Nancy Pelosi endorses Joe Kennedy over incumbent Ed Markey in Massachusetts Democratic primary

[Padawanbater2]

After having supported the DCCC position that progressives challenging incumbent Democrats would enjoy no support from the national party at large

Pelosi endorses Kennedy over Markey in contentious primary

Pelosi’s endorsement could be a significant boon for Kennedy as the race has tightened in recent weeks.

www.politico.com

"House Democratic leaders signaled Tuesday they have no plans to roll back a new policy aimed at protecting incumbents from a potential primary challenge despite the left panning the policy as a consultant “blacklist.”

The message has been delivered in public and in private about the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s prohibition on vendors working with candidates who challenge sitting lawmakers.

“I’m for winning the House for the Democrats,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a brief interview with The Washington Post when asked about changing the policy. “ . . . My focus is strictly on winning the election and to putting our resources where it will win the election for the American people.”"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/democratic-leaders-stand-firm-on-incumbent-favor-rule-rebuff-liberal-cries-of-blacklist/2019/04/02/117a7714-54bd-11e9-8ef3-fbd41a2ce4d5_story.html

Pelosi is protecting Democratic corporatists from being primaried by progressives while throwing her support behind a neoliberal seeking to oust one of the most progressive members of the Senate. So the next time the corporate wing of the Democratic party calls for "unity", it's all a charade to get progressives to fall in line. "Unity" never works the other way around. When Sanders was poised to win the Democratic nomination, the Democratic establishment, including Pelosi, did everything in their power to prevent it.

 

[UncleBuck]

does your wiener still go soft when you’re with a woman or have no women taken an interest in you since that

 

[Fogdog]

Can't control congress without winning the majority.

Is that a difficult thing to understand?

 

[Padawanbater2]

Can't control congress without winning the majority.

Is that a difficult thing to understand?

Pelosi blacklisted anyone attempting to primary incumbents, now she endorses someone trying to primary an incumbent

Can you be honest for once and explain the blatant hypocrisy in both of those positions?

 

[Unclebaldrick]

Pelosi blacklisted anyone attempting to primary incumbents, now she endorses someone trying to primary an incumbent

Can you be honest for once and explain the blatant hypocrisy in both of those positions?

Don't forget all those Republicans she owes for voting for her as Speaker!


Have you been crying for four whole days?


Lol, what a rube.

 

[hanimmal]

After having supported the DCCC position that progressives challenging incumbent Democrats would enjoy no support from the national party at large

Pelosi endorses Kennedy over Markey in contentious primary

Pelosi’s endorsement could be a significant boon for Kennedy as the race has tightened in recent weeks.

www.politico.com

"House Democratic leaders signaled Tuesday they have no plans to roll back a new policy aimed at protecting incumbents from a potential primary challenge despite the left panning the policy as a consultant “blacklist.”

The message has been delivered in public and in private about the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s prohibition on vendors working with candidates who challenge sitting lawmakers.

“I’m for winning the House for the Democrats,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a brief interview with The Washington Post when asked about changing the policy. “ . . . My focus is strictly on winning the election and to putting our resources where it will win the election for the American people.”"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/democratic-leaders-stand-firm-on-incumbent-favor-rule-rebuff-liberal-cries-of-blacklist/2019/04/02/117a7714-54bd-11e9-8ef3-fbd41a2ce4d5_story.html

Pelosi is protecting Democratic corporatists from being primaried by progressives while throwing her support behind a neoliberal seeking to oust one of the most progressive members of the Senate. So the next time the corporate wing of the Democratic party calls for "unity", it's all a charade to get progressives to fall in line. "Unity" never works the other way around. When Sanders was poised to win the Democratic nomination, the Democratic establishment, including Pelosi, did everything in their power to prevent it.

Same shit different election?

 

[Fogdog]

Pelosi blacklisted anyone attempting to primary incumbents, now she endorses someone trying to primary an incumbent

Can you be honest for once and explain the blatant hypocrisy in both of those positions?

Can you be honest for once and explain how you Left side Democrats will get all you want done under Republican controlled Congress?

I Keep telling you that I don't vote for any of those people. Pelosi, Markey, Kennedy. Their fates are determined by the voters in their districts. At the head of the House

You can come back and crow at me if Markey wins and I'll say the same thing. Good for the people of his district. I don't really support any of these people because I can't vote for them. Markey is a long time Democrat who doesn't work well with others. He doesn't even live in the district he serves. He supported the now dead Medicare for All bill by Independent Sanders and supports the symbolic New Green Deal that AOC wrote. He's the classic so-called Progressive because he just rides on other people's coattails. Like they all do when it comes to the Democratic Party.

On top of being speaker of the House, a head of the DCCC, it's her job to get as many Democrats elected as possible. Markey and Kennedy's jobs are to get elected. From what I see, everybody is doing their jobs. So quit hyperventilating and move to Markey's district if you want to support him.

When left side Democrats start winning tight races against Republicans, then I'll believe they have arrived. Right now, though, they only win in safe democratic held districts and are a drag on the party's chances of winning the Senate or the Presidency. I can easily see why Pelosi saw him as the weaker candidate regardless of his "credentials" on issues that your kind of people like. Not only that, I think she is more likely to be right on that than you are.

 

[schuylaar]

After having supported the DCCC position that progressives challenging incumbent Democrats would enjoy no support from the national party at large

Pelosi endorses Kennedy over Markey in contentious primary

Pelosi’s endorsement could be a significant boon for Kennedy as the race has tightened in recent weeks.

www.politico.com

"House Democratic leaders signaled Tuesday they have no plans to roll back a new policy aimed at protecting incumbents from a potential primary challenge despite the left panning the policy as a consultant “blacklist.”

The message has been delivered in public and in private about the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s prohibition on vendors working with candidates who challenge sitting lawmakers.

“I’m for winning the House for the Democrats,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a brief interview with The Washington Post when asked about changing the policy. “ . . . My focus is strictly on winning the election and to putting our resources where it will win the election for the American people.”"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/democratic-leaders-stand-firm-on-incumbent-favor-rule-rebuff-liberal-cries-of-blacklist/2019/04/02/117a7714-54bd-11e9-8ef3-fbd41a2ce4d5_story.html

Pelosi is protecting Democratic corporatists from being primaried by progressives while throwing her support behind a neoliberal seeking to oust one of the most progressive members of the Senate. So the next time the corporate wing of the Democratic party calls for "unity", it's all a charade to get progressives to fall in line. "Unity" never works the other way around. When Sanders was poised to win the Democratic nomination, the Democratic establishment, including Pelosi, did everything in their power to prevent it.

i want to know where my $600 weekly is..i need to pay rent and very shortly 30M will be telling their landlords..the landlords will be telling Nancy..i've taken that money and put it right back into the economy making certain my rent was on time.

yes, another fly in the ointment pada.

perhaps we can get an advocate for this pressing issue?..that's my priority right now.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Can you be honest for once and explain how you Left side Democrats will get all you want done under Republican controlled Congress?

I Keep telling you that I don't vote for any of those people. Pelosi, Markey, Kennedy. Their fates are determined by the voters in their districts. At the head of the House

You can come back and crow at me if Markey wins and I'll say the same thing. Good for the people of his district. I don't really support any of these people because I can't vote for them. Markey is a long time Democrat who doesn't work well with others. He doesn't even live in the district he serves. He supported the now dead Medicare for All bill by Independent Sanders and supports the symbolic New Green Deal that AOC wrote. He's the classic so-called Progressive because he just rides on other people's coattails. Like they all do when it comes to the Democratic Party.

On top of being speaker of the House, a head of the DCCC, it's her job to get as many Democrats elected as possible. Markey and Kennedy's jobs are to get elected. From what I see, everybody is doing their jobs. So quit hyperventilating and move to Markey's district if you want to support him.

When left side Democrats start winning tight races against Republicans, then I'll believe they have arrived. Right now, though, they only win in safe democratic held districts and are a drag on the party's chances of winning the Senate or the Presidency. I can easily see why Pelosi saw him as the weaker candidate regardless of his "credentials" on issues that your kind of people like. Not only that, I think she is more likely to be right on that than you are.

In other words, no, you can't explain the hypocrisy of Pelosi's position

I remember a while back we were talking about how Republicans can still support GOP politicians when they actively oppose their interests..

 

[Fogdog]

In other words, no, you can't explain the hypocrisy of Pelosi's position

I remember a while back we were talking about how Republicans can still support GOP politicians when they actively oppose their interests..

When left side politicians beat Republicans in their districts then I'll take them seriously. There is and never has been hypocrisy in my pragmatism.

Speaking of hypocrisy, you bashed Democrats for losing seats and now bash them for finding politicians and policies that win them back. Now that right there is hypocrisy.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Pelosi supported the DCCC position of primarying incumbent Democrats when it was progressives seeking office, now endorses a Democratic corporatist over an incumbent progressive in the Senate. So now we know for sure with no ambiguity Pelosi supports corporate Democrats over progressives so much, she's willing to publicly endorse one breaking one of the rules she previously supported

It's detrimental to the party to have these people hold office. Along with Crowley and Engel, their time is limited.

 

[mysunnyboy]

 

[Fogdog]

Pelosi supported the DCCC position of primarying incumbent Democrats when it was progressives seeking office, now endorses a Democratic corporatist over an incumbent progressive in the Senate. So now we know for sure with no ambiguity Pelosi supports corporate Democrats over progressives so much, she's willing to publicly endorse one breaking one of the rules she previously supported

It's detrimental to the party to have these people hold office. Along with Crowley and Engel, their time is limited.

Democrats have gained seats and displaced Republicans from control of Congress. This year they have a good chance at retaking the presidency and have a chance of retaking a majority in the Senate while holding the House. You say Pelosi is detrimental to the party?

 

[hanimmal]

Let's see if it makes any sense what Left-Troll is saying.

Oh I see, he is West Coast Bernie. Trolls and all.

 

[schuylaar]

Pelosi supported the DCCC position of primarying incumbent Democrats when it was progressives seeking office, now endorses a Democratic corporatist over an incumbent progressive in the Senate. So now we know for sure with no ambiguity Pelosi supports corporate Democrats over progressives so much, she's willing to publicly endorse one breaking one of the rules she previously supported

It's detrimental to the party to have these people hold office. Along with Crowley and Engel, their time is limited.

write her- ask her why..she might write back.

there are always two sides to every story; we are not privy to what goes on behind closed doors.

it would be interesting to hear what she has to say.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Democrats have gained seats and displaced Republicans from control of Congress. This year they have a good chance at retaking the presidency and have a chance of retaking a majority in the Senate while holding the House. You say Pelosi is detrimental to the party?

As if Pelosi is responsible for any of that. Democrats regained control of the House because of the way Republicans have governed since Trump became president, and because of the way they voted against impeachment. As of today, Biden has a chance to defeat Trump, but it's not at all strong enough to call it comfortable. It's hovering just above Clinton's lead around the same time in 2016. The only reason the Senate is in play this cycle is because Trump is so extraordinarily terrible, and the Senators at risk in traditionally safe Republican states still support him.

All of this is due to the fault of Republicans, not because the Democrats did something spectacular. They're the fall back to Republican failure. The only other option available.

Pelosi is detrimental to the Democratic party because she is corrupt. Corruption is bad for the party because voters see it, as vociferously as you deny it exists, leading to voter apathy - which you then go on to blame the voters for, not the politicians who are actually responsible, and because it fails to achieve constituents interests.

Let's see if it makes any sense what Left-Troll is saying.

Oh I see, he is West Coast Bernie. Trolls and all.

It's clear at this point, you've been manipulated by corporate interests whether you acknowledge it or not. Kind of ironic considering the stuff you've been pushing about Russia the past few years. Here's Scott Bixby, journalist at The Daily Beast exposing the hypocritical criticism you raise here

Bernie Bros Are Loud, Proud, and Toxic to Sanders’ Campaign

The Vermont independent is grappling with a toxic wedge of fandom that threatens to distract from his campaign and turn off potential supporters.

www.thedailybeast.com

Kamala Harris Built a ‘Digital Army’—Now She Gets to Use It

“While she’s on the national stage, and while people continue to attack her, we’re gonna respond," said Eric Bazail-Eimil, a student at Georgetown and member of the #KHive.

www.thedailybeast.com

The reality is any public figure has toxic supporters, even Taylor Swift. Democratic party analysts/officials/leaders/etc. took Sanders' toxic supporters and amplified them through mainstream media outlets, like The Daily Beast, to create the narrative Sanders supporters were more toxic than everyone else's supporters. You supported this. You are responsible.

This is a false narrative designed by party leadership to get people to oppose progressive ideals. It's an argument against opposing oligarchy based in emotion devoid of policy. Just like when Nancy Pelosi tore up Trump's speech while approving his defense budget.

 

[schuylaar]

As if Pelosi is responsible for any of that. Democrats regained control of the House because of the way Republicans have governed since Trump became president, and because of the way they voted against impeachment. As of today, Biden has a chance to defeat Trump, but it's not at all strong enough to call it comfortable. It's hovering just above Clinton's lead around the same time in 2016. The only reason the Senate is in play this cycle is because Trump is so extraordinarily terrible, and the Senators at risk in traditionally safe Republican states still support him.

All of this is due to the fault of Republicans, not because the Democrats did something spectacular. They're the fall back to Republican failure. The only other option available.

Pelosi is detrimental to the Democratic party because she is corrupt. Corruption is bad for the party because voters see it, as vociferously as you deny it exists, leading to voter apathy - which you then go on to blame the voters for, not the politicians who are actually responsible, and because it fails to achieve constituents interests.

It's clear at this point, you've been manipulated by corporate interests whether you acknowledge it or not. Kind of ironic considering the stuff you've been pushing about Russia the past few years. Here's Scott Bixby, journalist at The Daily Beast exposing the hypocritical criticism you raise here

Bernie Bros Are Loud, Proud, and Toxic to Sanders’ Campaign

The Vermont independent is grappling with a toxic wedge of fandom that threatens to distract from his campaign and turn off potential supporters.

www.thedailybeast.com

Kamala Harris Built a ‘Digital Army’—Now She Gets to Use It

“While she’s on the national stage, and while people continue to attack her, we’re gonna respond," said Eric Bazail-Eimil, a student at Georgetown and member of the #KHive.

www.thedailybeast.com

The reality is any public figure has toxic supporters, even Taylor Swift. Democratic party analysts/officials/leaders/etc. took Sanders' toxic supporters and amplified them through mainstream media outlets, like The Daily Beast, to create the narrative Sanders supporters were more toxic than everyone else's supporters. You supported this. You are responsible.

This is a false narrative designed by party leadership to get people to oppose progressive ideals. It's an argument against opposing oligarchy based in emotion devoid of policy. Just like when Nancy Pelosi tore up Trump's speech while approving his defense budget.

clinton was within margin of error to trump. biden is running 3x that..he's also leading in florida. who knows what desantis is willing to do for trump, after all gillum was winner +.5 and by the time it was said and done a miracle occurred with desantis trading places with gillum.

praise jesus!

PS everyone is looking past biden to the future = harris. it's as if to have a women president of black, asian decent we must sneak her in under cover of the white man.

 

[hanimmal]

It's clear at this point, you've been manipulated by corporate interests whether you know it or not. Kind of ironic considering the stuff you've been pushing about Russia the past few years. Here's Scott Bixby, journalist at The Daily Beast exposing the hypocritical criticism you raise here

Like by understanding that a corporation will sell me what I buy form them kind of manipulation? Sure thing.

If you mean that somehow it is corporations that have somehow programmed me into knowing the information about the Russian attack on our democracy you are incorrect.

I look forward to reading your links, because I call bullshit that any credible source would dismiss the facts in the Russian attack on our democracy by trolls pushing the 'don't vote' or 'Trump is just as bad as the 'establishment'' propaganda.

The reality is any public figure has toxic supporters, even Taylor Swift. Democratic party analysts/officials/leaders/etc. took Sanders' toxic supporters and amplified them through mainstream media outlets, like The Daily Beast, to create the narrative Sanders supporters were more toxic than everyone else's supporters. You supported this. You are responsible.

This is a false narrative designed by party leadership to get people to oppose progressive ideals. It's an argument against opposing oligarchy based in emotion devoid of policy. Just like when Nancy Pelosi tore up Trump's speech while approving his defense budget.

Yeah trolls have been militarized across every platform and anyone who has 'influence' will be a hotbed for them. 68 million American voters were interacted with over a billion times on just the one platform Facebook.

Pointing out to the very real information about Russian militarized trolls helping Bernie and Trump is not 'being responsible' for anything other than not allowing the noise that trolls like yourself create.

That doesn't mean that Bernie was working with the Russians like Trump is, but it does prove your bullshit that it is a 'false narrative'.

Those 'supporters' who are toxic are just as likely to be targets of the trolling Putin weaponized against our citizens with Trump's help as anyone else, but some candidates gave a lot more fuel for the troll fire than others.

 

[hanimmal]

clinton was within margin of error to trump. biden is running 3x that..he's also leading in florida. who knows what desantis is willing to do for trump, after all gillum was winner +.5 and by the time it was said and done a miracle occurred with desantis trading places with gillum.

praise jesus!

PS everyone is looking past biden to the future = harris. it's as if to have a women president of black, asian decent we must sneak her in under the cover of the white man.

I am looking forward to the Democratic primaries in 2024 for all the great candidates to have the chance to compete, along with seeing how the Republicans rebound, how Trump's cult responds.

Harris is a great VP because she can shine taking the damage that was always going to go the VPs way since Trump has nothing on Biden, at least since he impeached himself on Biden trying to manufacture dirt.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Like by understanding that a corporation will sell me what I buy form them kind of manipulation? Sure thing.

If you mean that somehow it is corporations that have somehow programmed me into knowing the information about the Russian attack on our democracy you are incorrect.

I look forward to reading your links, because I call bullshit that any credible source would dismiss the facts in the Russian attack on our democracy by trolls pushing the 'don't vote' or 'Trump is just as bad as the 'establishment'' propaganda.

How old are you?