This crap, again. From the libertarian/center-right Atlantic, “How Sanders and Warren Will Decide Which One Runs for President”:
… [A]s the 76-year-old Sanders positions himself toward a second run for president, it’s Warren who again looms largest over his designs. At a January strategy meeting at the Washington, D.C., apartment of the aide Ari Rabin-Havt, Sanders acknowledged to confidantes in the room that the biggest threat to his pursuit of the 2020 nomination would be the 69-year-old former Harvard Law professor, according to a person familiar with the discussion.
As the two most recognizable faces of the progressive movement, Sanders and Warren are natural allies on a host of liberal causes, none more so than the economic inequalities that strain the nation. And yet each side’s camp believes that when it comes to the next presidential contest, the Democratic primary is only big enough for one of them…
Sanders advisers and allies believe he’s earned the right of first refusal: He was the runner-up to Clinton, galvanized a fresh flock of young voters, and fundamentally reframed the issue matrix for a hyper-progressive party going forward. He would start with a leg up: a nationally tested organization with the hardened experience of one presidential run already under its belt, an email list of 7 million proven donors, and the ability to raise hundreds of millions of dollars. (Tim Tagaris, Sanders’s digital–fund-raising guru, has privately floated a range of between $275 million and $300 million for a primary campaign, one aide recalls.) A common refrain bandied about in Bernieland is that Sanders won at least 40 percent of the primary vote in 37 states…
Meanwhile, those in Warren’s world, including outside activists who are encouraging a 2020 bid, note that she’d be the natural person to whom the older Sanders could pass the torch. They say she’d enjoy a higher ceiling of support with a broader constituency, due to her fortified relationships with both the progressive and more establishment wings of the party. (Warren’s team declined to comment on the record about Sanders, though her spokeswoman, Kristen Orthman, told me that “Elizabeth has great respect for Bernie, his leadership, and the grassroots organization he has built.”)
The senator from Massachusetts is also more strategic in her fights, her allies say, adding that many Clintonites still hold a bitter grudge against Sanders. “Warren has achieved the remarkable feat of increasing her cred with the base over the years while also increasing her power inside the Beltway,” says Adam Green, a co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee who has all but endorsed a Warren White House bid. And Warren’s careful nourishment of her relationships—with fellow senators, state and federal regulators, and watchdog groups—gives her “by far the largest national network of any presidential candidate,” Green added…
While I (and I suspect Senator Warren) would prefer that she remain in Congress for the rest of both our lifetimes, I also suspect she’s preparing for (resigned to) running in the 2020 presidential primaries if there are no better alternatives. If, for some combination of unimaginable reasons, every good younger Democratic candidate (Harris, Booker, Gillibrand, et al) fails to enter the race, and the only competition is some no-hoper like the junior Senator from Vermont. Meanwhile, the general media perception that she must be running — because who wouldn’t, in her position? — simultaneously helps spotlight her target issues of financial malpractice and Republican corruption, while drawing Wingnut Wurlitzer fire that would otherwise be expended on more vulnerable Democratic candidates.
Consider last week’s much-forwarded Buzzfeed love letter to the BernieBros:
… If Bernie Sanders is leading a political revolution, then Elizabeth Warren is waging a different kind of fight. It’s more tactical and methodical. It’s robust, specific government regulation and oversight — on your student loans, your credit card fees, your banks. In every case, her objective is the same: to change the way Democrats think about economic policy and reshape it in the process.
In Warren’s office, she and her aides make plans in the span of months and years, not weeks. “Impact,” a word you hear a lot from the people around the senator, is a constant pursuit, achieved through a careful combination of public confrontation and private negotiation. When critics accused her of grandstanding, picking fights with bank regulators in Senate hearings — exchanges that her office would circulate in YouTube clips that garnered millions of views — Warren was energizing supporters from groups like MoveOn.org and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which in turn grew her platform, which in turn grew her leverage.
In 2011, the strategic approach helped her create the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. In 2013, her push to expand Social Security functioned as a broader effort to shift the “Overton window” on the issue — making “chained CPI,” shorthand for a proposal opposed by progressives to change the way the government accounts for cost of living, a less tenable option among mainstream Democrats. And in 2014, Warren and her aides were already engaged in a plan to influence Hillary Clinton’s campaign early on and in private, creating pressures and incentives that might sway Clinton’s thinking on the economy — all in an effort to shape the eventual makeup of the advisers in her 2017 transition team and administration…
In a political moment dominated by Trump on one side and Sanders on the other, how Warren now defines her own brand of politics, and to how wide an audience, is a question that will also shape the future of the progressive movement. Warren and Sanders are two enigmatic leaders who work as strategic partners toward shared policy views, but with almost opposite tactics.
“As much as people try to lump them together, they are stylistically very different,” said Anita Dunn, a longtime Democratic operative who got to know Warren after her 2012 Senate run. “He is trying to create a movement. She approaches so many of these policy issues as a good lawyer or powerful cross-examiner would. She looks for ways where the laws can be improved.”…
She is trying to get stuff done. He is trying to… well, IMO, ‘create a movement’ that will further increase the fortune he made campaigning in 2016.
You know the old, bitter joke? If you want something talked about, ask a man. If you want something accomplished, ask a woman…
One thing I would love young women to know, is that forty comes at you fast. One day you are 25, next day you are forty.
And when you get there, people will want to replace you too.
Stand by older female politicians who share your values and know their history and struggle.
— Monjula Ray (@queerBengali) August 27, 2018
Don't buy into this male notion that younger is better.
Nancy Pelosi is worth 10,000 Ted Cruz's
Hillary Clinton is worth 100,000 Marco Rubio's
Ageism is the dumbest form of bigotry, because if you are lucky you will age. Only unlucky people don't age.
And it happens fast.
— Monjula Ray (@queerBengali) August 27, 2018
One thing people don't tell you about ageism, is how entangled it is in sexism.
women are considered past their prime decades before men are (notice who wants pelosi out, but wants bernie to run in 2020).
For young women to participate in being ageist, is self sabotage.
— Monjula Ray (@queerBengali) August 27, 2018
The peak of your career will happen after 40, when men are still considered young and you are not.
Do you really want to perpetuate that kind of misogyny into the world?
— Monjula Ray (@queerBengali) August 27, 2018
Jeffro
Hard pass on both, thanks…fresh faces, Dems! You have a kajillion capable, inspirational, newer candidates out there. No need to settle for either Sanders or Warren.
schrodingers_cat
Talking about 2020 when 2018 midterms are just two months away is a distraction that the R leaning media wants us to engage. I say we don’t fall for that gambit..
cain
So fucking true.. In any case, I stand behind all the older women.
On the other hand, that doesn’t explain Diana Feinstein at all. Isn’t she almost 88 or something and probably still plans on running?
schrodingers_cat
@schrodingers_cat: engage in.
* Edit function I miss you.
A Ghost To Most
@Jeffro: Warren, if it comes to it. Wilmer, not a chance.
Draft Schiff.
jl
@Jeffro: Agreed, except I would like to see what Warren can offer as a candidate if she is interested. BS pundits won’t decide between the primary candidates, people in each states primaries will. I can think of a number of people who would be good. If someone decides to run, it’s a free country and if they meet qualifications. Rather than complain about things we can’t control, I think better to find a candidate you think is best and support them as much as you can.
Adam L Silverman
@schrodingers_cat: It sent a postcard from where it’s vacationing. It says: “wish you were here”.
Tractarian
I actually think Warren is underrated as a 2020 contender.
Unlike Booker and Gillibrand, she’s got progressive bona fides. And unlike Bernie, she’s actually a Democrat.
She doesn’t have decades of experience as a politician, but that could be a positive if it sets her up as a quasi-outsider.
jc
I can’t think of a better alternative than Warren for president. She’s the opposite of Trump in every way. But Trump ruthlessly cheated his way into office the first time, so there’s no limit to the rotten crap he’d pull running against Warren. It will take more than a strong stomach to take on The Swamp.
Yarrow
If I’m forced to pick, Warren. I’d prefer neither one of them.
@schrodingers_cat: And, yes. This. Let’s talk about the midterms that are happening this very year and are mere months away. Focusing on 2020 and arguing over candidates is what Republicans want us to do. Don’t fall for it.
jl
@cain: I think DiFi is too old, but it is not her calendar age I am talking about. It’s her mindset, which seems stuck in a previous political era. Booker has similar problems IMHO, and he is decades younger. I’m interested in what Gillibrand and Harris will say if they decide to run.
Brachiator
I understand that Sanders would think that he has earned a spot on the 2020 ticket on the basis of stuff like this, except for a couple of things. As they say about investment vehicles, past performance is no guarantee of future results. The past is the past. We have primaries precisely because a candidate has to demonstrate that he or she is what we need today, not 4 or 8 years ago.
Also, personally speaking, I have to say that in 2016 I looked at Sanders and rejected him. He was not my number two choice. He doesn’t interest me today. I would grudgingly vote for him if he somehow became the Democratic Party candidate, and maybe he has factored some of this into his strategy.
And of course, the elephant in the room is that I think it absurdly presumptuous that this dope who is not a Democrat, but who thinks he can attach himself to the party when he wishes for his own aims, is trying to pull this shit again. Fuck him.
I’m not hot for Warren, but if she decided to take a run at the nomination, I would give her serious consideration. For me, right now, she is just a name. The same is largely true about anyone else being talked about. I don’t have any preferences, and no one stands out. I kinda want someone younger than either Sanders or Warren, but other than that, it’s an open field as far as I am concerned.
trollhattan
@Tractarian:
Eternally confounded why Senator Warren isn’t taken at her word when she says she’s not interested in running and wishes to continue working in the senate. Is her word worth nothing on this topic?
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Adam L Silverman: I wish I was there as well.
Another Scott
@Tractarian: I like a lot about Warren, but we know almost nothing about her views on things other than economic issues (and most of those are related to banking and the like). I really don’t like the stampede to draft her when she’s made it clear many, many times that she wants to stay in the Senate. Of course, people can and do change their minds, but still.
I want to know more about her views on things like our various undeclared wars (Syria, Yemen, and even Nigeria, and elsewhere). I want to know more about what she thinks the government’s role in funding basic research, and how to pay for it. I want to know more about her views on bazillion-year long copyrights. I want to know more about her views on public education, beyond the cost of college. I want to know more about her views on Israel and Palestine and Egypt. And Myanmar, the ROK and DPRK, and China’s attempt to tie up the world with their Road and Belt Initiative. I want to know more about what she thinks we should be spending federal dollars on over the next 10-20 years and why.
And how she can appeal to more than us DFHs out here. ;-)
Stuff like that.
But as SC says, we really need to be concentrating on 2018, not letting the political press distract us.
Cheers,
Scott.
randy khan
@Tractarian:
I might grant you Booker on that one, but not Gillibrand. She’s totally solid on LGBT rights, reproductive freedom, and health care. She’s a cosponsor of the Medicare for all bill, and as a Senator has been good on gun control and immigration. She’s a real leader on women’s equality issues, specifically including sexual harassment and assault.
My position on Warren running is that I probably would prefer someone younger, but substantively she’d be great. In a Warren-Bernie matchup I’d vote for her and contribute to her campaign.
jl
@Brachiator: Did you do anything to try keep independents off the Democratic primary ticket in your state? Letters, show up to party meetings, anything? If not, you’ve had two years, and quit complaining about it.
delk
Step 1: Midterms
Step 2: War on Christmas
Step 3: Resolution Breaking
Step 4: Consider 2020
Anonymous At Work
@jc: The biggest reason for SPW to stay in the Senate, forever and ever, is that the President doesn’t get to question people under Oath. Senators holding hearings do. SPW taking on the witnesses called by Republicans on pet issues is like Bryce Harper pinch-hitting in a Little League game.
As President, she’d be able to use the mechanisms of the Executive Branch in ways that the Shit Gibbon hasn’t, and be very effective with the bully pulpit, but she’d lose the ability to question people under oath.
schrodingers_cat
Also too, fuck Bernie Sanders and the purity pony he rides on.
Keith P.
Another Trump Org person tried to get immunity, but it was not granted. There’s not a lot of people that this could be. Could be Rhona Graff, but why would she not get it. Not many other Trump Org employees, and I’ll go for the grandiose guess and say it was Don Jr. (but as I’ve said before, I think there’s already a sealed indictment against him that won’t go public until the investigation is over)
Luthe
@delk: Just another example of holiday creep.
Betty Cracker
I like Warren a lot. She’s the best of both worlds in a lot of ways — a Harvard professor who has a folksy manner and a knack for explaining incredibly complex issues in plain language. She doesn’t just talk about what’s wrong — she proposes bold ideas to fix what ails us, e.g., her work on the CFPB and the recent release of the “Accountable Capitalism” bill. I could absolutely support her for the presidency if she chooses to run.
comrade scotts agenda of rage
@Brachiator:
Same here. I went into the 2016 campaign open minded. Watched the first debate and discovered the decision was easy, Clinton hands down.
And nothing Bernie or his minions have done since has made me change my mind. Really wish he’d stfu and stick to senating stuff.
A Ghost To Most
@randy khan: Gilibrand helped railroad Franken. She’s dead to me
OzarkHillbilly
@trollhattan: Nearly every candidate for President swore they weren’t interested right up to the moment they declared their candidacy. I can hardly blame anyone for seeing a wink wink, nudge nudge even if it’s not there.
tobie
OMG. Irony is dead. Sanders supporters railed that Hillary treated the primary as a coronation and now Sanders believes he’s entitled to pick the “progressive” candidate. Holy moly.
I’d like to see who decides to run in 2020 before making a choice. I’ve been hoping that Chris Murphy would throw his hat in the ring because he’s shown himself to be a very reliable liberal with strong statements about both domestic and foreign policy. In the meantime…there are lots of voters who need to be registered for the 2018 midterms, detained children need to be returned to their detained or deported parents, Brett Kavanaugh must be opposed, among all sorts of other priorities.
Major Major Major Major
Do they think this is an impressive showing in a two-person race in a country with 50 states? I know they’re bad at math but come on.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@comrade scotts agenda of rage: I commented during the first debate thread here at Balloon Juice, “Why is the old man yelling at me?”.
Yarrow
@tobie:
YES! Has everyone called their Senators about Kavanaugh? If not, do it today.
OzarkHillbilly
@comrade scotts agenda of rage:
He has never done much of either before, I don’t expect him to now.
Betty Cracker
PS: I get why folks are saying we should focus on 2018 — I agree. But this is a pets-and-politics blog, so a little speculation about 2020 from time to time isn’t surprising, inappropriate, distracting or harmful, IMO. I think we do a pretty decent job of staying focused.
Miss Bianca
Well, slightly o/t from “Dem tragedy” (I hope!), will re-post from one of yesterday’s threads, which was dead before I arrived:
Looks like I will have a few minutes to interview Jared Polis, Democratic candidate for Governor of CO, after one of his campaign stops in Chaffee County this week. Ahoy, CO jackals! Y’all were so great with feeding me interview questions for Phil Weiser, how about feeding me some new ones for our (pray FSM, make it so!) next governor?
OzarkHillbilly
@Major Major Major Major: Heh.
debit
@A Ghost To Most: No one is more angry than me about what happened to Franken. But if Gilibrand is the candidate, I will do anything I can to help her win.
Dorothy A. Winsor
When you think about the age of people running for office, you need to think about what their age would be while serving too. Once you’re over 70, you can change very quickly. The difference between 70 and 79 is a lot more than the difference between 40 and 49,
Litlebritdifrnt
I love Elizabeth Warren, her “you didn’t build that” speech was so misused and misquoted by the RWNJ’s showed that it hit a nerve. However, I agree that she is too old, we really need young blood, someone like Obama that can get elected and then go on to make a difference post presidency. However, I am now in England and should not weigh in, it is no longer any of my business.
Major Major Major Major
@comrade scotts agenda of rage:
My story exactly as well, except that I’m not super happy with his senating either, other than the actual vote at the end of the day which anybody else from Vermont could just as easily perform.
Major Major Major Major
@trollhattan:
Because it is exactly what she would be doing if she was planning to ‘decide’ to run later. Her saying she isn’t running provides no actual evidence either way.
MisterForkbeard
@Yarrow: I agree completely. Between Sanders and Warren, I’d prefer Warren. She actually understands policies and plans around them, and she’s genuinely done more to help people. But I’d also prefer someone else.
Right now, I think Kamala Harris is my default. I like her a lot, and I haven’t seen much in the way of Republicans visibly damaging her. Booker may also work out well, but I have a lot of lefty friends already buying into the “he’s corrupt because banks” thing that was deployed against Hillary.
But in the meantime, we work for 2018.
MisterForkbeard
@Brachiator: Agreed. It galls me that Bernie is doing the “It’s my turn!” thing when they complained so bitterly about Hillary being ‘anointed’ and expecting to just get the nomination because she was the runner-up in 2008. But then, they already did similar things after whining bitterly about superdelegates and then switching to court superdelegates and get them to overturn the actual popular vote for Hillary.
Major Major Major Major
@MisterForkbeard: I think Harris will have a bit of a hard time if her opponents mention some of the positions she held as DA/things she’s actually done.
Jacobin: The Two Faces of Kamala Harris
Hyperbolic Medium post: Kamala Harris’ Career as AG, was built on Truancy and Separation of Black Children and Families #SeparatingFamilies
Yarrow
@MisterForkbeard:
Seems like there would be an opportunity for an ad based on that hypocrisy.
MisterForkbeard
@Yarrow: It would take someone actually attacking Bernie, which Hillary mostly wouldn’t do. And it might cause trouble in the long run. I’ve noticed that pointing out that Bernie isn’t awesome gets you a LOT of hate from BernieBros who are convinced he’s The One.
I’m worried we end up with a similar situation to Donald Trump, where he could have been knocked out of the primary relatively early but no republican wanted to attack him because they wanted his supporters. It’s possibly we’ll see the same thing with Bernie – Booker/Gillibrand/Harris/etc. won’t want to attack him because they won’t want to upset the “progressive” wing of the party.
efgoldman
@Major Major Major Major:
Who the fuck cares what Jacobin says/thinks/prints. They do not move a single actual vote, never have, never will
Fuckem
kindness
For my own purposes I’d prefer Senator Warren take a leadership role in the Senate instead of running for President. Mind you I would vote for her I just think she can do our side more good heading up important Senate Committees.
And don’t pay attention to any MSM talking head yet. They are all just projecting what they want and they want these people for their own reasons, not ours. Kinda like pampering the baby hoping the baby grows up liking you.
schrodingers_cat
@Betty Cracker: The focus on presidential politics to the exclusion of everything else has been detrimental to Ds. We won the presidency twice but lost ground everywhere else. The media wants us to continue on that same path.
Major Major Major Major
@efgoldman: I offered it as an example of somebody attacking Harris from the left.
Brachiator
@jl:
I live in California. We have open primaries and other rules that try to give a break to a wider range of candidates than simply those selected by political party kingmakers.
And you know what? I don’t have a problem with independents. But I can also make clear my own distaste at Sanders’ parasitic leeching off the Democratic Party as if it owes him something.
gene108
Warren was a long time Republican. She voted for Reagan. I doubt her non-economic views will be what liberals expect. Old habits die hard.
efgoldman
@MisterForkbeard:
No we won’t. Wilmer isn’t a Dem. Dem voters will give him fewer votes than last time.
Cacti
How about option C:
None of the above.
The Moar You Know
Sanders is not electable. Warren I will vote for if I have to, you’d think we could do better though.
efgoldman
@gene108:
Bullshit. Show your work.
the Conster
Fuck that unaccomplished non-Dem grifting fraud Sanders. I notice that the article doesn’t contain the words “Tad” “Devine” “Russia” “Jane” “bank” “fraud” or “FBI”.
gene108
@Major Major Major Major:
Something for the Russians to weaponize, like the 1990’s crime bill and Hillary saying “super predators” once.
What worries me about Harris is she is 1/2 Asian Indian and 1/2 Jamaican. She spent a good bit of her childhood in Canada.
I don’t know, if she is up to the “othering” of her that will come with running outside of CA. It will be just as bad or worse than what was done to Obama. And she can’t point to a white WW2 veteran grandfather or grandfather’s brother to back up her claims to American-ness, like Obama could.
Brachiator
@MisterForkbeard:
Between Sanders and a pitcher of warm spit, I’d prefer the pitcher. Sanders is pretty much a one-trick-pony, and a bit of a fraud. And where’s his tax returns?
Chyron HR
Well, of course Bernie thinks he’s entitled to the 2020 nomination on the grounds that “It’s his turn”.
OzarkHillbilly
@efgoldman: Any sanderites who would stay home instead of voting for the DEM running against trump was never going to vote DEM on any other level either.
Yarrow
@the Conster: Or taxes. Let’s see ten years of Senator Sanders’ taxes and go from there.
Betty Cracker
@schrodingers_cat: As I said, I agree with the general sentiment, but I don’t think it applies here. We rarely have posts on 2020, and most of the conversation and 100% of the fundraising is centered on midterms, current issues, etc.
@gene108: Hillary was a Goldwater Girl. John Cole was a W-supporting war blogger. People change. And fortunately, Warren has weighed in on non-economic issues extensively, so we don’t have to speculate.
randy khan
This view bewilders me. Franken was dead already. She just nudged the corpse off the platform (with, it’s important to note, the help of every other Democratic woman in the Senate).
In the three weeks following the first accusation, seven additional women had similar stories, and the rate at which they were coming out seemed to be accelerating. This wasn’t going away; Franken wasn’t going to be able to credibly claim that there wasn’t any real issue here. By the time he resigned, more than half of the Democratic caucus was calling for him to leave. She may have been the first, but the handwriting was on the wall.
I hear people saying Franken was denied due process, but really he wasn’t. First of all, there’s no due process in politics, and serving in the Senate is a privilege, not a right. (The Senate decides for itself whether to keep someone or kick him out and there’s no appeal and no standard for making that decision.) Second, if he’d wanted to stay and defend himself, he could have done that – nothing Gillibrand did prevented him from hanging on. All she and the other Senators did was make it clear that he wasn’t going to get any help from them.
I’d also add that sexual harassment had long been a big issue for her – for instance, she’d spent a lot of time and effort on harassment in the military – so it’s not like she suddenly discovered the problem and jumped in to make a splash.
Even if you want to say she was making a cold-blooded political calculation, so what? It was the right calculation, particularly in the context of what was going on in Alabama at the time. And, honestly, I want my Dems to be politically ruthless. We don’t have enough of that.
Martin
Warren is shaping up to be a really important voice here, if we listen to her message. She is the most pro-capitalist candidate going into 2020, because she actually understands capitalism. It’s critical that Democrats find a way to knock the GOP off of their game here. They aren’t capitalists at all but corporatists, and the remedy to corporatism isn’t socialism, it’s capitalism, including a recognition where capitalism cannot work and alternatives are necessary. That’s really the foundation of democratic socialist countries – they tend to be more capitalistic than the US because they can afford to be because they aren’t trapped in this cycle of trying to make capitalism work in markets where it’s simply not suitable (like much of the health care market). They have a much clearer notion of these three economic systems than the US does, mostly because we’ve perverted the shit out of the terminology.
Warren is one of only a few politicians that I’ve seen that understands those differences. She comes off sounding like a socialist because she speaks directly to the consumer and the worker, but her remedies are highly capitalistic – competition and worker mobility, etc. are all capitalistic ideas. Regulation and capitalism co-exist just fine provided the regulation doesn’t serve to undermine capitalistic ideas. In a working capitalistic system, companies are supposed to fail. That’s a measure of a healthy market when it accompanies new companies coming into the market. You can lay on however many laws you need to protect the environment, workers, and so on, provided they are transparent, evenly enforced, and everyone needs to meet them equally (yes, I’m aware that’s not how it usually works). She gets all that.
Now, I’m not super excited about another candidate my dad’s age. Democrats always seem to do better when the candidates expect to still be alive long after their policies go into effect, but Democrats would do well to learn from what Warren is doing. She’s just about the only candidate I see that is actually trying to fight this really, really important battle.
randy khan
@A Ghost To Most:
#62 was supposed to be a reply to you.
Cacti
@The Moar You Know:
I’ve always found Warren’s political chops to be highly overrated.
Having superior policy positions alone isn’t enough.
MisterForkbeard
@Major Major Major Major: I’ve only read *most* of the Jacobin story, and none of the Medium post, but most of the criticism I’ve seen of her performance as AG is that she was… an AG. She was generally pushing for incremental changes or enforcing the legal status quo. Things like “Felony convictions went from 51->65% under her tenure as AG” are one of those things where I have to scratch my head.
There’s some somewhat problematic stuff in there, especially around family separation, but mostly it’s the sort of thing that would pop up in any politician’s tenure: Sometimes you make reasonable decisions that look bad 5 or 10 or 20 years later.
Brachiator
@gene108:
This is an issue for you? Wow.
Is this along the same lines as Hillary Clinton must have been a closet Republican warmonger because she was a Goldwater Girl at one point in her life?
Aurona
No old white people, and that goes for Liz. I like her, but either as a senator or perhaps…Attorney General. But no old white dude who’s about my age and color. The 94% of black women who vote democratic are the people I’m watching as to who they endorse and discussion of 2020 before November elections is a click-grabber.
SiubhanDuinne
@Litlebritdifrnt:
I beg to strongly disagree. Well, I agree that you are now in England, but I fervently hope you will continue to weigh in.
It is absolutely your business. Like it or not, and notwithstanding everything Trump has done in just 19 months to fuck everything up, the US and UK are still allies, still partners, and still significant players on the world stage. It is in your own interest, and that of your fellow Brits, to be concerned and state your views.
Furthermore, you actually lived and worked in the USA for a number of years. You have seen and experienced this country at our best and at our worst. I hope very much that you will continue to weigh in with your thoughts about how to achieve the former and avoid the latter.
Yarrow
If we have to talk about 2020, are there any Governors who might be in the mix? I’m a bit tired of Senators being the only ones we’re talking about.
cain
@jl:
Yes, both are a problem IMHO. She’s definitely from an era that holds beliefs that run counter to what’s going on today. That said, I think it’s ridiculous to be 90+ and still doing the Senator gig.
Martin
@randy khan: It bewilders me as well. It buys into this notion that the elite are deserving of the title. I like Franken, and I sincerely hope he returns to politics, but we’ve got to fucking get to a point where holding people accountable is not unacceptable. Senators aren’t struggling to feed their kids – it’s a privileged job, and being a privileged job the standards for keeping it should be higher, not lower than for the rest of us. There are literally millions of people who are qualified to be Senators and only 100 slots, so the standard we hold our officials to should reflect that.
That said, it doesn’t need to be a career death sentence. People should be given second chances, provided they prove they have earned them. I don’t doubt that Franken would do that. He’s not a Roy Moore or a Jim Jordan that will deny their misdeeds and avoid responsibility. Franken called for his own ethics investigation, after all. So he loses his seat, but he should be invited to run again.
Cacti
@Brachiator:
Specious comparison. Clinton was a teenager, too young to vote when Goldwater ran for POTUS. Warren was a grown woman in her 40s before her road to Damascus moment.
FlipYrWhig
I look forward to referring to Bernie Sanders as the deep-pocketed frontrunner who doesn’t appreciate being challenged.
efgoldman
@Cacti:
If you’re looking for a reason not to vote for someone, you’ll find it.
Martin
@cain: I’m of the view that the closer you can get to the minimum age to run for the office, the better. There isn’t a single person in Congress that has a fucking clue what the implications of social media and election hacking are, or how to address them. The problems that need to be solved aren’t the ones from the past, but the ones from the future that we haven’t identified yet.
kindness
@efgoldman: Yea – talking smack about Kamela acting like her career as a DA isn’t going to help her is dumb fracking nutz. Have you seen Kamela in Committee hearings? That DA thing comes out and she does it really well. She’d be a bear in any presidential debate.
FlipYrWhig
@Yarrow: On paper you’d think Tom Wolf would be a contender. Or Kate Brown.
the Conster
@Yarrow:
I like Jay Inslee, a lot. I also like Mitch Landrieu. I know he’s a mayor, but he’s President of the American Association of Mayors. Every man, and especially white men, have to be #MeToo proof. No more John Edwards.
And regarding Bernie fucking Sanders – he was the most unvetted candidate in history. If he thinks he’s going to be coddled like Hillary and the GOP coddled him, he’s wrong. Right now, he’s a pawn caught between Mueller’s Russia investigation and Trump’s DOJ – the US Attorney makes the decision to indict. Why would the Sessions DOJ indict Crooked Jane as long as Bernie’s out there mucking things up for Democrats?
Gelfling 545
Would Sanders have been the runner up to Clinton if Warren had been running? I have my doubts.
Captain C
@Chyron HR: No one should be anointed, except Wilmer.
Everyone should be transparent, except Wilmer, who gets to hide his tax returns.
Superdelegates are undemocratic and should be abolished, unless they’re voting for Wilmer against the will of the electorate.
I’m beginning to notice a trend here.
Humdog
@A Ghost To Most: No one railroaded Franken. As a ghost, you are dead to everybody.
Gelfling 545
“You know the old, bitter joke? If you want something talked about, ask a man. If you want something accomplished, ask a woman…”
As I read somewhere this am: The rooster crows but the hen delivers the egg.
Brachiator
@Cacti:
And how old was Paul? What counts more, the age or the conversion?
Do you want to kick Warren out of the party? Tie her up and dunk her in a river to test whether her conversion is sincere?
Betty Cracker
@randy khan: You and me both, but it seems to be an immutable fixation. One can only hope that if KG wins the nomination, people could put their outrage aside to focus on job one: defeating Trump. Otherwise, they’re no better than Bernie-or-busters.
@Litlebritdifrnt: What she said.
@Martin: Agreed!
Juicebox
Amy Klobuchar is 58, really smart, wants the job, and comes across as really nice. Ambitious women will always be labeled with the B word, but that’s harder to do with Sen. Klobuchar. Like BHO, she doesn’t show anger. I like Warren, but she’s pushing 70 and it’s a hard damn job. She is also certain to be the object of two years of conspiracy theories and lies between now and 2020.
schrodingers_cat
@Betty Cracker: Someone who is not in this tired conversation about who will be the 2020 nominee could be our eventual nominee, like Beto from Texas. If he wins his race for senator it will catapult him to the front of the back. Did people know in the summer of 2006 that Obama was going to be the nominee? It is too early too have this discussion. YMMV.
Evil_Paul
FWIW, the more I’ve seen of Elizabeth Warren, the more I put her in the same category as I do with Nancy Pelosi: She’d be a million times better than any Repub candidate, but a lot of her talent would be wasted in the White House. For both women, their biggest talents and strongest contributions seem to be at crafting and passing legislation, and while there’s a fair bit of crossover with being President it is NOT the same job.
But she’d be infinitely better than Trump.
As for Bernie, if he wanted ANY say in the Democratic nomination in 2020 he should have stuck around and worked to build up the party. Was he helping to craft a whole slate of brand new candidates (many of them women and PoC) for 2018? Was he front and centre for the battle to save Obamacare? Did he throw his support (and funding) behind all these special races where long-shot Democrats have unseated established Republicans leading to media talk of a blue wave in Nov? Did he step up to defend Kamala Harris when she was so viciously attacked?
Actually I’m not sure about that last one but the rest are all NO.
Bernie should get the priviledges that his contributions have earned him: He can sit in the crowd and wave a sign at the DNC.
Gelfling 545
@Jeffro: The problem being thst if the faces are too fresh, the general public won’t recognize the name. I’d like to see younger people but there haven’t been that many who have developed the standing of an Elizabeth Warren.
Yarrow
@FlipYrWhig: I’d rather be talking about them since I don’t know much about them.
@the Conster: Let’s add both of them to the mix and yes definitely no more men with MeToo issues.
Maybe a thread for potential Governors who could be possible candidates would be fun. Bring up some new names.
schrodingers_cat
My answer to the above speculation is none of the above. I know Warren is the darling of the left but she leaves me cold. Of course I will vote for her this fall for senator but I don’t see her as our eventual nominee.
Major Major Major Major
@Martin: completely agree with these remarks on capitalism.
Spanky
@Litlebritdifrnt: Look around you and tell me that Trump isn’t making a difference there. Your opinions are more than welcome here.
A Ghost To Most
@randy khan: Believe what you want. Franken was railroaded, and she jumped to get in front of the tar-and-feather committee to burnish her cred.
SenyorDave
I hope they vetted Sanders’ wife, especially about Burlington College. From Wikipedia:
In 2010, Jane O’Meara Sanders oversaw the purchase of 33 acres of property to be used for college expansion, with the resulting significant debt to be covered by already pledged donations and tuition from planned increased enrollment over five years. Sanders departed shortly after, with Christine Plunkett assuming the position of president.
IOW, Jane Sanders was president when the the college collapsed due to financial mismanagement. My question is was it a case of stupidity or were other things going on.
Mary G
If Bernie hadn’t taken so long to concede, then very grudgingly supported Hillary after having to go to the WH to have his arm twisted by President Obama, then ostentatiously quit the party at 12:01 a.m. the day after the election, maybe I could agree that he has a chance, but for these and a million other reasons, he needs to sit down and shut up. I want to see a large, if not 17 like the Republicans had, primary field of people with somewhat different philosophies, run so voters can choose. Everyone who runs against their opponents and not against Republicans is disqualified.
Mnemosyne
@tobie:
It’s pure sexism — Hillary trying to lock up the nomination was her acting like “Queen Hillary” expecting a “coronation,” but Sanders doing the same thing is something that he’s owed by virtue of being a man who wants it for himself.
Women always have to earn everything; men should have the things they want handed to them because that’s their rightful due. And the more unearned privilege someone has, the more they believe these things.
Major Major Major Major
@Gelfling 545:
Barack Obama didn’t have this problem. (Edited for failed attempt at wit)
Another Scott
@Chyron HR: But it doesn’t say that Bernie believes that, it says that the grifters and remoras that have attached themselves to him – and are hoping for big paychecks for doing so – are saying that.
(Of course some genuine Bernie fans believe that too…)
Cheers,
Scott.
(“And I have little doubt that St. Bernard believes that, also too.”)
PJ
@Martin: Off the top of my head, I can think of a few minor problems from the past that need to be addressed: 1) Denial of civil rights to minorities, particularly the right to vote and the right to life; 2) lack of affordable health care available to everyone; 3) concentration of wealth in a tiny minority; 4) permanent indebtedness for vast numbers of citizens; 5) lack of affordable higher education; 6) privatization of public assets; 7) failure to prosecute crimes committed by businessmen and politicians; 8) involvement in war without end and, seemingly, without any real policy goals; 8) spending too much, too stupidly, on defense and war; 9) failure to effectively direct, control, and coordinate intelligence services and to oversee and train local police and the FBI; 10) alienation of allies and potential allies and trading partners and concomitant crippling of US political interests and business. That’s just ten off the top of my head, give me another five minutes and I could list ten more.
It’s true that many older politicians of all parties and judges are simply out of touch with the way people live today and the threats they face. Getting rid of good, effective, older politicians is not going to solve this problem, and is, frankly, simple ageism. The solution to bad politicians is to vote for better ones, or to challenge them to educate themselves on the issues. This is a larger problem with our political system, but it’s not going to be solved by simply voting for someone because they are younger.
SiubhanDuinne
@Spanky:
You said it shorter and better than I did.
cain
@MisterForkbeard:
Could be more of the “well since this is the way it is supposed to work, then it’s my turn!”
PJ
@schrodingers_cat: Yes. Obama got a lot of people’s attention after his speech at the 2004 convention. Neil Young even referred to him in a song in 2006, “Looking for a Leader.” According to this article, at the time, Obama denied that he had any intention of running for President in 2008: https://www.newstimes.com/news/article/Sen-Obama-gets-Neil-Young-s-endorsement-106675.php
Another Scott
@Martin: Point of order. It seems like Durbin (or at least his staff) has some idea of what’s going on:
Cheers,
Scott.
Yarrow
@schrodingers_cat:
After that 2004 convention speech many people were talking about him as a possible candidate. I think everyone thought it would be Hillary in 2006 and he was told it was “too soon” for him, but a lot of people were excited about him.
PJ
@PJ: Which only shows that you should never trust what a canny politician says about their political ambitions. A smart one will never say they intend to run until they are actually running.
Sondra
@MisterForkbeard:
As a registered Democrat who is also an activist working to elect more of them – I’ll think about supporting him when he actually joins the party & stays in it.
stan
@randy khan: Gillibrand is 100% an Albany machine product. Meanign she’ll take whatever position and use whatever tactic it takes to further her personal interests.
That’s not totally a bad thing in a politician. it’s about getting and using power, and I think Gillibrand has shown definite talent for that.
My only point here is to never, ever mistake her for a progressive or any other ideology. Her only ideology is Kristen Gillibrand.
NotMax
Why stop at 2020 when diverting energy and attention from what is vital to the present? Hogg ’36.
;)
Midterms 2018, please. Eyes on the prize.
schrodingers_cat
@Yarrow: I remember that.
Gelfling 545
@debit: She’s my senator and she’s done well by us. I disagreed STRONGLY with her stand on Franken and let her know that I did. If for no other reason, it prevented the investigation process from playing out and that process is important if these events are to be taken seriously. But she is a strong progressive and in the main supports what I support and so would have my vote should she be nominated.
the Conster
@SenyorDave:
No one is allowed to ask Wilmer questions about that FBI investigation – he hasn’t given an interview to local reporters in years. The one interview he did give – to VT NPR – worked out poorly for him because the woman interviewer didn’t let his scold his way out of answering her question about why he didn’t tell anyone he knew the Russians were helping his campaign. Bernie bros Chris Hayes and Jake Tapper only ask him about his thoughts on Democrats. The guy has never been pushed to answer anything about his shady pas, even though there’s an oppo file out there a foot thick back from his days of coddling left wing dictators, and his rape essays.
Yarrow
What frustrates me about focusing on people like Warren running for president is that it feeds the myth that main thing we need is a strong leader at the top. Sure, that’s important but we need excellent people in the legislative branch. Warren is one of those. I’d like her to stay there and keep being a great Senator.
We need the legislative branch to step up and do their job. For 25 years or so they’ve been abdicating their responsibilities. They need to take them back and we need good, smart people there to make that happen. As Democrats we would be better served to talk up the importance of the legislative branch of government as just as important as the presidency. Focus on that. It’s why the midterms are so important.
MisterForkbeard
@A Ghost To Most: This blog has had numerous conversations about this, but claiming it was to “burnish her cred” when sexual assault and harassment has consistently been something she’s cared about and performed real actions on is a proclamation I can’t understand.
Gillibrand has made sexual harassment/assault crackdowns a cornerstone of her career even when it wasn’t politically popular. If she performed similarly even when the target was a popular Democratic senator and the allegations were numerous, that points towards honor and consistency, not ambition or proving bona fides.
Now, it’s entirely reasonable to say she made a bad decision and Franken should have gotten time to rebut the (in some cases specious) charges, but saying it proves she’s ambitious and therefore awful is just doing the exact same ridiculous framing the right attached to Hillary, but attaching it to another female senator. In short: Knock it off and find a better reason to oppose her.
Juicebox
@Major Major Major Major: BHO had a star quality. My old, white, ex-Republican father was all in for Obama at least by 2007, if not 2006.
A Ghost To Most
@Gelfling 545: She helped push a fine Senator out, and did it to score points for herself. She’s just another grabby politician.
A Ghost To Most
@MisterForkbeard: No.
MisterForkbeard
@cain: I’d be more sympathetic if they hadn’t called ‘following the rules’ was ‘rigging the system’. They can fuck right off when it comes to arguments like this. You don’t get to pretend to be pure as the driven snow and then use the exact same methods you complained were inherently evil and corrupt.
This isn’t a ‘unilaterally disarm’ or ‘bring a knife to a gunfight’ situation either. It’s proclaiming that you’re the only moral and ethical person because everyone else does Thing A, and then doing Thing A as soon as it benefits you. It obviates your entire argument and anyone who advances this can fuck right off.
PJ
@Gelfling 545: @stan: She has taken progressive positions since she became Senator. Before that, she was pro-NRA and anti-immigrant: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/02/kirsten-gillibrand-tries-to-explain-her-pro-gun-anti-immigrant-past.html In other words, she took the positions she needed to take to get elected as a Representative in upstate New York and as a Senator for the whole state, and, I believe, she takes the positions she thinks she needs to take to become the Democratic nominee in 2020.
In some ways, whether or not a politician is sincere in their beliefs is irrelevant as long as they vote for the policies you want. The problem is that if there is a change in the weather, the person you voted in may act very differently when it behooves their personal power.
??? Goku (aka Amerikan Baka) ??
So… a coronation then?
Mary G
The Republican government is such a finely tuned machine, not:
Two senile old white men writing poorly on Twitter is not the discourse Jefferson, Hamilton, and the rest envisaged for America.
TenguPhule
Trump is doubling down on his threats against Google, Facebook and Twitter.
Our fucking media is not throwing a major shit fit about this. That’s how fucking bad things have become.
And I have a horrible feeling that at least 27% of the federal government is going to go over to Trump when he crosses the final line. And that 27% is going to be concentrated in the very institutions we’ve been expecting to defend the Constitution at the final hour.
Gelfling 545
@gene108: I think one thing we’re pretty clear on is her economic views.
Major Major Major Major
@??? Goku (aka Amerikan Baka) ??: don’t be silly, only women can feel entitled.
TenguPhule
@MisterForkbeard:
Then explain why her ardor has cooled off and “we must respect the process” with the latest allegations made against a Congressional Democrat?
Fuck her for not letting the system do its job in the sunlight.
joel hanes
@MisterForkbeard:
It galls me that Bernie is doing the “It’s my turn!” thing when they complained so bitterly about Hillary being ‘anointed’ and expecting to just get the nomination
But, of course, Sec. Clinton is a woman. That makes all the difference between outrageous presumption and deserving of course.
Gelfling 545
@gene108: Are you under the illusion that there is someone we can nominate that won’t be subject to outrageous attacks?
Mary G
And how is this dogwhistling?
WaPo: DeSantis says Florida voters would ‘monkey this up’ if they elect Gillum as governor
That’s openly racist. This is dogwhistling:
Articulate is the new uppity.
Chyron HR
@PJ:
Whereas the One True God was pro-NRA until the fucking Parkland shootings, which is why he’s the true progressive candidate and none of his supporters started hysterically shrieking “WHICH BERNIE????” when he did it.
MisterForkbeard
@Sondra: If Bernie’s the nominee, I’ll vote for him enthusiastically and volunteer relentlessly. But I also don’t think he’d be an especially good president, and he’s just awful at actually organizing movements or change. Good figurehead, awful politician and horrible policymaker. Absolutely better than any Republican, however.
I wouldn’t support him in the primary. Not unless it came down to something like him vs…. I can’t even think of a good example. Maybe Tester? Mickey Kaus?
@MisterForkbeard: Excellent refutation. I like your whole “I know it goes against the entire history of her career, but in my opinion it’s naked ambition”. Oh wait – you didn’t even do that. You just said “no” and walked away because you can’t argye the fact that her behavior in the Franken case is consistent with her entire past focus on sexual harassment and assault.
There are totally good reasons to oppose Gillibrand. Saying “She’s ambitious and wants to look good so she… exercised her principles” just makes you look like a sexist idiot. So for your own sake: Find a better reason or shut up about it. If you think she’s ambitious and knifes allies for her own benefit, find an actual example that illustrates your point.
Another Scott
@PJ:
A perfect example of this is Jimmy Carter:
Ultimately, a politician has to win in order to get their policies enacted. Sometimes that means taking positions that they regret, etc.
It’s a dirty business, politics, but it beats the alternatives. ;-)
Cheers,
Scott.
Spanky
@PJ: I liked Our Lady of the Dolphins’ take on it, even though totally unintentional (as all of Nooner’s truths are):
And savor we did, in the end.
TenguPhule
@randy khan:
And in an amazing coincidence, once Franken was driven out of the Senate, the stories stopped coming and the ones who had come forward had stories so flimsy they fell apart under scrutiny.
Banana, Tailpipe. Every fucking time.
MisterForkbeard
@TenguPhule: Which congressional democrat would that be? I’m willing to bet it’s a different situation than Franken, with public (though stupid) pictures and more and more women coming forward. Again, it’s easily possible that Gillibrand got rolled, but it’s consistent with her public prior stances.
Also – is it possible that she’s taken criticism to heart from the left and isn’t jumping on the bandwagon? Or does this just make her a weathervane that has no principles? Glad to see we’re applying the same criteria the right deployed against Hillary here. If she doesn’t listen, she’s ambitious and out of touch. If she DOES listen, it’s because she’s ambitious and has no principles. Way to go.
joel hanes
@randy khan:
Franken’s departure left a bad taste with some partly because Leann Tweeden was so transparently acting in bad faith: coordination with Roger Stone = ratfucking. I assume the other accusers were acting in good faith, and so Franken had to go, but first impressions and all that.
MisterForkbeard
@TenguPhule: “Once Franken wasn’t a Senator and it wasn’t a big public interest story, it stopped being news!” isn’t exactly compelling.
I do think Gillibrand went after Franken earlier than she should have and it was a dumb decision. But it’s also not disqualifying and immediately assuming the worst about her is falling into a trap.
trollhattan
@stan:
In this context what does “progressive” mean and why would I want somebody who hews to the label?
She’s not my senator but every time I see Gillibrand interviewed I find her positions supportable. Are her stated positions different from her actions?
NotMax
As for the whole ‘next in line’ crap –
How’d that work out for Dole? McCain? Romney?
TenguPhule
@MisterForkbeard: Tony Cardenas in the House.
A Ghost To Most
@PJ:
Elsa: “You would have done the same.”
Indy: “I’m sorry you think so.”
TenguPhule
@MisterForkbeard:
Oh bullshit. The accusations coming from the “women” stopped. Period. We got rat fucked out of a good Senator and showed everyone that we don’t defend our own.
TenguPhule
@joel hanes:
They were not. At least 2 of them had Franken able to prove that A) he wasn’t there because he was at another event or B) he was with his wife when said accusation claimed he was alone.
Amir Khalid
@Litlebritdifrnt:
@SiubhanDuinne:
I weigh in on American politics too, and I’ve never been an American. That certainly doesn’t disqualify you at this blog.
Litlebritdifrnt
@SiubhanDuinne: Yes, it bothers me that what people do in the US will directly affect people I know and love. I left the United States but I didn’t leave the people who mean a lot to me. I still have an opinion but I really feel uncomfortable weighing in on US politics these days because I am no longer directly affected by it. I do not want to be accused of having an opinion on an issue that does not directly affect me. I still appreciate your sentiment though, because you are right.
TenguPhule
@MisterForkbeard:
ONE FUCKING PICTURE. Which did not support the accuser’s story.
JFC am I going to be the only one who remembers things correctly?
Gelfling 545
@A Ghost To Most: Oh, by all means, let’s go with a non politician like, say, Trump. This is bs. She did it, among other reasons I presume, to not be accused of party bias in a matter she has championed strongly. I think it was an error but she was certainly not alone among dems in calling for his resignation. She had little to gain from this personally.
JR
@stan: Right now we need more Talleyrand and less Robespierre
cain
@Martin:
Indeed. In fact, life and social changes are happening even faster. The wisdom of age is not particularly well suited in this day of age except maybe in foreign policy, but that’s why you have advisors.
Amir Khalid
@MisterForkbeard:
It doesn’t prove Gillibrand is cynicaly ambitious and deployed her elbows to get rid of a potential rival in Franklin. But it does suggest that, in setting aside process and demanding Franken’s head before the Senate investigation he had asked for, she showed signs of a tendency to rush to judgement. And that, I think, is the cause for concern here.
TenguPhule
The Nazi Minority Demands their rights at Facebook
Trump is drawing everything out from under the rocks. Everything.
Jamey
Shorter Atlantic: Stupid Democrats! Be more dramatic!!
rikyrah
Not even going to read the article, because it’s meaningless until December 2018.
Every bit of energy from Democrats needs to go into the November 2018 elections.
PERIOD.
A Ghost To Most
@Gelfling 545:
Obama was a politician, but not an opportunist.
Next strawman, please. I want Schiff.
rikyrah
I like all the tweets about ageism…they were spot on.
Cckids
@Brachiator:
Funny how this thinking is “logical” when applied to Bernie, but when many of the same arguments were used to support Hillary in 2016 (because of her strong showing in 2008), she was being “anointed “, and it was a “coronation”.
I really despise these people.
MisterForkbeard
@TenguPhule: I think it’s an obviously different situation: “Firestorm of news with some documentary evidence of inappropriate behavior and more allegations coming out daily” vs “One single allegation from an anonymous accuser with no public evidence whatsoever”.
One of these is considerably more problematic than the other and it requires a different response. It SHOULD be treated differently.
rikyrah
@schrodingers_cat:
tell it
See you in December 2018 if you want to talk about 2020
MisterForkbeard
@TenguPhule: To re-iterate: I think it’s entirely possible that Gillibrand got rolled and I disagreed with her at the time. I also don’t assume perfidy or that she was deliberately knifing Franken. And though Franken was probably innocent of most of the accusations, he had admitted to inappropriate (but not illegal) behavior.
But it is not surprising at all that once Franken was out of office, any woman who’d had a bad or marginal interaction with him didn’t want to come forward. They wouldn’t need to to expose themselves to public scrutiny and attack. If Franken had stayed in office, I think he had a decent chance of fighting off the accusations (particularly since he’d be able to prove that some of his accusers were literally and provably lying, he had a good chance of getting most people to discount all of the accusations), but I would have expected more cases to come up. Him leaving really was a tossup choice, and I’m not pissed at any Democrat who thought he needed to go on either principle or PR reasons. Even if I disagree with that.
TenguPhule
@MisterForkbeard:
So should seven anonymous accusers claim Gillibrand sexually harassed them during her time in the Senate and drum up a firestorm of CNN & FOX broadcasters demanding that the Democrats hold themselves to a higher standard, you’re good with her being pushed off a cliff sans investigation?
burnspbesq
@debit:
Yup.
TenguPhule
@MisterForkbeard:
Four of the accusations were anonymous.
MisterForkbeard
@Amir Khalid: Yes! That’s correct. I think there’s good reason to criticize her here or say she acted before she should have. I also think there’s very good, defensible reasons for her to have acted the way she did. It’s good to have discussions about that and it would absolutely impact her candidacy.
Saying “she’s an ambitious grabby politician because she acted consistently when an apparent avalanche of accusers and evidence came out against an ally” is just stupid, though. THAT is a horrible, stupid framing and it plays into Republican hands on the subject.
MisterForkbeard
@TenguPhule: And many of them weren’t. Many women still don’t want to report sexual harassment or crimes *even when anonymity is guaranteed*, and there’s a wealth of research behind this. Even at a minimum it requires making statements to police and/or reporters, reliving the incident, etc. Why put yourself through that if you don’t have to?
oldgold
Amy Klobuchar deserves some consideration.
Miss Bianca
@Mnemosyne:
QFT
burnspbesq
@TenguPhule:
In your own mind, for sure.
James E Powell
@efgoldman:
Too true. And for many people, it’s very easy to find a putative reason (She gave speeches to Goldman Sachs!!!) to mask the real reason (Not comfortable with a woman in authority.)
TenguPhule
@burnspbesq: One photo seems to keep morphing into “photos”. And everybody keeps forgetting that the initial accusation was not supported by the photo in question.
Its enough to drive a sane person mad.
James E Powell
@TenguPhule:
I think everyone already knew that.
Lee
@Mary G:
Right out of the gate with the racism. This is the new GOP.
randy khan
@A Ghost To Most:
My comments were not belief; they were fact – he had to go, and it was getting worse, not better. If you don’t get this, then it would appear that you were not paying attention.
People can reasonably differ on whether there was some rodent fornication involved in what happened with Franken, but you had to be willfully blind not to see where it was going. I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on the first, and maybe even the second, woman, but my opinion of whether he had done what he was accused of doing was pretty much irrelevant by December 6.
I’d also suggest you consider the (barely) counterfactual in which it’s not Gillibrand who’s first, but instead it’s Booker or Schumer, or Brown. Would they be dead to you, too?
James E Powell
@Amir Khalid:
I’m pretty sure most of us really like and are very interested to hear from people from other places, with other experiences, traditions, and ways of thinking about the matters we discuss. Food, also too.
Lee
@TenguPhule: you’re forgetting the picture with the nutter.
randy khan
@TenguPhule:
No, because you’re remembering only the things that are convenient for your position.
I mean, of course the public accusations stopped after he resigned. Nobody was going to pay any attention to them after that.
Even conceding that all of the accusations were politically motivated, it doesn’t matter. He was turning into a punching bag. The Dems in the Senate gave him the benefit of the doubt when there was one accusation, but you can’t rationally expect them to keep doing that when the accusations start to pile up – again, it was 8 different women by the time he resigned, in just about 3 weeks.
I find it stunning that people don’t get this.
raven
@Lee: And they fucking love jumping up and down and screaming “POLITICAL CORRECTNESS”
rikyrah
@MisterForkbeard:
That was one of her major problems. She should have handled Bernie the same way she handled Barack Obama in 2008.
If he chooses to run, we need to lay waste to Bernie.
MisterForkbeard
I just want to say that it’s incredibly stupid how we’ve turned this into yet another rehash of the Gillibrand/Franken controversy. Hooray for infighting.
stan
@PJ: Agreed
Brachiator
@MisterForkbeard:
I can’t entirely support what Franken’s colleagues did to him based on theoretical cases that never came up. But I am not going to say that any Democrat is dead to me.
A Ghost To Most
@MisterForkbeard: Better now than in 2020.
I didn’t know jackals had to think in unison. YMMV.
A Ghost To Most
@Brachiator:
George Wallace is dead to me too.
James E Powell
@randy khan:
Right. And many people have forgotten that the Franken episode was at the same time as the Alabama special election. There was a political context.
J R in WV
@Anonymous At Work:
Actually the president can have a prosecutor question people in front of a grand jury… so there’s that.
Cacti
@efgoldman:
Warren’s ex-Republican status has never been a deal breaker for me.
My problems with her as Dem nominee are: 1. Not a very strong campaigner, 2. Too old. The second would be less of an issue if the first wasn’t such a problem.
The fact that she significantly underperformed Obama, in blue Massachusetts, on the same ticket, is a giant warning sign.
Lee
@randy khan: So you’re saying that if Roger Stone (or whomever) gets enough people to accuse any Dem Senator, you expect them to resign regardless of the validity of their claims.
If that’s the case how about I get me and 8-10 of my Marine buddies to claim how Sen Gillibrand got a bit handsy?
A Ghost To Most
@A Ghost To Most: Michael Bennet earned the same when he voted for cloture on Gorsuck.
Bill Arnold
@Mary G:
Been so for a long while. [0]
DeSantis – “I am inarticulate and white. Vote for me!”
[0] fully on on my white-person’s self-radar with this article IIRC: The Racial Politics of Speaking Well (LYNETTE CLEMETSON FEB. 4, 2007)
James E Powell
@Cacti:
FTFY
Brachiator
@A Ghost To Most:
Pretty sure that Wallace is pretty much dead to everybody. Being dead and all.
stan
I have no idea what you mean by “in this context” but I think we’d all agree ‘progressive’ means someone generally on the left.
My point was simply that I know where Gillibrand comes from (she is my Senator; I know her family) and she is neither progressive nor anti-progressive; neither conservative nor anti-conservative. And I’d bet money she didn’t give a toss about Al Franken except to the extent that he was a political rival. She had a chance to knock him off and took it. This is not a defense of Franken, by the way.
All I am saying is, this is how things are done in Albany and Gillibrand grew up with it. Her grandmother Polly Noonan was a master of it. Gillibrand is for Gillibrand, just like most Albany pols.
Before anyone asks, I don’t think that her lack of principles is a reason not to vote for her if she looks like the strongest dem nominee. Just do it with your eyes wide open.
A Ghost To Most
@randy khan:
Jump up and down all you want. Her gender, skin tone, or religion are immaterial.
She’s a blond Omarosa. The only thing she sees is her chance.
Seanly
I love & support Warren’s positions on many items. However, the Native American issue will become the most important issue ever to face a politician. It will be the same level of BS from the Republicans as Kerry’s purple hearts and Clinton’s email servers. Trump could be limping around naked on stage with drool & poop coming out everywhere and Chris Cilizza will be tweeting about this Native American issue.
TenguPhule
@Lee: The one where they’re posed and smiling together?
That doesn’t fall in the “stupid photos” category.
stan
If you really believe this you haven’t been paying attention.
TenguPhule
@randy khan:
I can when the accusations are bullshit and the goddamn Republicans have people STILL IN FUCKING OFFICE with more credible allegations against them.
A Ghost To Most
@Brachiator:
Yes, but Michael Bennet is very much alive. I plan to support a good primary opponent, should one arise.
TenguPhule
@rikyrah:
She lost to Obama in part because of that.
Miss Bianca
@MisterForkbeard: Damn…it’s true, ain’t it? And mind you, I speak as one who was pissed as hell at Gillibrand (and others) for pushing Franken out the door saying, “here’s your hat, what’s your hurry.” But having had some time to reflect on it, I am willing to say that I still don’t like the decision, but I’m not prepared to hold it against her if she’s the Democratic candidate, and I’d certainly work to get her elected.
Bill Arnold
@joel hanes:
Danced to Roger Stone’s tune, the Democrats did. (Not the first or last time, either.)
I don’t have disrespect for Gillibrand (she’s one of my Senators, heard her on the radio in a debate with Wendy Long and she was smarter and quicker than most male politicians, and she seems competent politically), but she should have waited a bit IMO.
sukabi
@MisterForkbeard: What’s even more galling is his not joining the party that he thinks should grant him “first grab”.
Might get him to STFU if there’s a constant “show your tax returns for the last 10 years and then we’ll talk.”
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Miss Bianca: I wish she and Hirono had called for some kind of investigation, in the name of due process, rather than going straight to resignation, but they both have records and chops that give them credibility on this issue. Gillibrand didn’t take on the Pentagon over sexual assault because she thought it might pay off if some picture of Al Franken acting like an ass turned up some day, after Hillary Clinton lost to Donald trump.
I’ll support her if she’s the nominee, but I don’t find her particularly impressive on the stump. As I’ve often said, my charisma-meter is way the hell off from most poeple’s.
A Ghost To Most
@Miss Bianca:
I’d vote for her in the general, but only because there is no other choice. Do you really want one opportunist to follow another? It’s going to take an Obama-level effort to start to fix this mess.
randy khan
@A Ghost To Most:
So, in other words, she’s like nearly all successful male politicians.
In any event, it’s pretty important to remember that Gillibrand did not do this alone. She was the leader of the group of female Democratic Senators. There is almost no chance she would have called for his resignation if the others had disagreed with her.
(And I see your comment about not wanting to follow one opportunist with another, which is pretty gross slander against her. About the only thing she has in common with Trump is being from New York.)
Lee
@TenguPhule: It was a photo, whether or not it qualifies as ‘stupid’ is up to you.
It sounds like the same one I’m thinking of (generic politician with constituents photo). She made the statement ‘my husband doesn’t hold me like that’ (hence the ‘nutter’ designation).
Bobby Thomson
Hard pass on Warren. She gave her voice to that “rigged primary” bullshit. Do not want.
L85NJGT
Bad generals are always fighting the last war, bad politicians (and political analysts) the last campaign cycle.
If either runs, It’s a safe bet they won’t end up in the top tier – that’s just the way it goes.
Miss Bianca
@A Ghost To Most: @randy khan: Well, yeah, basically what randy said. With the note that I probably wouldn’t vote for her in the *primary*, given another candidate – unless that candidate was Sen. Sanders, of course, in which case, oh *hell* yeah, I would. And as for “opportunist”, well…one man’s “opportunism”, in the political arena, is another (wo)man’s “pragmatism”. In that, yeah, if a politician wants a successful career, s/he’s got to be adept at reading the tea leaves when it comes to what positions the voters want her to take. Does it argue a lack of conviction? Possibly. It might also argue that that person is flexible and willing to compromise and even evolve her positions. Not necessarily the worst traits in a representative.
Raven Onthill
It seems to me that they are rather similar in their attitudes and conduct as legislators. It also seems to me that neither would be a good choice as a Presidential candidate: Sanders because he is unpopular with women and old enough that he would find the stresses of the office hard, possibly insuperable, and Warren because she’s an excellent legislator and I would like to see her stay an excellent legislator.
Of the hopefuls I am aware of, I think Kamala Harris is perhaps the best choice. I have problems with her (bet she really regrets not going after Mnuchin when she had him in her sights) but she is – we have seen – a competent prosecutor with a good grasp of issues and has become one of the leading voices opposing Republican immigration polices and Kavanaugh.
cain
@Mary G:
Very Obama-isque -> uppity. Also I hate the fact that everyone is far left now.
Mandalay
@TenguPhule:
It might have been even more egregious than that: the photographer claims that the “victim” was only pretending to be asleep, and she was in on the “joke” for the staged photo.
We’ll never know the truth of that, though I can understand why Franken didn’t push that story – if he had, and she denied it (regardless of whether she was lying) he would have made his predicament worse.
All that said, I think if Franken had hung around Doug Jones might well have lost – his brutal eviction definitely gave Democrats more credibility when sticking the boot in on Roy Moore. And the bar of what is acceptable conduct in future has definitely been raised on Democratic politicians now – surely a good thing.
TenguPhule
@Mandalay:
The precedent bar was lowered for what it takes to evict a Democratic Senator from office or derail a Democratic candidate with a scandal.
Not a good thing.
Betty Cracker
@Mandalay: Franken was boxed in on that accusation as you say, but he not only did not insinuate she was in on the joke, he apologized, said his behavior was inappropriate, etc. I do suspect the woman in the photo worked with Stone to sink Franken, but he handed them the concrete boots by posing for that photo.
As for the other accusers, without going back and reading through it all again, I remember thinking one was complete bullshit — someone complaining about Franken touching her waist during a photo. Sounded like a bid for attention from a woman with an untreated personality disorder to me.
But Gillibrand and some of the other senators who gave Franken the bum’s rush specifically cited the accusation from a congressional aide they personally knew as the last straw. As far as I know, that woman’s account has never been debunked nor has she been linked to a rodent copulation outfit.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Tina Dupuy, whose name I saw in my Sirus/Xm display on the progressive radio station a few weeks ago. She was talking politics like anybody gave a damn what she thought. I forget whose show.
TenguPhule
@Betty Cracker:
I do not recall them ever saying they personally knew who that accuser was. Merely that they found it credible.
“She” was never identified.
Steve in the ATL
Heard on whatever news channel is showing in the Cleveland airport: “it’s trump versus sanders in Florida!”
Fuck off.
TenguPhule
@Betty Cracker:
As far as I know, we couldn’t even confirm whether the accusation came from a real person.
Mandalay
@TenguPhule:
No it wasn’t. Franken chose to go quickly and quietly. Some of his unsympathetic and hostile colleagues surely played a part in his decision, but he could could have dug in. We’ll never know what an inquiry might have revealed, but it’s not absurd to argue that he might still be there now if he had toughed it out.
Regardless, his choice to leave quickly says absolutely nothing about what other Democratic Senators might choose to do in a similar predicament in the future.
Betty Cracker
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: That’s the one! Now I remember — she worked for former Congressman Grayson, IIRC. BTW, Grayson got blown out in his primary yesterday. Good!
@TenguPhule: Good point. It’s entirely possible Gillibrand and the other Democratic senators who cited that specific incident simply made up an imaginary congressional aide so they could pin a false accusation on Franken. They probably hatched the plot at a Illuminati-sponsored orgy for Roger Stone intern alums.
TenguPhule
@Betty Cracker:
its entirely possible they got suckered by yet another Republican. You said you recalled they personally knew the aide. Where did you see or hear that?
jk
For the billionth fucking time, Sanders and Warren are both too goddamn old for this job, enough already!
Betty Cracker
@TenguPhule: IIRC, when the story about the aide’s accusation broke, it was reported that the person who made the allegation was a Democrat (or at least someone who worked for a Democrat in Congress). Her story was corroborated by other people whom she allegedly told a few years before Franken went to the senate and something like a decade before she went public. If was a setup, she sure was playing a long game!
More recently, after Soros said he wouldn’t support Gillibrand and resurfaced the Franken flap in the media, Gillibrand responded by citing that particular accuser and saying something to the effect that the story from the congressional aide was the last straw and a quote along the lines of, “If we can’t protect one of our own, who can we protect?”
A Ghost To Most
@Betty Cracker: Heaven forbid a comedian tries to make a funny (however in bad taste). Louis C.K., he aint. The way he was used for another’s gain is the kind of shit that Rs do.
TenguPhule
@Betty Cracker:
Where did you see or hear this part? Because i recall nobody was named that could confirm or deny any of it. Even the people “she” allegedly talked to before remained nameless.
TenguPhule
@Betty Cracker:
Execution first, Trials optional.
Betty Cracker
@A Ghost To Most: A lot of behavior that went by the boards as “boys will be boys” 20 or even 10 years ago would sink a public figure today. I’m old enough to understand that it’s disorienting when culture evolves. There are things I said 10 years ago that I’m ashamed of today, and I don’t think it’s entirely fair when people’s past actions are held to new standards.
But on balance, I’ll take the progress, even if it occasionally bites me or someone I admire on the ass. Complaining that you can’t do or say XYZ because people are just too sensitive these days is the kind of shit that Rs do.
Betty Cracker
@TenguPhule: I’m not going down that rat hole, but feel free to Google the accusation from the congressional aide and see for yourself what she said and what evidence reporters presented to bolster her claim — it was widely covered! I think you’re right that neither the accuser nor the corroborators went on record with their names. I don’t blame them a bit since they’d be called ambitious harpies at best and secret Republican ratfuckers at worst.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
So what is the MSM nothing but Boomers with one foot in the grave that they keep on obsession over people to old to be president? I like Warren a lot, but she’s just to old for a 16 hours of stress a day. The job really calls for someone in their 50s.
As for Berni, well it’s been noted he’s far to pure for the Democrats so best of luck to him in independent run in 2020.
TenguPhule
Via google “congressional aide franken accusation”
@Betty Cracker:
Sure shows the sound reasoned judgement we’d expect from people we’d entrust with the highest powers of office AMIRITE?
TenguPhule
@Betty Cracker:
Remember this when Gillibrand’s turn in the barrel comes. And the GOP will make sure it comes.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Enhanced Voting Techniques:
Pst, a good number of Boomers are still in their 50’s.
Mandalay
@TenguPhule:
I really hope that you are not suggesting that the anonymity is in any way evidence of bullshit. And while I am not very keen on Gillibrand, and at one time I had hoped Franken would run for president, there is no way that Gillibrand would simply fabricate such an accusation. She would be ejected from the Senate if she was caught pulling that shit, and hopefully would end up in court as well.
Suppose Franken had gone down a different path, and chosen to say “Fuck off Kirsten – I’m not going anywhere, and you are full of shit!”. Then she would have had to deliver the dirt she was alleging, or resign herself.
I fear you are wandering into tinfoil territory.
TenguPhule
@Mandalay:
At least two of the other anon accusations turned out to be liars. I’m not accusing Gillbrand of making this up. I’m accusing her of being stupid enough to fall for a GOP ratfucking operation that increasingly relied on more and more outlandish claims by unidentified women to justify her knife in Franken’s back. This was an accusation he flat out denied and reads like some GOP hack thought he’d ape a bad comedy skit.
“It’s my right as an entertainer.”
Really? We’re gonna fall for this now?
J R in WV
@Chyron HR:
His turn expired when he quit pretending to be a Democrat the night after the election ~!!~
His turn expired when his delegates to the Convention acted like kindergarteners !!!
His turn expired when he refused to release all his tax returns~!!!!!~
His turn expired his last 5 birthdays !!!
I won’t be voting for Sanders, ever, he’s as big a Russian stooge as Trump is. They’ve got his ass cold somehow, probably tape from his honeymoon, in Moscow. I have no plans to vote for any Russian Stooges. They aren’t funny enough!
J R in WV
@Litlebritdifrnt:
You have every right to express an opinion about US politics ~!!!~ That’s part of America, speaking up about issues and opinions. I respect your opinions and views, even thought I won’t agree with you always, and can be abrasive about disagreements, a little — ;-)