Monday Morning Open Thread: Nevertheless, They Persisted

Another book I look forward to reading. From the Boston Globe:

Warren has produced a policy-focused (or, in her word, “nerdy”) book that is reflective of a politician whose future could depend on preserving Democratic alliances. Put another way, this is no Bernie Sanders-style screed.

In a rare interview at her home in Cambridge on Friday, Warren explained that she wanted to focus on how American government has stopped working for all but the very wealthiest citizens and corporations, and her worry that President Trump “is about to deliver the knockout blow” to the country’s floundering middle class.

Pressed on why she doesn’t use the opportunity of a well-timed book to offer a sharper critique of the Democratic Party, Warren’s answer is, essentially: Circular firing squads aren’t very productive.

“I never lose sight of the fact that Democrats have tried to do more for working people than Republicans,” she said. “Have Democrats failed? Yes. There have been places where we have not fought as hard as we should, but Republicans as a party have blocked every move that would have helped working families.”…

As Warren put it in the interview, corporate money invades Washington and “slithers through there like a snake.”

Warren was talking about campaign contributions and hired-gun lobbyists, but also about money that funds think tanks and other “experts for hire,” advertising, and even the courts that she argues also now “tilt in the direction of the rich and powerful.”

“And now, Donald Trump is in place and has assembled a team of billionaires and bankers that are pushing one blow after another to working families,” she said in the interview….

Her book ends with the Women’s March in Boston in January and thus stops before one of the most memorable recent skirmishes in her battle with Republicans — when Senate Republicans, led by Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, voted to formally silence her during debate over the nomination of Jeff Sessions to be attorney general.

The moment went viral and earned Warren a round of generally favorable national press coverage — not to mention a fresh flood of campaign contributions from her national network.

It also, apparently, has earned her an enduring cold-shoulder from McConnell…

Pissy little fella, ain’t he?

Patriot’s Day holiday or not, what’s on the agenda as we start another week?

163 replies
  1. 1
    rikyrah says:

    Good Morning, Everyone 😄😄😄

    ReplyReply
  2. 2
    Patricia Kayden says:

    Why does she want him to acknowledge her anyways? This is the man who boasted about stopping President Obama from filling a vacant SCOTUS seat and who explicitly stated that his entire goal was limiting President Obama to one term. He’s a nasty person. I would be the one not acknowledging him if I were Senator Warren.

    ReplyReply
  3. 3
    Patricia Kayden says:

    @rikyrah: Morning rikyrah!

    ReplyReply
  4. 4
    SFAW says:

    Pissy little fella, ain’t he?

    If an extremely-well-targeted meteorite were to get “up close and personal” with Turtle, America would be that much the better.

    I keep hoping he’ll end up being a “person of interest” in the Russia investigations, but I think he’s probably too smart to have left tracks, even if he actually were involved (which he probably wasn’t).

    ReplyReply
  5. 5
    SFAW says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    Why does she want him to acknowledge her anyways?

    The comity of the World’s Greatest [sic] Deliberative [sic] Body?

    ReplyReply
  6. 6
    SRW1 says:

    Pissy little fella, ain’t he?

    Sucker knows his words about Warren – “Nevertheless, she persisted.” – is already a feminist meme that caught him in person on the wrong side of history.

    ReplyReply
  7. 7
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Patricia Kayden: Simple, to show everyone what a small minded grudge bearing little man he is, and by default the entire Senate GOP that elects him to be the majority leader.

    ReplyReply
  8. 8
    satby says:

    Pissy little fella, ain’t he?

    Pissy, petty, jealous little man. As are Drumpf and Ryan. They may be doing their paymasters bidding, but they know they’re despised and unpopular and it eats at them in ways that money can’t soothe. Just like their supporters, they’re the embodiment of spite.

    Edited, and Fuck Kindle autocorrect.

    ReplyReply
  9. 9
    geg6 says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    I would guess she doesn’t care he acknowledges her. She just knows it drives him crazy for her to acknowledge him. He wouldn’t turn his head if it didn’t. So she PERSISTS!

    ReplyReply
  10. 10
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @geg6: Or yeah, shorter geg6, because it pisses him off.

    ReplyReply
  11. 11
    satby says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: yep. I’d do it too. Just to bug the fucker.

    ReplyReply
  12. 12
    Baud says:

    @rikyrah: Good morning.

    ReplyReply
  13. 13
    amk says:

    @Patricia Kayden: Yup. Enough with the “senate decorum” bs. The thugs are traitorous corrupt scums and there ain’t no effing decorum there.

    ReplyReply
  14. 14
    Chris says:

    Pressed on why she doesn’t use the opportunity of a well-timed book to offer a sharper critique of the Democratic Party, Warren’s answer is, essentially: Circular firing squads aren’t very productive.

    “I never lose sight of the fact that Democrats have tried to do more for working people than Republicans,” she said. “Have Democrats failed? Yes. There have been places where we have not fought as hard as we should, but Republicans as a party have blocked every move that would have helped working families.”…

    Bernie: take note. This is how you actually behave if you want to be a productive voice for the economic left in America.

    ReplyReply
  15. 15
    Baud says:

    @Chris: I want to know who is pressing her to attack Democrats.

    ReplyReply
  16. 16
    Anne Laurie says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    Why does she want him to acknowledge her anyways?

    Any behaviorist would call this a classic dominance announcement — you can see it in faculty lounges as well as primate troops & dog parks.

    If McConnell were really an “alpha”, like his fellow Repubs like to think of themselves, when Warren spoke to him, he’d look straight through her — the cut direct. But he’s not actually secure enough in his masculinity to carry this off, so he turns his head away & pretends he hasn’t heard her (like the little dog who’s always yapping at every other canine, until a larger / more dominant dog looks at him).

    Warren pointing this out — on camera, no less — is a “gentle teacher lady” way of bringing attention to which half of the not-stare-downs actually has more self-respect!

    ReplyReply
  17. 17
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Chris: But then he’d have to actually (shudder) work with other people while it’s much more fun to climb back on his purity pony and lecture everyone else about how they’re doing it all wrong wrong WRONG!

    ReplyReply
  18. 18
    David 🍁Canadian Anchor Baby🍁 Koch says:

    Matt McDermott‏ @mattmfm

    The Obama’s spent every Easter attending church service. Trump hasn’t attended church once since his inauguration. Where’s the GOP outrage?

    2,636 replies 30,127 retweets 59,612 likes

    Dump skipped Easter services and not a peep from the wingnuts or the Village.

    ReplyReply
  19. 19
    debbie says:

    He’s afraid of her, as he should be.

    ReplyReply
  20. 20
    JPL says:

    @David 🍁Canadian Anchor Baby🍁 Koch: I read online that he went to the same church in Palm Beach that he was married in.

    ReplyReply
  21. 21
  22. 22
    Baud says:

    @David 🍁Canadian Anchor Baby🍁 Koch: The Village take their cues from the Republicans. If the religious right isn’t complaining, then the Village won’t.

    I hope this finally kills the need for presidents to be religious, like attending the National Prayer Breakfast. I’m already happy about the White House Correspondence Dinner losing its luster.

    ETA:. Never mind.

    ReplyReply
  23. 23
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @David 🍁Canadian Anchor Baby🍁 Koch: As one Evangelical nut job lady said, “He is a tool in the hands of God and he will be wielded as God sees fit.”

    ReplyReply
  24. 24
    Baud says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: He is a tool.

    ReplyReply
  25. 25
    kindness says:

    When I talk with some of my Bernie friends, it’s amazing how many still seem to have more animosity towards other Democrats than they do for Republicans. I’d have thought after this last election they would see the need to come together to beat our common foe.

    Not so much sadly. Go Elizabeth!

    ReplyReply
  26. 26

    @Baud: I was struck by that too but I re-read it and I think it was just lousy phrasing. She should be saying democrats can work harder, have made mistakes, whatever–not have failed. Voters love that “work harder” stuff.

    ReplyReply
  27. 27
    debbie says:

    @kindness:

    Why? There are posters here who still hold Bernie supporters in contempt. I’m curious as to how productive the Perez-Sanders tour turns out to be.

    ReplyReply
  28. 28
    debbie says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    November wasn’t a failure?

    ReplyReply
  29. 29
    Betty Cracker says:

    I trust that Tom Perez knows what he’s doing, but it kinda chaps my ass that he’s doing a nationwide tour with non-Democrat Sanders. I get that Sanders has millions of fans — I used to be one!

    But he’s done little since the election but mischaracterize the reasons for the loss and shit on Democrats. He was doing that as recently as yesterday.

    I’d much rather see Perez tour the country with Warren. I guess she’s too busy doing her job, though. 🙄

    ReplyReply
  30. 30

    @debbie: It was a failure by the American people–the right ones, at least. My list of complicity goes people who voted for trump, people who voted for candidates other than Hillary, people who could but did not vote, the media, James comey, and they wayyyy at the bottom “the democrats”.

    ETA: at any rate, still no because that’s not the context warren was using the term.

    ReplyReply
  31. 31
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Baud: I’m not sure who’s hands he’s in, but I know it ain’t God’s.

    ReplyReply
  32. 32
    efgoldman says:

    @Baud:

    I want to know who is pressing her to attack Democrats.

    Wilmerbots and purity ponies, who else.
    i.e. The Usual Suspects.

    ReplyReply
  33. 33
    WereBear says:

    Pissy little fella, ain’t he?

    That is who McConnell is, and all he is.

    ReplyReply
  34. 34
    Baud says:

    @efgoldman: I got the impression that the article was talking about someone in the media.

    ReplyReply
  35. 35
    debbie says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    I think you need to include things like not campaigning harder in the red states. No one’s faultless.

    ReplyReply
  36. 36
    rikyrah says:

    @Patricia Kayden:
    Basic common courtesy to a co-worker

    ReplyReply
  37. 37
    amk says:

    @David 🍁Canadian Anchor Baby🍁 Koch: Only muslins attend church.

    ReplyReply
  38. 38
    Baud says:

    @debbie: No one is perfect. But some people acted maliciously.

    ReplyReply
  39. 39
    efgoldman says:

    Patriot’s Day holiday or not, what’s on the agenda as we start another week?

    No Patriot’s Day in RI. Just another Monday, although it is school vacation week.

    ReplyReply
  40. 40
    rikyrah says:

    About the Turtle not acknowledging Senator Warren…
    No more phucking stories from the Village about how folks should just go to cocktail hour more, like the old days. Have a drink with a muthaphucka who won’t even express common courtesy?

    PHUCK OUTTA HERE 😬 😬

    ReplyReply
  41. 41
    Betty Cracker says:

    @debbie: Should be interesting. My inbox has been bombarded with notifications about the Perez-Sanders tour. I don’t plan on showing up, but I guess I’m not the target audience anyway.

    Perez has a tightrope to walk between pissed-off Sandersites and folks who supported Clinton and are irritated with Sanders. He’s probably making the right choice by embracing Sanders, much as I find it objectionable.

    My sense is the Sanders people are more loosely affiliated with the party — like Sanders himself — and thus require more coddling. Squeaky wheels, etc.

    ReplyReply
  42. 42
    Baud says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    He was doing that as recently as yesterday.

    What happened yesterday?

    ReplyReply
  43. 43
    satby says:

    @Major Major Major Major: and that’s the right list, in the correct order. After all 3 million more people voted for the Democratic nominee, and no one foresaw the lopsided vote split that would hand the White House to the joke candidate. Including the joke candidate himself. That the system put in to protect the republic from people like him failed because it’s been corrupted by the same “party before country” also wasn’t foreseen by the Founding Fathers. To our loss.

    ReplyReply
  44. 44
    debbie says:

    @Baud:

    Absolutely.

    ReplyReply
  45. 45

    @debbie: that’s an acknowledged strategic error, but that is not anything like being a failure at working to help the poor, which is what warren is saying.

    ReplyReply
  46. 46
    Baud says:

    @Betty Cracker: I’m not optimistic.

    ReplyReply
  47. 47
    amk says:

    beebs

    President faces charges that include bribery, coercion, abuse of power and leaking state secrets.

    Wish it happened in us of a instead of SK.

    ReplyReply
  48. 48
    satby says:

    @rikyrah: Good morning 🌞

    ReplyReply
  49. 49
    Baud says:

    @amk: You mean SK?

    ReplyReply
  50. 50
    Sab says:

    @kindness: I have been going to grass roots level (precinct and ward) political meetings and they are full of Bernie folks who are energized . They are remarkably naive about how things work, but anxious to learn. Some of them are in their fifties and never been politically active. Others are youngish (thirty year old parents). I have been sporadicallyou politically active since 1970, and I can’t remember this level of political intensity since about 1972. I am optimistic, sorta, since it’s still a hard fight ahead.

    ReplyReply
  51. 51
    amk says:

    @Baud: nitpicker.

    ReplyReply
  52. 52
    efgoldman says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    He’s probably making the right choice by embracing Sanders, much as I find it objectionable.

    He can embrace Wilmer all he wants. Enemy of my enemy, need everyone on deck, all hands working together, all like that. Let them raise hands together like boxers at the end of the match.
    Then duct tape Wilmer’s mouth shut.

    ReplyReply
  53. 53
    satby says:

    @Betty Cracker: @Baud: Yeah, I’m of the opinion that most of the Sanderites aren’t and weren’t really Dem voters. Because the actual Dems I know who flirted initially with Sanders are now repulsed by him, but the mostly libertarian or non-voters I know are still on the BS bandwagon.

    ReplyReply
  54. 54
    rikyrah says:

    @Betty Cracker:
    keep your enemies close, and gather the receipts. I truly doubt that Perez would back Wilmer if he runs again, and if he starts whining about the DNC shutting him out, Perez can pull this receipt.
    Wilmer lives under a phucking delusion to think that the ACTUAL Democratic base wants.to hear one word about how we’re supposed to shovel​ away our concerns in order to “appeal” to the WWC.

    PHUCK OUTTA HERE 😬😬

    ReplyReply
  55. 55
    Baud says:

    @satby: I think he drew support from independents, Dem progressives, and bros. Most of the people in the middle category are probably going to be ok. The problem is responding strongly to the haters without creating a larger civil war. That’s hard to do.

    ReplyReply
  56. 56

    I think it’s good if somebody brings energy and bodies into the party, but it’s bad that some of them want to burn it down. It’s okay if they read too much (any) Jacobin but it’s bad if they want to fundamentally redo the party into something pure and nonfunctional. It can be both.

    ReplyReply
  57. 57
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Major Major Major Major: I read that as “failing at times”.

    ReplyReply
  58. 58
    efgoldman says:

    @rikyrah:

    Wilmer lives under a phucking delusion to think that the ACTUAL Democratic base wants.to hear one word about how we’re supposed to shovel​ away our concerns

    AT THE VERY MINIMUM, Perez, Ellison and Schumer ought to tell Wilmer that if he wants to speak for the Democratic party, the very least he can do – the LEAST! – is register and run for re-election in Vermont as a fucking Democrat.

    ReplyReply
  59. 59
    p.a. says:

    Instead of saying “Hi” she should have a little crib sheet of Kentucky statistics. Quote one whenever she passes him about how his state is a Human Development Index loser.

    ReplyReply
  60. 60
    Baud says:

    @efgoldman: Won’t happen. He’ll never be a Dem. That’s essentially saying goodbye to him.

    ReplyReply
  61. 61
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @amk: South Korea still has a functioning democracy.

    ReplyReply
  62. 62

    @OzarkHillbilly: like I said, I think she just misspoke.

    ReplyReply
  63. 63
    amk says:

    @efgoldman: Won’t do it. Present shtick is paying him very well.

    ReplyReply
  64. 64
    efgoldman says:

    @Baud:

    He’ll never be a Dem. That’s essentially saying goodbye to him.

    G’bye! G’bye! Don’t let the door hit you on the ass. They met him way, way more than halfway.

    ReplyReply
  65. 65
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Baud: And the problem is?

    ReplyReply
  66. 66
    Baud says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: We need votes from somewhere. Not enough self-motivating Dems to make up a majority.

    ReplyReply
  67. 67
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Major Major Major Major: Got it.

    ReplyReply
  68. 68
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Baud: He was on one of the Sunday shows saying UR DOIN IT RONG as usual. I don’t even necessarily disagree with what he said — maybe the Democrats should have put more money in the KS special election (though I’ve read the candidate in that election didn’t want them so involved by design, given the electorate he was trying to reach), etc. But Sanders validates every goddamned wingnut meme in these appearances, e.g., the Democrats are a coastal elitist party, blah blah blah. I’m fed up with it. But again, I’m not the target audience.

    ReplyReply
  69. 69

    @efgoldman: @OzarkHillbilly: at the present moment it’s probably less trouble to keep him around.

    ReplyReply
  70. 70
    Baud says:

    @Betty Cracker: It’s why he gets to appear on these shows.

    Thanks.

    ReplyReply
  71. 71
    satby says:

    @Baud: if course not. I do stop the bros cold when they treat me to another endless round of dumbassery about DWS by asking what Wilmer did with all the money he raised though. No one knows, he sure hasn’t spread it around to fellow progressives. Odd that.

    ReplyReply
  72. 72
    efgoldman says:

    @Baud:

    We need votes from somewhere.

    Have you seen any evidence at all that Wilmer brought or is bringing significant numbers of voters TO DEMOCRATS, as opposed to Jill Stein, or himself as the purity ponies of the moment?

    ReplyReply
  73. 73
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Baud: The votes are ours, we just have to figure out how to win them where it counts.

    Fact: more people voted for Dems.in the House than GOP
    Fact: More people voted for DEMs in the Senate than GOP
    Fact: More people voted for Dem in the White House than the dumpster.

    ReplyReply
  74. 74
    Baud says:

    @satby: That’s why I’m not optimistic. They’ll never accept Wilmer’s primary loss, and so they won’t accept it if he or his preferred candidate loses in 2020.

    ReplyReply
  75. 75
    Gin & Tonic says:

    What’s on the agenda? Another ortho follow-up, which means another opportunity to get this motherfucking cast removed. Probably not yet removed for good, but who knows.

    ReplyReply
  76. 76
    Baud says:

    @efgoldman: I don’t think he brought us votes in 2016. But we didn’t shun him in 2016. If we shun him now, even with cause, then how many votes does he take with him.

    @OzarkHillbilly: The first isn’t true.

    ReplyReply
  77. 77

    @efgoldman: he certainly revitalized interest in the local party elections in SF. A lot of that was led by longstanding lefty shit-stirrers though.

    Where would one get evidence of that, though? Seems like it would be anecdotal.

    ReplyReply
  78. 78
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Major Major Major Major: I do not disagree, and a lot of his supporters are of like mind with us. But I am tired of playing pattycake with someone who refuses to be a part of our party. Maybe it’s time we treated his supporters like adults and talked to them directly.

    ReplyReply
  79. 79
    Baud says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: Agree. There’s only so much you can accommodate without losing dignity.

    ReplyReply
  80. 80
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Baud: I have read that in multiple locations, I’ll try to find a cite, pls do same

    ReplyReply
  81. 81
    satby says:

    @Baud: Which makes them not actually our allies. Just political neophytes, or libertarian opportunists who saw Rand wasn’t going anywhere last time, or disengaged voters with an axe to grind. None of whom would be reliable enough voters for our side to waste time courting.
    Edited to add, we don’t need to shun him, but we can stop pretending he’s a Democrat.

    ReplyReply
  82. 82
    rikyrah says:

    @Baud:
    Tell that truth

    ReplyReply
  83. 83
    satby says:

    @Gin & Tonic: Good luck G&T!

    ReplyReply
  84. 84
    efgoldman says:

    @Baud:

    they won’t accept it if he or his preferred candidate loses in 2020.

    If he’s half as smart as he thinks he is, he won’t run.
    1) Too old, Not a Democrat
    2) If he looks at all competitive, all the negatives that HRC never brought up will come out.
    3) Too old, Not a Democrat
    4) Tax returns
    5) Too old, Not a Democrat
    6) Wife’s finances
    7) Too old, Not a Democrat
    8) Past as a Socialist/communist
    9) Too old, Not a Democrat

    Oh, did I mention that he’s too old?
    And not a Democrat

    ReplyReply
  85. 85
    rikyrah says:

    @Gin & Tonic:
    I hope that you get good news.

    ReplyReply
  86. 86
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Baud: You are correct:

    First, while Republicans, as of this writing, received a plurality of votes cast for Congress nationwide this year—49.9 percent, again according data from the Cook Political Report—they received a greater share, 55.2 percent, of the seats. Democrats, as a result, won a smaller share of seats than they did votes: 44.8 percent of seats as compared to 47.3 percent of the votes. (These numbers may change as final vote tallies are updated.)

    ReplyReply
  87. 87
    Baud says:

    @satby: I think stop pretending would equal shunning in his mind.

    ReplyReply
  88. 88
    satby says:

    @efgoldman: and propped up by right wing talking points and Russian disinformation.

    ReplyReply
  89. 89
    Baud says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: Thanks.

    ReplyReply
  90. 90

    @OzarkHillbilly: yeah, I mean, part of me just says fuck him, he’s useful for now but he’s out on his ass the second he’s not. The rest of me doesn’t say that out loud.

    ReplyReply
  91. 91
    satby says:

    @Baud: Good

    ReplyReply
  92. 92
    Betty Cracker says:

    RE: Sanders voters — they’re not a monolith. IMO, most are Democrats or share enough values with us to be reachable by Democrats. The hardcore assholes like that Jabberwocky Hollandaise Buggeroff creature who used to foul this space with his post-Trumpocalypse victory laps aren’t typical of Sanders voters.

    ReplyReply
  93. 93
    Baud says:

    @Betty Cracker: Right. But as I said above, the difficulty is responding to attacks by Jabberwocky Hollandaise Buggeroffs of the world without causing the Sanders supporters who are allies to take the wrong side in the fight.

    It’s like the problem we face in challenging the religious right without pissing off Dem-leaning Christians, or fighting racist without pissing off decent white folks. Tribal loyalties are strong and hard to overcome.

    ReplyReply
  94. 94
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Betty Cracker: Agreed. Hence we should be talking to them.

    ReplyReply
  95. 95
    Kay says:

    This is fun to read now that Chris Christie is the most unpopular governor in the country. He had to beat Sam Brownback so there was tough competition, but he did it:

    First, you have to understand the source of the Christie love. As a rich Northeastern Republican, with the typical rich Northeastern right-leaning Republican’s hard-line right-wing economic agenda, combined with certain less stringent positions on various other issues, elite “centrists” were already inclined to like him. But Christie is basically the dream candidate of the masculinity-obsessed middle-aged male centrist-worshiping pundit. He’s “tough,” because he shouts at people. He’s “brave,” because he supports various broadly unpopular positions related to government spending and taxing. And he’s also a “reform-minded” “moderate,” because … well, because centrist pundits say they like reform-minded moderates and they like Christie so he must be one of those. The fact that all this was wrapped up in a Jersey accent gave him supposed populist cred

    ReplyReply
  96. 96

    @Gin & Tonic: enjoy the freedom of movement, even if temporary.

    ReplyReply
  97. 97
    Baud says:

    @Kay: Trump is essentially a less intelligent Chris Christie. And neither are moderate.

    ReplyReply
  98. 98
    Divf says:

    The hardcore assholes like that Jabberwocky Hollandaise Buggeroff creature who used to foul this space with his post-Trumpocalypse victory laps

    Another finely-turned bit of invective to start the day. Thank you, Ms. Cracker.

    ReplyReply
  99. 99
    Jeffro says:

    Morning everyone! Back at work and back on east coast time without a hitch, apparently. SF’s a fun city to visit!

    Hey if you want a good grin, as well as a good way of framing things for any disenchanted GOP friends or relatives, check this out: Josh Marshall takes a whack at Trump’s profound, militant ignorance, deriding him in ways that deserve to be spread around a bit. Or a lot.

    Anyway, everyone have a great day!

    ReplyReply
  100. 100
    Tenar Arha says:

    @Anne Laurie: I imagine that Warren has got a pretty good Oaklahoma “bless your heart, Speaker” hello going on.

    ReplyReply
  101. 101
    Elizabelle says:

    NYT: United Airlines Staff Will No Longer Take Seats of Boarded Passengers

    United Airlines, which is reviewing its policies after the violent removal of a passenger from a flight last week, says it will no longer allow employees to take the place of civilian passengers who have already boarded overbooked flights.

    “We issued an updated policy to make sure crews traveling on our aircraft are booked at least 60 minutes prior to departure,” a spokeswoman, Maggie Schmerin, wrote in an email on Sunday. “This is one of our initial steps in a review of our policies.”

    Civilian passengers? What? I think the word they’re going for is “non-employee”.

    I always wondered why there was not more outcry initially about why United felt it needed to remove paying passengers. It’s because they did not plan and ensure seats for their own employees.

    With all the money they lost over this incident, and the settlement they will likely reach with Dr. Dao, they could have chartered a plane for their own damn employees.

    ReplyReply
  102. 102
    Elizabelle says:

    @Betty Cracker: LOL re the moniker.

    Yep. That poster, if not a bot, was effing insufferable.

    ReplyReply
  103. 103
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Baud & @OzarkHillbilly: True. That’s why I’m reserving judgment on Perez’s “Feel the Bern” roadshow. He’s trying to thread that needle, and I wish him luck.

    @Kay: That’s as good an explanation as I’ve ever read of the now-defunct Christie phenomenon, which I surely never understood on a personal level. I find him repellent in every aspect.

    ReplyReply
  104. 104
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Baud:

    Trump is essentially a less intelligent Chris Christie.

    And yet, who fetched who’s burger and fries?

    ReplyReply
  105. 105
    Baud says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: Yep. Less intelligence is what the voters on the other side wanted.

    ReplyReply
  106. 106
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Betty Cracker: There is a reason he is head of the DNC and I’m not.

    ReplyReply
  107. 107
    Baud says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: Only one?

    ReplyReply
  108. 108

    @OzarkHillbilly: Trump is an idiot but he’s damn good at ape-style dominance, to which Christie as a bully is weak.

    ReplyReply
  109. 109
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Baud: Yep, my papal armies would slaughter all the heretics but still lose all the elections.

    ReplyReply
  110. 110
    Peale says:

    @Betty Cracker: unpopular as he is, he yells at school teachers and locks up nurses in quarantine. And were he to run again against a woman, he’d probably get the backing again of a of the democrats and would probably come very close to winning.

    ReplyReply
  111. 111
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Major Major Major Major: Yep, and if Christie had had a single ounce of intelligence he would have seen that his only hope was to grow a pair and tell Donald to go fuck himself. As is, he is now nothing but a political mistake.

    ReplyReply
  112. 112
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    FTFNYT: (goes to ThinkProgress)

    Amidst backlash and subscription cancellations for hiring extreme climate science denier, Bret Stephens, the New York Times offered a stunning defense: There are “millions of people who agree with him.” With that ‘logic’, the Times could hire as a columnist former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan David Duke — or a flat earther or someone who thinks vaccines pose a health hazard. After all, millions agree with them.

    This defense is especially absurd since, as I detailed Friday, the Times has been running a major ad campaign claiming there is no alternative to the truth — and former Wall Street Journal deputy editorial page editor Stephens has repeatedly dismissed as “imaginary” the climate reality reported on every week by the Times’ own journalists.

    But apparently the Times editorial page is not engaged in a search for the truth. Instead, it is engaged in the search for popular ideas to spread even if they are known to be false “alternative” facts.

    No comment.

    ReplyReply
  113. 113
    Baud says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: One comment. The NYT is garbage.

    ReplyReply
  114. 114

    @OzarkHillbilly: assholes.

    OT: we’re off to the circus!

    ReplyReply
  115. 115
    Kay says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    They admire horrible people. That’s one explanation. This is why I reject the “smart elites versus unschooled rubes” explanation for Trump. This WAY pre-dated Trump and they played a huge role in it.

    They’re poor judges of character and that doesn’t depend on income or education.

    ReplyReply
  116. 116

    @Kay: bullies like more powerful bullies. Kind of a corollary to “hurt people hurt people”.

    ReplyReply
  117. 117
    rikyrah says:

    @efgoldman:

    AT THE VERY MINIMUM, Perez, Ellison and Schumer ought to tell Wilmer that if he wants to speak for the Democratic party, the very least he can do – the LEAST! – is register and run for re-election in Vermont as a fucking Democrat.

    I hope that the Dems have put into their rules..

    ANYONE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT UNDER THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY BANNER HAS TO RELEASE THE LAST 10 YEARS OF THEIR TAX RETURNS.

    That this muthaphucka never released his returns STILL chafes me.

    ReplyReply
  118. 118
    Kay says:

    @Baud:

    Trump. Christie- see also:

    How Trump Is Like Early Giuliani

    The WSJ, 2 days ago. Giuliani is ethics-free. He is a crook. They love him. They admire bad people.

    ReplyReply
  119. 119
    rikyrah says:

    @Kay:

    But Christie is basically the dream candidate of the masculinity-obsessed middle-aged male centrist-worshiping pundit. He’s “tough,” because he shouts at people. He’s “brave,” because he supports various broadly unpopular positions related to government spending and taxing.

    He’s a fat phucking bully. Period.

    ReplyReply
  120. 120
    rikyrah says:

    @Jeffro:

    Hey if you want a good grin, as well as a good way of framing things for any disenchanted GOP friends or relatives, check this out: Josh Marshall takes a whack at Trump’s profound, militant ignorance, deriding him in ways that deserve to be spread around a bit. Or a lot.

    Marshall has had his number from the beginning.

    ReplyReply
  121. 121
    Kay says:

    @rikyrah:

    I thought Sanders was planning on using his list and his funds to promote progressive candidates? If he backed one in Kansas and the candidate won he’d have a great argument for Sanderism.

    Why doesn’t he just do it? “Demanding permission” is weird. Either just take it or ask permission. Why this incessant need for affirmation? Who or what is stopping them?

    ReplyReply
  122. 122
    rikyrah says:

    @Kay:

    They’re poor judges of character and that doesn’t depend on income or education.

    Keep on telling it, Kay

    ReplyReply
  123. 123
    rikyrah says:

    @Kay:

    Why this incessant need for affirmation? Who or what is stopping them?

    NOBODY is stopping them, but backing candidates. Putting the effort in to getting them elected IS HARD WORK, and people expect RESULTS from these ‘ better’ Democratic candidates.

    ReplyReply
  124. 124
    rikyrah says:

    Trump-era damage to the EPA appears increasingly brutal
    04/14/17 12:52 PM—UPDATED 04/14/17 12:53 PM
    By Steve Benen

    It’s been a difficult year thus far for the Environmental Protection Agency. Consider the developments from just the last couple of weeks.

    EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, Donald Trump’s controversial far-right choice to lead the agency, decided two weeks ago to side with Dow Chemical – against the advice of the EPA’s researchers – on the use of an insecticide. The next day, the EPA’s scientific integrity office said it was reviewing whether Pruitt violated agency policies when he publicly questioned the role of carbon pollution in climate change.

    Five days later, EPA officials proposed eliminating “two programs focused on limiting children’s exposure to lead-based paint.” The day after that, Trump’s EPA issued a press statement praising the Energy Star efficiency program that the Trump administration intends to scrap.

    ReplyReply
  125. 125
    Kay says:

    @rikyrah:

    I feel like that’s a perfectly valid judgment. They admire bad people = they might be bad people. Probably are.

    My 13 year old admires Obama. This is good because Obama is admirable, as a human being. If he admired Donald Trump I would be very concerned and rightly so. He didn’t need any policy background or a graduate degree to make this distinction.

    ReplyReply
  126. 126
    Another Scott says:

    @satby: J is still very much in Wilmer’s camp and still very angry at the Democratic party. I don’t know how common her views are, but it’s weird in my view.

    E.g. she and he sister are going to the People’s Climate March on April 29, but she poo-poo’s the Science March on April 22 as being some sort of “anti-Trump political stunt”..?!?! I expect that the Science March will dwarf the Climate March, but we’ll see. The apparent enmity between at least some advocates for the latter seems like a waste of effort to me – we’re on the same side (policy-wise) and should be pulling together. (I’ll probably be at both.)

    I don’t understand it. :-/

    She’s basically still much more upset that Wilmer lost than that Trump won. If that view is common among Wilmer’s supporters, then we have a lot of work to do to run up the score to vote out the Teabagger monsters in office.

    We can’t assume that enthusiasm among his supporters is going to be helpful to the party going forward….

    Cheers,
    Scott.

    ReplyReply
  127. 127
    rikyrah says:

    Will Republicans Blame Trump if Jon Ossoff Wins?
    by D.R. Tucker April 16, 2017 7:00 AM

    It appears that Republicans remain nervous about holding on to the seat in Georgia’s Sixth Congressional District vacated by current Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price–a seat the GOP has owned since 1979:

    ………………………….

    Republicans are right to be nervous: Trump barely won the Sixth District last fall, and this is one of the rare recent Congressional races where Democrats and Republicans seem equally hungry for a victory. Note that Ossoff’s vigorous challenge has placed pressure on his main Republican rival to rhetorically de-wingnut herself:

    Meanwhile, Ossoff’s rivals had their arms full defending the Republican record in the Trump era. Karen Handel, a near-miss candidate in two statewide races — currently polling highest to make the runoff’s second spot — repeatedly rejected the House GOP’s health-care proposal and the negotiations to strip “essential health benefits” from the current system.

    “That’s not Tom Price’s plan,” said Handel. “Not every single time do we have a mandate that is horrible.” Moments later, longtime tea party activist and candidate Amy Kremer said that she, too, opposed the bill; Ossoff deflected one of her attacks by praising her “bipartisanship” for criticizing both parties.

    …………………………………………………..

    ReplyReply
  128. 128
    Immanentize says:

    @Elizabelle: the word “civilian” is one of the most pernicious in our current public space vocabulary. Somehow “civilians” have become lesser folks. “Civilians” seems to refer to an occupation society. My most hated version of this is when the media talks about police versus “civilians.” Police are fucking “civilians” regardless how brutish or racist.

    ReplyReply
  129. 129
    Nelle says:

    James Thompson of Kansas Fourth District was an early Sanders supporter. Does anyone know how much Sanders contributed to Thompson’s campaign?
    The Kansas Democratic party didn’t really support him (they turned down a last minute request for money) and the National party caught on that he was getting pretty competitive a week after the Republicans saw what was happening and threw money and people into the race. I was at an Indivisible meeting this last weekend here in Lawrence and each person there said that they had signed up to work in the local party but there was no follow-up. We’ll all try to be at the next meeting. Our Congresswoman is not running again – we are one of two reliably Democratic towns and are gerrymandered right down the middle of the town, so we’re represented by a woman positioning herself for big lobbying bucks after this term.

    ReplyReply
  130. 130
    Baud says:

    @Another Scott: For a third time, I am not optimistic.

    ReplyReply
  131. 131
    Baud says:

    @Nelle: I find it hard to believe that we could have won that election, given how red it is. But we’ll have another shot in about 20 months.

    ReplyReply
  132. 132

    @David 🍁Canadian Anchor Baby🍁 Koch:

    Dump skipped Easter services and not a peep from the wingnuts or the Village.

    IOKIYAR and bonus points for being rich and white.

    ReplyReply
  133. 133
    MattF says:

    @Elizabelle: I had an odd thought about the United thing the other day. Airlines claim that when someone buys a ticket, they agree to a long list of terms and conditions. Which, apparently, include giving an airline the right to inflict as much physical pain as necessary to get any passenger to do what it wants them to do. But… doesn’t that violate the Geneva Conventions? No, seriously. The US did sign that treaty, after all, regardless of what Mr. Fart says.

    ETA: Yeah, I know, airline passengers aren’t actually prisoners of war. But it sure feels like it.

    ReplyReply
  134. 134
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Kay: Here’s a HuffPo account of Dem fundraising for the KS special election:

    Thompson, a civil rights attorney and Army veteran, raised approximately $240,000 in 20,000 individual donations, much of it since Thursday…Thompson’s campaign said it raised a substantial portion of its last-minute fundraising ― about $85,000 ― via its website over the weekend. Daily Kos appeals accounted for about $143,000 of the total raised, while Democracy for America appeals brought in $12,000. Our Revolution, the progressive group aligned with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), helped contribute $900.

    Maybe Perez should be on the road with Markos Moulitsas. ;)

    ReplyReply
  135. 135
    rikyrah says:

    It’s not just the golf: Trump’s Mar-a-Lago ethics mess gets worse
    04/17/17 08:40 AM
    By Steve Benen
    It seems like only last year that Donald Trump was not only mocking Barack Obama for unwinding too often on golf courses, but also promising voters to be an entirely different kind of president. “I’m going to be working for you,” Trump vowed. “I’m not going to have time to play golf.”

    Wait, that was only last year.

    ………………………………..

    [S]ince his January inauguration, President Trump has spent seven of 13 weekends at his Palm Beach, Florida estate. According to NBC News’ estimates by Sunday Trump will have spent 28 percent of his term traveling to or staying at Mar-a-Lago.

    It’s not just a question of travel time, but of ethics and cost efficiency, according to watchdog groups and ethics experts.

    While presidents have always traveled on the taxpayer’s dollar – the Obamas were partial to Hawaii and Martha’s Vineyard while President George W. Bush frequented his Crawford, Texas ranch – Trump’s travel is “unprecedented,” one expert says, because he’s repeatedly visiting his own privately owned commercial property at Mar-a-Lago.

    I tend see this as a story with three angles. First, there’s the hypocrisy: Trump’s fascination with Obama’s golfing was endless – the line about Obama golfing more than professionals on the PGA tour was a staple of his stump speech – which makes it all the more striking that the president can’t seem to pry himself from the links.

    Second, there’s the pointless secrecy. White House officials, apparently feeling a little embarrassed, have routinely tried to pretend Trump isn’t on the course while he’s golfing.

    …………………

    But even putting all of this aside, the ethics mess is what matters most: Trump owns the courses he keeps breaking campaign promises to visit. Mar-a-Lago isn’t just some pleasant presidential retreat or a nice place for a president to unwind; it’s a private business that Trump continues to profit from.

    ReplyReply
  136. 136
    Baud says:

    @Betty Cracker: Ossoff has a ton of money. There’s a race in Montana that we need to focus on.

    ReplyReply
  137. 137
    rikyrah says:

    The Other Wingnut Who Wants Warren
    by D.R. Tucker April 16, 2017 11:00 AM

    Hey, you can’t blame ‘em for trying.

    The right-wing hatred for Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) increases on an exponential basis, and like longtime Mitt Romney pal John Kingston, that hatred has motivated another far-right Republican to make an effort to unseat her:

    Republican state Representative Geoff Diehl on Wednesday took a stride toward challenging Democratic US Senator Elizabeth Warren next year, announcing a federal campaign account and a formal exploration of a bid against the progressive favorite.

    Diehl, a conservative from Whitman who worked for President Trump’s campaign, said he is plotting a campaign strategy less with an eye on the man with whom he’d share a ticket, but rather on two federal candidates who have succeeded in Massachusetts in recent years.

    “It’s something I didn’t really focus on,” Diehl said of the electoral map that gave Republican Governor Charlie Baker his 2014 victory. Instead, he said, he has been studying the success of former US Senator Scott Brown, who earned a stunning win in 2010, and Trump, who carried last year’s primary with nearly half the vote over four other candidates. Diehl worked as Trump’s state campaign cochair.

    ReplyReply
  138. 138
    rikyrah says:

    The Next Voice You Hear…
    by D.R. Tucker April 15, 2017 3:00 PM

    It’s not that far-fetched of an idea. Not in this world, anyway.

    Think about it: we are told that James Murdoch, the head of 21st Century Fox, wants rid of Bill O’Reilly in the wake of increased media scrutiny (and decreased advertisers) over his history of alleged sexual harassment–a history that reportedly caused Megyn Kelly to leave for NBC News. If O’Reilly is forced out of Fox News, it’s profoundly unlikely that he’ll wind up at CNN, and unlike his erstwhile colleague Greta Van Susteren, MSNBC will probably not bring him on board. A man with his ego and lust for the spotlight is going to need something to do.

    Just over a decade ago, a former colleague of O’Reilly’s was given the opportunity to be the voice of a sitting Republican President. That former colleague was, like O’Reilly, a man who was able to convince many Americans that he was far less partisan than he actually was; he continued to demonstrate that unique skill in his new White House position, serving in that role for a year and a half before an illness that ultimately claimed his life forced him to step down.

    Why couldn’t it happen again?

    If O’Reilly is forced to leave Fox News, I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if he winds up replacing Sean Spicer as White House press secretary. He may well be more qualified.

    ReplyReply
  139. 139
    MattF says:

    @rikyrah: I just can’t see O’Reilly in the bunny suit. Now, Sean Hannity… much more likely.

    ReplyReply
  140. 140
    bupalos says:

    @Kay: Don’t forget that much like Trump he’s a waddling, blabbling personification of middle-aged herto-male double standards surrounding personal appearance.

    ReplyReply
  141. 141
    Betty Cracker says:

    @rikyrah: They might as well put a lying, self-aggrandizing, racist, bad-tempered, serial sexual harassing prick like O’Reilly in the press room. There’s already one in the Oval Office. The Republicans couldn’t express their contempt for facts, good governance, minorities, women, etc., more strongly than their embrace of Trump already has done.

    ReplyReply
  142. 142
    Chris says:

    @efgoldman:

    If he’s half as smart as he thinks he is, he won’t run.

    It’s not just him, though, it’s “his preferred candidate” too. Look at the recent tiff over Perez and Ellison. By all accounts, there’s nothing wrong with the way Ellison behaved, but the Berniebro brigade still found a way to turn him into a hill to die on, and his adversary into a Corrupt Neoliberal Establishment Shill. Which isn’t auspicious for 2020, since they’re basically making it clear that they’ll take their ball and go home unless the party just hands them on a silver platter every position they want.

    ReplyReply
  143. 143
    Woodrowfan says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: I agree. She notes his attitude because it shows further what a huge ass the turtle is.

    ReplyReply
  144. 144
    satby says:

    @Another Scott: J is typical of the few die hard BSers I know (one is my 22yo godson). Way more angry at the only organization that tries to represent their interests than they are at the party and person who intends to destroy them. The power of propaganda, now we have oldsters with Fox propaganda and young’uns with BS propaganda to simultaneously do battle with.
    Odd how both of those end up aiding a particular party though, hmm?

    ReplyReply
  145. 145
    Chris says:

    @Kay:

    First, you have to understand the source of the Christie love. As a rich Northeastern Republican, with the typical rich Northeastern right-leaning Republican’s hard-line right-wing economic agenda, combined with certain less stringent positions on various other issues, elite “centrists” were already inclined to like him. But Christie is basically the dream candidate of the masculinity-obsessed middle-aged male centrist-worshiping pundit. He’s “tough,” because he shouts at people. He’s “brave,” because he supports various broadly unpopular positions related to government spending and taxing. And he’s also a “reform-minded” “moderate,” because … well, because centrist pundits say they like reform-minded moderates and they like Christie so he must be one of those. The fact that all this was wrapped up in a Jersey accent gave him supposed populist cred

    This is why I used to think Christie was their perfect candidate – he was rich and East Coast enough to make the centrists and establishment types swoon, but he also had that “tough” “masculine” image (in the sense that these people imagine, which is to say, the equivalent of a school bully walking the halls shoving people into lockers and laughing about it) and record of using it against liberals (especially uppity ones like the teachers’ unions) that the base would love. All the centrist cred the Villagers loved in Mittens, but without Mittens’ stiff-assed patrician demeanor.

    Of course, then Hurricane Sandy happened and he actually did the right thing for his state instead of “standing on principle” and sticking it to Obama, so any presidential ambitions he had as a Repub died then.

    ReplyReply
  146. 146
    Chris says:

    @Kay:

    They admire horrible people. That’s one explanation. This is why I reject the “smart elites versus unschooled rubes” explanation for Trump. This WAY pre-dated Trump and they played a huge role in it.

    They’re poor judges of character and that doesn’t depend on income or education.

    This this this.

    ReplyReply
  147. 147
    Woodrowfan says:

    @satby: heritics are always treated with more anger than infidels

    ReplyReply
  148. 148
    rikyrah says:

    @Chris:

    Which isn’t auspicious for 2020, since they’re basically making it clear that they’ll take their ball and go home unless the party just hands them on a silver platter every position they want.

    Then they are gonna run into a whole lotta people waiting for them with 2×4’s, cause, nobody has time nor patience for the bullshyt. These muthaphuckas won’t apologize for their role in 2016, and think that people are gonna be gingerly around them in 2020.
    PHUCK THEM.

    ReplyReply
  149. 149
    satby says:

    @rikyrah: come sit by me 😉

    ReplyReply
  150. 150
    Jeffro says:

    @rikyrah:

    Marshall has had [Trump’s] number from the beginning.

    I like the way Marshall points out that not only is Trump ignorant, but militantly so, and about things that even most adults (much less actual subject matter experts) already know…and therefore Trump’s only way to play this is to act as if it’s a revelation to everyone, like a two-year-old.

    It’s almost as if one day, Trump will be waddling around the golf course and realize he has no clothes on. “I’m naked”, the Emperor said, “How about that? Who could have known that not putting on clothes would result in me standing here on Hole #9, completely in the buff? Amazing!”

    ReplyReply
  151. 151
    Elizabelle says:

    @Immanentize: Yes! Word creep with “civilians”, and pernicious it is.

    My best to Mrs. Immanetize for a complete recovery. Sorry to hear she has to undergo chemo, but hope it does a world of good.

    ReplyReply
  152. 152
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Chris: Here’s what worries me: The hardcore Sandersites, in part thanks to Sanders himself, don’t seem to want to take YES for an answer. Their ostensible wish list WAS handed to them on a silver platter. The Democratic Party platform in 2016 was the most progressive ever in the history of the republic. That wasn’t good enough for at least some portion of the Sanders fan base.

    And to hear Sanders talk sometimes, you’d think the party was still stuck in 1993, as if Obama never happened, as if the party hadn’t moved significantly to the left, a journey Sanders presumably entered the race to inspire.

    I’m not sure what we can do about that group of voters in 2018 and 2020. Maybe they’ll come around since their hate-fetish object Clinton won’t be on the ballot. Maybe the sheer horror of the Trump administration will bring them around, much as GWB’s maladministration smacked my stupid Nader-voting ass with a clue-by-four and taught me to never again regard my general election vote in a swing state as a vehicle for personal expression.

    But it’s hard to see how that happens if Sanders plans to continue crapping on the Democratic Party.

    ReplyReply
  153. 153
    The Moar You Know says:

    Maybe the sheer horror of the Trump administration will bring them around, much as GWB’s maladministration smacked my stupid Nader-voting ass with a clue-by-four and taught me to never again regard my general election vote in a swing state as a vehicle for personal expression.

    @Betty Cracker: You’d be the exception. The Naderites I know all, every last one of them, eventually went GOP. Lesson not learned.

    ReplyReply
  154. 154
    a thousand flouncing lurkers (was fidelio) says:

    @Elizabelle: I think this is the thing that they can’t defend in court, and know they can’t defend in court, as it’s the simplest and most practical fix to a situation that leaves them with limited choices: If they must give priority to traveling flight crews, and they have a crew needing transportation, then that crew should be on hand (or at least advising them of their need to be on a specific flight) well before boarding. An hour isn’t too much to ask of the travelling crew, who should be aware of where they need to be and what they have to do to get there.

    My eldest nephew’s wife is a flight attendant, and her take on this is well past appalled and furious. An incident like this results in an angry and distressed group of passengers–and it’s the flight attendants who then must deal with them for the duration of the flight. So she’s somewhat self-interested in this, but she’s pretty outspoken about what poor customer service this is, in general–and how avoidable it was, if United had a good policy in place in advance that everyone followed consistently.

    ReplyReply
  155. 155
    Chris says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    @Chris: Here’s what worries me: The hardcore Sandersites, in part thanks to Sanders himself, don’t seem to want to take YES for an answer. Their ostensible wish list WAS handed to them on a silver platter. The Democratic Party platform in 2016 was the most progressive ever in the history of the republic. That wasn’t good enough for at least some portion of the Sanders fan base.

    Yeah, exactly. Should’ve clarified, when I said “every position they want on a silver platter,” I meant “position” as in “candidacy,” not as in “political stance.” They just wanted the Democratic candidacy of 2016 handed to Sanders no matter what (which makes the incessant whining about “coronation” especially ironic).

    And to hear Sanders talk sometimes, you’d think the party was still stuck in 1993, as if Obama never happened, as if the party hadn’t move significantly to the left, a journey Sanders presumably entered the race to inspire.

    Honestly, the more I look at his candidacy, the more obvious it seems that as far as the national stage goes, he’s just a bandwagoner. He watched Obama and a ton of others shift the country to the left for the last eight years, realized that left-wing economics were finally a winning message again, and decided to pretend he’d invented the whole thing.

    I’m not sure what we can do about that group of voters in 2018 and 2020.

    I have no idea. Honestly, I think a ton of it depends on Sanders himself. If he shuts the fuck up, goes away, and allows others, be it Keith Ellison or Elizabeth Warren or, honestly, almost anyone else in his corner of the party to take the lead, we should be fine by 2020. As long as he stays in the spotlight, not so much. If his brand was problematic before last November, it’s been absolutely toxic since. Unfortunately, I don’t see that happening, especially as long as the media continues to massage his ego. Which is why I’m plenty worried for 2018 and 2020.

    ReplyReply
  156. 156
    Gelfling 545 says:

    Today is Dyngus Day in Buffalo. I will not be attending any of the organized events as they are for heartier souls than I. I wiil however be dining on a friend’s fine, homemade pierogies and sausage.

    ReplyReply
  157. 157
    The Moar You Know says:

    I have no idea. Honestly, I think a ton of it depends on Sanders himself. If he shuts the fuck up, goes away, and allows others, be it Keith Ellison or Elizabeth Warren or, honestly, almost anyone else in his corner of the party to take the lead, we should be fine by 2020. As long as he stays in the spotlight, not so much. If his brand was problematic before last November, it’s been absolutely toxic since. Unfortunately, I don’t see that happening, especially as long as the media continues to massage his ego. Which is why I’m plenty worried for 2018 and 2020.

    @Chris: Canada ended up with Stephen Harper for over ten years – with votes totaling less than 40% of the voting populace, because the liberals couldn’t patch up some stupid split between them.

    Like you, I am not hopeful this gets resolved anytime soon.

    I lie far more on the side of what Sanders professes he wants, but am smart enough to look at his actions and realize that:
    1. He doesn’t want what he says he wants (where’s those tax returns, Mr. Transparency in government?)
    2. He is unelectable. Seriously, completely unelectable on a national level.

    ReplyReply
  158. 158
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Chris: I agree much of it depends on Sanders himself, and I’m not encouraged by what I’ve seen over the past few months. I don’t think he necessarily needs to shut up and go away (though I can well understand why many DO feel that way), but he needs to get with the goddamned program. I think it’s the first big test of Perez’s leadership, handling Sanders’ massive ego and convincing him to stay inside the tent and redirect the stream of piss OUT. Good luck, Tom!

    @Gelfling 545: I had Easter dinner with several Buffalonians yesterday, and they fondly reminisced about Dyngus Day. Have a happy one!

    ReplyReply
  159. 159
    Chris says:

    @The Moar You Know:

    And the worst part is that this is, literally, all about Sanders. Elizabeth Warren’s doing fine. Keith Ellison is doing fine. In terms of national politicians, it’s only him who’s continuously throwing the party under the bus. We’d be doing just fine if we had literally anyone but this smug and useless little shit representing that corner of the party.

    @Betty Cracker:

    Yeah, I just don’t see him getting with the program. As I’ve said a few times, I didn’t really hate him until after November. If, even after an event of the magnitude of Trump’s election, your first reflex is still to pop right up and start braying about corrupt establishment Democrats, then it’s pretty clear you’re never going to get with the program and you’re as toxic to the party as Joe Lieberman used to be.

    ReplyReply
  160. 160
    Jay C says:

    @Chris:

    Of course, then Hurricane Sandy happened and he actually did the right thing for his state instead of “standing on principle” and sticking it to Obama, so any presidential ambitions he had as a Repub died then.

    Well, it certainly did wonders for his gubernatorial ambitions – even though anything but full-bore relief lobbying post-Sandy would have been political suicide. That, and the sleazy backroom deal he made with Trenton Dems to sandbag their candidate in 2013 pretty much guaranteed his reelection. However, Christopher the Large is term-limited out: barring some odd reversal in the time-honored political traditions of the Garden State, the next Gov. is likely to be a Democrat. Until he or she alienates the electorate as usual after a term or two, then flip time again…..

    ReplyReply
  161. 161
    WVm says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    Jabberwocky Hollandaise Buggeroff creature who used to foul this space …

    Wonderful way of spelling that boy’s name! Wasn’t he a pill?!?!?!

    No more common sense than a wet hen! Probably not an AI, Perhaps an AS (artificial stupid) – certainly a troll. I probably interact too much with trolls, but sometimes they are just such tempting targets, large, full of hot air, slow moving, and with a satisfactory Pop! in the end.

    ReplyReply
  162. 162
    WVm says:

    @rikyrah:

    I hope that the Dems have put into their rules..

    ANYONE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT UNDER THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY BANNER HAS TO RELEASE THE LAST 10 YEARS OF THEIR TAX RETURNS.

    That this muthaphucka never released his returns STILL chafes me.

    Truly so!! And one more similarity between Sanders and Trump, to go with the Russia love!!!

    ReplyReply
  163. 163
    nightranger says:

    He looks so tough in that bomber jacket.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *