Vee

That's the legendary Nancy Stephens as Marion Chambers from H1/H2/H20 to the left in the pic with Anthony Michael Hall.

Maybe they didn't grasp it because the premise was stupid beyond comprehension.

JMO but I don't think Warren's base is Sanders'. There's more flexibility to moderate. There's a reason his bros have spent the last weeks and months taking early potshots at her.

I just didn't see her as 'falling apart' in most of those arenas. I think she's had stumbles on M4A of late, but that can be rectified. I also think she shrugged off the birth certificate thing over the last six months, which I didn't think she could do. And make no mistake: Not all of those attacks or panic are about sincere distress over simple electability. There are a lot of old guard in the party and donor class who will only ever feel comfortable with a centrist right-leaning moderate that leans into accommodating the framing of the parties dating back to the '80s, when Democrats had to constantly apologize for being Democrats and beg to curry favor with 'sensitive' conservatives. That's also a big part of the mainstream media framing on us, and it has to end. I grew up with a mother who worked on the Hill for the Dems her whole career; before that she was a radical, and she grew and learned over decades. I am not a dreamer. I understand pragmatism. I think Obama did the best he could with some impossible situations and you will never hear me shít on Obamacare, which has been invaluable to many people. I also don't think we're anywhere near being ready for M4A; Warren has said as much in leaked conference audio intended to discredit her to the Bernie wing. But what we can do is work to improve that system and many others. It's Warren's unapologetic forcefulness on these issues that frightens and outrages the right-leaning media as well as a lot of the 'sensible' Dem donors. I know some people genuinely like her and fear she can't win; I've met them. I just disagree. But as to the rest of the hard push against her, that is engineered. From media to the rich, it's about keeping the party in its place. I think Warren speaks most of all to the larger base, not just irrational radicals or stodgy centrists, and does so in a plainspoken way. And I think she's a good fighter. Is she perfect, no, but she's the strongest we've got. That's just my take. As for Bloomberg - don't make me laugh. I lived under that revenant's administration for years. He makes poor Joe look like the second coming of FDR. People begging him to come in just shows how badly the party needs more change. But in the end so much of this drama is typical primary bluster. When the rubber hits the road, whoever the candidate is most of these people will fall in line.

I thought Warren had crippled herself nine months ago with the ancestry test crap. I was wrong, she bounced back very strong. I think she can win. I have a lot of love for Joe Biden but I think he's hopelessly out of touch with the moment now - preaching about sitting down at the table with the Republicans again. We're so far past that. This isn't 'hail fellow well met' bipartisan sport like the old days anymore. The only way to effect systemic change in the places we need it before total catastrophe is to work aggressively and fight back knowing the GOP wants to delegitimize and disempower us at every turn. They take Joe and others' eagerness for comity as a license to kill. It has to end. I think Warren can do that while remaining sensible and rational about the realities of working within our system. I would've loved Harris, but that's not going to happen. So that's where I'm at. YMMV.

Bye!

They can try. Didn't work for Roy Moore.

@DRW50 The first time they've ever been interviewed together, to my knowledge.

Sounds like Season 3 is likely. Which I expected tbh.

Happy Halloween! Meanwhile, somehow not an Onion headline:

I mean, I agree their new corporate overlords are scum. But I also think much of the Gawker Media site folks bought and paid for this ongoing slow motion destruction by playing the cool kids, livetweeting their tantrums over Hogan‘s sex tape, or whether they can or can’t out professional competitors at Conde Nast with no public profile, and still acting like they’re doing it all out of some great spirit of revolution and speaking truth to power. I remember their lowlights; it was scummy shít. Whenever they got in hot water they'd default to “lol we’re just bloggers, don’t hold us to any standards”. And then whenever they couldn't do as they pleased, they’d throw tantrums in posts or liveblog on twitter and whine and demand to be taken seriously as journalists again. Big surprise the creeps from Wall Street or wherever don’t respond to passive aggressive protest posts that were able to cow overindulgent daddy figure and former owner Nick Denton. This new mythology about Gawker actually being journalistic crusaders is their own revisionism, including at the satellite sites, some of whom have good journalists but it’s not exactly John Reed in the Russian Revolution. There’s also a lot of incestuous bullshit re: what they sometimes cover, especially at Kotaku and io9. They got high on their own supply and stayed there, and now they’re still trying to operate like they’re Nick Denton’s overindulged children. Tweeting through it will not save the company. Foolish choices killed it. Some of them have done good work there at those sites, and elsewhere. They should go do that. Meanwhile: