9 hours ago, sivad40 said:

 

 

 

Why are de Blasio and Reich all in with Bernie? @DRW50  I understand why a "revolutionary" like Shaun King who wants to burn down the system is with Bernie, but this these guys are seasoned politicians who should know better. 

 

de Blasio is a longtime activist, as is his wife. They are the same 'movement' as Bernie in one way or another (including some of the ways that involve accusations of grifting...). Unfortunately de Blasio's very poor record as mayor undercuts anything he has to say.

 

I only know the basics about Reich, but I'm sure some well-meaning people do support Bernie. The problem is they aren't running his campaign. This is the type of person who is running his campaign:

 

 

 

Why the hell is this all about YOU, dumbass??? Why is this about people knowing how much you suck? What happened to all those people we're supposed to be having a revolution for? Say what you will about James Carville, I certainly have, but I didn't see him going on TV in the '92 primaries talking all about himself and how people are mean to him.

 

Berenie's campaign people are AWFUL, AWFUL, AWFUL. They have consistently guided him in the wrong directions, enabled the worst of his supporters, and made the wrong moves. 

 

It was Rashida Tlaib deciding that two days before the Iowa caucuses was the best time to lead thousands of people (or however many were there) to boo Hillary (who wasn't even running!!!) that helped derail him in Iowa and started him hobbling onto the path where he is now. 

 

He has the worst instincts and makes the worst choices about who should be on his side.

Edited March 5, 20205 yr by DRW50

1 hour ago, JaneAusten said:

No Sanders is not done. In fact when California comes in he will probably have a slight lead. But it's far shy than what was expected and predicted.

 

These people live in their "fake news" world. Those of us in the real world know how hard Obama worked to try and restore credibility after the Iraq War. He did as much as he could. We know Clinton is well liked. Pelosi I have no idea, I will take your word for it. Trump is popular in Israel, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and North Korea.

 

Thanks

 

Mostly people like Pelosi because she's the only one standing up to Trump, or least she's the only one who makes it onto the news. A lot of people feel like she's the one stopping things (like getting involved with Iran for example) that would end up effecting other countries. But yes, Obama and Clinton are *extremely* well liked, along with Biden mostly. My aunt and grandmother watch RT a lot and I think RT has actually cooled some on Trump lately lol. He's no longer "darling Trump" or "beautiful Trump" but it's still usually positive. Sanders gets a lot of praise on RT too, which adds to my impression that he's a grifter and shady tbh.

I love Robert Reich. I think he's for Bernie Sanders because he really believes in the progressive agenda especially economic justice for the poor and working class. At the same time, he has also spoken highly of Warren and has said we have to get behind the nominee. That's the difference between legitimate progressives and the nuts who are Bernie or bust. Even worse,  Bernie or they will make us all pay by voting Trump.

 

Another difference is that Bernie really is an ideologue. Carville was right about that. It's all about economics and class for him. I think he really believes that economic justice will fix all of our ills. He doesn't acknowledge the intersection of race/gender/poverty. It might be more precise to say he will when pressed, but he tends to shift the discussion right back to economic inequality in general. I can even understand why he believes these things. It's a type of intellectual, white tower way of thinking, but it doesn't connect to many people's experience of the world. RR always acknowledges the extra challenges faced by women and non whites. 

So, according to the Washington Post, our president told Fox News' Sean Hannity that he has a "hunch" the mortality numbers on the coronavirus are being inflated.  (The CDC says the mortality rate is 3.4%.  Donald Trump believes it to be more like one).  Mind you, he has no intel to back up his latest claims; he just has a hunch.

 

If I've said it once, I've said it a million times: this [!@#$%^&*] is gonna get us all killed.

 

2 hours ago, Juliajms said:

I think he really believes that economic justice will fix all of our ills. He doesn't acknowledge the intersection of race/gender/poverty. It might be more precise to say he will when pressed, but he tends to shift the discussion right back to economic inequality in general.

 

In that regard, Bernie Sanders is a lot like my ex-sister-in-law (who is a conservative Republican, by the way).  Neither will address the issue of racism in this country, because neither believes racism exists or exists anymore.

Edited March 5, 20205 yr by Khan

10 hours ago, JaneAusten said:

So Bernie "Anti establishment" Sanders is now reaching out to the actual most popular politician in the US after tanking last night.  What a con artist.

 

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/03/04/sanders-obama-ad-super-tuesday-results-lead-vpx.cnn

 

The best part of that ad is this response from...weeks ago.

 

 

Meanwhile, Rashida Tlaib is on Twitter using Anita Hill to try to get people to not support Biden. As if Hill has not already been hounded enough by the media over the years, she's now being weaponized by a member of Congress? I know Hill has made statements about Biden as recently as January, but to me that's different than being thrown around on Twitter this way - it's just one more politician using her for their own gain. And given Bernie's past writings, is this really a good door to open??

 

So much of the Bernie support is tearing other people down and being divisive. I keep seeing his supporters sneer that it's very sad if you don't want health care/want people to die because someone is mean to you on Twitter, but beyond the refusal to see that many people just do not believe Bernie can help them get health care (unless he wants to sell one of his houses), the main question becomes - if fighting for health care is so important, then why do you compromise your cause by spending months or years harassing candidates and their supporters and posting bile about them? Once upon a time movements were taught to be civil and respectful as much as possible to get something accomplished, yet now you have all these so-called activists who do nothing but abuse and then say "it doesn't matter" or "I can say/do whatever I want because I'm not privileged" (you know like all the older black voters who have been trashed for supporting Biden). Not to mention that most of the toxic elements spearheading Bernie, like Jacobin and Chapo, are run by rich people. This is actually what one of Bernie's biggest supporters said yesterday:

 

 

Many of the people who are suffering and dying in this country never get any attention from her, or the Chapo guys, and sure as hell not from Bernie. I wish they would just admit their true feelings about how little they genuinely care. They have nothing left to lose now anyway - other than about 10 more primaries soon...

While I'm venting, I was also disgusted to see this earlier. 

 

 

Last year, Maza was relentlessly bullied by a far right bigot/grifter and failed Arthur voice artist whose name isn't worth mentioning. Now he is ardently defending the same type of treatment that he received, as long as his cause benefits from that treatment. This is also the exact same line used to justify Trump votes. This tells us where the far left is and what they will be. And consider his fellow bros were so giddy about pushing homophobic bile against Buttigieg, the same used against him, he shows himself as an even more bankrupt, amoral figure. 

 

The older I get, the more I realize that the people who fought against the hard left as much as they did against the hard right probably had good reason. 

Edited March 5, 20205 yr by DRW50

This Op-Ed piece discusses what many of us already know about the ridiculously high bar that women candidates face in terms of perceived "electability" but I'm posting this for those who may be unaware and may need it to be spelled out. 

I do think Cottle fails to examine the intersectional challenges that non-white women candidates may have, as studies have shown that black women, in particular, historically have more difficulty raising funds for their own campaigns (even as they have been shown to be highly effective at raising funds for other candidates, ahem Kamala). Think about the abysmal statistic of how many black women have ever been in the Senate. A prize to anyone who can name even a handful of black women who have ever been elected to the Senate.  I'll wait. For a people who have been in the U.S. for over 400 years, that's a statistic that serves as an indictment on this country's electoral system.

But I digress.

Still worth a read.

 

Michelle Cottle: Maybe next time, ladies

Am I the only one who thinks Tlaib, etc. trading on Anita Hill's name in this primary will backfire? She is not a shrinking violet when it comes to being appropriated for coverage, not by Biden last year or I suspect anyone else.

Edited March 5, 20205 yr by Vee

22 minutes ago, Vee said:

Am I the only one who thinks Tlaib, etc. trading on Anita Hill's name in this primary will backfire? She is not a shrinking violet when it comes to being appropriated for coverage, not by Biden last year or I suspect anyone else.

 

I hope it does. If Anita Hill wanted to tell people to support Bernie, or Warren, she'd have every right, but for someone else to use her name, and in such a glib Q&A format, is incredibly crass and soulless. This isn't new for Tlaib either. It's part of the bubble Bernie and his supporters tend to be in.

1 hour ago, Vee said:

Am I the only one who thinks Tlaib, etc. trading on Anita Hill's name in this primary will backfire? She is not a shrinking violet when it comes to being appropriated for coverage, not by Biden last year or I suspect anyone else.

 

Hill has already said that she would vote for Biden if he's the nominee. This is another example of how the Bernie left only looks at marginalized people in a purely transactional fashion. She doesn't give a [!@#$%^&*] about Anita Hill.

Looks like Warren is dropping out. 

 

I've already said this too many times, but she and Kamala were the only ones I would have been happy to vote for and could have seen as being President. She made some mistakes, but so many were clearly waiting for her to fall. 

 

She will be one hell of a force in a Cabinet if she gets the chance. I hope she gets that chance.

1 hour ago, DRW50 said:

[Elizabeth Warren] will be one hell of a force in a Cabinet if she gets the chance. I hope she gets that chance.

 

I hope she gets the chance, too.  I would have gladly voted for Elizabeth Warren, had I believed she stood the best chance of defeating Donald Trump.  She actually came into this contest with plans and not just rhetoric.  I just believe that we still aren't ready for a female president, and that after everything we have been through with Trump, people are too skittish -- maybe more skittish than ever -- to break that glass ceiling.

 

3 hours ago, Vee said:

Am I the only one who thinks Tlaib, etc. trading on Anita Hill's name in this primary will backfire?

 

Nope.  If there's one thing I know about Black women, it's that they don't like their names in other people's mouths without their permission. 

 

By the way, has anyone else been following the back-and-forth between John Roberts and Chuck Schumer?

Edited March 5, 20205 yr by Khan

Warren doesn't have to endorse anyone at this point. If she does, good for her but it's not a necessity. The primaries have managed to survey without Obama's endorsement thus far. Clyburn's endorsement was probably the one that actually shifted the race. After SC, events more or less progressed in a certain manner. 

Just now, DramatistDreamer said:

Warren doesn't have to endorse anyone at this point.

 

Agree.

 

In a way, Elizabeth Warren sits in the catbird seat.  Her endorsement could mean plenty to Joe Biden's or Bernie Sanders' campaigns.  So, if I were her, I would just say, "I will support whoever the nominee turns out to be," and then leave it at that.

I said my piece on my candidate and how proud I am of her, warts and all, the other day. No sorrow, she's just gonna keep moving forward. And maybe make Joe and especially Bernie work for an endorsement. I think Joe is more than willing to work with her re: policy.