What is difficult to understand in terms of the Democratic race for the party’s nomination is “why many Americans seem willing to vote for a likely Democratic Party nominee who stands little chance of winning against Donald Trump in 2020?
I recently posed this question to some American friends and got a smattering of answers that may help NEO readers to understand the mindset and political realities of US presidential politics.
Begging the question further, “Just how does Biden maintain his poll numbers when it is clear, at least from my personal perspective, that he is as crooked as all get – and is likely the worst of all those democrats (of the lot) running?” His lies about his educational accomplishments are well documented, even from his own admission.
As we now know from recent impeachment hearings, the US State Department under Obama knew of Hunter Biden and his corrupt dealings in Ukraine, and it tried to keep a distance by turning a blind eye. It blows my mind, in light of his father’s track record and the son’s dealings in Ukraine. The father tries to excuse his shortcomings, based on being borderline senile, a liar and thief to boot. And he likes touching girls and women – and that put him in good company!
One respondent wrote, “The Democrats in charge insist on putting him in because of his previous experience, even though he is the weakest, or the most crooked, of the candidates. The oligarchs are in control, not the people.”
Interesting enough, but that still does not answer my question, only raises more. I then asked my son, who is a graduate student in the United States, University of Kentucky, and his answer was just as unenlightening, “I don’t know. I haven’t met a single Biden supporter, however, keep in mind that Lexington is a college town. I’m guessing there must be nicer people in their 40’s who don’t know better.”
American polling techniques are designed, purportedly, to measure what the vast majority of the population thinks. However, those numbers can be played upon, by manipulating how respondents are selected and which party members are polled more, as reported by Forbes.
One only has to consider the results of the Trump vs. Clinton race in 2016 to understand that polls are useful tools to deceive the public. It is, therefore, no wonder that the flaws of polling and interpretations are becoming ever more obvious. You will notice that I have not put any poll numbers in this article, as I don’t trust them.
ut what is clear is that the vast majority of the population no longer cares about the next year’s Democratic primary. That should be better reflected in presidential political polling. But it is well reflected in the fact that people just don’t show up to vote.
The chattering classes, the people that I talked to in researching this article, they are living and breathing it … but the vast majority of humanity still doesn’t care. When these polls are done, the poll takers supposedly contact people at random, and the random average American doesn’t care.
Joe Biden, a former vice president, is slightly more famous than Bernie Sanders, a former presidential candidate. That’s all that these polls are measuring. And that’s all that they have the ability to measure. But one must keep in mind that nearly half of Americans don’t even bother to vote anymore.
As another respondent, (middle aged) explained further, “if there was somebody running who was actually famous, an athlete or an actor or a musician, the poll would show them winning by a factor of 10 to 1. But that certainly doesn’t mean that they would win the election next year.”
It is becoming apparent that who wins depends on money and who the establishment is backing, and that includes the backing of the MSM as well—as the power makers are also the ones who control the media.
I wouldn’t say Biden is unchallenged. He is what the party elites want but they will be much more careful this time after they, the DNC, stole the nomination in 2016 from Sanders. But it backfired, and this might help Trump get another term at the office.
For some democrats Biden represents a time that is reminiscent of the time when Obama was the president—at least they have convinced themselves of that. They are disturbed by Trump, and Biden appears to be the safest bet to them. Many of them believe that a moderate candidate is the best way to beat Trump on Election Day. Those same Democrats, also to include much of the older generations, who vote for a given candidate party out of habit— without looking at current events or taking into consideration the latest allegations.
And “the crooked-er-the better,” as for reasons beyond my grasp, the Democratic Party thinks Biden is the only one who has a chance of winning in 2020.
Repeat Performance of 2016
In my opinion, he is the Democrat most likely to lose to Trump in the same way that Clinton lost in 2016. It is likely a combination of PR, some nostalgia, as it is looking like history is to repeat itself, and with impeachment hearings losing steam, and there is no no Republican who appears to be able to challenge him. Current allegations against Trump, even if half true, are working to the detriment of what appears to be a lynch mob of democrats. Hence Trump may continue be in the game in 2020, as who is there to oppose him for the Republican nomination.
When in reality, the lady Army Major, Gabbard, is the only one who can beat Trump in a nose-to-nose horse race. She really scares the shit out of the deep state. It is, therefore understandable why Gabbard is NOT the candidate of choice for the DNC.
She speaks her mind about the DNC and Hillary Clinton. And so she has been branded unacceptable. She also turned her back on the DNC back in 2016, walking away, when she realized how Hillary was rigging the election, stealing the Democratic nomination and White House from Bernie Sanders.
Hence Gabbard is a likely choice over Biden in terms of the ability to beat Trump. But still I don’t understand why she is not polling higher; especially after Hillary Clinton basically endorsed her by calling her a Russian asset.
Hillary is actually doing something constructive for the first time in her sordid career – by giving an unexpected and much-needed boost to Tulsi Gabbard who is the only candidate who challenges the military-industrial complex and the never-ending war agenda.
To add injury to insult, she upsets the status quo by criticizing foreign entanglements supported by both political parties, and is good at bashing both Israel and Saudi Arabia for their human rights abuses. Again, this may alienate many Americans but may draw in as many if not more as it drives away in the right circumstances. However, will it be enough to get her nominated?
Gabbard is not backed by the deep state, end of story, Biden is.
And that is just how the political system operates. But is largely because of PR, not that they actually don’t know Biden’s sordid history, and much wickedness transpired before Ukraine and allegations of corruption against him and his son were exposed!
I am sure some of you are still confused, as in a political system where the candidate who does not always get the most votes on the national level can be elected president. It all depends on the Electoral College, and that vote tally balances the power of bigger states with smaller when it comes to deciding who gets to sit in the White House.
In places like Kentucky and West Virginia, all that matters are job numbers and the illusion that most people are living the “American Dream” and if the stock market is high than all is good in never-never land.
In parts of the US, in the Northeast many think Elisabeth Warren will get the nomination, and if she does, does that mean she stands a chance against Trump, and to what degree does local/regional politics impacts national politics?
Keep in mind that many people in different parts of the country only see the world and the political reality from their own perspective, and from a regional standpoint dependency. The West Coast and Northeast decides more often than not as who will be the Democratic nomination. Keep in mind America’s heartland, and states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kentucky, and much of the Midwest and Mountain States, are traditionally conservative in their politics and values.
It was these states that put Trump into office over Hillary Clinton in 2014. It would be nice to believe that the best, most qualified candidate will prevail, based on informed voter choice. But keep in mind that more often than not it is not who people vote for that matters the most, but who they are voting against, often the lesser of several evils.
Not voting is also a kind of voting in many respects. It is a vote against a system that more and more Americans are begin to understand that everything is bought and sold, and is riddled with corruption. It is difficult to understand and identify who is behind influencing voters with fake polls, making them think that Biden is most certainly the nominee.
As for Gabbard and Bernie, they scare the shit out of people in power and would appeal to the masses but…a democracy needs educated people and the unwashed masses who are stupid and worn out with crony capitalism and corruption fatigue.
Most Americans are clueless. They are even naive enough to think they still live in a democracy. That is why it makes total sense. How else can it be explained that Gabbard is not gaining more in the polls?
Henry Kamens, columnist, expert on Central Asia and Caucasus, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.