Tactics Employed by the Democratic Establishment
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
londonfog
Well-Known Member
Do you think you will ever get a chance to vote for Bernie or did you blow your only chance, when you went full
.If he is found guilty of helping his wife get fraudulent loans should he go to jail ? would you write him ?
Tim Fox
Well-Known Member
YAY ,, THIS IS VERY GOOD NEWS THANKS FOR SHARINGSACRAMENTO, California – Today the California Assembly voted to approve the Prime Time Primary (Senate Bill 56, which will advance California’s presidential primary from one of the last in the nation to one of the first.
Senator Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) is author of SB 568, and principal co-author and Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore Kevin Mullin (D-San Mateo) presented the bill in the Assembly.
Secretary of State Alex Padilla is the sponsor of the Prime Time Primary.
"Moving California's presidential primary to March from June means candidates in both parties can't treat immigration, climate change, criminal justice reform and investing in jobs and innovation like afterthoughts, as they did too often in 2016,” said Senator Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens). “The prime time primary will lift up the voices of Californians on issues where we are leading the nation if not the world."
“Voter empowerment and engagement has been and continues to be a cornerstone of my legislative agenda,” Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore Kevin Mullin said. “Voters tend to be more engaged in the process when there is a candidate or initiative they are passionate about. Making California part of the early presidential primary process, gives voters a more prominent voice. SB 568 will benefit all Californians regardless of party affiliation and make California count and provide our voters a prominent voice in the selection of our presidential candidates.”
“Too often California is relegated to serving as a political ATM for presidential candidates. Moving up California’s primary will strengthen the voice of California voters in the presidential nominating process,” Secretary of State Alex Padilla said. “The Prime time Primary Act has received bipartisan support, and will help ensure that issues important to Californians are prioritized by presidential candidates from all political parties.”
California Assembly Passes Prime Time Primary Bill to Make California Count in Presidential Election
CA has the highest number of delegates (551), and it's likely whoever wins CA will win the Democratic primary
California wants to pick the 2020 Democratic presidential nominee
California moves up 2020 presidential primary to March in bid for more sway
CA has three major markets, San Francisco/Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Diego, which means it's the most expensive state to campaign in, which translates to a disadvantage to any non establishment candidates
Who's running for president in 2020 from California?
SACRAMENTO, California – Today the California Assembly voted to approve the Prime Time Primary (Senate Bill 56
Senator Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) is author of SB 568, and principal co-author and Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore Kevin Mullin (D-San Mateo) presented the bill in the Assembly.
Secretary of State Alex Padilla is the sponsor of the Prime Time Primary.
"Moving California's presidential primary to March from June means candidates in both parties can't treat immigration, climate change, criminal justice reform and investing in jobs and innovation like afterthoughts, as they did too often in 2016,” said Senator Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens). “The prime time primary will lift up the voices of Californians on issues where we are leading the nation if not the world."
“Voter empowerment and engagement has been and continues to be a cornerstone of my legislative agenda,” Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore Kevin Mullin said. “Voters tend to be more engaged in the process when there is a candidate or initiative they are passionate about. Making California part of the early presidential primary process, gives voters a more prominent voice. SB 568 will benefit all Californians regardless of party affiliation and make California count and provide our voters a prominent voice in the selection of our presidential candidates.”
“Too often California is relegated to serving as a political ATM for presidential candidates. Moving up California’s primary will strengthen the voice of California voters in the presidential nominating process,” Secretary of State Alex Padilla said. “The Prime time Primary Act has received bipartisan support, and will help ensure that issues important to Californians are prioritized by presidential candidates from all political parties.”
California Assembly Passes Prime Time Primary Bill to Make California Count in Presidential Election
CA has the highest number of delegates (551), and it's likely whoever wins CA will win the Democratic primary
California wants to pick the 2020 Democratic presidential nominee
California moves up 2020 presidential primary to March in bid for more sway
CA has three major markets, San Francisco/Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Diego, which means it's the most expensive state to campaign in, which translates to a disadvantage to any non establishment candidates
Who's running for president in 2020 from California?
+rep
Tim Fox
Well-Known Member
man i never thought in 2020 when Bernie is elected that we would have even MORE mess to clean up after 45 and his crownies get done with things, this new budget and tax cuts is going to really really hurt people,,, I work with the sick and the dieing , in home care,, and i see the plight of the sick and poor daily,,, this is going to hurt them so bad,, ill be there,, to hold thier hands,,
Do you think you will ever get a chance to vote for Bernie or did you blow your only chance, when you went full
If he is found guilty of helping his wife get fraudulent loans should he go to jail ? would you write him ?
You better get your 40 psychiatric visits before trumpcare kicks into place.
That's one of the things to be taken away.
if they don't get kicked out and put on the streets- that's where they used to be..are you familiar with the 1880's per chance?
Tim Fox
Well-Known Member
yes,, its already happening here in Portland Oregon,, rents have sky rocketed, and the poor are being handed double rent in creases by land lords,, the sheer amount of people living in RV's here now is so high its completely noticabel,, they dont even try to hide anymore,, tent cities under bridges here,, its real and the suffering is real,, and its going to get so much worse after the GOP are done ripping it apart,,,
i watched a documentary on New York it covered from the 1400's till now,, and the parts thru the 1700 and 1800's was hard to watch,, the suffering and plight of people,, and how hard the worked to survive and pull thru,, and the gains made to help all of us have a better living condition is being dissmantled,, we will be back to poor houses and orphanages soon,,,
What's the deadline for registering to run for the democratic primary?
you see more and more 'normal' people out there now..no safety net from the government other than $200/monthly for SNAP..$5/day Dinner KFC 2-tender GO-Cup $3.20, Breakfast banana $1.00..bank that $.80
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
If only it were that simple. The Tea Party succeeded in dragging the Republican Party to the right, even against the wishes of most of its members. Its influence is still reverberating through American politics.
I think there's an even larger group of course who want to see the Democratic Party move to the Left. The establishment party itself is bought and paid for and won't move of its own accord- see the recent reshuffling of the DNC for proof of that- so influence must come from outside.
I doubt a third party to the Left of the Democrats will be viable- or needed in the medium term (8-20 years)- but the threat of one is needed NOW in order to push the establishment Democrats to the Left and thereby better represent the needs of their constituents.
wait until all those people in kentucky, wva etc find they have no subsidy for their KYnnect = ACA.
It's really the donors who want no legacy and don't care if millions are uninsured to do it.
voters don't want to repeal/replace.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
In the eyes of the donors who call the shots, she was never disgraced to begin with; her only sin was being caught.um Donna Brazile?
what is SHE doing back..didn't she RESIGN in DISGRACE?
How do you REDEEM yourself in MONTHS?
Thanks, Citizens United!
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
It's a real word. It was just out of favor for awhile. I don't know that it will be making as much of a comeback as, say, dotard lol
look how quickly SHE was recycled..DWS and you know who are waiting in the wings:
https://www.onwardtogether.org/
The pretense will be to 'draft' her..'we're doomed..there's no one else to run'..completely ignoring bernie again..muddying the waters.
this time..voters (bernie bros) are gonna go berzerk!
Last edited:
I like that word and have used it several times since Kim Jong Un turned me on to it.
covfve..not so much.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Thank James Buchanan, Charles & David Koch, the Walton family, David and Rebekah Mercer...
Because the rich have the right to govern simply because of their status. Not one shred of evidence to support this idea, but enough Americans are stupid enough to believe it that the Chump made it into office.
Tim Fox
Well-Known Member
completely agree,, and thier "so called " new channel is brainwashing them all,, even to the point of doing crazy things,, with cars and guns and more,, really scary
Bernie Sanders Leads Biden:
"Most Democratic primary voters (58 percent) are undecided or could not provide a name when asked in an open-ended question whom they would support," the Granite State Poll found. "Democratic primary voters most recently mentioned Bernie Sanders (14 percent), Joe Biden (five percent), Hillary Clinton (five percent), Elizabeth Warren (four percent), and Joseph Kennedy III (four percent)."
Sanders' support rose when the respondents were provided a list of potential candidates. That question revealed 31 percent support for the self-described socialist, compared to 24 percent for Biden and 13 percent for Warren.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bernie-sanders-leads-joe-biden-in-2020-new-hampshire-poll/article/2637949
"Most Democratic primary voters (58 percent) are undecided or could not provide a name when asked in an open-ended question whom they would support," the Granite State Poll found. "Democratic primary voters most recently mentioned Bernie Sanders (14 percent), Joe Biden (five percent), Hillary Clinton (five percent), Elizabeth Warren (four percent), and Joseph Kennedy III (four percent)."
Sanders' support rose when the respondents were provided a list of potential candidates. That question revealed 31 percent support for the self-described socialist, compared to 24 percent for Biden and 13 percent for Warren.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bernie-sanders-leads-joe-biden-in-2020-new-hampshire-poll/article/2637949
This cunt is going to run and I hate to break it to her, George Clooney cashola ain't gonna be there this time..EVERYONE wishes she would just go away:
Hillary Clinton has taken off the "straitjacket" she says she was forced into during the 2016 Democratic primary.
In her new campaign memoir, the former presidential candidate wasn't exactly subtle about her disapproval of Sen. Bernie Sanders' campaign against her for the Democratic presidential nomination, writing that Sanders, a Vermont independent, caused her "lasting damage," deepened divisions among progressives, and "pav[ed] the way for then candidate Donald Trump's 'Crooked Hillary' campaign."
While many, including Sanders, dismissed Clinton's criticism as an irritating re-hashing of a now-irrelevant battle, the divisions between Clinton's centrist wing of the Democratic Party and Sanders' more progressive (or more populist) supporters couldhave implications for Democrats in the 2018 midterms and even the 2020 presidential election.
'Purity tests'
The day after Clinton released her book, Sanders unveiled his much-anticipated single-payer healthcare plan. Short on details and ambitious in its vision, the proposal won the endorsement of 15 top Democrats, many of them likely 2020 presidential candidates.
But other party leaders, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, distanced themselves from the plan.
"We want to move the issue forward," Schumer said, adding that "there are are many different bills out there," including "many good ones" that he and other Democrats are examining.
Pelosi warned that support for a single-payer system shouldn't become a "litmus test" for Democrats.
In an interview on the liberal podcast "Pod Save America," Clinton said that while she supports the proposal as a "political statement," she doubts it's much more than a pipe dream at this point.
She also criticized the plan's lack of particulars in an interview with Vox.
"I don't know what the particulars are," Clinton told Vox. "As you might remember, during the campaign he introduced a single-payer bill every year he was in Congress — and when somebody finally read it, he couldn't explain it and couldn't really tell people how much it was going to cost."
Democratic strategist Rodell Mollineau, a co-founder of the consulting firm Rokk Solutions, echoed this skepticism.
"I believe in single-payer," he said. "I think there's a big difference between saying you support single-payer and figuring out a way to get the votes and an economic plan in order to get it passed and to pay for it."
Clinton raised the issue of ideological "purity" in her book, arguing that Sanders unfairly narrowed the progressive platform.
"It was beyond frustrating that Bernie acted as if he had a monopoly on political purity and that he had set himself up as the sole arbiter of what it meant to be progressive," she wrote, adding that Sanders simultaneously gave "short shrift to important issues such as immigration, reproductive rights, racial justice, and gun safety."
Mollineau warns that ideological tests could prove just as dangerous for more centrist candidates in 2020.
"When I hear or read that there's some folks who think that someone like a Kamala Harris might not be progressive enough to be our nominee in 2020 — now regardless of whether you support her or not, that's a ludicrous statement and it's a horrible way of applying a purity test," he said.
Steve Schale, a Florida-based Democratic strategist and former adviser to President Barack Obama in the state, says that ideological debates among progressives are not what the party needs right now.
"We're not going to win elections trying to make sure that we have 100% loyalty among 35 or 40% of the electorate, which is what Democrats are," Schale said. "We've got to have a conversation about how we grow the appeal."
Unity among liberals is important, Schale argues, but not nearly as critical as opening the party back up to those independents or one-time Democratic voters who, for a myriad of reasons, abandoned Clinton.
"It's easy to scapegoat the base, or to scapegoat Sanders voters," he said. "But the reality is that [Clinton] lost because the places Barack Obama was much more competitive in in 2008 and 2012 ... she just got torched in."
Onwards and leftwards
Throughout Clinton's book "What Happened," and in interviews over the last several days, Clinton argued that Sanders is not a Democrat. She alleged that he ran for the nomination not to help the party, but to "disrupt" it.
And by that measure, she says, he succeeded.
Mollineau argues that Sanders and others eager to challenge the party establishment "can't have it both ways."
"If you want to affect change within the Democratic Party than you need to become closer to the Democratic Party – you can't lob bombs from outside," Mollineau said, adding that while Sanders "could have been doing more to change the Democratic Party from within" throughout his years in Congress, "he just chose not to."
But while Clinton's career in public office is likely over, Sanders still remains a powerful force in national politics. For several months, he's held the mantle as the most popular politician in the country.
Many Democrats, including Jill Filipovic, an author and liberal commentator, argue that it is now Sanders' responsibility to unite the left.
"Sanders has positioned himself as a leader for the future of the left, and his followers agree, with near-messianic worship," Fillipovic wrote in a CNN column. "Embracing the whole left would be a good place for him to start."
But as Thomas Edsall pointed out in a recent New York Times column, there is evidence that progressives have only moved farther left since the election. He cites Pew Research Center data that shows that Democratic voters — particularly whites, Millennials, and post-grads — are much more eager to label themselves "liberal" in 2017 than they were in past years.
And while the left has seen a resurgence in support since November, the money and energy that's flowing into the party is going to Sanders' Our Revolution organization and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, rather than the Democratic National Committee, which is suffering somewhat of a crisis of credibility post-2016.
While Mollineau admits that there are "ideological battles" that will likely be fought in the coming months and years, the tension between Clinton and Sanders won't necessarily remain central.
Although he doesn't put it past campaigns or super PACs to use lingering 2016 tension to "gain a tactical advantage" by aligning a candidate with Clinton or Sanders in an effort to alienate the others' supporters.
"It wouldn't surprise me, it's just a matter of how powerful that is and whether or not voters have moved on by then," he said.
http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-2020-2017-9
Hillary Clinton has taken off the "straitjacket" she says she was forced into during the 2016 Democratic primary.
In her new campaign memoir, the former presidential candidate wasn't exactly subtle about her disapproval of Sen. Bernie Sanders' campaign against her for the Democratic presidential nomination, writing that Sanders, a Vermont independent, caused her "lasting damage," deepened divisions among progressives, and "pav[ed] the way for then candidate Donald Trump's 'Crooked Hillary' campaign."
While many, including Sanders, dismissed Clinton's criticism as an irritating re-hashing of a now-irrelevant battle, the divisions between Clinton's centrist wing of the Democratic Party and Sanders' more progressive (or more populist) supporters couldhave implications for Democrats in the 2018 midterms and even the 2020 presidential election.
'Purity tests'
The day after Clinton released her book, Sanders unveiled his much-anticipated single-payer healthcare plan. Short on details and ambitious in its vision, the proposal won the endorsement of 15 top Democrats, many of them likely 2020 presidential candidates.
But other party leaders, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, distanced themselves from the plan.
"We want to move the issue forward," Schumer said, adding that "there are are many different bills out there," including "many good ones" that he and other Democrats are examining.
Pelosi warned that support for a single-payer system shouldn't become a "litmus test" for Democrats.
In an interview on the liberal podcast "Pod Save America," Clinton said that while she supports the proposal as a "political statement," she doubts it's much more than a pipe dream at this point.
She also criticized the plan's lack of particulars in an interview with Vox.
"I don't know what the particulars are," Clinton told Vox. "As you might remember, during the campaign he introduced a single-payer bill every year he was in Congress — and when somebody finally read it, he couldn't explain it and couldn't really tell people how much it was going to cost."
Democratic strategist Rodell Mollineau, a co-founder of the consulting firm Rokk Solutions, echoed this skepticism.
"I believe in single-payer," he said. "I think there's a big difference between saying you support single-payer and figuring out a way to get the votes and an economic plan in order to get it passed and to pay for it."
Clinton raised the issue of ideological "purity" in her book, arguing that Sanders unfairly narrowed the progressive platform.
"It was beyond frustrating that Bernie acted as if he had a monopoly on political purity and that he had set himself up as the sole arbiter of what it meant to be progressive," she wrote, adding that Sanders simultaneously gave "short shrift to important issues such as immigration, reproductive rights, racial justice, and gun safety."
Mollineau warns that ideological tests could prove just as dangerous for more centrist candidates in 2020.
"When I hear or read that there's some folks who think that someone like a Kamala Harris might not be progressive enough to be our nominee in 2020 — now regardless of whether you support her or not, that's a ludicrous statement and it's a horrible way of applying a purity test," he said.
Steve Schale, a Florida-based Democratic strategist and former adviser to President Barack Obama in the state, says that ideological debates among progressives are not what the party needs right now.
"We're not going to win elections trying to make sure that we have 100% loyalty among 35 or 40% of the electorate, which is what Democrats are," Schale said. "We've got to have a conversation about how we grow the appeal."
Unity among liberals is important, Schale argues, but not nearly as critical as opening the party back up to those independents or one-time Democratic voters who, for a myriad of reasons, abandoned Clinton.
"It's easy to scapegoat the base, or to scapegoat Sanders voters," he said. "But the reality is that [Clinton] lost because the places Barack Obama was much more competitive in in 2008 and 2012 ... she just got torched in."
Onwards and leftwards
Throughout Clinton's book "What Happened," and in interviews over the last several days, Clinton argued that Sanders is not a Democrat. She alleged that he ran for the nomination not to help the party, but to "disrupt" it.
And by that measure, she says, he succeeded.
Mollineau argues that Sanders and others eager to challenge the party establishment "can't have it both ways."
"If you want to affect change within the Democratic Party than you need to become closer to the Democratic Party – you can't lob bombs from outside," Mollineau said, adding that while Sanders "could have been doing more to change the Democratic Party from within" throughout his years in Congress, "he just chose not to."
But while Clinton's career in public office is likely over, Sanders still remains a powerful force in national politics. For several months, he's held the mantle as the most popular politician in the country.
Many Democrats, including Jill Filipovic, an author and liberal commentator, argue that it is now Sanders' responsibility to unite the left.
"Sanders has positioned himself as a leader for the future of the left, and his followers agree, with near-messianic worship," Fillipovic wrote in a CNN column. "Embracing the whole left would be a good place for him to start."
But as Thomas Edsall pointed out in a recent New York Times column, there is evidence that progressives have only moved farther left since the election. He cites Pew Research Center data that shows that Democratic voters — particularly whites, Millennials, and post-grads — are much more eager to label themselves "liberal" in 2017 than they were in past years.
And while the left has seen a resurgence in support since November, the money and energy that's flowing into the party is going to Sanders' Our Revolution organization and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, rather than the Democratic National Committee, which is suffering somewhat of a crisis of credibility post-2016.
While Mollineau admits that there are "ideological battles" that will likely be fought in the coming months and years, the tension between Clinton and Sanders won't necessarily remain central.
Although he doesn't put it past campaigns or super PACs to use lingering 2016 tension to "gain a tactical advantage" by aligning a candidate with Clinton or Sanders in an effort to alienate the others' supporters.
"It wouldn't surprise me, it's just a matter of how powerful that is and whether or not voters have moved on by then," he said.
http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-2020-2017-9