copy editor is sitting on a bar stool in a dive close to the print shop, muttering to himself as he prepares to swallow his boiler maker, "Good evening Mr. and Mrs. America, from border to border and coast to coast and all the ships at sea. Let's go to press!"
Hoom the gods would doom and so they hamstrung him on the front of the back of both legs while affirming that he had a better suit though it was jarringly thin on the ground and others each dusted it in New Hampshire.
What relevance is South Carolina? Why is a win, here, important? It’s 50 odd votes, and Biden didn’t get them all, out of several thousand.
Oh, no! Don't encourage me! I'm already overburdened with hearing and seeing grammatical errors. Try sitting through a Sunday sermon and not cringing. The saving grace for me at this point in time is that my pastor is Nigerian and speaks perfect English.
Flegenheimer and Glueck ignore Strunk and White.
Rosa Marie, Nigerian pastor speaking perfect English can only be Episcopalian.
Bernie isn't the chosen one, but he holds power over a substantial amount of those that claim they're Democrats. So, the next move is a media character assassination, which will lead to a reduction in funds for Bernie, a piling on by other candidates, and what may eventually be a brokered convention. If that happens, the actual candidate wanted by the Democrats will emerge, and the repercussions will be ugly.
After three tries at the Presidency, Joe Biden finally won a primary.
On the same day Donald Trump ended a war.
Dutch Schultz (born Arthur Simon Flegenheimer; August 6, 1901 - October 24, 1935)
Biden's one-off win in SC might just energize Bernie's support. There's still plenty of hard feelings about him getting screwed the last time. Media character assassination doesn't seem to work when aimed at Trump, so it might not work against Bernie.
If the Dems really wanted to stop Bernie, Obama would endorse his own VP Biden today.
Question of the morning: if Obama continues to play Marcel Marceau (i.e. remain silent), what does that signify politically?
If the Dems really wanted to stop Bernie, Obama would endorse his own VP Biden today.
Obama awaits instructions from Management.
Brain Doom, faced by whom?
Joe Biden: “I’m looking forward to appointing the first African American woman to the United States
Maybe, just maybe, Slow Joe didn't do that well in South Carolina, but the powers that be (Democrat bigwigs) decided enough is enough, and Crazy Bernie needs to start losing from now on.
Who/whom is a great challenge for me.
... because I think centrists also fear that Biden would doom the party this fall.
And that’s no malarkey!
Owen: "What horrible sloppy writing in that piece."
Writers aren't expected to get it 100% right. In the past, copyeditors were employed to catch such mistakes and bad writing. But in cost-saving moves, publishers are increasingly relying on just Microsoft Word's spell checker and grammar checker rather than human copyeditors. Copyediting is a dying profession in the age of Twitter and Amazon self-publishing.
Major best sellers like Fifty Shades of Grey were published without any copyediting at all. And it shows. But it didn't hurt sales.
Obama's never had coattails. It's not time to remind everyone.
Whom and doom both rhyme with...Bloom,
The subliminal ice berg toward which the good ship Biden is cruising
Whom, after Super Tuesday, will make Joe an offer he can't refuse
With Steyer out, it's safe to watch commercial TV again.
Was really hoping I wouldn't have to log in on a Sunday morning just to remind 2020's newest internet czar grammar Nazi how to decline the relative pronoun and diagram sentences. But in the example quoted, centrists is the subject, fear is the verb, and the democratic socialist is the object. Hence, to allow that relative clause to identify that antecedent as Bernie Sanders - the individual mentioned in the independent clause preceding it - the relative pronoun (who) is declined into the direct object form (whom). Rhyming or "flow" has nothing to do with it. You might think that makes it sound awkward - a subjective judgment, but not grammatically incorrect.
Left Bank of the Charles is correct in that a relative pronoun declined in this way may be omitted in English, but it is not incorrect to include it. Take this example to any high school English teacher or college English professor so they can give the same explanation as to why they disagree.
It's a bad idea to submit to a vote by blog chat commenters who have never written and would never write more than a page in their lives, grammar rulings. Not only are they uninformed, biased and prone to herd mentality, but in this case are famous for hating compound sentences or complexity and mistaking simplistic aesthetic judgements for correctness. What a shame that at least 30 of your herd (at last count) don't understand any better.
Biden is far more likely to do well against Trump than Sanders, because Biden doesn't scare people off by talking endlessly about socialism and how wonderful Castro's regime was.
Financial analysts this morning have stated that there is now a 40% chance of a recession this year, caused by worldwide economic fallout from the coronavirus. If so, Trump's chances of re-election will decline significantly, and whoever the Dem nominee is will have a better chance of becoming President. (It was a mild recession that doomed Bush 41 in 1992.)
Joe Biden: “I’m looking forward to appointing the first African American woman to the United States Senate."
It's funny how these racists assume that their own racism and sexism is beyond reproach, if not actually wonderful:
"Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., an African-American woman, would presumably help confirm that nominee [about whom nothing is known except her race and sex] as she serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee."
Steyer spent $3373 per vote. So, to win the prize he would need to spend over $23 billion. Tom, you can't take it with you anyway.
After spending all the millions he did so far, and a lot of it in my market, I went from knowing nothing about him to knowing he is an idiot and pretty creepy. Well done, Tom.
it's fully blutowski with him, isn't it, like when he said fdr had been giving an address in 1929, on tv,
the Joe of ten years ago would have been able to capitalize on this victory, but not today's Joe, who is truly suffering from some mental deficits.
And the basic dynamic, a crowded "moderate" lane (Biden, Bloomberg, Klo, and Pete) and an uncrowded radical lane (Bernie and the fading Liz), continues, with Bloomberg only coming online on Super Tuesday.
But in the example quoted, centrists is the subject, fear is the verb, and the democratic socialist is the object. Hence, to allow that relative clause to identify that antecedent as Bernie Sanders - the individual mentioned in the independent clause preceding it - the relative pronoun (who) is declined into the direct object form (whom)
It's the feelings theory of grammar. The relative pronoun has empathy for the case of its antecedent.
If you count the culture's racism in a non-racist way, i.e. open disdain for people based on skin color, any color, then the present might be the most racist time in our history as so many people openly and with pride attack a single race and suggest that they be discriminated against and excluded for no other reason than their race. And has race ever been so often brought up and used as a weapon with such animus toward a particular skin color with little defense offered?
YouTube is full of videos of Biden getting handsy with young women, not remembering which state he’s in, what office he’s running for, and on and on and on. And lots of Democrats think he’s the best they’ve got. Okaaaaayyyyyy
The thin jar refers to Biden's cranium.
Joe wins his first primary in three different campaigns.
Have you ever seen those heartwarming stories where the football team lets the disabled kid run for a touchdown where everybody fakes they are trying? That's Joe in South Carolina. Without the heartwarming part. They finally let Joe believe he won something. Out in 2 weeks.
Right now those chickens are feeling neglected, hardin.
Obama will not step in. He doesn’t care which candidate will “doom the party. His interest is in dooming the country. In that regard any of the Democrat candidates will do.
The D party might be dysfunctional, but South Carolina is even more dysfunctional. If bonehead Biden wins any other states, I'd be surprised.
I could see him picking up a couple more at most in the other Confederate states, but hopefully that will be it. If not, then the fight is legitimate. If so, then the D party has to concede that they don't want some skinny old demented Irish white guy no matter how extreme his opponent is or how many senile Southern black senators can convince their flocks that Biden looks and talks and speechifies just like Obama, if only you hold him up right to the light.
Pathetic.
"how can writers at this level not know how to figure out"
How can they! It's terrible! It's so sad! In the New York Times! At This Level! They should try to be better! At the New York Times!
Anyway, this is one essential difference between Althouse and most of the commentariat: we look down on the NYT with all the contempt it so richly deserves, she still clings to her bourgeois standards and quaint illusions, that NYT writers represent "this level," in style or substance.
Things I never thought I'd write: President Toilet Paper Shoe's Cooked-Up Drug Deal makes an interesting point.
If you put a period after Sanders and start a new sentence, 'whom' would be correct:
"With a commanding victory on Saturday, Mr. Biden made a compelling case that he is the Democrat best positioned to head off the nomination of Bernie Sanders. The democratic socialist senator whom centrists fear would doom the party this fall."
Neat.
"...mistaking simplistic aesthetic judgements for correctness."
Does that include spelling?
No rule can stand long against the prevailing wind of simplistic aesthetic judgement.
Southern politics is as corrupt as a cavity, as stale as a sterilized stud steer, as sclerotic as a Southern-fried coronary artery.
Fuck that stupid state. It was fun to see Newton Gingrich roaring on the self-righteous high and mighty fire and brimstone in 2012 for John King asking about his affairs, all to uproarious applause. But for fuck's sake lets get some priorities.
Bay Area Guy: Question of the morning: if Obama continues to play Marcel Marceau (i.e. remain silent), what does that signify politically?
Obama knows that none of these clowns running on the DemoCRAT ticket are going to win. They are all losers.
Obama doesn't give a rip about the "party" or the United States at all anyway. He cares about his own personal legacy and about not being caught backing a loser. Since there is nothing on the upside for Obama to back any of them....he will remain silent and pretend that he is above the fray.
It is all about Obama and not about anything else.
How can they! It's terrible! It's so sad! In the New York Times! At This Level! They should try to be better! At the New York Times!
The grammarians of AM talk radio and truncated Instapundit fragments speak!
In a world of run-on sentences Glenn Reynolds would be king.
With Steyer out, it's safe to watch commercial TV again.
One hopes, but it's not likely.
Steyer spent a lot of money on "Trump Impeachment" ads before he ran and may do something similar again.
I think he wants to be a player and can buy his way into the club. However, Bloomberg has almost already bought the club.
He's making a fool of heself. You need heself so you know it refers back to the subject.
Shouldn't it be "both dusted" instead of "each dusted?"
Dust Bunny Queen: “...It’s all about Obama...”. Bingo.
It's the feelings theory of grammar.
All human language grammar is based on feelings: it's right if it sounds right.
The relative pronoun has empathy for the case of its antecedent.
"This is a classical example of what grammarians call a pluperfect connubial imprecation, which, in layperson's terms, means that it violates state and federal health-warning laws."
Althouse
Do you know the race or gender of the writers? Wrong to criticize the grammar of certain cohorts. A white thing. Wrongthink.
All human language grammar is based on feelings: it's right if it sounds right.
To whom? To people who read regularly or to trash collectors and construction workers?
Let's pretend communication norms are not dependent upon audience. No, the NYT is not communicating to people who would sooner read Glenn Reynolds' constipated sentence fragments than several books a year.
The only place I’m ever fully confident of whom is in the who/whom formulation. We all know who the whom is there, no need to ask.
PT
In what state do you reside?
Shitting on Glenn Reynolds requires a giant turd.
"I ain't no ways tyaard."
I think it's in one that beat the Confederate traitors, Michael.
Are you saying that southern fried politics are progressive, or at least that the Biden-Clyburn machinations are?
Do you think Jim Clyburn is really a leader of anything? Do you think the willingness of those who feel most simpatico with what he says to do are remarkably thoughtful, rational or helpful?
Do you think that the SC-based, born-and-bred singer of the abominable musical fart known as Hootie and the Blowfish contributes anything memorable to American culture?
I could go on. But I think I can rest my case.
If I may, Jim Clyburn is the Darius Rucker of American black politics. Or so it would seem.
Obama might have needed Biden to seem as palatable as a cracker. But neither Clyburn nor a large portion of the SC Democratic constituency can cracker jack that silly stutterer into the White House, no matter how hard they try.
"The democratic socialist senator whom centrists fear would doom the party this fall."
The subject "democratic socialist senator" lacks a verb.
Mr. Biden made a compelling case that he is the Democrat best positioned to head off . . .
But isn't that the way it is for practically EVERYTHING with the Dems/leftists?? Always against someone/something? Always saying they are going to take on someone/something? And in all this dividing, claiming how they are bringing people together?
So Biden is running primarily on two reasons to vote for him -- He can beat Bernie. He can beat Trump.
Yeah, Joe. But what are you going to do if you become president?
Do you have any issues other than YOU?
Yeah, Joe. But what are you going to do if you become president?
He doesn't have a clue. He's just the special golden child beneficiary of political patronage. In at least one state, anyway.
He has a friend in South Carolina. A very forward-thinking state.
We should award him the presidency for that.
Whom: all of those, including us, who would have Biden thrust upon them because the Dem establishment is desperate to maintain power at any cost.
Are you saying that southern fried politics are progressive, or at least that the Biden-Clyburn machinations are?
This doesn't really have anything to do with being "southern fried", it's just that blacks view politics in a much more practical, transactional manner than white liberals do. They have kind of an old school, Tammany Hall mentality towatds the whole thing. What are you going to do for me, is what black voters want to know.
And the black community has local kingmakers, guys like Clyburn or those Revruns in Chicago, who can really deliver votes, whereas white liberals follow national trends a lot more.
You would have the same result in any black dominated jurisdiction, regardless of geography. It just shows up more in the south because that's where black voters are predominant.
PT
You live n a place you are ashamed to name?Got it.
Thurber says whom should be used whenever a note of dignity or austerity is wanted.
Lol! You should know we Yankees are all the same, Michael. A homogenized, mongrel bunch. We don't have to name individual states, or family patriarchs, or plantations, or Scottish tribes we derive from long ago a century or more, let alone honor whatever bad causes they fought for. We don't go on about this bit having to do with generations remaining in the same place.
It's just enough for us to know that we didn't take up arms against the U.S. And we don't fight against the work it needs to do now, either.
Sorry if that bothers you, bad boy.
With a commanding victory on Saturday, Mr. Biden made a compelling case that
he is the Democrat best positioned to head off the nomination of Bernie Sanders, the democratic socialist senator whom centrists fear would doom the party this fall.
__""""
,,,he is the Democrat best positioned to head off the nomination of Bernie Sanders (.)
The democratic socialist senator senator whom centrists fear would doom the party this fall.,,,
Punctuation change fits it better.
PP
Wonder why you won’t name your state. Your town I am guessing is 2 hours from a Palm restaurant. LOL.
The democratic socialist senator senator whom centrists fear would doom the party this fall
It would need commas around the relative clause, which would be nonrestrictive.
Obama can’t stand by his decision to have Joe as his running mate and VP? Call me unsurprised.
Blogger Ann Althouse said...
"How can you be “hamstrung” on “two fronts”?"
The left leg and the right leg?
_____&&&&&
That should be two behinds.
I am very proud to be from the state of NOT-South Carolina.
We are a large group. All 49 of us.
None of us proudly claim the execrable legacy of Fort Sumter.
None of us is a state from which Darius Rucker hails.
None of us have reps as fatuous as the one that engineered the completely pointless and worthless Clyburn-Biden pact.
We are large. We are legion.
Not sure why this bothers you. Don't you still have two completely charisma-bereft billionaires in even the DINO party you could vote for?
LOL!
Can't teamBiden claim Rs voter enhanced Bernie to deny Joe majority?
@Blogger rhhardin said...
The democratic socialist senator senator whom centrists fear would doom the party this fall
______
I Correct my typing -
The democratic socialist senator whom centrists fear would doom the party this fall
"None of us proudly claim the execrable legacy of Fort Sumter."
There were a surprising number of New Yorkers who supported the South during the Civil War.
But that's what happens in Civil Wars.
PP
I am guessing a shit area of a shit northern state, an area in steep decline as are most areas of NY and Penn.
I think Althouse is correct here- the "whom" in this sentence is the subject of the relative clause, and it doesn't matter that the antecendent is the object of the main clause.
There were a surprising number of New Yorkers who supported the South during the Civil War.
But that's what happens in Civil Wars.
True enough. For many reasons.
Southerners who opposed secession should be discussed more as well.
“It's a bad idea to submit to a vote by blog chat commenters who have never written and would never write more than a page in their lives, grammar rulings. Not only are they uninformed, biased and prone to herd mentality, but in this case are famous for hating compound sentences or complexity and mistaking simplistic aesthetic judgements for correctness. What a shame that at least 30 of your herd (at last count) don't understand any better.”
I’m just going to assume you’re on some mad, be-bop Kerouac-ian riff here, and appreciate it on that basis.
Crazy, baby.
PP
I am guessing a shit area of a shit northern state, an area in steep decline as are most areas of NY and Penn.
No, those areas are the ones where Trump support is higher.
Why are you such an apologist for all things Southern? Is it really that difficult for you to understand why things like jazz, blues, rock and roll, Cajun, Gulla, NOLA, soul food, crossover country, the banjo, Daniel Boone, folk music and many other Southern oddities are warmly welcomed here and abroad as vital components of American culture, while most things having anything to do with toxic white identity grievance politics (and equally, whatever bullshit motivates Jim Clyburn) are not?
Davy Crockett.
Why shit on the south? It doesn’t enhance a valid criticism of the corruption behind Clyburn’s Biden endorsement. It makes it seem as though you’ll shit on anyone who doesn’t support Bernie, which is precisely the Bernie-bros caricature Bernie opposers are drawing. It’s a trap.
"Southern black senators" says it all.
"In South Carolina, there are many tall pines.
I remember the oak tree that we used to climb.
But now when I'm lonesome, I always pretend
that I'm getting the feel of hickory wind.
I started out younger, at most everything.
All the riches and pleasures, what else could life bring?
But it makes me feel better, each time it begins,
callin' me home, hickory wind.
It's a hard way to find out that trouble is real,
in a faraway city, with a faraway feel.
But it makes me feel better, each time it begins
callin' me home, hickory wind.
Keeps callin' me home, hickory wind."
Lyrics taken from Gram Parsons
I'll leave it to someone who knows more about South Carolina's rulers to talk about the "valid criticism of the corruption behind Clyburn's Biden endorsement."
Until then, it seems that in places that prize slow and heritage over everything else, someone was able to convince heavily black districts that Biden wasn't too white a wafer to place within the Obama cracker sandwich, and that's all that mattered to the general mindset. It might not be politically correct to say and a sizable generalization, but if you've got anything more sophisticated or realistic an assessment of how primary preferences played out down there, by all means let it rip.
Jess said...
Bernie isn't the chosen one, but he holds power over a substantial amount of those that claim they're Democrats. So, the next move is a media character assassination, which will lead to a reduction in funds for Bernie, a piling on by other candidates, and what may eventually be a brokered convention. If that happens, the actual candidate wanted by the Democrats will emerge, and the repercussions will be ugly.
Oh, I've been expecting a "brokered" convention for a while now. And in a brokered convention the actual candidate wanted by the Democrats will emerge.
Question is, the actual candidate wanted by which Democrats?
What would be really great if some state delegations walked out, leaving a rump caucus, and those states put a different Democrat nominee on the ballot. There's precedent for it. Even if a national convention puts up nominees for POTUS and VP, state organizations still have to get them on the ballot. And every state has different rules...
If a mad dash toward Biden is really the only way to save the Democratic Party, Obama should break his silence and endorse him before Super Tuesday. But I don't think he will, because I think centrists also fear that Biden would doom the party this fall. Why would Obama stake his reputation on that?
Obama won too big too early.
You could see it during his presidency. He would shy away from normal give and take politics, because he couldn't risk his reputation of infallibility and invincibility. He ended up isolated in the White House, trying to rule by executive order.
Now his own vice president is running on a platform of preserving his legacy vs a socialist who wants to blow it up, and Obama doesn't care enough to give an endorsement?
Biden is a terribly flawed candidate, but at some point you've got to make your choice or accept that you have nothing to say.
Here are the roughly possible scenarios for Tuesday on just pure popular vote totals from all the races run that day:
(1) Sanders 40%, Biden 40%, Bloomberg etal 20%
(2) Sanders 40% Biden 30%, Bloomberg etal 30%
(3) Biden 40%, Sanders 30%, Bloomberg etal 30%
I would argue that all three scenarios reduce the race to a two man race after Tuesday where about 60% of the pledged delegates remain to be assigned. I still think it unlikely that a brokered convention happens. But we will see. To get a brokered convention, I think Bloomberg needs to get 20-25% of the total vote on Tuesday- if he doesn't, he can spend another billion dollars in the following week, and get 10% or less of the vote on March 10th.
If Bloomberg had not entered the race, it would already be heads up this morning.
Also, if Sanders does get nominated and it does lead to a Corbyn style wipeout, I don't think democrats will remember Obama's silence fondly.
To pick up the pieces after a major loss, you want three things:
1) To have opposed the faction of the party that was in charge when the loss happened.
2) To have campaigned hard for candidates down the ballot.
3) To have a viable future nominee.
#3 is the most important, and Obama doesn't have anyone except Biden.
#2 is still in play, but we haven't seen a lot of campaigning so far.
#1 requires Obama to make a choice pretty soon.
Fernando wood, ny mayor and later congressman, was an honorary confederate,
Biden is personally far past his prime, but I don't think anybody would shy away from voting for a party that nominated him.
Sanders is much crazier, in a way that would leave a bitter aftertaste.
What would be really great if some state delegations walked out, leaving a rump caucus, and those states put a different Democrat nominee on the ballot.
Looked at the '68 Democrat convention page at Wikipedia to see if there were state delegation walkouts there. Appears not, but it mentions that the convention had to decide which of competing slates of delegates to seat from a few states; while I vaguely recall that this was an issue I cannot remember why it was. Politics of racial justice, I think.
Riots and delegation walkouts in Milwaukee and a third semi-national candidate would be entertaining to this observer, as long as there wasn't any bloodshed, or at least very little of it.
Zach,
If the Democrats get crushed in November, it won't matter what Obama did or didn't do- Obama is in the past unless Michelle decides to pick up the baton. The only thing we really do know in that event is that someone will resurrect the party with electoral success- it always happens- there is always a Bill Clinton or a Tony Blair, or a Ronald Reagan or a Donald Trump. I have no idea who that person would be for the Democrats in 2024 or 2028, I just know someone will come along.
Chris Wallace: "Thanks for your time and please come back in less than 13 years."
Joe Biden: "alright, Chuck, thank you very much
CW: "Alright, it's Chris, but anyway..."
JB: "Chris, I just did Chris, er, I just did Chuck..."
In 1968, Wallace definitely caused Humphrey to lose the election- Wallace caused Humphrey to lose enough states to Nixon in just the south to swing the election, and he certainly cost Humphrey states like Illinois and Ohio even if I grant that Nixon might have won those southern states without Wallace on the ballot (see the 1964 election).
Bloomberg is trying to be the guy who finances the resurrection, and therefore the man who chooses the next pretender.
Yancey, the only Dem candidate with any significant bloc of voter support is Sanders. It’s not a two man race, it’s a one man race and has been since nobody besides Sanders picked up any momentum. Only way they stop Sanders is by “following the rules.” So long as he hasn’t got the majority of delegates, the convention chooses. As a result, it may be more effective in terms of denying Uncle Bern a delegate majority for several of the candidates to continue their campaigns. Also worthwhile for each of them personally to go into convention with delegates they can “give” to someone else. Why would anyone drop out now unless they’re out of cash?
Usually who/whom mistakes are easy to spot, but this one seems ambiguous. I'd need the Chicago Manual of Style to figure it out. I used to think the quality of writing in elite newspapers was at some higher level, but I don't any longer.
Yancey, the only Dem candidate with any significant bloc of voter support is Sanders. It’s not a two man race, it’s a one man race and has been since nobody besides Sanders picked up any momentum.
Right, it's hard to understand all this talk about brokered conventions when Sanders is in such a commanding position. All indications are that he's going to win big on Tuesday and if that happens, it's over.
Rum-Dumb. It rhymes and is also descriptive of the level of thought of many of those who scatter their intellectual seed on the pages of the NYT. There's a lot of onanism of the dreariest sort there.
I have no idea who that person would be for the Democrats in 2024 or 2028, I just know someone will come along.
I spent a lot of time working with Democrats on health issues in California back in the 80s. We usually worked with Democrats because few Republicans cared about health. I met some pretty sharp Democrats. One, whose (Hispanic) name I can't recall, was really impressive but he developed an alcohol problem and kind of flamed out. All these years later, nobody has become an heir to Brown and he was getting older and older. Newsom is an idiot and Harris we saw last fall. I don't pay much attention anymore but you would think someone would come along like Jess Unruh or Willie Brown. It hasn't happened. Instead we get people like AOC and Omar.
There is a reason why Pelosi is still there at 78. And Bernie and Biden. Obama pretty much killed off the farm team.
PP
3 hours from a Palm restaurant. I would put money on that.
"Newsom is an idiot" Can confirm. This is what a one party gets you, political incompetence wearing raybans and a smug look. God help us if we have a bad health crisis in California because you can bet political correctness will come way before sensible policies.
In the Civil War around 150,000 white southerns served in the Union Army, many from East Tennessee or the Alabama piney woods region. Along with a few northern regiments, about 150,000 black served in the army, overwhelmingly serving in the United States Colored Troops, USCT.
Oh, and to put down the Union sentiment in Eastern Tennessee, represented by Andrew Johnson in the Senate, the Confederates hung over 300 prominent citizens. You can look it up.
"Whom" no longer follows a rule related to its historical case. It is now simply a cultural marker to show that you are educated, and that there is another form of "who" that only the cool kids know. See also, semicolons.
"Whom" no longer follows a rule related to its historical case. It is now simply a cultural marker to show that you are educated, and that there is another form of "who" that only the cool kids know.
"Who" can be used anywhere, but "whom" can only be used where it was formerly required.
Exception, after fronted prepositions. "For whom the bell tolls," requires "whom."
"Who the bell tolls for" is okay.
This is a register requirement, not a case requirement: the fronted preposition is formal register, and "who" for "whom" is informal register. You can't mix them.
Easier just not to ask.
Question of the morning: if Obama continues to play Marcel Marceau (i.e. remain silent), what does that signify politically?
Signifies that Moochelle will honor the United States with her candidacy.
If you think Bernie is the disease and Biden is the cure, you shouldn't go beyond 'Operation!'- level medicine. Biden going up against the collection of cranks and blowhards in the Dem primaries is bad enough- up against Trump Biden will seem like a very poor joke. But hey, why would I want the Dems to put up someone electable?
clint said...
I for one look forward to the new twitter-friendly emoji-textspeak edition of the Times.
I 🤩 🐦📰 -- 👏!
******************
If it ain't in hieroglyphs, I ain't buying it.
Prediction: Bernie and Warren both beat Biden like a rented mule on Tuesday. The two socialists will form a strong alliance and win against Trump, with Warren as VP and Bernie as a heart attack victim between election day and inauguration. The nation will mourn for about 5 minutes total, then get back to enjoying the Dow at 6500 and 15% unemployment, with 20% inflation and 25% interest rates.
I kid, I kid. The three together welded into a Megatron of Democratic wokeness could not beat Trump in November unless our current president has been dead for over a month on election day.
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন