Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

JFC, are there no editors left at that goddamn rag?

Many life forms that would benefit from greater intelligence, sadly, do not have it.

He really is that stupid.

Let’s not be the monsters we hate.

My years-long effort to drive family and friends away has really paid off this year.

Technically true, but collectively nonsense

President Musk and Trump are both poorly raised, coddled 8 year old boys.

Republicans cannot even be trusted with their own money.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

People are complicated. Love is not.

Republicans: “Abortion is murder but you can take a bus to get one.” Easy peasy.

Nothing says ‘pro-life’ like letting children go hungry.

They want us to be overwhelmed and exhausted. Focus. Resist. Oppose.

A sufficient plurality of insane, greedy people can tank any democratic system ever devised, apparently.

You can’t attract Republican voters. You can only out organize them.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

🎶 Those boots were made for mockin’ 🎵

Republicans don’t want a speaker to lead them; they want a hostage.

He seems like a smart guy, but JFC, what a dick!

Radicalized white males who support Trump are pitching a tent in the abyss.

“woke” is the new caravan.

An almost top 10,000 blog!

“I was told there would be no fact checking.”

Of course you can have champagne before noon. That’s why orange juice was invented.

You are here: Home / Archives for Politics / Democratic Politics

Democratic Politics

Open Thread: The 2024 DNC Convention Will Be In Chicago

by | 43 Comments

This post is in: , , ,

… The convention will take place Aug. 19-22 next year. It is expected to draw 5,000 to 7,000 delegates and alternates and attract up to 50,000 visitors to Chicago.

Evening events will be at the United Center — the main site of the 1996 Democratic convention in Chicago and the largest arena in North America — with daytime business to be conducted at the McCormick Place Convention Center, the location of the 2012 NATO Summit.

Delegates will be housed in about 30 hotels in Chicago.

For more than a year, Gov. J.B. Pritzker, Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., a co-chair of the Democratic National Committee and Mayor Lori Lightfoot have led a drive for Chicago to host the Democrats in 2024.

Chicago won the convention with a bid package of about $80 million…

By selecting Chicago for the convention, Democrats are highlighting the importance of the Midwest “Blue Wall” states — Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota. The governors in these states, all Democrats, were all reelected in 2022.

Chicago’s convention backers highlighted the abundance of downtown-area union hotels; the large, centrally located convention venues near hotels; Midway and O’Hare airports; and the restaurants and museums in the city…

The Sun-Times earlier reported that Pritzker and others pledged that the DNC would not realize any losses from the convention. The DNC requires an extensive financial package from the host city to cover a variety of costs, from festivities connected to a political convention to paying for the venues…

Atlanta’s convention argument focused on its important history in the civil rights movement and its status as a swing state sending two Democratic senators to Washington.

But Chicago and New York slammed Atlanta because Georgia is a right-to-work state and has only two union hotels. Organized labor and union voters are an important part of the Democratic base…

show full post on front page

Open Thread: The 2024 DNC Convention Will Be In ChicagoPost + Comments (43)

An Un-Holy Alliance (and Kittens!)

by | 198 Comments

This post is in: , , ,

The Republican Party.  It’s an ugly coalition, surely an un-holy alliance of hate, but this alliance is how the Republicans get to nearly 50%.

Roger Moore wrote this a week or two ago, and I have been thinking about it.

I would put it a little differently.  I think they fundamentally recognize their ideas are losing popularity.  They wouldn’t be trying to cheat if they thought they could win fairly.

The fascist wing of the party are the ones who think it’s more important to get their way than to have free and fair elections.  The remainder of the party is a mix.  Some of them are willing to give up on some facet of the party platform to try to win, and some of them still want to stick to the platform but think they’ll get their turn to implement it once the Democrats show their asses and lose.

I guess some of them also want to implement the platform and think they can weasel their way to a victory by lying about their goals.  That group is less significant, though, because this is obviously a very limited strategy.

It’s hard to win reelection when you have a track record of doing stuff the electorate doesn’t like, though people like Glenn Youngkin have shown it can be effective as a short-term approach.

They have formed an unholy alliance, but it’s working.  For now.  Is it working because they all care about power and about winning more than they care anything else?  Is it their ugly version of “Just win, baby!” ??

It may have started as a quest for power, but now it seems to be all about hate.  Or maybe hate is just a means to hang on to power?

I mean, think about the religious right.  So-called Christians.  They have signed on to all the hate and ugliness that is the antithesis of christianity.  Truly, Jesus wept.

So what’s our ultimate driving force, the thing that can bring us all together?  That can allow us to drive the current iteration of Republican ugliness right into the sea?  Are we partly there already?  What other pieces do we need to put in place?

Something to think about maybe, on a quiet weekend afternoon? :-)  Your thoughts?

Oh, and here’s a photo of the new kitty that Beautiful Plumage is bringing home today!  (fluffy kitty on the right)

An Un-Holy Alliance 1
Black kitty is staying in her current home, Marie is the fluffy kitty that is coming to live with Beautiful Plumange, and the baby is her friend’s granddaughter.

Black kitty and the new dog get along fine, but apparently the new dog and Marie are not doing well together, so Beautiful Plumage gets to have Marie all to herself, and no doubt will spoil Marie the way she should be spoiled by her new servant.

Open thread.

An Un-Holy Alliance (and Kittens!)Post + Comments (198)

Interesting Read About Arizona (Open Thread)

by | 96 Comments

This post is in: , , ,

There’s an article about Arizona in the Los Angelos Times.  I think there must be some mistake because they quote a Republican strategist, someone from Ruben Gallego’s team, and a Democratic strategist who has worked with Kirsten Sinema.  No one does that anymore!

There are several questions to be answered heading into next year’s election, chiefly whether Gallego cleared the field; how much former President Trump will influence the Republican primary, and what role, if any, Sinema will play in a potential three-person race. But the biggest question may be how purple is Arizona?

“I wish I could say that Arizona’s turning blue and all the good work we’ve done is convincing people that progressive ideas are right, but that’s not where the state is yet,” said Stacy Pearson, a Phoenix-based Democratic strategist and longtime Sinema ally. “Arizona is not any more progressive, but it continues to reject extremism.”

I knew that Arizona is fairly evenly split between Republicans, Independents and Democrats, with Democrats coming in last by a few percentage points, and I found the information quoted below to be less than encouraging.

Sinema’s favorability rating went up 13 percentage points with independents, to 42%, and 5 percentage points, to 43%, with Republicans after she announced she was leaving the party, according to a January Morning Consult poll. Her support with Democrats fell 12 percentage points, down to 30%.

We all knew her support with Dems has cratered, but I had no idea that Independents more than made up for that with their increase.  It’s not at all surprising that Republicans were happy she is leaving the party.

I am pretty sure I have read in the comments here that Sinema’s support was cratering everyday.

In the article, the Democratic strategist working for Gallego’s campaign thinks he can win it.  The Democratic strategist who has been working with Sinema believes she can win it.  The Republican strategist is quoted as saying this:

“You have to go into this race assuming that she doesn’t stay in, and that you need to win with 50[% of the vote] plus one,” he said. “If she does stay in, there’s a very good chance that she will take more Republican votes than Democratic votes in the general election, and that makes it all the more important that Republicans nominate a strong candidate.”

Apparently Gallego raised more than $1 million dollars in the first 24 hours after he announced he is running.  An article from last week posited that the Democratic Party is going to decide who to back in Arizona based on the numbers for the first quarter in which Gallego announced – based on how much/many of the donations are coming from folks in AZ, because they think he can’t win if his support is mostly national.

Sinema has $8 million in her campaign account.  I have no idea how far that goes these days, but it seems like a significant amount of money to me.

I don’t have any predictions, but it’s certainly interesting.  The article suggests that AZ isn’t really a purple state; they just reject the extreme MAGA republicans.  I hope it doesn’t come down to whether the Rs run a crazy MAGA candidate, or just a regular awful Republican.  They are all MAGA as far as I’m concerned.  If you support it, you own it.

Open thread.

Interesting Read About Arizona (Open Thread)Post + Comments (96)

So This Is An Interesting Article

by | 158 Comments

This post is in: , ,

There seems to be a fair amount of enthusiasm for Ruben Gallego on Balloon Juice.

Here’s his ad, in case you haven’t seen it.

Here’s not shy!  Here’s Ruben Gallego, 2 months ago, calling out Kyrsten Sinema for not raising a finger to help Democrats win in November.

The article below makes the case that Democrats are waiting to see what kind of support financial support Ruben Gallego gets from donors within Arizona, because small-dollar donations from individuals is likely to be correlated to votes, and they want want to see what kind of enthusiasm there is before the party is willing to support him publicly.

That seems like a smart strategy to me, but I am certainly not a Democratic party strategist.  What do you guys think about that?

L.A. Times

So as you can see Gallego’s announcement on Monday that he would challenge Sinema in the Democratic primary has been somewhat of a slow train coming. Funny thing is while having a Democrat officially challenge Sinema puts the national party in an awkward situation, it’s actually the frustrated liberals in Arizona who are now on the clock.

I’ll explain.

The deadline to report all of the money a candidate receives and spends in the first quarter is April 15, but the books close March 31. That leaves Gallego and his supporters a little more than two months to raise enough money to prove there’s either enthusiasm for him or enough blue anger at Sinema to warrant national resources. And it can’t just be big checks from outsiders. There needs to be proof that there would be votes as well as dollars. As one political operative told me, national leaders will be focusing more on the small checks from local residents to gauge how viable Gallego’s chances are before deciding how to back him.

And if his first-quarter numbers are strong, the national party will have to back him, which will undoubtedly affect how the incumbent maneuvers in the Senate. Though keep in mind, Sinema has yet to announce she’s even seeking reelection. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer wouldn’t say whether he would endorse her if she did. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin wouldn’t say either. Neither would Gary Peters, chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

If this were baseball, she would be out. But this is politics, and Gallego — while liked — isn’t necessarily known around the state for his fundraising prowess, I’m told. So, national Democrats aren’t being coy, as much as patient. They really don’t have to say anything until the wallets in Arizona do first.

Besides, this whole dynamic is new to all of us.

While we have independents besides Sinema in the Senate now, Maine and Vermont don’t have nearly as many variables to negotiate, starting with race. Maine and Vermont are more than 95% white. Nearly a third of Arizonans are Latino. Indigenous and Black make up another 11%. Then there’s the politics surrounding the border — and I’m not talking about the Canadian one. But the biggest variable is size. Of the 4.3 million registered voters in the state, a third are independents.

…

This is why the Federal Election Commission quarterly report is so instrumental in determining the party’s next move. The amount of local money going to Gallego — or another challenger — provides clarity. Unless there is a measurable indication that liberal voters in Arizona are really ready to move on from Sinema, why would Schumer and company speak against her during the primary and alienate a potential ally? And remember, Gallego must prove he’s a viable candidate not only against Sinema but against whatever Republican might emerge to face him.

I remember when Barack Obama asked for $5 donations in 2007, and he touted the # of donations more than the dollars raised.  I still have my little Obama HOPE lapel pin, and I’m still choosing hope over fear, but my hope is a lot more guarded than it was in 2007 and 2008.

Open thread.

So This Is An Interesting ArticlePost + Comments (158)

Leader Hakeem vs. ‘Squeaker’ McCarthy, Part 2

by | 114 Comments

This post is in: , , ,

Look at these photos.

Leader Jeffries vs. ‘Squeaker’ McCarthy, Part 2 1  Leader Jeffries vs. ‘Squeaker’ McCarthy, Part 2 2
If you just look at the faces, with no context, the first guy looks like he might be constipated, but the guy on the right seems happy enough.

In the full picture, I see a very gracious man handing over the symbol of power, and another guy saying “gimme that!”

Leader Jeffries vs. ‘Squeaker’ McCarthy, Part 2

Leader Jeffries:

As Democrats we do believe in a country for everyone….
We believe that in America, our diversity is a strength.
It is not a weakness.
It is an economic strength. A competitive strength. A cultural strength.
Our diversity is a strength.
It is not a weakness.

We are a gorgeous mosaic of people from throughout the world. As John Lewis would sometimes remind us on this floor, we may have come over on different ships. But we’re all in the same boat now.

We are white.
We are black.
We are Latino.
We are Asian.
We Are Native American.

We are Christian.
We are Jewish.
We are Hindu.
We are religious.
We are secular.

We are gay.
We are straight.
We are young.
We are older.

We are women.
We are men.

We are citizens.
We are dreamers.

Out of many, we are one.
That’s what makes America a great country.

Squeaker McCarthy:

Okay, I confess.

I couldn’t listen to McCarthy.

If someone did listen and wants to share a short summary in the comments, I can add it to the post.

This week will certainly tell us a lot – a lot about the rules themselves, a lot about whether republicans will vote in lock step, a lot about what we can expect to see from the various factions in the republican party.  Can they get rules passed?  Will the rules be passed as a package, take it or leave it?  Or will there be votes on the rules, one by one?

Might we see a repeat of sorts of the 15 votes for Squeaker?

Thoughts and predictions?  It would be irresponsible not to speculate!

For my money, I think the big fight will be related to committee chairs – isn’t that what the (near) fisticuffs was about on Friday night?   I think the political terrorists do not get their promised positions as chairs, and then because of that they set the whole thing on fire.  I don’t always have to be right, but please please let me be right on this.

Open thread.

Leader Hakeem vs. ‘Squeaker’ McCarthy, Part 2Post + Comments (114)

Leader Jeffries vs. ‘Squeaker’ McCarthy

by | 241 Comments

This post is in: , , , ,

Going forward, I will be calling Kevin either “Squeaker McCarthy” or “The Squeaker”, or just plain “Squeaker”.

*Kudos to Geminid for either coming up with that, or for sharing that with us, whatever the case may be.

Has everyone watched the Hakeem Jeffries speech from last night?  I am about to watch it now.

For the record, even if the Rules package passes without incident, my money is on Squeaker fucking up the Rules somehow, in some way that we can exploit.

So for myself, I am swearing off pre-worrying about the Rules.  I’m going to focus on the fact that these past few days have allowed us to see just what Hakeem Jeffries is made of, just what the new Democratic leadership is made of, and what the Democrats in the House are made of.

I came away impressed on all three counts.

In terms of leadership, we have the best of both worlds:  outstanding new leadership and the presence of Nancy Pelosi still in the House, with all the wisdom and experience she brings with her.

So fuck the Squeaker, and fuck the party he rode in on, which hopefully he will drive further into the ground.

Open thread.

Update:  link shared by JeffreyW

Leader Jeffries vs. 'Squeaker' McCarthy 1

 

Leader Jeffries vs. ‘Squeaker’ McCarthyPost + Comments (241)

Day 104: The Final Vote to End All Votes?

by | 504 Comments

This post is in: , , ,

Please god, let someone fuck with McCarthy tonight,  just because they can.  One final humiliation, please, before the real shit show begins.

Has any Speaker of the House ever summarily dismissed people from the regular committees just because they can???

I will confess that I am holding a grudge against NY for fucking up some of their House races.  It’s possible that we didn’t even have to be in this position in the first place, with the crazy train being run by the extreme crazy bunch.

Open thread.

 

 

Day 104: The Final Vote to End All Votes?Post + Comments (504)