Mostly nothing.
But actually, it is not only the clearest signal to me that Joe Biden is not running for president, it also says that Hillary knows it.
With Obama and Republicans already being odd bed fellows on the TPP, what good does climbing in to endorse or opening your mouth to oppose, do for Clinton's campaign?
The answer is mostly nothing.
Those who support Clinton will likely do so whether she was in or out on the TPP. Those who oppose her but would vote for her over the GOP options are likely those thousands of folks flooding in to see Bernie Sanders speak, a flood unlike any other candidate is experiencing including Donald Trump who does at least draw enough folks to make the room look full.
During Bernie's events, his mass appeal has forced his curious onlookers and ardent supporters into outdoor overflow areas with widescreen television views while raising millions on nickel and dime donations from the same eager masses.
Hillary got killed for having one particularly empty roomed event, and Jeb Bush has resorted to the quiet room where his big giant 'Jeb! 2016' campaign board fills half of it. Granted, neither of these known entities actually need the extra name recognition, but neither does Trump.
Trump is slowly losing his campaign crowd panache, and is quick to categorize his crowds alongside Sanders who is clearly the current crowned king of turnout.
Feel The Bern Now?
Hillary can't run from her plummeting poll numbers nor can she deny who and what is causing all of this. Bernie Sanders is doing what even I, a proud Socialist, doubted he could do; owning those fictional independent voters, that wide swath of the electorate that votes rather predictably even if they hate party affiliation.
What Sanders must also do is attract just enough right leaning independents to make his candidacy possible, pulling out the volume of commoners that it will take to give Hillary another horrific primary failure.
Conventional wisdom says that Hillary is feeling her own burning desire to overcome the mistakes that caused her to come up short the last time around. That same conventional wisdom chimed in on the rise of Trump and has been wrong every time. In other words, nothing feels conventional this time around, especially the Bern.
If Trump keeps it up, Bernie and Hillary might actually have hope with the massively growing Libertarian wing of the GOP, which is the new vocal minority. Libertarians are not beholden to the religious aspects of the GOP agenda favoring a self reliance mentality that finds them typically skeptical of everything including two party politics. .
In this area of interest, Libertarian skepticism finds itself allied with the Progressive skepticism like that of Sanders or Senator Elizabeth Warren, the leaders of modern populism. Neither Sanders or Warren are down for the TPP, but their opposition of it isn't any more significant to the losing side than is Hillary Clinton now that she has joined them there.
Not being for the TPP will eventually look a lot like not being for the Iran deal. Capitalism has expanded thoroughly enough for other nations to recognize the importance of cooperation and regulations to protect public health and insure corporate profits, and Iran has long since been a nation that opposes the old war mentalities that foster nuclear proliferation, seeing nukes as an antiquated weapon.
Hillary can't deny her plummeting poll numbers nor can she deny who and what is causing all of this. Bernie Sanders is doing what even I, a proud Socialist, doubted he could do; owning the fictional independent voters, that wide swath of the electorate that votes rather predictably even if they hate party affiliation.
 |
| "I oppose this deal" for whatever that's worth. |
Capitalism is nothing if not pragmatic, and our feeble attempts to insure democracy in our own homeland (without the Voters Rights Act?), while also trying to spread it abroad have fallen woefully short of reaching the mass epidemic that capitalism has.
We've developed into a generation of Americans who think that the Made In America label still matters more than Show Me The Money. If corporations can find cheaper means of production, they find greater hope of longevity in a competitive world where cheap labor won't suddenly die and go away just because a few Americans insist on trying to outwork third world countries.
Change The Model?
We will always be in competition for the leanest means of production/profit because companies that survive also maintain consistent profit/production. High priced workers have to double production amounts just to achieve profit/production to the capacity of those who earn less than half of what you do, thus WE (American workers) disrupt the only model for measuring the success of capitalism that we know- profit and loss. Unless we change the model, we all remain enslaved to its design.
Our current model demands that WE expand our reach, and that we do so while protecting corporate profits a bit better than we are doing right now. For the most part, the TPP will do just that, working to improve copyright protections and product ownership rights that are basically ignored or non-existent in competing economies. U.S. Pharmaceutical companies, for example, are the sole profiteers of a new drug for 12 years before the market can compete by creating generics that are cheaper.
If an approved drug is seen as being beneficial to the world, not a lot of good things come from a 12 year corporate monopoly on that drug except price gouging and profit stashing.
12 years is a timeline that even the Obama administration thinks is too long, so the TPP negotiations are intended to move it closer to the 5-8 year range that is more common to international standards. Although the pharmaceutical industry wanted stronger protections than this, any negotiated compromise will help drug companies who currently see generic versions of their drugs hitting foreign markets within a year or less of their release in the U.S.
To stand in opposition of the purpose of the TPP, or the Iran Deal for that matter, is essentially immaterial because it comes down to whether or not the countries involved in the negotiations will commit to being more fair and more accessible as a result as these signed negotiations insist they all will do.
If the assumption of fairer trade practices is also connected with a promise of expanded access to corporate opportunities in each market, this is a win win that is larger and more significant than the ink that created it. Both of these deals amount to a promise to work together for the benefit of all involved, including the ability to respond if commitments aren't met.
Whether expanded access to American capitalism eventually leads to corporate outsourcing of production is a foregone conclusion since corporations have long since acted to insure the growth of production/profit, and very little will ever change that capitalistic reality.
With or without the TPP, large corporations search for global trends and respond, or they are swallowed whole by the leaders of the trends. Don't be surprised at how quickly Iran is involved in certain aspects of TPP commerce.
Hillary knows all of this because her husband authored that last trade deal (NAFTA) which expanded the trend of global expansion and outsourcing, causing US to not want another magic trade deal, no matter what it is supposedly intended to magically achieve.
So why did Clinton bother coming out either way?
Standing against the TPP is Clinton's best hope of minimizing the impact of Bernie Sanders.
Period! (with an exclamation point)
As I mentioned before, it is also the first sure sign that Biden is likely a spectator for the 2016 race. Hillary is in no position to want or need to show her hand on this deal and risk losing an Obama endorsement that will likely be the only reason she wins. But she's doing it anyway.
Satisfying a voracious press core didn't force Hillary's hand before the polls aided them, and the polls say that Clinton's numbers and her pathway to the victory are being impacted by the segment of swing voters (that Bernie is owning) who she will ultimately need regardless of the eventual GOP nominee since most of the GOP front runners are in favor of the TPP, further alienating yet another segment of their potential voters.
Hillary's hope, and every presidential candidates hope for the foreseeable future, hangs on that sacred swing voter. Clinton is positioning herself for those who won't have Bernie as their final choice (unless he goes 3rd party), can't imagine standing behind Trump as the GOP nominee, and want a candidate that hasn't agreed to any "trade deals", a populist pseudonym for shipping more American jobs overseas.
Enter Hillary Clinton who would denounce TPP, NAFTA and Bill Clinton too if it helps her win the White House. "As of today I am not in favor of what I have learned about it" said Clinton (CNN).
Translation: This Bernie Sanders thing is serious and there are already way too many strange bedfellows for the TPP as it is.
Unlike Donald Trump, who can't win and can only lead the conversation into directions most of us wish it wouldn't go,Bernie Sanders can't win either, but has changed the conversation.
Maybe for good.
No comments:
Post a Comment