snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Dec, 2018 05:29 am
Question (posted in another thread also):

When (not if - you know it will happen) crowds at Democratic rallies start chanting "Lock him up!", how should Democratic candidates handle it? Ignore it? Squash it and exhort them to "go high"? Chant along?
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Dec, 2018 08:38 am
@snood,
snood wrote:

Question (posted in another thread also):

When (not if - you know it will happen) crowds at Democratic rallies start chanting "Lock him up!", how should Democratic candidates handle it? Ignore it? Squash it and exhort them to "go high"? Chant along?


Something inbetween a knowing smirk and chanting along. Unless the politician is at some kind of meeting that's along the lines of a memorial for a recent tragic event or eulogy for a beloved individual then the pole should "go high."

AND PS:
LOCK HIM UP!
LOCK HIM UP!
LOCK HIM UP!
LOCK HIM UP!
LOCK HIM UP!
LOCK HIM UP!
LOCK HIM UP!
LOCK HIM UP!
LOCK HIM UP!
LOCK HIM UP!
LOCK HIM UP!
LOCK HIM UP!
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Dec, 2018 10:20 pm
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren Meet and Agree:

They Both Are Probably Running.



Published December 13, 2018
Quote:
WASHINGTON — Senator Elizabeth Warren and Senator Bernie Sanders met Wednesday night at her condominium in Washington to discuss their political intentions but did not reach any accord about coordinating their dueling presidential ambitions, according to two Democrats briefed on their discussion.

Only the two senators were present and they stated what has become abundantly clear: that they are both seriously considering seeking the Democratic nomination in 2020. But neither Ms. Warren nor Mr. Sanders sought support from the other or tried to dissuade the other from running, said the officials familiar with the meeting.

Ms. Warren sought the sit-down and did so as a courtesy and because they have a longstanding friendship that is rooted in candor, according to one Democrat close to the Massachusetts senator. Her office declined to comment about the meeting.

Mr. Sanders dismissed questions Thursday in the Capitol about the meeting, asking why a reporter was not asking about his successful push to have the Senate pass a symbolic resolution withdrawing United States support for Saudi Arabia’s military campaign in Yemen. And the Vermont senator flashed irritation when he was asked about it during an interview on MSNBC.

“I talk to Elizabeth Warren every single day,” he said, scolding the anchor, Andrea Mitchell, for inquiring about the meeting. “The fact that two senators get together to chat becomes a big deal, that’s a real problem for the media.”

But advisers to both senators made no efforts to play down the conversation, which comes as they move closer to making long-expected announcements that they plan on seeking the presidency.

Mr. Sanders has said he will “probably run” if he thinks he is the candidate with the best chance to defeat President Trump. Ms. Warren is expected to form an exploratory committee after the new year.

Both senators, though, are confronting signs that they will not enjoy an easy path to the nomination.

Ms. Warren has been sharply criticized for her decision to release a DNA test in October proving that she has Native American heritage. And Mr. Sanders’s hold on the party’s progressive base may be slipping as a new generation of Democrats like Representative Beto O’Rourke demonstrate early strength in polls and straw polls, such as the one conducted this week by the liberal group MoveOn.

The two would-be candidates have made their names as outspoken economic populists and are expected to run on similar platforms, with slight differences.

The prospect of two high-profile progressives pursuing White House runs has stirred concerns among some on the left that they could cut into each other’s support, potentially letting a less progressive candidate emerge with the nomination.

A handful of liberal lawmakers on Thursday downplayed that prospect, arguing that the center of gravity in the party had shifted inexorably left. But they acknowledged that if both senators run it could force the hand of Democrats who like each of them.

“When it comes to progressives, I think Bernie and Warren are in a different league,” said Representative Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, noting that if each of them enter the race “I’ll have to decide.”

In 2016, many of Mr. Sanders’s backers bitterly complained about the Democratic establishment’s attempt to effectively crown Hillary Clinton as the nominee, making it difficult for Democrats to suggest that any potential candidate step aside or that there be any attempt at clearing the field.

“They both deserve to make up their own mind,’’ said Representative James McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts. “It would be wrong for any of us to say, ‘well you’re the better progressive.’ We can all make up our minds, that’s what primaries are for.”

Since the 2016 campaign ended, Mr. Sanders and Ms. Warren, who have been friends since before either entered the Senate, have been running shadow campaigns that demonstrate both their similarities and their differences.

Advisers to each have gone to great lengths to downplay their nascent rivalry — highlighting Ms. Warren’s appearance on Mr. Sanders’s podcast, for example — but he was irritated by her refusal to endorse his presidential 2016 campaign and has bridled at questions about her.

Since running an unexpectedly competitive race against Mrs. Clinton, and becoming a global sensation on the political left, Mr. Sanders has exulted as the Democratic mainstream embraced central elements of his message, including his call for universal health care. But he has done little to broaden his political circle and has struggled to expand his appeal beyond his base of primarily white supporters.

Ms. Warren has, like Mr. Sanders, continued to present herself as a scourge of Wall Street greed. But she has worked aggressively to win over a wider range of supporters and has sought to draw a thinly veiled contrast between herself and her self-identified democratic socialist colleague by noting she is a proud capitalist.

She has also been aggressive in attempting to cultivate friendships in the party. Her session with Mr. Sanders was the latest, and perhaps most significant, of dozens of lunches and dinners she has had in Washington and Boston with party leaders, union officials and progressive activists in recent months.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/sanders-and-warren-meet-and-agree-they-both-are-probably-running/ar-BBQVgLY?li=BBnbcA1&ocid=UE13DHP
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  2  
Reply Sun 23 Dec, 2018 07:18 pm
There’s a huge offensive starting in the MSM by Beto surrogates against Bernie supporters. NBC seems to be taking the lead.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna951016

Excerpt:

WASHINGTON — Forces loyal to Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders are waging an increasingly public war against Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke, the new darling of Democratic activists, as the two men weigh whether to seek the party's presidential nomination in 2020.

The main line of attack against O'Rourke is that he isn't progressive enough — that he's been too close to Republicans in Congress, too close to corporate donors and not willing enough to use his star power to help fellow Democrats — and it is being pushed almost exclusively by Sanders supporters online and in print.


It's been the first flashpoint in what promises to be a politically bloody primary — one that has drawn responses from foot soldiers in the Obama and Clinton wings of the party — as Democrats begin to focus on who has the best chance to deny President Donald Trump a second term in the Oval Office.


Nomiki Konst, a progressive activist and 2016 Sanders supporter who is now running for public advocate in New York City, said liberal activists mostly kept quiet about their concerns over O'Rourke's record, including the backing he got from the centrist Blue Dog Democrats, before he lost a Texas Senate race to Republican Ted Cruz in November.

"They sucked it up while he was running" because they wanted him to win, Konst said. "But now it’s a different story."

The biggest difference may be that O'Rourke is now a threat to Sanders in the 2020 primary. Though neither man has announced whether he will run, O'Rourke captured the hearts and dollars of veteran Democratic activists, donors of all ages and millennial political newcomers across Texas and the nation in his Senate run.
————————————
Bernie supporters are merely saying they won’t vote for Beto.
NBC is using strongly biased word choice to paint Beto as a ‘war’ victim.

Getting started early this cycle...
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  3  
Reply Mon 24 Dec, 2018 12:13 am
Democrats to Hold a Dozen 2020 Presidential Debates


Published December 20, 2018
Quote:
The Democratic National Committee announced Thursday it would hold a dozen presidential primary debates during its 2020 nominating process, with the first to be held this June.

After months of consultation with Democratic stakeholders and media executives, DNC chairman Tom Perez said six debates would be held in 2019 with another six to follow in 2020, ending in April of the election year.

Anticipating a large field of candidates, the first two debates – scheduled for June and July of 2019 – would be guided by a generous qualifying criteria yet to be determined, according to Perez.

"We need more than polling to measure participation," he told reporters on a conference call. "There will be an alternative pathway to participation."

He listed the demonstration of grassroots fundraising as a potential way for low-polling candidates to make the initial stages, but stressed he was still assessing the exact metric to be used. The thresholds for the first two debates will be released in January.

Depending on the size of the Democratic field, the candidates could be split into two separate debates to be held on consecutive nights in June and July. Participating candidates would be placed on stages "by random selection," in a public drawing according to Perez, in an effort to establish fairness and parity at the outset.

While the exact dates and locations of the debates will be determined in the coming months, the six debates in 2019 will be held outside of the first four early nominating states of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. Those states, instead, will host debates in 2020 in the run-up to their primary elections.

Perez said the DNC would request that candidates refrain from participating in debates not sanctioned by the committee.

The early announcement of the 2020 debate guidelines is a clear demonstration that the DNC is committed to correcting the perceived errors and bias of the 2016 cycle. Last time, the DNC didn't even announce its debate schedule until August of 2015, less than six months before the first primary votes were cast. And the party only initially sanctioned six debates total, in what was widely seen as a way to accommodate the wishes of then-frontrunner Hillary Clinton.

Perez called the 2020 plan "the most inclusive debate process in our history."

"I firmly believe that the more voters that see our candidates, the more voters that will vote Democratic," he said.

The DNC reserved the right to adjust its plan after it evaluates the number of candidates who ultimately announce.

"We expect that large field and we welcome that large field," Perez said.

https://www.usnews.com/news/the-run/articles/2018-12-20/democrats-schedule-a-dozen-2020-presidential-primary-debates
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  3  
Reply Thu 27 Dec, 2018 01:41 pm
For Bernie Sanders, Holding Onto Support May Be Hard in a 2020 Bid.

Published December 27, 2018
Quote:
WASHINGTON — Some of his top congressional supporters won’t commit to backing him if he runs for president again — and two may join the 2020 race themselves. A handful of former aides might work for other candidates. And Bernie Sanders’s initial standing in Iowa polls is well below the 49.6 percent he captured in nearly defeating Hillary Clinton there in 2016.

Mr. Sanders may have been the runner-up in the last Democratic primary, but instead of expanding his nucleus of support, in the fashion of most repeat candidates, the Vermont senator is struggling to retain even what he garnered two years ago, when he was far less of a political star than he is today.

Sign Up For the Morning Briefing Newsletter

“It’s not a given that I’m going to support Bernie just because I did before,” said Lucy Flores, a former Nevada assemblywoman who previously endorsed Mr. Sanders. “There are going to be plenty of people to look at and to listen to. I’m currently open at this point, and I think the majority of people are.”

As Mr. Sanders considers a second bid for the White House, he and his advisers are grappling with the political reality that he would face a far different electoral landscape than in 2016. Rather than being the only progressive opponent to an establishment-backed front-runner, the Vermont Independent would join what may be the most crowded, fractured and uncertain Democratic primary in the last quarter-century.

There would also be candidates who are newer to the national political scene than Mr. Sanders, offering fresh energy — something many in the party prefer — as well as those who echo his message about economic justice and the corrosive effects of money in politics.

“Ironically, Bernie’s agenda for working families will be the Democratic Party’s message in 2020, but he may not be the one leading the parade,” said Bill Press, a progressive talk show host who was an early backer of Mr. Sanders in 2016.

Mr. Press said he thinks a candidate like Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio could carry the same populist message. “What I hear from a lot of friends is that a younger Bernie is what we need,” he said.

There is no doubt that Mr. Sanders, 77, would be one of the most formidable contenders if he does run. No other potential candidate would start with the foundation of a 50-state organization, a small-dollar fund-raising list that delivered $230 million and undying devotion from a core group of backers.

His advisers note that these advantages could prove crucial in a splintered field when only a plurality may be needed to prevail at the end of a long race.

Mark Longabaugh, one of Mr. Sanders’s top strategists, said he had no expectation of winning over the more cautious factions of the Democratic Party.

“Insurgent candidates never come back and become the establishment favorite,” said Mr. Longabaugh, noting that Gary Hart, after shocking the political world with his success in 1984, nevertheless had plenty of company when he ran again in 1988.

And some of Mr. Sanders’s most dedicated devotees are already moving to resurrect his organization.

“We have an opportunity to start organizing, and missing out on this moment is not an option,” Spencer Carnes, a leader of the volunteer “Organizing for Bernie” group, wrote in an email promoting the group’s first volunteer organizing call last week.

Melissa Byrne, who did digital and get-out-the-vote work for Mr. Sanders in 2016, said she’s eager to work for him again and noted, “We’re all more experienced and battle-tested.”

But unlike recent primaries when a second-place finisher ran again and won the nomination, such as with John McCain in 2008 or Mrs. Clinton in 2016, there has been no rush of new support to Mr. Sanders ahead of his formal announcement. Instead, the early maneuvering is striking for the large numbers of officeholders, activists and voters who want to wait to see how the Democratic race develops. And that roster of progressives includes many who backed Mr. Sanders two years ago.

“I think one has to wait and see who’s got the best chance mathematically,” said Representative Raul Grijalva of Arizona, Mr. Sanders’s first congressional backer in 2016, because, as he put it, “the insurgency is broader.”

Mr. Grijalva was hinting at a phenomenon that many Sanders supporters have cited: He is something of a victim of his own success.

The senator’s views on issues like universal health care and his willingness to shun corporate contributions have increasingly become not only part of the Democratic mainstream but also litmus tests within the party.

Perhaps nowhere is his success more evident than in the lineup of other presidential candidates. Two other lawmakers who backed Mr. Sanders last time, Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, are both moving toward long-shot, populist bids of their own.

And that is to say nothing of Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who watched as Mr. Sanders occupied the progressive lane that some on the left had hoped she would fill against Mrs. Clinton in 2016; or, for that matter, Representative Beto O’Rourke of Texas, whose unvarnished appeals on the stump and refusal to take PAC money in his Senate campaign this year recalled Mr. Sanders’s approach.

The other potential candidates pose a more practical threat to Mr. Sanders: They may also absorb some of his former campaign aides.

While he would retain the same senior team, Mr. Sanders may suffer defections among some key staffers who worked for him in 2016.

For example, Symone Sanders, his former press secretary (who is not related to the senator), said she may work for one of Mr. Sanders’s opponents.

“There are a lot of good candidates this time,” Ms. Sanders said. “I’m going to wait and see.”

Further, the political consulting firm led by three of Mr. Sanders’s top digital aides from the last campaign — Kenneth Pennington, Hector Sigala and Elizabeth Bennett — worked for Mr. O’Rourke’s Senate bid and are hoping to work on his presidential campaign should he run, according to a Democratic strategist familiar with the firm’s thinking.

Two veterans of Mr. Sanders’s 2016 campaign, Becky Bond and Zack Malitz, were instrumental this year in helping to organize Mr. O’Rourke’s race against Senator Ted Cruz. Both said they are eager to be a part of any “Beto for President’’ effort.

“I don’t know if Beto is going to run, but if he does I’m all in,” said Ms. Bond.

Mr. Malitz added: “I want Beto to run and would want to work on that campaign.”

But it is not just lawmakers, strategists and potential staff members who are hanging back from Mr. Sanders: Some of his supporters in early nominating states are doing the same, in part because they do not want to litigate the divisive 2016 primary again.

Ron Abramson, an immigration lawyer in New Hampshire, was on Mr. Sanders’s steering committee there and hosted a 2015 house party for him before the campaign outgrew those types of small gatherings.

But Mr. Abramson — who still called himself “a huge fan of Bernie’s” — is not eager for another Sanders run. He said he was especially concerned about the senator’s age given how physically demanding the job of president seemed.

“It’s not 2016 anymore — the considerations may need to be more pragmatic than ideological,” Mr. Abramson said. He later added: “There are just too many Democrats who don’t forgive him for not being a Democrat. I don’t want to go through the same type of divisiveness again that we saw.”

Mr. Sanders does still enjoy some bedrock support in states like Iowa and New Hampshire. Unlike some of his lesser-known rivals, his unwavering base of progressives will guarantee him a floor of support should he enter the race.

But the first surveys of Iowa caucusgoers indicate he has lost some of his less-ardent backers. He is polling in the teens there even though he has universal name recognition and won nearly half the state’s vote in the Democratic caucuses in 2016. And while he is in second place at the moment, he is closer to Mr. O’Rourke, who was virtually unknown outside Texas until this year, than he is to the early front-runner, former Vice-President Joseph R. Biden Jr.

Of course, Mr. Biden may not run, leaving even more votes up for grabs. But other likely candidates will work just as aggressively to step into that vacuum. And this surfeit of contenders may keep some institutional pillars of the left on the sidelines.

Organized labor, for example, is unlikely to rally around Mr. Sanders should another populist like Mr. Brown enter the race, according to multiple union officials.

“People are talking a lot about how it could change things for labor if Sherrod gets in,” said Randi Weingarten, the head of the American Federation of Teachers.

The uncertainty has created some awkwardness for veteran progressives, who feel a measure of loyalty to Mr. Sanders but also recognize 2020 may prove very different than 2016.

“I don’t know, I honestly don’t know,” said Joseph Cirincione, a foreign policy adviser to Mr. Sanders in 2016, when asked if he’d support the senator again. “I would certainly continue to advise him. Would I support him? I think a lot of us want to see how this develops.

“I think he should do it, he’s an important voice. But does he prevail, would he be the strongest candidate? We don’t know yet.”

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/for-bernie-sanders-holding-onto-support-may-be-hard-in-a-2020-bid/ar-BBRuEZH?ocid=UE13DHP
maporsche
 
  2  
Reply Thu 27 Dec, 2018 03:20 pm
@Real Music,
He won’t get my vote in the primary if he runs. Some of the other candidates appeal more to me.

He’d get my vote in November for sure though.
snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Dec, 2018 03:38 pm
@maporsche,
Ditto
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  3  
Reply Thu 27 Dec, 2018 04:23 pm
My current dream team: Sherrod Brown/Kamala Harris
Real Music
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Dec, 2018 04:27 pm
@snood,
My dream team is Joe Biden with Andrew Gillum as his running mate.

Of course that could change between now and 2020.
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  4  
Reply Thu 27 Dec, 2018 04:34 pm
@maporsche,
Quote:
He won’t get my vote in the primary if he runs. Some of the other candidates appeal more to me.

He’d get my vote in November for sure though.

Although I do have my own personal preferences, I will ultimately vote for whoever wins the democratic nomination.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 07:53 am
Some rustling out there, among 2020 trees.

Warren, taking steps.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/democratic-sen-elizabeth-warren-releases-video-possibility-2020/story?id=60086575

Sen. Elizabeth Warren announced Monday morning that she was formally establishing a presidential campaign exploratory committee in an email to supporters with an accompanying video message posted online.

“In our country, if you work hard and play by the rules, you ought to be able to take care of yourself and the people you love,” the Democratic senator from Massachusetts says at the start of the new, 4 1/2 video.

“No matter where you live in America or no matter where your family came from in the world, you deserve a path to opportunity,” Warren continues in the new political video. “That’s the America I am fighting for, and that is why today I am launching an exploratory committee for president.”

0 Replies
 
snood
 
  3  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 11:44 am
I just don't get the popular spin the MSM puts on the DNA controversy with Warren & 45.

So, 45 mocks her and implies she's a fake and liar for two years. Warren finds evidence that her claims to some native ancestry have some basis, and she makes it public.

The way I see it, she sure wasn't gaining any ground by silently taking the abuse. So it seems to me a reasonable response would be to prove her own claims, thereby exposing 45 as just pulling stuff out of his derrière as usual.

But the way it's spinned is that she really flubbed, and 45 scored?
I just don't get that.
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 11:54 am
@snood,
I'm not really following the DNA thing. Personally I think it is far more relevant that she's a deranged lunatic with weird political views.

But the impression that I get is that her attempts to justify her heritage claims only illustrate how preposterous they are.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  0  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2018 03:20 pm
I might be able to help understanding. The Trump thing is completely separate.

I have Cherokee blood. A lot of people in the south do—and I’m guessing plenty of people around the country have some measure of native blood.

When I filled out my college application, I could’ve done what she did, ticked the box, perhaps gotten a scholarship and improved my odds of getting in a school with stringent admissions criteria, but I would’ve cheated out someone else more deserving—like Warren did.

Also, it cheapens the historical and current experiences of native Americans to pretend that Warren and those like her are as deserving of the denotation as those who suffered due to their heritage.

Some people don’t like what she did. Has nothing to do with Trump.
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 02:29 am
How Biden Has Paved the Way for a Possible Presidential Run.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/how-biden-has-paved-the-way-for-a-possible-presidential-run/ar-BBRGJcZ?ocid=UE13DHP
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 05:42 am
@snood,
snood wrote:

I just don't get the popular spin the MSM puts on the DNA controversy with Warren & 45.

So, 45 mocks her and implies she's a fake and liar for two years. Warren finds evidence that her claims to some native ancestry have some basis, and she makes it public.

The way I see it, she sure wasn't gaining any ground by silently taking the abuse. So it seems to me a reasonable response would be to prove her own claims, thereby exposing 45 as just pulling stuff out of his derrière as usual.

But the way it's spinned is that she really flubbed, and 45 scored?
I just don't get that.


Anyone want to take a crack at explaining to me why Warren's showing proof of ancestry was such a bad strategic error?
maporsche
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 08:55 am
@snood,
I don’t think it was that bad, just unnecessary.

I don’t fault Warren for any of this (aside from giving something to her opponents). The fact her mother was legally/officially an Native American and she wasn’t because her great grand mother was only 1/2 NA instead of full NA seems like a minor bit of family confusion that happens to all of us (my brother has a tattoo that in part pays tribute to his “Germanic” heritage that my parents said we had...turns out after a DNA test...no German heritage).

I’m already tired of the 1/1024 meme (as slanted as it is, because 1/64 doesn’t look as good)
snood
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 05:41 pm
@maporsche,
To me, it was about the same thing as Obama feeling like he had to produce a birth certificate to shut agent Orange's mouth.
maporsche
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2019 06:44 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

To me, it was about the same thing as Obama feeling like he had to produce a birth certificate to shut agent Orange's mouth.


Yep. Pretty much the same for me too.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/26/2020 at 03:22:09