Senator Warren, still my idol. Here’s some more excerpts from the MassLive interview:
… Q: Who is we? I hear progressives, and politicians in general, talk a lot about the middle class, but not much about people who live in poverty. Why is that?
Warren: One of the things I talk about is the way I divide the world. It’s the top ten percent who do very, very well; and the remaining ninety percent. And I talk about the interests of the ninety percent together, and make the argument that the investments in education, in infrastructure, in a robust economy, and in research are the things that benefit the ninety percent.
Q: So the breakfast waitress, and the dual-income double-professor family?
Warren: That’s right. Who are busting their rear ends but still can’t pull it all together. So that’s really the idea behind it. America once worked to build a lot of opportunity. And they called it the middle class; they filtered things through the middle class. But the truth was, opportunity was there for the middle class, for the working class, for the working poor, and for the poor poor. And you watch from about 1935 to about 1980, income goes up for everyone.
Q: Are you talking about Reagan; the 1980 mark?
Warren: Yes, that’s the 1980 mark. And African Americans talk about this as well. From the time we first started measuring, there was a black-white wealth gap; a big one. But we were hooked on the idea of opportunity. When the Civil Rights movement picks up steam in the 1960s and 70s, the black-white wealth gap shrinks by 30 percent. Then the shift to a trickle-down economy causes the black-white wealth gap to triple. So that’s the point. We can make a set of investments that work for all of us.
Q: You know some African-American political analysts say the progressive movement is tone-deaf when it comes to race. They say economic opportunity is all well and good, but it’s not going to make racism go away.
Warren: I talk about this in the book; about the economics of race. Which is a different point. It’s there in the first part of the story; how we built a middle class, and it’s there in the second part with trickle-down economics. But I also talk about it in terms of the politics of race. And the discussions around the Republicans; the dog-whistles on race, and then Donald Trump’s deliberate efforts to try to stir up bigotry…
That’s really an essential point — the Democratic Party’s problem is not that civil rights and women’s rights are somehow a distraction from “real” economic issues. It’s that, in our two-party system, some people who don’t want to call themselves Republicans are trying to turn the Democratic Party into a platform to talk about their issues (ECONOMIC JUSTICE! SINGLE PAYER NOW!) rather than the messy, open-ended coalition of “special interest groups” (urban activists, local machine politicians, immigrant workers, civil rights and women’s rights supporters) we’ve been at our best and most successful.
In fact, this is another nasty revival from the original Gilded Age, when Finley Peter Dunne mocked the Goo-Goos determined to purge American politics of ‘corrupt’ urban professional politicians (with the help of voter registration!) and replace them with clean-minded properly-educated white ‘native-born’ men. Just as it was more than a century ago, it’s always the people of color, immigrants, women — and working-class — voters who are expected to sacrifice themselves for True Progressivism.
(To be continued)
Jeffro
Disagree. We’re Dems – at our best and most successful, we remind folks that we cover both of these sets of issues for our constituents quite well. And we remind folks that Republicans couldn’t give a sh__ about either set.
Anne Laurie
@Jeffro: No, that was my point — we Democrats don’t have to “prioritize” economic justice over social justice, because they’re not really separate issues. And the unicorn hunters who are demanding we ignore “distractions” like Black Lives Matter activists or feminists are trying to enforce a false distinction, because drawing that dividing line would benefit… the unicorn hunters!
ArchTeryx
@Jeffro: The Republicans couldn’t give a shit about anyone that ain’t white, male, Christian, and rich. It’s really that simple. ALL the rest of us are just meat. Or at least, expendable.
JPL
OT.. Chaffetz announced a few weeks ago that he was not running for reelection to spend time with family. Then rumor was he was going to leave early now he needs surgery.
Why didn’t he have the surgery while congress was on recess? hmmm
Jeffro
@Anne Laurie: Um, what I just said – both sets of issues are important, we can walk and chew gum here??
@ArchTeryx: Thanks for the lesson, I was already there?
Brachiator
If the implication here is that there are only Democrats or Republicans, then I totally reject the argument. This actually makes it easier for purity ponies to argue that there is no difference between the parties and their rejection of both sides is the only rational alternative.
But even people who are less pure, for example Independent voters in California, have no problem in voting for Democrats, and punishing Republicans, when their own interests align with those of the Democratic Party.
NobodySpecial
This is word salad. No Republican is talking about things like single payer. This is another tiresome attempt to lump everyone who hates Third Way politics into the same dumpster. How about we talk about how Republicans who fled the Reagan Revolution have done a good job warping the Democratic Party?
guachi
Any time I or anyone else thinks economic and social justice are separate I remember what MLK was doing when he was killed.
Omnes Omnibus
@NobodySpecial:
No one said they were.
Schlemazel
@Anne Laurie:
THIS! If we make an economy that works for working people we solve 50% of the racism problem. Look at how much worse racism today when the economy is NOT working. Progressives & Dems were working on many of the other manifestations of race discrimination, like redlining, hiring discrimination and environmental discrimination (it is not accidental that Minneapolis built its garbage plant in predominantly black North Minneapolis & not a couple miles over in toney Bryn Mawr. They are not two separate issues they are one issue with two intertwined branches.
Kropadope
Any guesses on why supporters of those policies don’t want to call themselves Republicans? We may never know…
Woodrow/Asim
Damn straight, and this crap needs to STOP before we lose everything.
Quinerly
@JPL:
@#4….strange, indeed. The whole family thing was odd too. I think 3 children. All but one already out of the house. The one at home is close to 16 years old.
jl
I agree that arbitrary prioritization of social justice versus economic issues is a bad idea. Democrats need to work on both at the same time.
And that should not be hard, now that we have what appears to be government-by-idiot 25/8.
NobodySpecial
@<a href="#comment-6350976" rel="nofollow"Omnes Omnibus</a
RIF.
James Powell
Who defines True Progressives®?
We, the Balloon-Juice commentariat, do. I mean, it’s not like we’re going to let the people at the Great Orange Satan do it.
Omnes Omnibus
@NobodySpecial: That sentence doesn’t say what you think it says. It is awkwardly constructed, I will grant you, but it doesn’t say that Republicans are discussing single payer.
Sab
@Brachiator: I am a solid Democrat who grew up in an old fashioned Republican family. My folks supported fiscal conservatism, black voting rights, prochoice on abortion. These used to be standard Republican positions. Planned parenthood in my town was started by a white Republican who thought the blacks were overbreeding. Actually the white rich guys wereboverbreeding.Now the Republican party has been overrun by southern Dixiecrats.
Kropadope
@Anne Laurie:
On today’s episode of “Projection and other False Distinctions with Respect to Unicorn Hunting” we have guest speaker Anne Laurie. Today we also discuss burning questions like why don’t we have a pithier name. Tonight at 7.
randy khan
The fight about what makes a progressive is pretty significant. For the life of me, I don’t understand people who want to just talk about economic justice – and often in terms that are much more attractive to white, middle class people than to poor and working class people and people of color – to the exclusion of issues that are critical to women and people of color. (And “my policies will be good for people of color” is not talking about those issues.)
I mean, even Donald freaking Trump managed to talk about both immigration and trade policy, even if everything he said on either topic was incoherent.
SiubhanDuinne
@JPL:
According to his apostrophe, he has only one constituent. Seems right.
jl
What if the earth has fallen into some kind of Groundhog Day mode and we will only notice gradually.
Democrats will argue endlessly about Pragmatism versus True Progressivism (like most voters even care or would notice the squabble…)
I heard the Trumpsters and Ryan were babbling today about filing your income tax on a postcard. That gave me the creeps. How many times have I heard that? I looked at the calendar to make sure it wasn’t 1980 again.
Except Trumpsters were quoted in the news as saying “large” postcard. Sellouts! Traitors to True Conservatism!
Gin & Tonic
@Quinerly: I’m going to try hard not to Bill Frist this, but as the owner of a couple of pieces of very expensive orthopedic hardware, I have to be very skeptical of a claim that *after 12 years* his surgeons are calling for “immediate” removal. That just sounds really off.
Kropadope
@James Powell:
Only people wearing official Bull Moose Party paraphernalia.
Major Major Major Major
Open thread?
I saw a pretty moth at work today.
schrodingers_cat
@ArchTeryx: They are the party of the uber rich, the .1%,. Its the rentier party, not a party of the working people and by that I mean anyone who works to earn a living and does not live off their investments.
NobodySpecial
@Omnes Omnibus: So now we’re halfway to agreement with my point that that was Palinesque word salad?
clay
@Gin & Tonic: It means he won’t be around for the “health” “care” vote, or the budget wrangling, I guess, but why would that scare him off?
efgoldman
@JPL:
And it’s not like congress and the RWNJs couldn’t survive without him for a month or two
Omnes Omnibus
@NobodySpecial: No.
joel hanes
@NobodySpecial:
how Republicans who fled the Reagan Revolution have done a good job warping the Democratic Party?
By showing up and voting in primaries and off year elections.
The bastards.
efgoldman
@Brachiator:
But that doesn’t mean we allow non-Democrats to hijack the party – especially because, in the end, most of them won’t vote, or vote third party because they’re too pure for coalition politics.
Gravenstone
@NobodySpecial: You do understand that the inference is the individuals alluded to do not want to call themselves what they actually are – Republicans. In other words, they’re ratfuckers.
schrodingers_cat
BTW has the Senator from Vt said anything about the Russian connections and the ongoing investigations?
kindness
Well there are those that would do to the Democratic Party what the Teabaggers did to the Republican party. Remove any compromise. Democrats are a bigger group of groups who are less good about actually voting for the Democrat running than Republicans are. So we end up with a President Trump.
Yeay for us.
Butthurt Jordan Trombone (fka XTPD)
@schrodingers_cat: This dates back to February.
Major Major Major Major
@schrodingers_cat: too busy defending Ann Coulter.
Steeplejack
@Anne Laurie:
Your “purge American politics” link is missing a colon after the https. Fixed here.
dogwood
@James Powell:
I have no idea what “Progressive” means. I’ve always called myself a Democrat. I remember when the term came into vogue. “Liberal” became a bad word so “progressive” showed up.
Gvg
@Major Major Major Major: that is a very pretty moth.
NobodySpecial
@joel hanes: Yeah, except they don’t. Check exit polling. Liberals turn out. Less engaged voters don’t. It’s been that way for all my time.
schrodingers_cat
@Butthurt Jordan Trombone (fka XTPD): I mean the latest revelations. Whenever I see his name in the news, he is always bashing Dems, nary a word about the Rs or their leader.
NotMax
Have always, always has a deep and abiding hatred of the construction “trickle-down economics.” (Not to mention the proposal, institution or passage of any such labeled policy.)
Dogs whining at the dining table (might) get trickle-down nourishment. “Trickle-down economics” is shorthand for policy which by design makes beggars of all of us not a part of the top tier.
schrodingers_cat
@NotMax: Agreed we need to bring back Keynes, Marx and Friedman are two sides of the same coin too extreme to be practical.
Steve in the ATL
@Gin & Tonic: why would you assume that chaffetz is being honest?
Villago Delenda Est
@NotMax: The top tier is made up of parasites. Do with them what you would do with any parasite.
glory b
@NobodySpecial: ‘Republicans who fled the Reagan Revolution have done a good job warping the Democratic Party?’
Exactly who are you referring to? Who left the Republican Party?
Achrachno
@Major Major Major Major: It’s an arctiid moth — what a woolly-bear caterpillar turns into.
Major Major Major Major
@Villago Delenda Est: I think they’d break my drier if I put them in on hot for 30 minutes, though.
Omnes Omnibus
@glory b: Maybe he means Cole.
Major Major Major Major
@Achrachno: in NorCal?
Somebody suggested a harnessed tiger moth.
Omnes Omnibus
@Major Major Major Major: Why would you harness a tiger moth?
Achrachno
@NotMax: Wasn’t “trickle down economics” an epithet our side devised to attack the republicans constantly claiming that making the right richer would allow wealth to “trickle down” to the rest of us?
Gvg
@dogwood: yes it showed up when liberal got to be a toxic label. I have never been clear what progressive is. I am a liberal and a democrat. The true progressive fight annoys me, partly because it seemed to me that it’s people who ran away from being called liberal when there was nothing to be ashamed of. I can also say there seem to be different definitions and I don’t get it.
Liberal to me meant quit trying to busybody about other people’s private lives that don’t really hurt anything. In other words stay out of bedrooms, religions and such if it doesn’t involve stopping murder or child abuse. Especially stay out of other people’s uterus’s. Also defend civil rights.
About that time it got easy for any Johnny come lately politician to get elected by saying he was tough on crime and lower taxes. The establishment republicans welcomed them because they liked having more votes in congress but in my view that’s when they started getting stupid. The smart ones thought the new stupid ones were just reliable votes who would let the “smart” republican’s lead but eventually the moron’s were about all that was left. I noticed it after the Berlin Wall fell and peace dividend meant cut taxes was an easy sell. It can be a good idea to cut taxes when they have been high for decades of Cold War, but not forever. Cut and cut and cut and its now a really bad idea.
It wasn’t just Reagan, it was also the fall of the iron curtain countries. If danger concentrates the mind, the end of a long danger can relax into idiocy.
Major Major Major Major
@Omnes Omnibus: I don’t know but it seems to have worked.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@jl: There you go again…
Omnes Omnibus
@Major Major Major Major: Maybe it was for science.
Achrachno
@Major Major Major Major: Arctiid is the general common name for all the moths of the family Arctiidae. Tiger moth is a common name for some of them (like yours) and harnessed tiger moth sounds like the common name for a particular species. I don’t know what species it is. Nice moth though.
ThresherK
@jl: A large postcard? The kind that require…additional postage?!
Sounds like a ploy. Surely the USPS have an agent provocateur over therem0.
Major Major Major Major
@Omnes Omnibus: Everything’s for science nowadays. Yawn.
jl
@?BillinGlendaleCA:
My curse on you for today! May you click on this youtube, and may it never stop playing:
Paul Ryan “Imagine A Tax Form That Is the Size of a Postcard” We are working on it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bU44jvoFi8
Major Major Major Major
@Achrachno: harnessed tiger moth on wiki. Not an arctiidae.
Omnes Omnibus
@Major Major Major Major: Listen you! I marched for science while you were off doing odd things. Don’t you lecture me, you tosser.
Chet Murthy
Is it wrong to root for injuries? https://qz.com/969867/american-farmers-hate-the-donald-trump-plan-to-trash-the-nafta-trade-deal-with-canada-and-mexico/
NotMax
@jl
Which Ryan appropriated from Steve Forbes’ dead end run for the presidency.
dogwood
@jl:
Accountants will love that.
Kropadope
@dogwood:
The terms liberal, conservative, progressive, and likely several others have long since abandoned any resemblance of their actual meanings in our political discourse.
Let’s start with liberal. The stem of the world involves freedom. Isn’t an economic liberal simply a capitalist? Someone who wants a “free” market to some extent? And a social liberal wants people free to govern the social domain of their own life. Liberal is not, as the teevee will lead you to believe, a euphemism for socialist.
A conservative wants to conserve things. The status quo, for example, or at least enough of it to provide stability as the world changes. Not to be confused with a conservationist, who wants to protect the environment. Of course, one could be a conservative conservationist, guarded in their attempts to protect the environment.
Then you have progressive, someone who wants progress. Progress towards what? Progress how fast? Doesn’t seem very helpful without added descriptive terms.
Of course these terms aren’t mutually exclusive as they are often treated. Consider the Democrats who seem to be conservative liberals both in the social and economic domain. Republicans are radical economic liberals and social reactionaries, broadly speaking. They purport to be conservative, but want to conserve nothing. Rather they want to consume, exploit, and destroy everything in their path as they fight to make the well-connected richer.
Major Major Major Major
@Omnes Omnibus: You may have marched but I’m a master of science! Or so the paper says.
Steve in the ATL
@Gvg: I only got through book 2, chapter 6, of your post, but I proudly call myself liberal and progressive and a democrat. And hopefully we can overcome the bad economic of effects of Reagan before my grandkids have kids. And I don’t have any grandkids yet.
NotMax
@Chet Murthy
Just now announced that while on the phone with the heads of state of Mexico and Canada, Dolt 45 pledged to keep NAFTA intact.
Of course come tomorrow, who the heck knows?
Omnes Omnibus
@Major Major Major Major: I have a Bachelor of Arts, but I subsequently got married (and divorced).
dogwood
@Kropadope:
Exactly. These words have lost any true meaning. They’d become tribal identifiers.
jl
@NotMax: @dogwood: Ryan leans back in his chair, closes his eyes and looks like he is getting a blow job under the desk when he says it. Which found very moving. It tugged at my heartstrings.
Edit: Or maybe he is remembering that college kegger where he first confided his tax policy dreams to his frat rat friends, and they are finally coming true… true… true… !
?BillinGlendaleCA
@jl: I have hover-play, no need to click, that said I only lasted 5 seconds. It’s quite easy to have tax forms that could fit on the size of a STANDARD post card. No deductions(except maybe a standard deduction) and all income treated the same. I know that you understand they, being a purveyor of the Dismal Science and all, but Batboy* on the YouTube video and the members of his party don’t seem to understand this.
Fuckem.
*I believe that Batboy is a registered trademark of the Globe tabloid.
Ian
@efgoldman:
What is a plan of action for this? I mean it in all seriousness, not snark. Do we refuse to allow independents or republicans to register as Democrats? Do we try to winnow out our primary voters based on past votes? Do we not support blue dogs even if they win their primary? What do we do that achieves the outcomes you desire?
NotMax
@jl
Forbes even had a postcard sized mock-up made which he would pull out of his pocket and wave around while on the stump.
Achrachno
@Major Major Major Major: It appears Arctiidae has been reduced to subfamily under another family, which I’m not familiar with. From the article you found: “Arctiinae – tiger, lichen, and wasp moths” so, it’s both a tiger moth and an arctiid — but I had the rank wrong. Sorry.
Major Major Major Major
@Omnes Omnibus: Did that have any effect on the Arts?
Omnes Omnibus
@Ian:
Of course not. But maybe we don’t let people run under the party label if they won’t register and/or identify as Democrats.
jl
@NotMax: Ryan waves a glossy postcard too. So nyah nyah nyah.
efgoldman
@Ian:
The voters can do what they want, dependent on state laws.
We don’t allow an old fart who REFUSES to run or register as a Democrat to run in our primaries or speak for the party
There is a difference between voters and candidates.
Omnes Omnibus
@Major Major Major Major: Do you remember the ’80s?
Kropadope
@schrodingers_cat:
Yeah, like if you reeeeeeally stretch what he said about Ossoff in GA, and ignore half the quote. Also, if you ignore all his complaints about Republicans and the policies they pursue, you will come to truly believe, as we all have, that Bernie Sanders is history’s greatest monster.
NotMax
@jl
Again, imagery he stole from someone else.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@jl: The postcard is real perrdy, gota give ZEGS that.
Major Major Major Major
@Achrachno: I’ll never forgive you :P
@Omnes Omnibus: Didn’t Jon Demme do a movie about that?
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Omnes Omnibus: Do you remember the 60’s? There’s your answer.
Ian
@Omnes Omnibus:
How do we do this when in most states candidates qualify with signatures? Only a handful of states do the old school machine politician thing/
Felonius Monk
@jl:
This Bullshit on a Post Card has been around since the 1960s. Ryan is certainly unoriginal, if nothing else.
Kropadope
@Major Major Major Major:
Sorry, I won’t believe it until you show me another paper that says you’re master of whatever language the document is printed in, presumably English. The long form, please.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Kropadope:
He’s replaced President Carter?
Major Major Major Major
@Kropadope: I wrote a book, is that long enough?
clay
@Ian:
I can’t speak for OP, but I think it means exactly what it says… If one wants to talk about what the Dems “need to do”, then become a Dem and then we’ll listen. Influence the party by getting inside and turning the wheel.
But if you just want to lob advice at us from afar without getting involved in the organizing and outreach and hard work of party building… if you want Dems to do all the work but can’t be bothered to join us, then you can just keep your advice to yourself.
NotMax
@Felonius Monk
His first job was hawking baloney, and he hasn’t stopped since.
Omnes Omnibus
@?BillinGlendaleCA: Some of the 60’s. I was still five when they ended.
jl
@?BillinGlendaleCA: You should watch it. I think there is a shot of Uncle Sam giving you (yes, you. BillingGlendale) a dime towards the end. Whoever got the dime seemed very grateful, which is why if figure it must have been you, or maybe Baud.
Kropadope
@Major Major Major Major: LMAO, yes, I suppose it is.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Omnes Omnibus: Being that Major^4 was about that age when the 80’s ended…
SFBayAreaGal
Off topic: Take a look at the Google doodle. Pretty cute
?BillinGlendaleCA
@jl: Not gonna do…ain’t worth a dime.
ETA: Who the fuck does ZEGS think he is, givin’ out dimes, John D. Rockefeller?
Kropadope
@clay:
What if you’re a registered independent who routinely contributes, votes, and volunteers in D political campaigns? Asking for a friend….
efgoldman
@Kropadope:
You have been a Berniebot since he started running. Whether that’s because you’re delusional or a bad case of CDS or just stubborn I don’t know.
He’s not going to run again. If he does he’ll be embarrassed. The next person/people he runs against won’t be so easy on him on taxes, on his connections to Russia (especially if he or his advisors are even tangentially implicated in the current investigation), his finances in general, his wife’s finances….
He is not a savior. He is not a Democrat. The party has given him multiple chances to stop shitting on them. He has refused.
As for his remark about Ossoff: both he and you should know goddamned fucking well what happens to reporting about remarks like that. Don’t blame it on the press, blame it on his stubborn cluelessness.
Felonius Monk
Here’s the Donald Trump tax plan on a post card:
FlyingToaster
@?BillinGlendaleCA: He hasn’t replaced the one who shan’t be named, or when my husband in DC tells the cabbie, “Take me to the Butcher of Guatemala Airport”.
Major Major Major Major
@Kropadope: Personally I’d say we welcome your help but maybe don’t run for president in our party.
Ian
@clay:
I think my point is being overlooked here. I am 100% in agreement that BS should become a Dem or shut the hell up. The question at hand is how do we get Democratic primary voters to do the things we supposedly want them to, as opposed to doing what they want. The suggestion on the floor, ban Wilmer (who I once supported to my now everlasting regret) from running in the primaries, is a non starter. The reason it is a non starter is the DNC does not have that power. A point I brought up in an earlier thread- even Mike Gravel in 2008 got enough signatures in 2008 to be on most ballots. The only candidate that I can think of who failed to clear this threshold is Jim Gilmore in 2016. So given that the appearance of a Wilmer or Wilmer style candidate seems pretty unavoidable as the rules are configured, do we change the rules or what do we do to stop this (or should we stop it?)?
ArchTeryx
@Jeffro: Never hurts to state it over and over again. It’s what they seem to do so well. So I’m going to keep right on reminding people, iRL and here on the intertoobs, that Republicans are the party that simply want to burn and pillage.
jl
@Major Major Major Major: ‘our party’? As a registered Democrat, (we can do that in CA, you see), speak for yourself.
Any of you people ridiculously steamed that Bernie Wilmers ran for president in the Democratic Party primiary, in a way that is perfectly allowed under the current rules I have a suggestion. Change the rules.
Otherwise, it COULD HAPPEN AGAIN (the horrors!) Though I hope it doesn’t happen with Uncle Bernie again. But the door is still open to outsiders and others who cannot give the secret Democratic Handshake.
Omnes Omnibus
@Kropadope: if your “friend” want to maintain independence, then your friend should understand that there may be limits to how far he or she may go in participating in party affairs.
NotMax
Provocation?
Gian
@glory b:
Lincoln Chafee and others like him?
The GOP has gone off the rails in trying to pander to a coalition of religious nuts on abortion (remember 2008 McCain and his mocking of the “life of the mother” exceptions?) Randian assholes on taxes and the environment (dovetails with religious dominionists) and good old fashioned southern strategy racism plus a strange obsession with keeping women in their “place”
(and the anti Mexican racism from trump…)
Honestly it’s not the 70s era socially moderate (and now extinct) North-East Republican. If it was 1975 Bloomberg would’ve been a “liberal” republican.
/rant off
Kropadope
@efgoldman:
You have confused my annoyance with knee-jerk mainly fact-devoid criticisms of the man, not to be confused with the legitimate and cogently articulated criticisms, with some sort of infatuation or devotion. So first, stop projecting your state of delusion onto me. Second, I’m not even really that fond of Bernie. I’m a King Obama for life kinda guy.
But even though I voted for Bernie in the primary, you know who was the only candidate I donated to or called for? Hint, the initials are HRC. Just because I don’t hate Bernie or don’t see Hillary Clinton as the font of all well-being in the world, doesn’t mean I dislike Clinton.
I also like the tendency to completely ignore what I said and just go direct to insulting me. There’s a Latin term for that I believe.
efgoldman
@Ian:
The state parties control ballot access for the primaries. Wouldn’t surprise me if he’s pissed enough of them off to make a rule excluding him, if he runs, which I don’t think he will. He has peaked, I think he’s done. Before too much longer the producers on MSNBC will be tired of him and move on to another shiny object.
jl
Everyone here is out of date, out of it, un-hep. Sad low energy old people.Fighting yesterday’s battles.
For example Chealsea Clinton is tomorrows history’s greatest monster. Get with it, people!
clay
@Kropadope:
Well then, that would seem to qualify under the “getting involved in the organizing and outreach and hard work of party building” clause of my statement, wouldn’t it?
Although I would certainly wonder what your friend is trying to prove by not joining the party. After all, a main purpose of the Democratic Party is to represent its members (just like any organization). It’s only gonna change if a critical mass of its members want it to.
Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes
@Kropadope:
Hopefully Bernie has a stroke or an MI on video so I can DVR the moment and laugh my ass off in glee, over and over again.
Fuck that feckless, incompetent mediocrity, and fuck Vermont for sending him to Washington.
Major Major Major Major
@jl: I did say ‘personally’.
I see nothing wrong with a requirement for having been registered with the party for a certain amount of time if you want to run for its nomination to the highest imaginable office on the planet.
LurkerNoLonger
@Kropadope: I like Progressive, in my mind it conveys moving forward. Republicans are Regressive, trying to take us back to the bad old days.
Gretchen
When I learned that some slave states had vast black populations controlled by tiny slave owner classes, I wondered how that was sustainable. The answer was that the poor whites were convinced that if the slaves got anything it would come out of the little that the poor whites had. If they’d banded together, they could have defeated the slave-owners. The slave-owners knew this and kept the two groups at odds, competing for the scraps. The owner class is still at it today, convincing struggling rural whites that Obamacare is going to lazy blacks out of their tax dollars, rather than letting them realize that the reason nobody has anything is that the plutocrats are stealing it all.
Chet Murthy
[Please, don’t think I’m trying to incite a riot, and I’m surely not trolling. I -actually- want to learn something here.]
I’ll start with this link from Chris Hayes starring Wilmer & Tom Perez (h/t Russell Mokhiber at Counterpunch.
Russell, I fear, overplays his hand:
More fairly, Perez simply didn’t want to answer the question. But then, Bernie (I’m betting) doesn’t want to answer the question “what about all those people (a lot of them) whose oxen you’re going to gore with single-payer, Sen Sanders?” But the entire clip was interesting. I don’t watch either of these two pols much since the “Naqba”. My understanding of them comes from reading articles about their speeches. So …. here’s what I saw in that clip: Wilmer’s a “set things on fire” kinda guy. And Tom is trying to reassure the monied interests who back the Dems, that “it’ll all be OK, guys”. [OBTW, he was -terrible- at it. I really, really wondered why Tom&Wilmer hadn’t cooked up a back-and-forth schtick for Chris’ questions — I mean, they weren’t exactly unexpectable, ffs.]
Now, I -DO- still have problems with Wilmer’s “I’ve been there” statement, and similarly with the way that Jane Sanders deconstructed the mess in Omaha. So I’m not a Wilmer-bot. No way.
Here’s what I’m wondering: How much of this -mess- between straight-up Dems and Wilmer is just a misunderstanding? How much could be solved by properly coordinating the messaging of these two camps? I’m completely serious here.
Look: I’m not going to accept the thesis that a “class-based movement” is enough. BULLSHIT. One notes that “the correct position for women in the movement is horizontal” (from the ’60s). One notes that perennially white feminists have been able to do what they do, b/c women of color take care of their babies, clean their houses.
At the end of the day (at least on women’s rights), Wilmer has been as stalwart in his VOTING as any other Dem — I looked up his ratings here and found no signs of squishiness. I don’t know how to search for his (voting) stand on issues to matter to people of color, but if somebody could help me, I’d appreciate it.
Now, just to make sure you don’t think I’m a Bernie-bot, let me make something clear: In the past, I had some sympathy with the (undereducated) WWC, and hence supported some forms of attempts to restrict immigration of low-skill workers. TO BE CLEAR, the only way that can work, is (a) draconian penalties for employers who hire undocumented immigrants AND (b) green cards for such undocumented immigrants who turn in their employers. I’m a firm believer in the power of the Free Market ™ and the idea that we can somehow solve this problem by punishing the workers is as stupid as the idea that we can fix the drug problem by imprisoning addicts. BUT THAT SAID, since the election, I AM NO LONGER WILLING to make common cause with the undereducated WWC (the guys whom I went to high school, worked 2.5 years full-time in food service with). I am 100% in support of rights for undocumented workers in the US. Why?
Because Dampnut’s WWC voters think I’m not as much of an American as they are. They hate me because I am brown, and I return that hate hundredfold.
In the immortal words of EFG, “fuckem”. Concretely, that means I no longer give two flying fncks about their needs, issues, and problems (notwithstanding that they are ((only) putatively) fellow citizens). And so, the needs, issues, and problems of real, existing, undocumented immigrants take precedence.
OK. Too long. Stop now. I want to understand what’s wrong, and I want to get past sound-bites and snippets of speeches. Anybody got any advice?
Kropadope
@Omnes Omnibus:
It’s simply a practical consideration. If you register independent in MA, you can vote in whichever primary you like. What if the D primary in non-competitive? What if there’s a viable Republican who, against all odds, is not an asshole?
Major Major Major Major
@jl: We should all fight about how pretty this moth I found is.
jl
@Major Major Major Major: We disagree on making that a requirement. But the rules are what they are.People who are steamed about what the rules allow should work to change them.
I think it would be big mistake. So, if the folks so upset about the rules do try to change them, I look forward to arguing and contributing against the rule change.
Omnes Omnibus
@clay: You have to understand that Krope is better than all of us. He is independent and pure.
dogwood
@Kropadope:
My problem with his comment about Osseff wasn’t the comment itself as much as his ignorance about who Osseff was. That’s ok if you’re an Independent who doesn’t involve himself in Party politics. But he is traveling the country with the imprimatur of the Democratic Party, yet won’t even give the Party, who’s footing the bill for this lecture tour, the courtesy of paying attention to a highly publicized congressional race. He doesn’t even attempt to stop his followers from booing Tom Perez. If you want to join a tour like this, it seems you should at least commit yourself to fostering respect. . And if he sees Perez as an enemy sell-out, he should have had the decency to stay home.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@NotMax: We launch those all the time, they’re really pretty when they do it at sunset. That said, the DPRK might view it a provocative.
jl
@Major Major Major Major: Thanks for reposting the pic. I was going to comment that the moth was pretty and ask if you know what kind of moth it is. But then Ryan waved a postcard in my face and I got distracted.
Major Major Major Major
@Chet Murthy:
Gosh, maybe it’s got something to do with the fact that only one of them is actually trying to do anything that would demonstrate unity, and the other one decides now is the time to talk about Ann Coulter’s right to free speech?
Omnes Omnibus
@Kropadope: Sophistry at this point. And tiresome.
J R in WV
@Major Major Major Major:
Open thread?
My dad worked nights, and they didn’t have A/C back then. They had windows that cranked out, with screens. When moths fluttered into the screen, dad could lower his window, trapping the moth against the screen, and then slide open the screen, and capturing the moth in approved butterfly/moth collector style.
He would bring them home to me, Fortunately they were dead when I woke up, Back then I was a little bug phobic, having been repeatedly stung by wasps as a toddler. I was into collecting stuff, but never really said how uncomfortable those big bugs made me.
Your moth is very cute, though. In a kind of graphic way.
Major Major Major Major
@jl: I don’t really care about the rules that much, especially since that particular rule change would just be poking certain people in the eye, many (most?) of whom don’t really deserve it. However, if the rule had been in place two years ago, I wouldn’t have really seen a reason to change it, Bernie or no Bernie. There’s nothing wrong with requiring a little demonstrated allegiance to the party machine (which when properly running does get shit done, a party machine) in order to lead it.
West of the Rockies (been a while)
@schrodingers_cat:
Problem is though, S Cat, is that they get sixty million voters. The .1% may be the apex predators of the party, but lots of very ignorant ninnies identify with the Republican brand.
Ian
@efgoldman:
Wait, your suggestion is they place a specific ban on a single individual from being on the ballot even if state laws require that individuals who receive enough valid signatures to be on the ballot?
Certainly might stop him from getting a majority of delegates, but at the point the ‘process is rigged’ jackasses might actually have a point. And how does that stop a hypothetical 2020 Wilmer-lite or Bloomberg from doing something similar?
Kropadope
@dogwood:
He declined to put a label on Ossoff when he didn’t know whether Ossoff would want that label. That does not equal “doesn’t know who he is.”
This was discussed at length the other day, someone even put up a video. Neither Sanders nor Perez were on stage at the time.What was he supposed to do, rush the stage?
clay
@Ian: I’m not talking about Bernie, or any candidate, really. I’m talking about activists who complain that the Dems should do whatever, but can’t be bothered to work to make it happen.
If a Susan Sarandon-type wants the Dems to be less beholden to corporations or whatever, then they can work to get Democrats elected who will make that pledge. But if they aren’t going to put in that work, why should Dems listen? They’re going to listen to the folks that got them elected (which may, in fact, include corporations).
Kropadope
@Omnes Omnibus: Care to defend that with any sort of argument or you just gonna stick with the ad hominem?
J R in WV
@Major Major Major Major:
Your moth can’t be a harnessed tiger moth. From your linked WiKi:
So, Not in CA. sorry.
Chet Murthy
@Chet Murthy: [because logorrhea is contagious …]
I thought I should add that yes, Wilmer beats up on Dems. But then (in that clip), TomP was definitely not willing to confront issues that CLEARLY involve taking things away from the wealthy. YEAH YEAH, I get that it’s harder to promise group A things, than to promise to take things away from group B. But FFS, Hayes basically asked him (TomP) point-blank (around 4:30) “are you willing to tell voters that the rich are the enemy?” And Tom was UNWILLING TO SAY IT. Look: I get that Tom’s unwilling (as I noted at CrookedTimber, I have little problem with PBHO (PBUH amen) taking $$$$^6 for speeches to Cantor Fitzgerald or whomever).
So: I hear Tom, and I wonder why he’s so tone-deaf. And that makes me wonder whether the same problem obtains for Wilmer.
More than anything, I wonder how things would be, if in that interview (and elsewhere on the trail) Perez & Wilmer traded places — Tom answers Qs for Wilmer, Wilmer answers Q for Perez. And the other sits there nodding, smiling, etc. And follow-ups make it clear that they agree. Keep on dreamin’ Chet.
efgoldman
@Kropadope:
Fact #1: He is not a Democrat and refuses to become a Democrat
Fact #2: Even now, even traveling with the DNC chairman, he slags the Democratic party
Fact #3: He ignores two of the biggest core constituencies (POC and women) in the Democratic electorate
Fact #4: His “all concerns are economic” one note may be true on some factual basis, but it is not helpful to Democrats and it doesn’t speak to the concerns of most of us. It is politically stupid.
Fact #5: His statements that we have to cater to the mouth breathing, knuckle dragging, delusional, purposely-ignorant, racist, flying monkey Orange Shitgibbon voters in the hope that a few of them might be persuaded to vote for a Democrat is delusional and against Democratic values
Fact #6: The fact that somebody who has been in the house and senate for more than 25 years had no idea how he’d implement his fantasy plan to break up the banks, his self-defined signature issue, shows that his candidacy was all about vanity, not moving the country forward.
Sorry. I remember the last year here. You have no credibility.
Omnes Omnibus
@Ian: Okay, you are talking about mechanisms. Maybe we don’t have them tonight. We can work on them. Are we expected to solve everything on this blog tonight? Maybe a concept that folks agree on is good and the details get worked out?
Kropadope
@Chet Murthy:
Are the rich the enemy? What’s rich? Are there any good rich people?
Omnes Omnibus
@Omnes Omnibus: Deleted
Major Major Major Major
@J R in WV: California has never had a foreign species before!
Sure does look like the pictures though.
@J R in WV: interesting moth catcher.
dogwood
@Chet Murthy:
What the hell kind of question is “are you willing to tell voters that the rich are the enemy?” There are plenty of rich people who aren’t the enemy of the Democratic Party. Hayes is an idiot.
Omnes Omnibus
@Kropadope: Suggesting that your argument was sophistry is not ad hom.
efgoldman
@Kropadope:
Maybe in an unknown parallel universe. And Charlie Baker me no Charlie Bakers.
clay
@Chet Murthy:
Well good for him! The rich are the “enemy”? Jesus, what an awful thing to say! Oprah’s rich, is she the enemy? Is Bill Gates or Mark Cuban or Warren Buffet the enemy? George Soros?
Dems should be opposed to policies that favor the rich over the poor and working class*, but to claim that wealth itself is the problem is ridiculous.
*Democrats almost 100% ARE opposed to these policies already.
Kropadope
@efgoldman:
2 and 3 aren’t facts, but lies.
4 isn’t a fact, but an opinion.
5 and 6 aren’t facts, but opinions framed around lies.
Don’t talk to me about credibility. If I don’t have credibility with a handful of individuals prone to knee-jerk flights of fancy, GOOD.
Omnes Omnibus
@Kropadope: When and why did you decide to go full troll again?
Mnemosyne
@Kropadope:
So you’ve missed the recent screeching from “progressives” that it was bad for Obama to be paid $400K for a corporate speech?
Yes, there is a large contingent of Bernie fans who think all rich people are evil. See also the people who protested when George Clooney held a fundraiser for HRC because Clooney is rich and therefore the fount of all evil.
efgoldman
@?BillinGlendaleCA:
I wonder how many times Mattis and McMaster have told Peach Pestilence that a single cruise missile or artillery shell landing in North Korea will lead to the destruction of Seoul within a few hours.
efgoldman
@West of the Rockies (been a while):
They identify with the racism and sexism. The label is incidental.
Chet Murthy
@Major Major Major Major: M^4, as much as I want Ann to be greeted in her afterlife (FWIW) with being hollowed out and used as prophylactics by thorn-cocked Gulbuth The Rampant, even the ACLU supports her right to speak. Now, she oughta be met with massive protests, but that doesn’t mean she shouldn’t be able to speak. Now, Wilmer went too far (old man, don’t tell me I can’t heckle her — it’s the quintessence of protest to ridicule the target, old man, you old man).
Again: I’m trying to be as charitable as I can. I watched that clip (from my prior comment). And TomP came across as a corporate tool (yeah yeah, it’s b/c I want FRANCE NOW, bitchez ;-). I KNOW this isn’t the case. But the *best* interpretation was that he was there to say “Oh, nevermind this bomb-thrower, we got your back, richies”. HE WAS UNWILLING to call out -any- category of rich people as being the enemy. Calling out Lord Dampnut doesn’t cut it.
AGAIN: I note that I have NO EVIDENCE EITHER way about Wilmer’s voting record regarding people of color or LGBTQ folks. I would welcome being educated, and (heck) being called a uninformed fool (with links).
Felonius Monk
@efgoldman:
Not nearly enough, not nearly enough!
dogwood
@Mnemosyne:
Susan Sarandon is rich, but I guess she gets some kind of special exemption because reasons.
efgoldman
@Ian:
Nope. They require that ballot access requires registration in the party by a certain date. That’s all. Not directed at an individual. Bloomberg wouldn’t do it either. Either party has that right.
Kropadope
@Omnes Omnibus:
It accuses me of falsehood or deception with no factual claims to support your allegation of “sophistry.” Whatever it was, it was a lazy attempt to hand wave away my reasoning. Without any other facts presented, the suggestion left is that I’m being dishonest. Ad hominem, to the man. If you have a better term for it, let me know, but I think it fits.
Kropadope
@Omnes Omnibus: Those are legitimate questions.
dogwood
@efgoldman:
People who don’t bother to pay attention to pesky rules always claim the system is rigged.
Major Major Major Major
@Chet Murthy: I agree about Coulter too, but if I were (as his fans point out ad nauseam) the most popular politician in America right now, I imagine I’d be talking about literally anything else.
ETA: especially if part of my shtick was how politicians have been ignoring the plight of the working class for too long!
Omnes Omnibus
@Chet Murthy: Which rich person is your enemy? Define rich? FDR? JFK?
NotMax
@efgoldman
“Not if we take out Seoul first. That’ll show them commies!”
Villago Delenda Est
Wilmer has proven himself to be all talk, no walk, and I’m fed up with him. He has no practical knowledge of how to implement his agenda, no matter how compelling it might be, and he’s demonstrated a decided deafness to so many issues that are central to what the Democratic party is supposed to be about. It’s not just about economics; it’s about social justice for someone besides white male straight protestant redneck gun toting assholes.
Ian
@Omnes Omnibus:
I am not trying to solve them tonight, but it is obviously a conversation the Democratic party needs to have. Do we try to go the tea-party route, and get our desired members out of primaries, or do we throw the dice in the air and see how it lands? A year ago I would have gone with b), but I think that myself and others here have seen how that went down for us in 2016. Any discussion of procedure and machinisms is inherently a political question- how do we structure ourselves as a party? I took issue with efgoldman’s original statement
My question is how.
dogwood
@Omnes Omnibus:
All of them, Katie.
Kropadope
@Mnemosyne:
I didn’t miss it. I just didn’t turn my disagreement with that position into a religion like some people I might mention.
so…..what?
Chet Murthy
@Kropadope: Kropadope, we’ve butted horns A LOT. A LOT. So when I agree with you ON THIS POINT, please understand that it’s restricted TO THIS POINT.
YES, there are rich people who are worthy of opprobrium, and that TomP should have been able to call out: every form of rent-extractor. Martin Shkreli. Every fossil-fuel company that relies on govt subsidies. Pharmas that rely on USG for all basic research. Wall Street (gee, that’s not even -hard-). And the list goes on. What’s not on the list? (because that’s equally important, right?) Every entrepreneur who risks their own capital and livelihood to build something new. Solar City. Tesla (yeah, I got my problems with Elon, please don’t get me started, but he ain’t that pig-fncker Richard Grasso, FFS).
FFS, there was a straightfoward story he could have told, about oligarchs against entrepreneurs. And HE DID NOT.
[maybe I didn’t answer your question “are there any good rich people”. But he didn’t need to answer that. He needed to show that the Dems aren’t the party of entrenched oligarchy, while still showing that the Dems are the party of enterprise. And he just -punted-].
Kropadope
@Omnes Omnibus:
Omnes asks the same person similar questions to me regarding a post, calls me a troll.
By his own accounting, Omnes=troll.
@Chet Murthy:
You agree with me on questions. This is getting stranger.
Villago Delenda Est
@Omnes Omnibus: Donald J. Trump and everyone around him. To include all his cabinet appointees and in particular the vile parasites that are the Mercers.
Omnes Omnibus
@Kropadope: I said you were wrong. Logically. It was not an attack on you. It was a disagreement. Don’t do anything else with it.
Chet Murthy
@dogwood: Yes,yes, yes. Indeed, Chris asked a stupid question. But Wilmer actually answered it. And TomP did not. Look: I’m with Mancur Olson — who pointed out that the problem wasn’t “bandits”, but “roving bandits”. He noted that stationary bandits have an incentive to invest in their subject population, and eventually that can result in democratic governance. But roving bandits … well, “I(‘ll)B(e)G(one,)Y(ou’ll)B(e)G(one”. IBGYBG.
TomP DID NOT ANSWER, and he could have in a way that didn’t scare off any Dem contributor who wasn’t already gone.
Chet Murthy
@efgoldman: Charlie Baker. Looked him up. He’s against sanctuary cities. Fuckem (TM efgoldman).
Kropadope
@Omnes Omnibus: I’m not wrong logically, though. Every time I go to vote in a primary they ask me “would you like to take a Democratic or Republican ballot.” I choose. It’s marvelous.
Options > no options. Always.
Mnemosyne
@Kropadope:
I’m sure this comment made sense in your head, but I can’t figure it out.
And when you’re trying to argue that there’s no reason to hate the Berniebros, and people cite specific reasons to hate the Berniebros, and you then pretend you forgot what you were originally saying, that’s when people call you a troll.
Omnes Omnibus
@Kropadope: meh.
dogwood
@Chet Murthy:
I think Clay at 147 had the perfect answer to the ridiculous question. Dems oppose policies that favor the rich over the rest of the citizenry. Plenty of examples of republican plans that illustrate that point are teed up right now.
Chet Murthy
@Major Major Major Major:
M^4, I agree. He (Wilmer) should have kept his trap shut. I’m restricting myself to those subjects that are his core message. And even here, I just don’t get why he can’t get on the same page with the Dem party. Maybe it’s b/c he’s a narcissist. Idunno. It seems self-sabotaging, the way he’s going about things, it really does.
Chet Murthy
@Omnes Omnibus: OO, I’ve answered elsewhere, but felt I should reiterate:
The right answer to Hayes’ question (by TomP) would have been to distinguish between oligarchs and entrepreneurs. Between those who extract rents by virtue of their position, and those who create something new (howsoever tendentious that “creation” is). It wasn’t hard. It wasn’t hard.
Hell, I thought of another: (making up numbers) “35 jobs on the DAPL pipeline. 10k jobs in coal mining. 56k jobs in renewable energy)”.
Shit, the punchlines write themselves.
Mnemosyne
Also, since I’m feeling a little ranty right now, I want to echo Sen. Warren:
Being able to decide how many children to have is an economic issue.
Being able to get a home loan regardless of your race is an economic issue.
Being paid the same as your coworkers regardless of your race or gender is an economic issue.
Etc.
Chet Murthy
@dogwood:
YES! And yet, TomP didn’t have that answer! That’s what I’m getting at! It’s a little pate for the chairman of the DNC to not have a smooth answer to that question, eh?
dogwood
@Chet Murthy:
Is this tour over yet? I was hoping it actually would be unifying, but it really does take two to tango. And it’s easy to be popular when you aren’t responsible for any type of leadership, and your political opponent doesn’t dump oppo research on you.
Chet Murthy
@Mnemosyne: Mmem, yes, that’s EXACTLY right. What would it have cost, to get Wilmer to say those words? He votes that way already, ffs. THIS is what mystifies me. HE ALREADY VOTES THAT WAY. Hell, it’d be enough if he had his surrogates parrotting that line. I. Just. Don’t. Get. It.
dogwood
@Chet Murthy:
I agree.
ETA: I will be kind enough to give Perez at least the benefit of the doubt here because the nasty crudeness of that question actually thew me for a loop when you posted it.
Kropadope
@Mnemosyne:
I never argued there’s no reason to hate Berniebros. I argued two things, that it’s unfair to paint better behaved Bernie supporters with the same brush, as you do. And there’s no reason to obsess over it, as you do. That’s not even nuance, that’s just reading. Can you read?
What I was originally saying or have ever said has nothing to do with how you respond. See above. You and the point may, in fact, be complete strangers.
People call people troll for lots of reasons. Some want to form their own epistemically closed bubble coughyoucoughcough. Sometimes people are legitimately trolling. I’ve been known to do it on occasion. You appear to have taken it on full-time. I hope it pays well Some people are ugly, but that’s a bad reason to call them a troll.
Villago Delenda Est
@Kropadope: If you want to vote in the Democratic primary, register as a Democrat. If you want to vote in the Republican primary, register as a Republican. It’s that fucking simple.
Kropadope
@Villago Delenda Est: Can you explain to me one way that would benefit meor anyone else? Is there a Democrat cupcake of the month club I’m missing out on? Because, if not, I can already vote in whichever primary I choose. Your literally demanding I do something with absolutely no benefit. Sorry, no sale.
efgoldman
@Kropadope:
When you decide to be a Democrat, you maybe can call people names. Same for Bernie.
You are not. He is not. You and he and the bots have no say in what the party does, who it nominates, or what it stands for. Go fuck yourself.
clay
@Chet Murthy: Eh. DNC Chairman =/= DNC spokesman. Perez needs to be good at organizing, finding and distributing resources, crafting policy.., not necessarily delivering pithy responses to talking heads.
(You may ask, well why is he on TV then, and I’d say yeah, good question.)
Kropadope
@efgoldman:
Except for voting, volunteering, donating, calling members of Congress, and cetera.
ETA: Oh yeah, and Bernie gets to be in the Senate.
Would that I could, but alas…
Chet Murthy
@clay: clay, (1) that did not occur to me, and as with Nancy SMASH, now that you mention it, I’m OK with it. (2) in keeping with the OP, I wonder where S(enator)P(erfesser)W(arren) is on this (PBUH amen). Again, I could -so- get behind a “each answers questions directed at the other” schtick with her and Wilmer.
And I feel compelled to note (again) that I have no knowledge of his voting or positions on issues of critical importance to PoC and LGBT folks. Which forces me to rely on his public statements, some of which are …. objectionable. I need to dig more, I guess.
Major Major Major Major
@clay:
Remember Michael Steele? It’s kind of a silly idea to make your administrator your spokesperson.
dogwood
@Chet Murthy:
Sanders lost me early on in his presidential run when he expressed his dismay that black people voted for Barack Obama because he was black. That’s something Trump would come up with. It concerned me that a man who had spent decades in political office was so clueless about the nature of the coalitions that comprise the major parties. You have to be completely self-absorbed to sit in Congress for years and be so clueless.
efgoldman
@Major Major Major Major:
Or give him a make-work job in the White House.
Oh, hi, Rinse! I guess you left your pride in your other pants.
efgoldman
@dogwood:
And elected from a state that’s 96% white for all that time.
David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch
How bout the time he said racism is over because of Obama’s election.
Or the time he scolded Rachel Maddow saying minimum wage is a more important issue than a woman’s right to choose.
White, male privilege is a hellva drug.
ruemara
@Ian: Your question is very strange. If independents register as Dems, they’re no longer independents. If they decide they want to dictate who runs the party and what’s in it’s platform while not being part of the party then they should take a long walk off a short cliff, because they don’t have the party base’s best interests at heart.
liberal
@Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes: speaking of mediocrities, I know someone who helped make Libya safe for open-air slave markets and lost a major election to a reality-TV show host.
David ?Canadian Anchor Baby? Koch
@liberal: You mean Wilmer, who co-wrote the resolution to intervene in Libya?
Or do you mean the Wilmer who today is openly calling for “regime change” in Syria?
Villago Delenda Est
@liberal: Oh, sure. Let’s get the Alex Jones opinion on board. You can fuck off and die, misnymed asshole.
Temporarily Max McGee (don't count me out yet)
Were this a discussion of the struggles within a Church, we’d be calling it the, “zeal of a convert”.
AxelFoley
@Gretchen:
It has been ever thus in this country.
Peter
These clowns are too lazy or stupid to build their own party apparatus, so they want to hijack an existing one instead. Well, they can fuck off, and take Sanders’s purity-pumping asshole with them.
schrodingers_cat
@West of the Rockies (been a while): What I was saying is that the policies Rs make benefit only the .1%.
Uncle Ebeneezer
@Chet Murthy: He enjoys and gets rewarded for shitting on Dems. That simple. He may share alot of goals and values of Democrats but he has a deep-seeded resentment for the party and has made a career out of bashing it. Insert modified “when his job depends on him not understanding it” quote, and there you have it. The minute he gets on board with Dems, he loses his rabid fan-base that loves him for that more than anything else. His tone-deafness is a major part of his appeal.
Uncle Ebeneezer
@AxelFoley:
And even gave the poor whites a chance to raise their own status by becoming part of the slave patrols (which evolved into our police.)