You Don’t Say

My brother is being resasonable about what he calls “The Brooklyn Dodgers,” namely Hillary Clinton’s and Bernie Sanders’s non-answers at the most recent debate.

WHEN A CANDIDATE for high office can’t respond to a simple question with an honest answer, attention should be paid. More often than not these days, that kind of behavior is just greeted with a shrug by the members of the elite media, but specific acts of evasion are worth studying. Because if something’s important enough for a candidate that they concoct a ludicrous non-response, there’s probably a sore point under there somewhere.

And when a candidate won’t directly answer the question, it’s also legitimate to speculate why that might be.

I’m not talking here about the positions on the issues that the candidates are taking, and whether they are logically consistent or wise. I’m not fact-checking. I’m just looking at evasive responses, and what they mean.

There follows multiple examples. I think this a model of what news analysis during campaigns should be.

PS. That said, reasonable surmise #2 appears to have been disproved by events? Could the reason Bernie hadn’t released his returns have been as simple as the returns being back home, the family is on the campaign trail, no one else had the key?

This entry was posted in 2016 Election, Dan Froomkin. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to You Don’t Say

  1. Vic says:

    This is a prime example of people attributing their own motives to politicians and wiggling them around until they appear to fit – all while not seeing the truth that stares them in the face every day. People tend to think that others think like they do. Especially smart people.

    The first rule of politics and understanding politicians is: EVERYTHING they say or do is to further either getting elected or staying elected. Everything.

    Politicians are not hypocrites. They are not taking positions that have some meaning in the greater scheme of things. They are only doing the “People’s Work” by coincidence while furthering their only meaningful of getting elected and/or staying elected. Until you start looking at things through that lens, you will NEVER understand what is going on.

    they KNOW that most people are not going to take the time to investigate anything further than what they hear in a sound bite. They also know that most people don’t follow politics AT ALL and just vote for whatever all their friends believe, if they even bother voting at all. So everything they publicly say is geared toward maximizing return among that demographic. They avoid saying much of anything, but people who don’t understand what they are doing AGONIZE over the hidden meanings and real agendas involved. The only agenda and getting and staying elected. It’s as simple as that.

    Why? Shouldn’t that be OBVIOUS by now?

    Take one of a million examples that is perfect here: Dennis Hastert. Forget the details of the crimes he accused of. They don’t matter for this point. The man gets elected to Congress after being a High School teacher with a net worth of less than $300K. While in Congress he gets paid less than $175K/yr. Yet in order to cover up his alleged crimes he can afford to pay $3.5 million of his near $20 million net worth.

    Think about that for a little while.

    Yes, I’m sure his lawyers and accountants have all kinds of legal explanations as to how someone goes from being a middle class HS teacher to a multimillionaire all while “serving the People,” but the fact is that this happens with ALL of them and it is a chief motivation behind everything they do. Being in Congress allows one to turn a small nest egg into one of the world’s great fortunes and lifestyles. Becoming President is like winning the lottery. You and your family are set for life. Multi-million dollar book advances, quarter-mil speaking fees, membership on anything you want. Access to anyone you want. This is one of the most corrupting systems in the world and it stay that way because it mostly harms nobody, and the “big thinkers”are so flummoxed by its shear obviousness that they can’t bring themselves to believe what’s going on.

    Which is ALSO why Trump and Sanders are so disliked by the Parties. Sure they both have serious faults, but their main one is that they can’t be bought like everyone else. They threaten to upset the golden goose that is Washington D.C.

    Your brother’s article is interesting, but is just another example of trying to make a complex explanation for something that is simple, but not desired. An informed person would simply laugh out loud at some of the things Hillary (for one example) says, rather than they to attribute some deeper motive than greed to them.

  2. Vic says:

    Well, I thought I’d try once again to actually engage you on your supposed blog, but obviously, you are not interested in having conversations or interaction.

    As one of the only people who EVER has anything to say here, let me be probably the last to wish you well on your dying place on the Internet. Turn out the lights when you leave.

    • Maybe in your family attacking your brother is an invitation to a good conversation, but that isn’t how it works in mine.

      • Vic says:

        This was not an attack on your brother, who I’m sure is capable of defending himself if he feels so slighted. I think you need to spend less time forming your social norms by the interactions with students you grade, and more time getting out in the world were people might have different ideas than you hold. Maybe you’ll see the difference between an ACTUAL attack, and a mere expression of opinion that is not also accompanied by deference.

        And yes, this maybe IS a little bit of an attack, because frankly I think its rude of YOU to shut down anyone who doesn’t agree with you 100% by claiming that they aren’t playing by some rules that you Yale Men all agree to abide by.

        Again, this behavior is why your blog is largely ignored. You can choose to change that, of just enjoy the big empty room you are in charge of.

Comments are closed.