Krugman: Time for Sanders to start acting responsibly

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Sanders is running more than anything against a corrupt system. We don't live in a pure democracy, of course, where every issue is decided by referenda. Sanders is a human being and therefore he is going to make strategic mistakes, but his message is positive. He has a bold positive message for the future.

Clinton, to me at least, represents the old thinking of politics as usual which has failed us.

None of this has to be personal. I am glad that both of them have made the campaign about ideas, policies, the direction of the country. There are many things that Clinton supports that are good, like sensible gun control. It represents a campaign about visions for the future. Both candidates are likely to take us in a better direction in general than the Republican alternatives. There remains the concern about whether Clinton can add to and improve on things that Obama has done. My biggest concern is what kind of foreign policy we can expect from President Clinton.

What people fail to understand is that it's not "politics as usual." It's frankly just "politics." Obama was something new and radical and different. Someone who promised to bring change to the system. And look what happened. The system works the way it works for a reason, and it's not going to turn on its head just because a raving naive politician wills it to.

There's no indication whatsoever that Bernie offers anything that has any chance of actually changing the way things are done. You may say that we'll never know unless we try, but trying for something when there's an overwhelming risk of it becoming a devastating belly flop is irresponsible, and it speaks to the reasons why Bernie is drawing support from relatively secure white folks who can afford to take the risk. I mean, what I'm saying is pessimistic because it implies that there's never any sense in trying, but... there's not. The American political system was always intended to be a system that facilitated incremental changes, so the best choice is a politician who knows how to work within that system to get positive things done. Bernie has been in the system shouting about his brand of radical politics forever with very little to show for it. His becoming president is not going to magically change things, especially when his fiery base gets disillusioned and runs out of patience after the first 100 days of nothing seeming to change. If by some stretch of bad fortune he wins the presidency, it will frankly be the worst thing for the left that I could possibly dream up. He has raised the bar so impossibly high that he will be unable to score any kind of win at all. Surrounded by the context of government and not high-flying speeches or 10,000-person crowds, he will be like a balloon that keeps spewing air from its blowhole in a slow leak. Flailing and desperate, he will be cast aside almost at once. Good luck Democrats.

Of course, Bernie doesn't actually care about that. He's convinced that his fantasy is bulletproof.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Sanders is running more than anything against a corrupt system. We don't live in a pure democracy, of course, where every issue is decided by referenda. Sanders is a human being and therefore he is going to make strategic mistakes, but his message is positive. He has a bold positive message for the future.

Clinton, to me at least, represents the old thinking of politics as usual which has failed us.

None of this has to be personal. I am glad that both of them have made the campaign about ideas, policies, the direction of the country. There are many things that Clinton supports that are good, like sensible gun control. It represents a campaign about visions for the future. Both candidates are likely to take us in a better direction in general than the Republican alternatives. There remains the concern about whether Clinton can add to and improve on things that Obama has done. My biggest concern is what kind of foreign policy we can expect from President Clinton.

What people fail to understand is that it's not "politics as usual." It's frankly just "politics." Obama was something new and radical and different. Someone who promised to bring change to the system. And look what happened. The system works the way it works for a reason, and it's not going to turn on its head just because a raving naive politician wills it to.

There's no indication whatsoever that Bernie offers anything that has any chance of actually changing the way things are done. You may say that we'll never know unless we try, but trying for something when there's an overwhelming risk of it becoming a devastating belly flop is irresponsible, and it speaks to the reasons why Bernie is drawing support from relatively secure white folks who can afford to take the risk. I mean, what I'm saying is pessimistic because it implies that there's never any sense in trying, but... there's not. The American political system was always intended to be a system that facilitated incremental changes, so the best choice is a politician who knows how to work within that system to get positive things done. Bernie has been in the system shouting about his brand of radical politics forever with very little to show for it. His becoming president is not going to magically change things, especially when his fiery base gets disillusioned and runs out of patience after the first 100 days of nothing seeming to change. If by some stretch of bad fortune he wins the presidency, it will frankly be the worst thing for the left that I could possibly dream up. He has raised the bar so impossibly high that he will be unable to score any kind of win at all. Surrounded by the context of government and not high-flying speeches or 10,000-person crowds, he will be like a balloon that keeps spewing air from its blowhole in a slow leak. Flailing and desperate, he will be cast aside almost at once. Good luck Democrats.

Of course, Bernie doesn't actually care about that. He's convinced that his fantasy is bulletproof.

Obama's idea of "changing politics as usual" was MUCH different than Sanders'.

Obama's moronically naive idea was that he would be "post-partisan" and compromise with wolvish Republicans in a system that is, despite his hopes, fundamentally zero-sum.

The "compromises" he got were cuts to social security and extensions on tax cuts for the rich.

He still channelled people's thirst for change into a movement that was going nowhere. That's no different than what Sanders is doing. You have to follow the rules to change the rules. Instead, he's inciting an angry mob that will help him break down the front door of government. Fine. Maybe he'll make it inside, but then the mob is going to disperse and he'll have no friends to help him with his quest.

He has done nothing to help build a friendly Congress, has shown no loyalty to the party he's using to make his pet project a reality (I use the word "reality" lightly), and is only going to create more frustration if he somehow manages to win, because he has exerted no effort thinking about how to actually translate his dreams into real change. If he had thought about it, he almost certainly would have re-evaluated his dreams to bring them down closer to earth (see his plan for free college that relies on the charity of Republican governors... ha!). So as it stands, the whole thing is one big con. And after 2008, I would think people would be a bit wiser to it. Instead they're just digging their heads further into the sand.