Dakota to Decatur

As I’ve said before, I worry that the Democratic party likes to spend millions of dollars backing non-ideological civility-bots in wealthy suburbs instead of competing everywhere. I’m not against backing candidates like Ossoff but I’m against not really backing candidates like Parnell.

The truth is that the returns from the specials look pretty good so far even if we haven’t won one yet.

So let’s raise more money for all 238 districts currently controlled by Republicans (note: I randomized the order now so that it will get spread out equally over all districts over time)

Goal Thermometer






389 replies
  1. 1
    randy khan says:

    I don’t know the details from previous cycles, but this time around the swing has been pretty consistent within the special elections, too.

  2. 2
    Shygetz says:

    I agree. I would think civility pushes target Brooks-style Republicans, who are not gettable in sizable numbers. Seems like the focus should be in turning out the base and those who feel disenfranchised…and neither of those groups count civility as a priority.

  3. 3
    Ben from Virginia says:

    It would really help in our quest to take back the House if those of us who think maybe, just maybe, we need younger (and less radioactive) leadership than Nancy Pelosi aren’t automatically labeled misogynists…

  4. 4
    joel hanes says:

    As I understand the rationale, the DCCC chooses to fund “corporatist”/centrist milquetoasts in preference to more liberal candidates even in Dem +bignum districts because :
    1. “corporatists” see nothing wrong with taking corporate contributions, and so will probably do nothing to disrupt the funding stream from the corporate donors who are the biggest source of DCCC funds
    2. centrists who rely on DCCC support are tractable members of the caucus; they can be whipped into line by reminding them of where the funds for their next campaign will come from
    3. the more-liberal candidates are sometimes prone to disruptive pursuit of goals that cannot realistically be delivered: they over-promise, over-generalize, and frighten the GOP livestock without any offsetting political advantage among voters who actually turn out.

    Some of those reasons I think are bad things; some are just reality, and some are the Iron Law Of Institutions at work.
    Careerists are not often attracted to the idea of upsetting the applecart, even if the applecart is not actually taking them to the ostensible goal.

  5. 5
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @joel hanes:

    Ossoff checked off every progressive box on just about every issue. If anything, running a more moderate candidate in GA-06 would have helped.

    A guy winning in a suburban middle class district is not going to line up with us on every single issue–pick and choose your battles.

    Running a candidate for mayor of Omaha (remember: this is Nebraska!) out of the party on a rail for being pro-life, for example, is extraordinarily counterproductive.

    If he was running for Senator from New Jersey? Yeah, that’d be a problem. But mayor of Omaha? Does it really matter if he makes pro-life noises on abortion as cultural signaling so he can win an office that won’t impact abortion rights at all?

  6. 6
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    She’s radioactive to Republicans because she’s so effective, so fuck the fuck off.

  7. 7

    @Ben from Virginia: If infant Jesus were to lead the Democrats he still would be radioactive. Wanting to getting rid of Pelosi to satisfy Rs smacks of cowardice and yes misogyny.

  8. 8
    joel hanes says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    maybe, we need younger (and less radioactive) leadership

    Pelosi is one of the most effective caucus leaders in history. Still is. She built that.
    She’s radioactive to conservatives because her district is easily caricatured as a hotbed of liberalism and social libertinism, AND BECAUSE SHE’S A STRONG WOMAN.

    I cannot for the life of me figure out why she might be considered “radioactive” to progressives.
    Can you explain that?

  9. 9

    (note: I randomized the order now so that it will get spread out equally over all districts over time)

    This doesn’t particularly make me want to donate via this method.

  10. 10
    randy khan says:

    @joel hanes:

    The DCCC generally does not fund candidates until the general election (some exceptions, but not many), so as a general rule you can’t say that it favors centrist candidates in any specific districts. It’s probably reasonable to say that it historically has favored centrist candidates when deciding which districts to fund in the general.

  11. 11
  12. 12
    pat says:

    Sorry, I know this is not an open thread, but I want to check if I can comment without being told that the site has been improperly construed and not safe… If this goes through I will delete it.

  13. 13
    ruemara says:

    @Ben from Virginia: You’re not asking for less radioactive, you’re asking for appeals to republicans. Because if you think that a younger politico won’t be covered in slime by the GOP the minute they are elevated, you don’t understand hardball. Thankfully, Pelosi does. And if a younger person is waiting to take over, then the smart thing to do is get in her good graces and fucking learn from the baddest bitch with that Speaker gavel.

  14. 14

    @joel hanes: Because so called progressives are taking orders from Putin.

  15. 15
    mai naem mobile says:

    @Shygetz: you say Brooks. You mean Bill Cohen. Brooks won’t vote for a Dem if his mother’s life depended on it.

  16. 16

    @Ben from Virginia: being pro-choice is a fundamental part of being a democrat.

  17. 17
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @schrodingers_cat:

    Like that State Farm ad – “what are you wearing, “Ben from Virginia”?

  18. 18
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne:

    She’s not effective at winning elections these past few cycles. At all. She was an extraordinarily effective Speaker ten years ago, but those days are over. We need new leadership. And younger leadership–seriously, our House leadership is beginning to resemble the Brezhnev-era USSR in terms of median age. It’s ridiculous.

  19. 19
    joel hanes says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    Ossoff

    I was speaking generally, not specifically about Ossof; I agree with everything you said, and my #3 is a quiet rebuke to the more left-delusional among us.

    Given our partisan situation, a caucus that sticks together is our only hope, so I actually think my #2 works to our advantage, although it pisses off the more purity-minded of our activists.

    Ain’t beanbag. Inherently sausage-making. Etc.

  20. 20
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    I’d say the same thing about being pro-life and being Republican and, yet, Republicans are willing to put up with pro-choice Susan Collins in exchange for a reliable Republican vote 99.99% of the time.

    I’d take a pro-life Democratic Senator from Nebraska over Ben Sasse any day of the week.

  21. 21

    All prominent “progressive” targets have been women
    1. DWS
    2.HRC
    3. Nancy Pelosi
    4. Donna Brazille

    Coincidence? I think not.

  22. 22
    quakerinabasement says:

    If a tie is “like kissing your sister,” a moral victory is like kissing yourself.

    We need more real kissing…errr… winning, not moral victories.

  23. 23
    joel hanes says:

    @randy khan:

    My understanding has been that it’s usually pretty clear sometime before the primary which candidate the DCCC might be willing to invest real money in. If that’s incorrect (and I have no first-hand knowledge), I’ll be glad to be corrected.

  24. 24

    You know, than Hollandaise Bechamel guy started off here saying that Dems would win rural white assholes if only they would let pro-life people in the party, so I’m gonna assume troll until proven otherwise.

  25. 25
    joel hanes says:

    @schrodingers_cat:

    Because so called progressives are taking orders from Putin

    Sorry; they may be the victims of disinformation, but that’s just over the top.
    I’m bitter too, but let’s not tell lies to comfort ourselves.

  26. 26

    @schrodingers_cat: Kamala Harris will be next once the bros learn her actual record.

  27. 27
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    It’s not her job to win elections. She’s a Congressperson who won her own elections several times. The person you’re thinking of is Bernie Sanders – Chair of Dem Outreach, endorser and campaigner for Quist and Mello.

  28. 28
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    Ossoff checked off every progressive box on just about every issue. If anything, running a more moderate candidate in GA-06 would have helped.

    No, it would not have helped. He ran a great campaign for this area. The only things that would have helped are (1) un-gerrymandering the district, and (2) reducing the racism of the voters in the district.

    And a pre-emptive “fuck off” to any trolls who show up and claim he should have run a Wilmer-style campaign.

  29. 29
    joel hanes says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    She’s not effective at winning elections these past few cycles

    Good God. In the list of reasons why Dems don’t currently control the house, Pelosi is about the fiftieth most important.
    And any other effective Dem will be just as easily smeared by Rs, so I can’t see that we’d gain much.

    Agree that we need a generational change.
    Let’s get specific.
    Who would you like to see be speaker in 2019 if not Nancy SMASH?

  30. 30

    “I just don’t see the value in decades of experience and relationships forged in fire for somebody trying to run a Byzantine parliamentary chamber of 435 self-important assholes with a book of rules longer than any one person could ever remember. We need somebody like Tim ‘Dago Red Wine’ Ryan.”

  31. 31

    @joel hanes: I speak of the bots that infiltrated the liberal blogs and used disinformation against HRC. Its not something I just made up.

    ETA: Anti-HRC propaganda was fed to BS supporters and they ate it up with a spoon.

  32. 32
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @schrodingers_cat:

    Kamala Harris, Joy Reid, Liz Warren, Dolores Huerta

  33. 33
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Ben from Virginia: Don’t call them pro-life. That is their marketing term and it is intentionally dishonest. They are anti-abortion.

    Democrats are pro-life as we want people to have food, shelter, and healthcare, and we don’t want people getting shot or executed,

  34. 34
    joel hanes says:

    @schrodingers_cat:

    Ah. I am aware of the propaganda; I had thought that you were conflating the perpetrators with those who swallowed it.
    As I now understand you, your “so-called progressives” refers purely to the perps.
    I had taken it to refer to those who were duped.

  35. 35
    Yutsano says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    reducing the racism of the voters in the district.

    Ye gods this. Osoff had to almost hide his minority outreach because it would have spooked his erstwhile “solid” suburban white ladies. I think the main reason he did as well as he did there was John Lewis was supporting him the whole time.

  36. 36
    ruemara says:

    @Steve in the ATL: But Bernie woulda wo-*chokes on a flaming ball of stupidity*

  37. 37

    @Steve in the ATL: Explain this, how is gerrymandering constitutional. It subverts democracy.

  38. 38
    Mike J says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    She’s not effective at winning elections these past few cycles

    Pelosi doesn’t run dtrip. That would be 45 year old Ben Ray Luján from NM.

  39. 39
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @schrodingers_cat: gerrymandering is flagrantly unconstitutional, but until SCOTUS says that then it will continue. And SCOTUS has a conservative majority and a chief justice whose prior legal career was performing voter suppression.

    Apologies for answering your rhetorical question!

  40. 40
    pat says:

    @pat:

    Well it went through and I did try to delete it….
    anyway, while I’m here, I DO NOT WANT to see any serious attempt to replace Nancy Smash with some mealy-mouthed bro. This Tim Ryan is a joke.

  41. 41
    Peale says:

    @Ben from Virginia: Seriously, then call your own damn Democrat House Member and ask them to revote on who the minority leader is. This is a stupid argument for us to have because we actually (and actually very reasonably) don’t have a say in who the minority leader of the House is. That’s up to the Democratic members of Congress. Traditionally, those positions last until the next Congress is is session (2019). It is beyond believable that you expect someone to come in a fire her and replace her. Power within the Democratic party is very dispersed. There is no central chairman with the power to come in and remove her from that job.

    This is the kind of shit that Democrats do that lead to, say, Darryl Issa successfully getting the Democratic governor of California recalled and replaced by a god damned celebrity republican for two terms. There is no recall of Congresswoman Pelosi, Her peers elected her to that position just a few months ago. Ever since she was re-elected its been like month after month of Ryan and his loser clown show begging again for us to take his side and have a new election. He’s convinced no more representatives to back an alternative than he had six months ago, so he just goes to the press to whine again and again.

    Take it up with your Congressman so that next time they have some younger faces from more conservative districts represented in key positions. Otherwise, talk to me when you find her in bed with an under-aged teen boy stuffing oil lobby money down his g-string.

    I feel like I’m dealing with a bunch of losers who didn’t show up at the town meeting when the agenda item was decided who then show up every month asking for it to be voted on again.

  42. 42

    @Peale:

    I feel like I’m dealing with a bunch of losers who didn’t show up at the town meeting when the agenda item was decided who then show up every month asking for it to be voted on again.

    Also, they didn’t know the town had meetings until last year and have never lived in (and refuse to move to) the town.

  43. 43
    glory b says:

    @Ben from Virginia: Winning elections isn’t her job! Keeping her caucus properly herded is what she does.

    To repeat what was said above, the Repubs smear her for a reason.

  44. 44
    Peale says:

    @Mike J:

    That would be 45 year old Ben Ray Luján from NM.

    who is, btw, very, very, handsome. And more progressive than Steve Israel, who had the job before him. Who was more conservative than Chris Van Hollen, who had the job before him but whom everyone hated for some reason, who was probably more liberal than Rahm Emmanual, who everyone was toasting for leading us to victory in 2006, until they decided that all credit should go to moderate neo-liberal Howard Dean.

    Actually, I wouldn’t mind Ben Ray on TV more. He’s a looker and unlike, say, Howard Dean these days, probably won’t sleep walk his way into interviews unprepared for questions.

  45. 45
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @glory b:

    Progressives have no idea how anything works, yet it never slows their roll from having extremely strong bropinions.

    ETA: If progressives did know how anything worked, they wouldn’t be progressives which seems to demand total lack of understanding of process, complexity, nuance, context or compromise, except when it comes to the bad parts of the bills Wilmer voted for, which requires all of the above plus pretzel logic.

  46. 46
    Tilda Swintons Bald Cap says:

    Ben from Virginia, another example of why there will be no wave in 2018, or maybe he’s posting from Russia.

  47. 47
    low-tech cyclist says:

    I’m having a hard time getting around the notion of Ossoff as a DCCC-handpicked candidate. Early in the year, the big fundraising push for Ossoff seemed to be coming from Daily Kos, which I hardly think of being on the same wavelength as the party hierarchy.

    I sure don’t remember hearing all these complaints about Ossoff before he lost, either. I honestly don’t know whether he was a good candidate or a bad candidate, but ISTM that we’ve got a mixture of extreme Monday morning quarterbacking, and flat-out rewriting of some very recent history.

  48. 48

    @Tilda Swintons Bald Cap: don’t be silly, the username “Ben from Virginia” is as American as pie from apples.

  49. 49
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @schrodingers_cat: You forgot Pocahontas.

  50. 50
    Gator90 says:

    @Steve in the ATL: They aren’t even anti-abortion. What they’re against is the wrong women having access to safe abortion.

  51. 51
    Barbara says:

    @Ben from Virginia: We do need younger leadership and it is legitimate discuss the best way to develop such leaders but if that discussion arises out of or is just a facade for a wish to get rid of Pelosi you can count me out.

  52. 52
    amk says:

    Given that how you ‘turn on a dime’ and trash the candidates that you ‘fund raised for’ when they lose, why would anyone take you seriously, doug?

  53. 53
    Cheryl from Maryland says:

    Tim Ryan is just shit stirring because he lost the Democratic House election for Minority Speaker. That he is willing not to show unity at this time and is instead sniping publicly against Pelosi 8 months later shows how unfit he is for the job.

  54. 54
    FlipYrWhig says:

    Are we still pretending Archie Parnell was a fire-breathing progressive ideologue for the purposes of this insipid bankshot counterargument?

  55. 55
    SatanicPanic says:

    @amk: Doug is getting pretty bro-gressive lately

  56. 56
    FlipYrWhig says:

    STOOPID DEMS HAVE NO BENCH AND NEED YOUNGER LEADERSHIP AND ALSO JON OSSOFF WAS UNFAMILIAR AND SEEMED LIKE A KID

  57. 57
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @Steve in the ATL: I agree with Doug!. Ossoff was a civility bot. I’d be more open to the suggestion that he ran a great campaign if, you know, he’d won. I’d even maybe agree that it was a solid campaign if he’d done better than the Trump spread (Trump won the district by 1%), but he did neither. He lost by 4-5%.

  58. 58
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @Barbara:

    Always with the demand for the women to step aside. Never accepting our offer to make room for them, never offering support or the willingness to pay any dues, just white male entitlement to show up and take over after discovering politics in 2012. Like their cult leader.

  59. 59
    Trentrunner says:

    @Ben from Virginia: Can we just call you sexist assholes instead? I mean, because you are.

  60. 60
    hovercraft says:

    @Steve in the ATL:
    Thanks for that.
    You gotta love all the political strategists who’ve come out of the woodwork to tell him how he could have won if only he’d ………………………
    GA -06 is not San Francisco. In terms of raw numbers, the democratic vote for Ossoff was very high, it showed that people were highly motivated, he came up short because the rethugs were just as motivated to stick it to liberals. That’s 6 months in, imagine how motivated we’ll be by the Fall of 2018.

  61. 61
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: Yeah, who needs the base anyway. The way we Dems keeping winning, we can afford to toss ’em off the bus.

  62. 62
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Chief Oshkosh: And the contrasting guy for the purposes of all the things the Democrats do wrong is Archie Parnell, who achieved a numerically similar near loss by parlaying his status as a Goldman Sachs employee and making pragmatic appeals to local Republicans and moderates. But it’s totally different and much more promising because reasons.

  63. 63
    Fair Economist says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    Don’t call them pro-life. That is their marketing term and it is intentionally dishonest. They are anti-abortion.

    Absolutely. Texas’ anti-abortion policies have literally doubled maternal mortality. Anti-abortion is pro-DEATH. The *real* pro-life position is for reproductive choice.

  64. 64
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:

    They’re not the base. They’re unreliable flaky and dismissive of the base. They’ll be voting Republican the first decent job they get, because they don’t give a shit about the base – women and PoC. If Ron Paul were running, they’d be sniffing his jock instead of Wilmer’s.

  65. 65
    raven says:

    @Chief Oshkosh: and I suppose you have some suggestions on who should have run, right?

  66. 66
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Chief Oshkosh: Yeah, the Democratic base in Georgia and South Carolina is definitely the opposite of suburban moderates and middle-aged women. I’m pretty sure it’s gutter punks and guys who sell rain sticks.

  67. 67
    Barbara says:

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: Deferring to women drives some (a lot? most?) men crazy.

  68. 68
    smintheus says:

    OT but important: A lawyer writing on the Senate bill’s waiver provisions argues that it permits a single crazy governor, on his own authority, to destroy some of the most important ACA provisions for every person living in the US…such as essential benefits, and annual/lifetime caps…and that once those waivers have been granted, it is impossible under the Senate bill to revoke them.

  69. 69
    amk says:

    @Chief Oshkosh: what base, ‘chief’? Idiot.

  70. 70
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @Barbara:

    Most.

  71. 71
    Peale says:

    @FlipYrWhig: Or still noting that he came closer than Ossoff. Oh wait. We’re arguing about candidates who finished 0.2% different in the vote tallies.

    I actually agree that Parnell probably should have recieved a bit more consideration. There probably wasn’t time to set up the type of underground GOTV organization that he needed. But they really needed to do GOTV under the radar or the GOP would have poured money into that race. that’s an issue. In a district where the Dems spent money all of the Dems showed up (Ossoff) plus those who only show up for presidential years. (It took a lot of money to do that). The Democratic Base (defined as those who vote for a Democrat in every election) is much smaller in SC-5, but we only needed to find about 6,000 more of them and about 20,000 of them didn’t show up. How to get 6,000 base voters to the polls on short notice without the GOP noticing is actually a good question.

  72. 72
    Fair Economist says:

    @Cheryl from Maryland:

    Tim Ryan is just shit stirring because he lost the Democratic House election for Minority Speaker. That he is willing not to show unity at this time and is instead sniping publicly against Pelosi 8 months later shows how unfit he is for the job.

    Yes, absolutely. In the abstract, it would be fine to have somebody in leadership who’s good at appealing to the WWC (which Tim Ryan is). But he’s showing that he personally is a lousy leader, and somebody else would have to fill that role.

  73. 73
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @hovercraft: I don’t disagree with regards to his policy positions. I do disagree that this was a well-run campaign. The 800 lb gorilla was Trump. Like it or not, everyone in the world knew that this was a referendum on Trump.

    Everyone except Jon Ossoff.

    He, his campaign, and the establishment Dems did almost nothing to tie Handel to Trump. The ads practically wrote themselves, yet somehow it was beyond the Illuminati of the Left. I really wonder if combined they could pour piss out of a boot with instructions on the heel.

    As so we lost. And not only did we lose, we lost by several percentage points more than Hillary lost this district (4-5% vs 1%).

  74. 74
    joel hanes says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:

    if he’d done better than the Trump spread

    With respect, that’s cherry-picking.

    Trump was a uniquely awful candidate for that district: a NYC con man, serial adulterer, Not A Real True Christian, married to a furriner.
    Handel is, by contrast, an archetypical Republican from a southern state.

    Ossof did a whole lot better than the Price spread, which I think should be the relevant standard of comparison.

  75. 75
    hovercraft says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:
    That Twitler vote is a red herring, as he was winning the district by 1%, Tom Price was winning it by 24%
    It’s a ruby red district, the fact that they did not like Twitler did not prevent them from voting overwhelmingly for Price.
    We need to stop letting the media hype sucker us into believing that we are on the cusp if winning rub red districts where the entire GOP vortex of money has trained their death star to hold onto a seat. The media keeps harping on the 23 million Ossoff raised, all the while ignoring the millions Ryan and outside groups poured in to attack him over the last couple of weeks.
    As Doug said we should compete everywhere, but there are I think it’s 73 districts where the GOP won by less than 10 points, not to mention the 23 Hillary won, this was always an uphill slog, don’t let the media and the GOP tel you otherwise.
    Remember that Twitler picked the people in these seats for his cabinet partly because they were in safe republican seats that would be easy to hold onto. They didn’t expect to have to spend millions just to hold onto them.

  76. 76
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @amk: There you go again, winning friends and influencing people.

    You think the Dems are going to win without progressives? And I’m the idiot?

  77. 77
    low-tech cyclist says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Are we still pretending Archie Parnell was a fire-breathing progressive ideologue for the purposes of this insipid bankshot counterargument?

    Damned good question.

    The one race I really thought should have been the focus of the party’s efforts was MT-AL. Quist seemed like a good candidate, Gianforte seemed to have some obvious and major weaknesses, and the Dems have won a pretty good share of statewide races in Montana in recent years.

    I still think that if the DCCC had thrown some money from the get-go into some good old-fashioned character assassination of Gianforte, this would have gone the other way.

    KS-4, despite my sentimental attachment to it (my mother, my uncle, and my cousins all grew up there; I spent every Christmas there until I was 16) was always a longshot, and it’s amazing that it was as close as it was. But still, the DCCC should have tossed $50K into the race just to see what it could do. Because what else were they going to do with their money in an off year?

    Not to mention, beginning with the Women’s March, there was a huge surge of grassroots activism, and the DCCC should have seen its mission as adding momentum to that surge.

  78. 78
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:

    So why did the singing cowboy lose in a purple state that has a Dem governor and Senator with Wilmer at his side? That race was tailor made to test your theory about the path forward. Oh right, that’s Pelosi’s fault too.

  79. 79
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @hovercraft: You make a good point about Price’s 24% except that it ignores that the voters had had months of Trump being Trump.

    Ossoff had ONE job: Tie his opponent to Trump. It was absolutely the only play he had to close the deal. He didn’t do it. Why not?

  80. 80
    joel hanes says:

    @low-tech cyclist:

    I still think that if the DCCC had thrown some money from the get-go into some good old-fashioned character assassination of Gianforte, this would have gone the other way.

    Too much of the vote, 37%, had already been cast by the time Gianforte decided to assault a Fox minion.

  81. 81
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @low-tech cyclist:

    Not to mention, beginning with the Women’s March, there was a huge surge of grassroots activism, and the DCCC should have seen its mission as adding momentum to that surge.

    White men of the left and right have allied to kneecap the resistance from the women and PoC who have organized and dedicated themselves to fostering it. White men need to look in a mirror.

  82. 82

    @smintheus: well yeah, that’s the whole point! A race to the bottom interstate regulatory issue is a feature, not a bug, in republican ‘regulations’.

  83. 83
    Sab says:

    @Major Major Major Major: I am quite annoyed with Tim Ryan, but he was raised by his Italian-American mother, so if he wants to call himself a “dago” I’m okay with that.

  84. 84
    amk says:

    @Chief Oshkosh: Yeah, there you go again. Why isn’t the real dem base kissing the whiny white guyz asses who couldn’t score electoral victories?

  85. 85
    raven says:

    @Chief Oshkosh: You’re full of shit Dawg.

  86. 86
    TriassicSands says:

    @quakerinabasement:

    We need more real kissing…errr… winning, not moral victories

    I agree.

    @joel hanes:

    99.99% of the time

    Just to be accurate, see Progressive Punch’s senatorial rankings.

    On votes considered “crucial” to progressives, Collins has voted with the Dems 27.32% of the time lifetime, but only 8.45% of the time in 2017-18.
    I would expect that many of Collins’ pro-Dem votes have been on women’s issues. She is the least loyal Repubican. If you removed women’s issues, she might well be pushing 99.99% — I don’t have those statistics.

    By contrast, the least loyal Dem is Ol’ Joe Manchin. On votes crucial to progressives he has sided with the Dems 57.65% lifetime and 59.15% in 2017-18.

    That’s a huge difference between Manchin and Collins. And it points to why Collins can’t fairly be called “a” moderate. She might be “moderate” for a Republican, but that isn’t objectively moderate. Manchin, on the other hand, votes with the Democrats less than 60% of the time on crucial votes.

  87. 87
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Trentrunner:

    Personally abusive and content-free, aka par for the course for the “Social Justice” Brigade.

    Kathleen Rice wants Pelosi gone, too, is she a sexist asshole? Oh wait, it’s “internalized misogyny”, amirite? You’re not doing politics–you’re doing theology.

  88. 88
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Chief Oshkosh: well, poster I’ve never seen before who suddenly appeared to educate us all about GA-06 voters, some of us here live in GA-06 and have for many years, and we know a fair bit about this electorate . And it doesn’t vote in large numbers for Democrats ever, with the single exception of Jon Ossoff. And it sure as hell doesn’t vote for fire-breathing Marxists. This is a mostly upscale suburban electorate where civility is expected. Had Ossoff run as an in-your-face asshole, he would have been slaughtered. Instead, he came closer to winning this seat than any Democrat since the 1970’s, and, more importantly, he has excited and motivated the long-ignored liberal voters of GA-06, including but not limited to beloved and highly respected B-J posters such as JPL and, of course, moi.

  89. 89
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: You seem to be confused. I’m a big Pelosi fan. I don’t think that getting Dems elected is her strong suit, but I don’t see anyone else doing a better job in that department.

    I don’t know about the singing cowboy; did he have a couple dozens of millions for his campaign? I do know that we gave Ossoff in the ballpark of that amount of money. If the cowboy had that amount of money, then maybe his race is a good comparison with GA06.

    Ossoff very little chance to win. From my POV, there was only one path to victory: tying his opponent to Trump. He chose not to do that. At all.

    Of course I could be totally wrong about this, so convince me otherwise.

  90. 90
    low-tech cyclist says:

    @hovercraft:

    In terms of raw numbers, the democratic vote for Ossoff was very high, it showed that people were highly motivated, he came up short because the rethugs were just as motivated to stick it to liberals.

    Another thing is, in most years, people aren’t paying a lot of attention to special elections like the ones we’ve had this year. So if your side is motivated, you can win a seat like GA-6 because the other side isn’t awake.

    Well, by June 20, practically everybody in the damn country knew there was a special election happening in GA-6. So everybody on both sides showed up, and there were simply more of them than there were of us in a district with that sort of PVI. (ETA: IOW, I’m agreeing with and building on your comment.)

  91. 91
    SatanicPanic says:

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: hey hey they might try but we still have working knees!

  92. 92
    joel hanes says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:

    You think the Dems are going to win without progressives?

    We’re going to have to. They’re not reliable voters — they often don’t turn out even for their own favored candidates, and they’re easily distracted by shiny-object trolls like Nader and Stein.
    By contrast, the middle-aged women of color who grossly outnumber “progressives” and who are the modal Democratic voter are much more reliable voters.

  93. 93
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:

    You’re the confused one – what does Pelosi have to do with getting Dems elected?

  94. 94
    Mike J says:

    @joel hanes:

    Too much of the vote, 37%, had already been cast by the time Gianforte decided to assault a Fox minion.

    Fox owns the grauniad?

  95. 95
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    Yeah, that kind of talk will really get us the votes of swing voter Midwestern Catholics…look: would you characterize Senator Casey in that manner?

  96. 96
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:

    Yeah, who needs the base anyway. The way we Dems keeping winning, we can afford to toss ’em off the bus.

    The #1 most loyal Democratic voters — the ones who show up in every election — are African-American women. In fact, it’s women of every color and ethnicity except, sadly, white women. I am an anomaly in my own demographic.

    So I agree with you: there’s no reason to betray our most loyal voters in the hope of getting a few more white men to vote for us.

  97. 97
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @Steve in the ATL: Meh. I took a new screen name. I’ve lived in the GA04 and GA05 probably since before you were born.

    Who is saying Ossoff should have “run as an in-your-face asshole”?? Steve, it’s Friday afternoon. Try decaf.

    What I am saying is that Ossoff could have run as a civility bot, could have run as a Republican-lite (I don’t think that, but some do), could have run as many things. But at the end of the day, the ONE thing he HAD to do (or had arranged to have been done), was tie his opponent to Trump.

    What is the problem with doing that? Why NOT tie the every Republican candidate to Trump in districts where Trump showed poorly in the election and where he continues to poll poorly?

  98. 98
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @Mnemosyne: Totally agree. Maybe I have different definition of “progressive” than others. I’m pretty much an old fart, old-time liberal.

  99. 99
    low-tech cyclist says:

    @joel hanes:

    Too much of the vote, 37%, had already been cast by the time Gianforte decided to assault a Fox minion.

    I wasn’t thinking of that. I was thinking more of things like his being a young-earth creationist, his stated belief that people shouldn’t ever retire because Noah was working when he was 600 years old, and stuff like that that the Dems already knew about him from the gubernatorial race.

  100. 100
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    Write off college-educated suburban white voters as a bunch of racists. That’s a great strategy for winning elections!

  101. 101
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:

    You think the Dems are going to win without progressives?

    You think Dems are going to win without women and people of color?

  102. 102
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Cheryl from Maryland: I live in his district and literally only vote for him because of the D after his name. He’s embarrassing. Just like the local party chair, a corrupt ambulance chaser, complaining after the election about how HRC never visited Youngstown. She visted at least 3 times during the campaign

  103. 103
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: Good lord – you’re the one who brought that up.

    Though as House Minority leader, I’m pretty sure she influences decisions…

  104. 104
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @joel hanes:

    Off the top of my head, I think Cedric Richmond would be an interesting choice. So would Kathleen Rice.

  105. 105
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    Personally abusive and content-free, aka par for the course for the “Social Justice” Brigade.

    Your mask is slipping, broflake.

  106. 106
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @joel hanes: Ah, I see the problem. I don’t think of “progressives” as just the recent Berniebros, or even Naderites. I use th term more like your history prof might have used. Sorry ’bout that.

  107. 107
    tobie says:

    @Chief Oshkosh: Fact check: The final spread was 3.7%. He got a total of 48.1% of the vote; HRC by contrast got 46% of the GA-06 vote in Nov, so he did improve on her performance by that metric, though I don’t really believe you can compare a Presidential and a special election.

  108. 108
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:

    Though as House Minority leader, I’m pretty sure she influences decisions…

    Like how?
    Please cite your bullshit

  109. 109
    Sab says:

    @Ben from Virginia: I am married into a family of Midwestern Catholics. They are mostly anti-abortion but they are entirely in favor of food, shelter, healthcare and gun control, and they are entirely against capital punishment.

  110. 110
    Tilda Swintons Bald Cap says:

    @Mnemosyne: Yep that’s a tell. Hey Ben go on back to whatever right wing fever swamp you in habit, maybe r/The_Donald.

  111. 111
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    Personally abusive and content-free, aka par for the course for the “Social Justice” Brigade.

    Kathleen Rice wants Pelosi gone, too, is she a sexist asshole? Oh wait, it’s “internalized misogyny”, amirite? You’re not doing politics–you’re doing theology.

    Drat! Foiled again by those ebil SJeWs!
    I had a feeling you were an MRA

  112. 112

    @TriassicSands: does this take into account the amount that Collins’s vote was needed to advance something, and not just an extra? I can’t recall any time she’s bucked her party when it actually meant anything.

    ETA: even on the stimulus she wasn’t strictly necessary.

  113. 113
    low-tech cyclist says:

    @TriassicSands:

    On votes considered “crucial” to progressives, Collins has voted with the Dems 27.32% of the time lifetime, but only 8.45% of the time in 2017-18.

    It’s also probably that high lifetime because the leadership gives her a pass to vote the other way whenever they’ve got a majority locked up. I’d like to know how many times she’s voted with the Dems when it wasn’t just for show.

    ETA: Beaten to the punch by Major^4.

  114. 114
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Sab:

    Great! They’re the kind of people that can be won with the right sort of candidate. But you might have to run somebody who says they’re “pro-life” or at least makes noises about how abortion is icky, even as they vote down-the-line for Democratic priorities (including judges).

    There are people within our party know who think it is anathema to even use the old “safe, legal, and rare” line for example, and that’s just utterly absurd.

  115. 115
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @joel hanes:

    Lost in that whole shit show was reporting that exit polling showed a number of voters who voted on election day voted against Quist BECAUSE of Wilmer. Whoops.

  116. 116
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:

    The problem is, ever since the primary started, there have been huge calls to replace the “establishment” with “fresh faces.” Only problem is, us Democratic women (and some men) can’t help but notice that all of the “establishment” figures who need to be replaced are women like Nancy Pelosi and Donna Brazile, and all of the “fresh faces” are white dudes like Sanders and Tim Ryan.

    It’s a pattern, and that pattern is a problem.

  117. 117
    NR says:

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: If our “centrist” betters knew how anything worked, they wouldn’t have lost 1,000 legislative seats to the Republicans over the last eight years. QED.

  118. 118
    SatanicPanic says:

    @Chief Oshkosh: yeah I don’t get why he didn’t try harder to tie Handel to Trump, but I’m not from the district and not a member of his campaign so who knows.

  119. 119
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷:

    Do you have an actual point you’d like to make?

  120. 120
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Reps. Cedric Richmond and Kathleen Rice are both possible leadership options named above, and they both want Pelosi out. Rep. Filmeon Vela wants her out. This attempt to make it about a bunch eeebil white males rather than a much-needed generational leadership change is getting really fucking stale and bears no resemblance to reality.

  121. 121
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Chief Oshkosh: “Progressives” before the GA election: DEMOCRATS NEED A MESSAGE BEYOND TRUMP SUCKS THATS WHY HILLARY LOST

    “Progressives” after the GA election: DEMOCRATS DIDNT SAY ENOUGH ABOUT TRUMP SUCKING THATS WHY OSSOFF LOST

    “Progressives” before the SC election: DEMOCRATS NEED TO MAKE IT CLEAR TO WORKING PEOPLE HOW MUCH THEY HATE WALL STREET CLOSENESS TO WALL STREET IS WHY HILLARY LOST

    “Progressives” after the SC election: DEMOCRATS DIDNT SUPPORT THE GOLDMAN SACHS CANDIDATE THIS IS WHY THEY LOSE

    Everyone is being a fucking idiot.

  122. 122
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @joel hanes: Now that I understand how you’re using the word “progressives”, sure, we can afford to toss that tiny group of hotheads and continue to win with just female African American voters, like we’ve been doing for several cycles now.

    I’m obviously teasing, but I am wondering: why bring up another constituency when all I said was we can’t afford to toss away potential votes from a particular group. Are “progressives” now considered antithetical to female African Americans? This will come as some news to my lovely better half.

  123. 123

    @🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷:

    I had a feeling you were an MRA

    Was it the suggestion that women’s healthcare should be negotiable, or just the general rhetorical style that gave him away?

  124. 124
    Sab says:

    @🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷: Call his office. I also live in his district, and I called today to say that I don’t see how it’s helpful for the District for our Congressman to be alienating the Speaker.

  125. 125
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    But you might have to run somebody who says they’re “pro-life” or at least makes noises about how abortion is icky, even as they vote down-the-line for Democratic priorities (including judges).

    I’m willing to hold my nose and vote for a Democrat who says they’re pro-life and that’s why they support access to health care and birth control, better welfare benefits, etc.

    I’m not willing to support a Democrat who co-sponsors a bill for vaginal ultrasounds before a woman can get an abortion. No, not even if the bill pretends it’s all “optional.”

  126. 126
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @NR: What’s your plan comrade? And where the Real True Progressives (TM) during all of this? Oh wait I know, bitching on blogs and not doing a fucking thing in meatspace.

    I think this Dead Kennedys line is apropos:

    So many people I know
    Come of age tense and bitter-eyed
    Can’t create so they just destroy
    C’mon!
    Let’s set someone’s dog on fire

    Whoops! Sorry if this is “hectoring” you. Weenie.

  127. 127
    Mike J says:

    @🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷: Justice seems like an odd thing for a liberal to be against.

  128. 128
    hovercraft says:

    I think it’s time for some pie, ummm!

    I will just add one last thing, the most reliable part of the democratic base are black women, we are more reliably democratic and we vote at the highest percentage of any group in our coalition, so when people talk about winning without the “base”, they aren’t talking about us, they are talking about the BS acolytes who want all their demands met before the deign to support good solid democratic candidates. We are a very diverse party, we all have our own pet issues, but the one thing that we should be united on is that unless we all pull together and understand that people are running to serve a particular district/state, not some purity assholes vision of what a true democrat should be, we will not be able to fight the GOP. We need to be united, no one’s priorities will be addressed if we don’t get elected in the first place, coalitions must make compromises, if they don’t they end up as noisy purists yelling from the sidelines achieving nothing. If the so-called progressives don’t like our diversity in positioning as well as priorities, then they really do need to go the fuck away, form their own party and leave us to figure out how to fight them, apathy and voter suppression.

  129. 129
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Ben from Virginia: I made one. You’re an MRA trying to bullshit us. It’s pretty transparent

  130. 130
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @NR:

    That fucking old tired talking point – do you also have the online poll to show us that Wilmer is the most popular politician in America? Voting for the ACA cost the Dems dearly in 2010 – the census year – while the progressives who know shit about shit all stayed home because they believed Obama sold them out on the PO, led by Ed Schultz and the TYT/Intercept crew, even though it was Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson. Dems don’t show up like the Tea Party assholes do in midterms as well. Redistricting happened, the VRA was gutted, voter ID laws happened, and white America freaked out about the Kenyan usurper’s plan to destroy America with Obamacare and punished Dems. But the single payer unicorn is right around the corner, broseph, if you clap hard enough.

  131. 131
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @NR: One day a miracle will occur and you might recover from the massive short and long-term memory disorder that drives you to incessantly repeat misleading and outright false things. And on that day you will achieve both sentience and what other people call, and I know this confuses you, “learning.”

  132. 132
    hovercraft says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    You think Dems are going to win without women and people of color?

    I think on some level these people figure we’ve got no place else to go, so fuck em.

  133. 133
    Mnemosyne says:

    @NR:

    Oh, look. It’s the boy who insists that voter suppression didn’t happen, and even if it did happen, it didn’t make any difference.

    Have you moved your goalposts back yet? Last time I think you’d moved them to 1994 but had forgotten that the Republicans won that wave election because they were able to demonize the Clintons for being too liberal with DADT and healthcare reform. Do you have a new date for us of When Everything Went Wrong And It Was All the Democrats’ Fault?

  134. 134
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @FlipYrWhig:”Progressives” — The way you’re tossing that word around makes me think of the several scenes in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid where one of them is always saying to the other “Who ARE those guys?!”

    I’ve been informed just within this thread that, as awful as they are, they are expendable. So, what difference does it make what they say?

    As to your other statements, I was saying all along, and continue to say, that Ossoff should’ve tied Trump around his opponent’s neck. Of course he had to run using many other tactics, some more necessary than others, but the Trump card was sorely missing. Others obviously disagree, but think I it was the one necessary tactic.

  135. 135

    @hovercraft:

    I think on some level these people figure we’ve got no place else to go, so fuck em.

    On some level? They say as much about LGBT folks at least.

  136. 136
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Mnemosyne: 1861

  137. 137
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: Re: the baseline level of support or affection felt for Bernie Sanders:

    A new CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll on the 2004 presidential election, based on a national survey conducted April 22-23, finds Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman holding a slight edge over the field of nine Democratic candidates that will meet in South Carolina this weekend in the season’s first nationally televised debate.

    THE MOST POPULAR POLITICIAN!

    (Source: Lieberman Leads Field of Nine, April 29, 2003.)

  138. 138
    joel hanes says:

    @TriassicSands:

    @joel hanes: 99.99% of the time

    misattributed

  139. 139
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    Reps. Cedric Richmond and Kathleen Rice are both possible leadership options named above, and they both want Pelosi out.

    People who want to become leader in Nancy Pelosi’s place want her voted out so they can try to get her position? Gosh, that sure is a shocker. Clearly the fact that other people want the leadership position is proof positive that Pelosi should step down.

    Next thing I know, you’ll tell me that people from the same party run in primary races against each other because they both want the job. Who knew?

  140. 140
    NR says:

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: It’s a lie that progressives stayed home in 2010.

    As for the rest, maybe you guys should try actually winning some fucking elections before you gloat about how the people you don’t like are losers. Because as it stands now, you look a lot like a football team that just lost by 90 points pointing at some other players and yelling about what losers they are. i.e., pretty silly.

  141. 141
    Ben from Virginia says:

    You think Dems are going to win without women and people of color?

    They are necessary, but not sufficient, for a national Democratic majority. We also have to peel off one or both of the following: (1) suburban, college-educated whites, and (2) recently defected WWC voters. Note I said peel off, not win a majority. That goes double for whiter-than-average states and CDs. This is a matter of electoral math, whether you like or not. Writing them off as bunch of secret Klansmen isn’t going to do it, FWIW.

  142. 142
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @hovercraft: @hovercraft: Not that I disagree with your basic message, but saying both:

    “We need to be united,”

    followed by

    “they really do need to go the fuck away,”

    Somehow doesn’t quite flow as well as one would want. :)

  143. 143
    joel hanes says:

    @Mike J:

    grauniad

    Good catch. Thanks.
    I bobbled because it was so remarkable that the Fox reporters broke ranks and sided with the reporter, rather than with the Republican.

  144. 144
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:

    Progressives don’t seem to understand the concept of progress, how progress happens, and how to create an environment for progress – for everyone. They can’t be taken seriously because they’re as low info as the Trumpers, but think they’re holier than thou, when really, they just want free stuff from the government for their pale male asses first. Like the Trumpers.

  145. 145
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    That was the winning Obama coalition – the one that Wilmer set out on day one to divide. He’s still doing it. Look in a fucking mirror.

  146. 146
    germy says:

    checked my local sinclair tv station website and here’s their top story:

    Reports: Senate Judiciary Committee looking into former AG Lynch role in Clinton emails
    UPDATED

  147. 147
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Mnemosyne: I think that’s “everything went wrong in the states and it was all the fault of establishment Democrats in Washington moving to the right but the places where state-level Democrats were already on the right both do and don’t count and also I admit grudgingly there may have been some racism too.”

  148. 148
    joel hanes says:

    @low-tech cyclist:

    being a young-earth creationist, his stated belief that people shouldn’t ever retire because Noah was working when he was 600 years old, and stuff like that

    It’s my belief that such opinions play very well in his district.

  149. 149
    NR says:

    @Mnemosyne: Oh look, it’s the girl who consistently lies about what the people she doesn’t like are saying. And yep, still up to your usual tricks I see.

  150. 150
    Mnemosyne says:

    @NR:

    Percentages are meaningless without actual numbers. If 20 percent of the voters in exit polls claimed to be progressives, but 100,000 fewer voters showed up, the percentage means nothing.

  151. 151
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    @NR:

    Where have the Berniecrats won again?

  152. 152
    TriassicSands says:

    @Major Major Major Major: @low-tech cyclist:

    Progressive Punch doesn’t break things down like that, but it is a fair point.

    Looking at what is available, it does seem that she’s getting more conservative. Or at least voting that way.

    In all her years in the Senate, however, there are two votes that really stand out — or will. The first was on the PPACA. The Dems were going to pass it; she could have voted with them as a matter of conscience as a “moderate.” But she didn’t.

    Now, comes Trumpcare. Will she find some phony rationale for supporting this POS or will she vote to help 20+ million people keep health care?

    When they’re done counting votes, if there are four, or five, or more GOP “No” votes, then it won’t make any difference how she votes. If she votes “Yea” it still loses. If she votes “No,” it still loses. Under those circumstances, she can maintain her pretense as a moderate by casting what would be, essentially, a meaningless vote (to the outcome). I would expect her to vote “No” if she’s got the cover of at least three other GOP senators. But that would tell us nothing about her moderation.

  153. 153
    Mnemosyne says:

    @NR:

    So you didn’t say the other day that Bill Clinton lost the 1994 midterms because he was too conservative? 🤔

  154. 154

    @NR: my god, you are such a smal, spiteful, petty waste of meat.

  155. 155
    joel hanes says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:

    I use the term more like your history prof might have used.

    So Teddy Roosevelt and Bob LaFollette and Taft and Wilson.

    No wonder you have difficulties with your audience.

  156. 156
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne:

    What was Obama’s winning coalition? Just women, blacks, and Hispanics, or those plus a good chunk of the two other factions I identified? If you’re saying the latter, you’re correct, if you’re saying it’s just the former, that’s not true.

    It’s mathematically impossible to win in the vast majority of country with just POC and women. Running that coalition in, say, Texas gets you….the Wendy Davis campaign. Not exactly a model of electoral success.

  157. 157
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @NR: Why is it always put on us? What are you doing to win elections? Not just at you either. More generally, just go out and win an election. People will follow you if you do

  158. 158
    Crashman06 says:

    The circular firing squad evident in this thread is really discouraging. If we’re going to keep fighting last year’s primary among ourselves, we stand little chance to take the House back in a year and at least slowing down the wrecking ball that is being aimed at our institutions and the social safety net. There are legitimate disagreements on how we should proceed, but if we can’t hash them out in even a semi-productive manner, we all stand no chance.

  159. 159

    @Ben from Virginia:

    It’s mathematically impossible to win in the vast majority of country with just POC and women.

    Oh, how astute, I hadn’t thought of that before. Please explain more things to us with your man-math.

  160. 160
    joel hanes says:

    @germy:

    sinclair tv station

    Second-largest operator of TV stations in the nation, most in rural markets.
    Really a bigger problem than Faux, because so under-the-radar.
    Much more slanted, with a heavier emphasis on the eternal cosmic justice of Christianist hegemony.

  161. 161
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @NR: I bow before the electoral superiority of Bernie Sanders-style candidates who win so many elections, like, you know, that famous one, and that other one everyone was talking about. It pretty much always happens so the details aren’t important.

  162. 162
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @Mnemosyne: Hm. Hadn’t though about it that way. I think Pelosi, Lee (both of them!), Warren, Klobacher, and Clinton are very effective leaders and legislators. Brazile is not, and I’d just as soon she was enjoying retirement on a beautiful beach or at a mountain retreat, but each to his or her own. I haven’t followed Kamala Harris much, but the little I’ve seen impresses me. I hope the troglodytes keep dinging her — it’s really upping her profile!

  163. 163
    Sab says:

    @hovercraft: I’m a white woman, and I agree with you about who is really our base.

  164. 164
    SatanicPanic says:

    @NR: Look man, I say this to my leftist friends – if you’re having trouble convincing us, the people who are most likely to be sympathetic to your argument, then there’s something wrong with the way you’re trying to convince people, or maybe you just have bad ideas. Either way you ought to take some time to think about that, because banging your head against the wall like this can’t be good for you.

  165. 165
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    You really enjoy attacking white male Democrats more than Republicans, don’t you?

  166. 166
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Crashman06: I sincerely doubt that our argument here is going to have an effect on the election next year

  167. 167
    germy says:

    @joel hanes:

    Second-largest operator of TV stations in the nation, most in rural markets.

    It’s what my neighbors watch. And my M.I.L.

    They ain’t reading LGM or Booman or balloon-juice.

    Instead, it’s “sports, weather, and here’s Boris with a political analysis.”

  168. 168
  169. 169
    TriassicSands says:

    @joel hanes:

    My sincere apologies. Obviously, that was the cat’s fault, not mine. But she’s not one to apologize, so I will do so in her stead.

    I am sorry. It was meant for Ben from Virginia, I guess.

    I’ve been using an 8″ tablet lately and making more mistakes of every kind — the small size of the screen makes it easier to over or underscroll and then not be able to see the rest of what one is after.

    Full disclosure — I did it. The cat, Annie, is innocent.

  170. 170
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Ben from Virginia: No. Just obnoxious morons like you

  171. 171
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @SatanicPanic: _Discourage_ him from banging his head? Why?

  172. 172
    hovercraft says:

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne:

    what does Pelosi have to do with getting Dems elected?

    The democrats have someone who is smart and accomplished, GOP sees someone who is a threat to them.
    Attack, create bullshit scandals, and conduct bullshit investigation, accuse them of socialism, evil and throw the kitchen sink at them.
    Media – Hmm the GOP is attacking this person so there must be a reason, dig, dig, dig, nothing here, but the fact that they are under constant investigation is suspicious. They must be really good at hiding their tracks, maybe if I dig a bit more I will be the Elliot Ness, I’ll be the one to finally get them!
    Media – we’ve dug through every aspect of their lives, nothing there, but now they are boring and tainted, there are always “questions” and an air of scandal, no scandals but a taint.
    Media – Why don’t the democrats run someone who is fresh and free of taint? Don’t they know that the GOP is going to use X as a bogeyman?
    Democrats – What exactly is X’s crime, transgression that they should shut them self away for, surely if hey did something wrong they would have been charged for it?
    Media – The fact that they are controversial is the problem.

    I used to think that if Twitler had run in 2012 against Obama, he would have had the shit kicked out of him, but given that Twitler would have run around the country screaming that the ni**er is bankrupting us, the ni**er is bringing in millions and millions of Muslims and brown people, I’m not sure how many of these racists would have come out of the woodwork to vote for him. I still think Obama would have won, the black and young voters who stayed home would have come out to vote for him, but how much would his share of the white vote gone down?
    A year ago I would have said very little, but given what’s going on and far too many peoples response to it, I wonder.

  173. 173
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    Yes, it’s true that Obama’s winning coalition included white people, many of whom defected to Trump this year.

    I’m still waiting for an explanation of why those white voters switched to Trump that has an explanation other than racism and sexism. We already know that white voters who make less than $30K a year stuck with the Democrats. It was the white voters who make more than $50K a year who switched.

    So why was that? “Economic insecurity” is clearly an insufficient answer since only one candidate had plans to improve our infrastructure and create more jobs, and it wasn’t Trump.

    What’s your explanation? My explanation is what my friends in Michigan told me happened: their suburban white friends voted for Trump because they hated Black Lives Matter. They said this openly and specifically, with no hesitation, even to my friend who’s been married to a Black woman for 20 years.

  174. 174
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @hovercraft:

    Trump won a grand total of one percent more of the white vote than Romney did.

  175. 175
    NR says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Percentages are meaningless without actual numbers. 

    That’s… not how electoral math works.

  176. 176
    SatanicPanic says:

    @FlipYrWhig: I have this weird thing where I try to act as if people are behaving in good faith even when I’m not sure I believe it. THANKS OBAMA

  177. 177
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @Crashman06: I understand your concern, but as great as this blog is, it’s really just a tiny part of the big old world. That means that, while this has been a low-stakes circular firing squad, it was a very, very tiny circular firing squad.

  178. 178
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    Since you seem new around here, have you seen the extensive discussion on voter suppression by the Brennan Center?

    Republicans in Wisconsin were openly bragging in April of 2016 that the Republican was guaranteed to win the state because of their race-based voter suppression laws. And we’re supposed to believe that Hillary lost WI because she didn’t go to a Packers game? GTFO with that bullshit.

  179. 179
  180. 180
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @NR: As I said before; all you have to do to change the Democratic Party is to win some elections running on a Sanders like platform. If you win more people will copy you. End of story

  181. 181
    NR says:

    @Major Major Major Major: Love you too, Chuckles.

  182. 182
    Mnemosyne says:

    @NR:

    That’s… not how electoral math works.

    Really? Electoral math doesn’t depend on how many voters show up at the ballot box to vote?

  183. 183
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @FlipYrWhig: Linky no work

  184. 184
    Fair Economist says:

    @low-tech cyclist:

    It’s also probably that high lifetime because the leadership gives her a pass to vote the other way whenever they’ve got a majority locked up.

    Collins really did vote with the Democrats a non-trivial amount of time until 2009, although far less often than Snowe, who was genuinely a moderate. Collins was just a non-crazy Republican. It was with Obama’s election that Collins. turned into a concernbot.

  185. 185
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Celebrity, the old “we need an outsider/run the government like a business!” trope, and Clinton fatigue are all explanations. Especially celebrity–I’m amazed at how little attention that factor gets.

  186. 186
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷: Tried to fix it, then lost the link. Doh!

  187. 187
    NR says:

    @🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷:

    Why is it always put on us? 

    Because you guys are in charge of the party and have been for a long time now.

    If we’d been in charge of the party for the loss of 1,000 seats, you’d have some grounds for calling us losers. But we weren’t. You guys were, and still are.

  188. 188
    rikyrah says:

    meta‏ @metaquest

    Watch Trump & admin co-mingle & conflate voter fraud commission and Russian cyberwarfare as evidence they’re doing something about intrusion

  189. 189
    germy says:

    @🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷:

    As I said before; all you have to do to change the Democratic Party is to win some elections running on a Sanders like platform.

    Sanders can’t fail. He can only be failed.

  190. 190
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷: Whenever handpicked Sandersites lose their elections it’s still the fault of THE ESTABLISHMENT by the juvenile logic of Look What You Made Me Do!

  191. 191
    TriassicSands says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:
    it’s really upping her profile!

    The question is, in this country with our electorate, when you up a female politician’s profile is that a good thing?

    I mean, we’ve got idiots whining about “white genocide” because of the diverse cast of the newest Star Trek series. And it’s undoubtedly twice or three times as bad because those poor whites are being killed off by women of color. End. Of. The. World.

    Note: I watched Harris be mean to Sessions and I thought she was the most effective Democratic questioner I saw. She was obviously used to questioning people (often very bad people?) in an adversarial setting. Sessions, claiming a lifetime of distinguished legal service, couldn’t take a WOC being mean to him. Go, Senator Harris. Go to hell, AG Sessions.

  192. 192
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Neither Pennsylvania nor Minnesota had voter ID laws that were any more strict than 2012 in place. Hillary lost the former and just barely won the latter. The drop-off in the Rustbelt goes way beyond voter ID laws, as loathsome as those laws may be. What’s more, Virginia had a photo ID law and she easily won the state.

  193. 193
    tobie says:

    @FlipYrWhig: This rant is so good! I think with MajorMajorMajorMajor’s drawing skills, the two of you could make a really great cartoon.

  194. 194
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    Celebrity, the old “we need an outsider/run the government like a business!” trope, and Clinton fatigue are all explanations.

    I at least have an anecdote for my explanation, plus actual facts from the Brennan Center.

    I will need some links from you before I buy that your factors were more than edge cases to the larger explanations of racism and race-based voter suppression.

  195. 195
    NR says:

    @SatanicPanic:

    if you’re having trouble convincing us, the people who are most likely to be sympathetic to your argument, 

    The notion that you guys are sympathetic to any leftist argument is so ridiculous it’s laughable. Look at Conster’s posts for a start. He hates liberals far more than any right-winger I’ve ever met.

    Here and in many other places, anyone who criticizes the Democratic establishment is immediately hit with accusations of racism and sexism. There is no openness to discussion, only crude attempts to shut it down.

  196. 196
    NR says:

    @Ben from Virginia: Shh, facts aren’t too welcome around here.

  197. 197
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @NR: What is this “you guys” shit? You can’t just expect to come marching in, demanding to be put in charge (even if you’re right!), and expect everyone to just roll over and agree. That’s not how institutions work. You have to prove yourselves and your strategies first before anyone is going to take you seriously.

    If uber-progressive Sanders-like candidates are able to win elections then awesome! Wonderful! Others will copy you where they feel that message will work.

  198. 198
    Crashman06 says:

    @Chief Oshkosh: I guess my fear is that this is a symptom of a more widespread problem among Democratic voters in general.

  199. 199
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    Voters in Pennsylvania were being wrongly asked for voter ID, and turned away if they didn’t have it.

    Minnesota is a purple state, not a blue one. Their Democratic governor won in a squeaker.

  200. 200
    ruemara says:

    @Ben from Virginia: Then you better start telling 3rd party fuckers to stand down.

  201. 201

    @tobie: don’t i do enough for you people already?

  202. 202
  203. 203
    NR says:

    @Mnemosyne: Elections are decides by who gets the most votes. That’s expressed by a little thing called a percentage.

    It’s called math, maybe read up on it?

  204. 204
    tobie says:

    @Fair Economist: One of my many bugaboos about Collins is that she like all Republicans never has to pay for saying and doing some very dumb shit. She took out all direct state aid in the 2009 stimulus bill on the grounds that state aid was not “stimulative.” States of course were among the first to let go of workers during the great recession. What’s supposed to be her area of expertise in the Senate exactly?

  205. 205
    Aimai says:

    @NR: true–you have to have won something to have lost it.

  206. 206
    Fair Economist says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Everyone is being a fucking idiot.

    No, just “progressive” trolls. The real progressives, including many of the Berniebots (probably all of them that are real people), are perfectly aware that even a centrist Democrat is a huge improvement over a Republican and they advocate for approaches and policies they like rather than constantly trying to tear down Democratic candidates.

  207. 207
    joel hanes says:

    @TriassicSands:

    No harm done.
    I only meant to alert you, not to complain. No umbrage taken.
    Onward, comrades!

  208. 208
    SatanicPanic says:

    @NR: most likely to be sympathetic
    Is what I actually said. Regardless of what you think of us, is there some other group you’re likely to have more luck with? If not, then maybe you need to work to ingratiate yourself with us. Or give it up as a lost cause. The thing is, yes I preferred Hillary, but I’m sympathetic to most of what Sanders was proposing, and I sometimes find the Sanders hate-fests here grating. So if I’m reading your comments and shaking my head, it means you need to work on your skills. We’re all in this together man.

  209. 209
    rikyrah says:

    Newly-elected House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Trey Gowdy does not plan to investigate Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election or questions of whether President Donald Trump obstructed justice.

    The South Carolina Republican told a gathering of reporters Friday that he instead wants to return the Oversight panel to its original “compulsory” jurisdiction, including overseeing more mundane issues like government procurement and the Census.

  210. 210
    tobie says:

    @Major Major Major Major: Yes…but isn’t doing something for the BJ community always a pleasure?

  211. 211
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @NR: All you ever do is come here to whine like a loser about the Evil Establishment and how if they’d just let Real Progressives take over everything would be right as rain. You only ever show up when Sanders or some Sanders-adjacent person is criticized or brought up.

  212. 212
    Fair Economist says:

    @tobie:

    One of my many bugaboos about Collins is that she like all Republicans never has to pay for saying and doing some very dumb shit. She took out all direct state aid in the 2009 stimulus bill on the grounds that state aid was not “stimulative.”

    And you never hear media talk about how Collins is the #1 reason the stimulus act was inadequate. It’s amazing what they help Republicans get away with.

  213. 213
    rikyrah says:

    Kyle Griffin‏Verified account @kylegriffin1

    Repubs have suggested the upcoming tax reform measure will largely be shaped among themselves behind closed doors.

  214. 214
    Mnemosyne says:

    @NR:

    So if 120,000 people voted for the Democrat in 2008 and 100,000 voted for the Democrat in 2010, the important thing is the percentage of liberal voters among that 100,000 and not the fact that 20,000 fewer people voted than in the previous election?

    I may be bad at math, but I’m not that bad.

  215. 215
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @ruemara:

    People who vote third party in a FPTP system are doing the electoral equivalent of masturbating and I have zero time for them.

    If you’re talking about the Bernie types, I’m agnostic on whether or not promoting Bernie-style candidates is the way to go–I think it could be in places like the WWC midwest. In the white suburban/exurban college-educated “Panera” districts? That style probably won’t play very well–though some of his positions might (i.e. free college tuition). I voted for Hillary in the ’16 primaries FWIW.

  216. 216
    joel hanes says:

    @NR:

    I’m calling you a loser anyway.

  217. 217
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Mnemosyne: Don’t hector N(R)!

  218. 218
    rikyrah says:

    REMINDER
    Allan Brauer‏ @allanbrauer 35m35 minutes ago
    Harry was on his way out, and pushed as close to the line of revealing classified information as he could, and the media spat in his face.

  219. 219
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @NR:

    Elections are decides by who gets the most votes.

    Except for when Bernie Sanders loses his primary and his favored candidates lose every race they’re in apart from a statehouse seat in Long Island, because that proves he has the winning formula and that the people who support him should get control despite being outnumbered every time it’s up for a comparison.

  220. 220
    TriassicSands says:

    @joel hanes:

    Thank you for keeping me honest and accurate.

  221. 221
    rikyrah says:

    Allan Brauer‏ @allanbrauer

    Here’s how our media responded when Harry Reid tried to warn America about Trump/Russia last fall.

    https://twitter.com/allanbrauer/status/878294469858123776?

  222. 222
    Immanentize says:

    Olde Wimmins are ruining my Football!

    This Pelosi discussion is making me crazy!
    1) Who will replace her if some got their wish and she stepped down tomorrow? Steny Hoyer, that’s who. Steny Hoyer who is older than Pelosi, Steny Hoyer who is a blue dog who has to work for more progressive goals because Nancy P. has his pecker in her pocket. Steny Fucking Hoyer would take her place.
    2) Why is Nancy Pelosi the Leader? Because she was elected! By her colleagues. Who knew who she was, how old she is, and everything about all the other candidates. In short, she won in a democratic election of informed voters. But the “get rid of Pelosi” crowd hates democracy. Doncha know some young person would be better!!!!
    3) Who is their candidate? {{{crickets}}} Because there isn’t one. Generic younger (dude) who cannot be named would be better than a person who has an amazing ability in the critical aspects of the job — wrangling the caucus, raising money, legislating (or blocking legislation). PLEASE I am begging someone to give me the young upstart candidate that should replace her. please?
    4) It is not the job of the leader to win other people’s elections. I know this is a hard truth but there are two friggin huge entities who are supposed to do that — the DNC and the DCCC. That is their job. Sure the leader helps guide strategy (and the funds she herself raises) but it is not her job to win GA 6. I’m not even talking about how the local district is actually responsible for that — with HELP from the DNC and the DCCC.
    5) Where is this big anti-Pelosi thing coming from. I read that about a dozen house members met to discuss the possibilities but they admitted that it is not gonna happen. And that who must elect a new leader. So who is behind the anti-Pelosi stuff? Who? Who does it serve?

    So unless you can respond to these issues with intelligent answers and your candidate’s credentials, please STFU. If you have a candidate, then I am all ears regarding whether that is a better choice than N. Pelosi. But not one person has suggested one person. Except “Dago Red Wine” Ryan. No. Just No.

    “Nancy should go” makes as much sense as saying “people named Ben should not be allowed to vote.”

  223. 223
    NR says:

    @🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷: But that’s where you’re wrong. I’m not demanding to be put in charge of anything. I’m pointing out that the people currently in charge of the Democratic party have done an abysmal job, and it’s time to start listening to liberals for a change.

    I want our voices to be heard, but I don’t want us to be the only voices because believe it or not, I think other people have some good things to contribute too. Not the current Democratic establishment, but the people generally allied with them.

  224. 224
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @NR: I’ll let you in on a little secret. Another potential factor in why your arguments are not always that well-received is that you are an obnoxious, abrasive, self-congratulatory, endlessly repetitive, bad-faith dealing dick. I don’t know for sure, but it’s probably related.

  225. 225
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @N(R):From the post you’re replying to

    You have to prove yourselves and your strategies first before anyone is going to take you seriously.

    If uber-progressive Sanders-like candidates are able to win elections then awesome! Wonderful! Others will copy you where they feel that message will work.

  226. 226
    SatanicPanic says:

    @Immanentize: Can we also throw out there that the MIGHTY REPUBLICANS WHO ALWAYS WIN are led by a 75 year old man and a dude they had to beg to be their leader.

  227. 227
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Immanentize:

    I’d be for throwing out Hoyer too. I want a full spring cleaning of the ossified Dem leadership. I suggested thre people above–none were white men, FWIW, since there’s an awful lot of people who are obsessed with genitals and melanin here.

  228. 228
    Immanentize says:

    @SatanicPanic: Why yes, yes we can throw that out there too.

  229. 229
    Immanentize says:

    @Ben from Virginia: Who are your candidates? Name them. Name the Congress people who want to do this and who can do this.

    AND Steny is just gonna say OK? He is one powerful dude. You may be all for throwing them out but they are not. That is like PS-1 level fantasy play.

    ETA for clarity

  230. 230
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Chief Oshkosh:

    Meh. I took a new screen name. I’ve lived in the GA04 and GA05 probably since before you were born.

    In that case, you should have gone with Chief Noc-A-Homa

  231. 231
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Ben from Virginia: And I’m sure they’ll bow to your superior Progressiveness. Pull the other one

  232. 232
    TriassicSands says:

    Who(m) Do You Believe Trump or Comey? (From K. Drum)

    NBC News has apparently done a poll asking who is more believable Trump or Comey. The results are — as you might expect — depressing.

    Democrats: 76% believe Comey; 2% Trump
    Independents: 47% believe Comey; 17% Trump
    Republicans: 10% believe Comey; 50% Trump

    In other news, 50% of Republicans are in a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery.

    It’s a real shame that Trump didn’t have recordings. Sigh. It wouldn’t make any difference.

  233. 233
    NR says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    So if 120,000 people voted for the Democrat in 2008 and 100,000 voted for the Democrat in 2010, the important thing is the percentage of liberal voters among that 100,000 and not the fact that 20,000 fewer people voted than in the previous election?

    Yes, the percentages are what matters when you’re trying to make a “liberals stayed home in 2010” argument. The percentages show that liberals did not stay home at any higher rate than any other ideological group.

    It’s simple math.

  234. 234
    Patricia Kayden says:

    @Ben from Virginia: “younger (and less radioactive) leadership than Nancy Pelosi”

    Hmmm. President Obama was younger than Pelosi but he became radioactive pretty soon once Republicans got a hold of him. That’s how it would be with anyone leading Congressional Democrats once the Rightwing blogosphere and Republicans got a hold of him/her. It’s a pipe dream to believe that replacing Pelosi with a young whippersnapper unicorn would magically solve all of the Democrats’ “problems”. Let’s focus on resisting Trump instead of attacking one of our own.

  235. 235
    ruemara says:

    @Ben from Virginia: I don’t care if you voted for Hillary in the primaries. I care that you’re on here now, increasing the spread of vapid analysis about the recent losses, knowing nothing about the district and nothing about the relevant effects of crosscheck, voter suppression and yes, 3rd parties. Who cares about your primary or election vote? What’s relevant now is how you encourage people to vote and work and yet, here you are.

  236. 236
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Immanentize:

    5) Where is this big anti-Pelosi thing coming from

    Republicans

  237. 237

    @tobie: maybe if the cartoon had vampires.

  238. 238
    Immanentize says:

    @Immanentize: And Jim Clyburn — He’s gone too? That’s a lot of people who are just gonna say — yes, I was elected fair and square but I will give it all up because Ben from Virginia doesn’t like the Olds?

  239. 239
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    Oh come on, Obama was never as radioactive to swing voters as Pelosi is, even at his lowest approval ratings. He was and remains a popular figure outside of the right-wing fever swamps–as evidenced by the fact that he got elected twice with a majority of the popular vote and comfortable Electoral College margins.

  240. 240
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @N(R):

    So many people I know
    Come of age tense and bitter-eyed
    Can’t create so they just destroy
    C’mon!
    Let’s set someone’s dog on fire

  241. 241
    Immanentize says:

    @Steve in the ATL: I thought maybe Russia too?

  242. 242
    Kay says:

    @rikyrah:

    The main reason I think they’ll find coordination between Trump campaign and Russia is Hillary Clinton said so. She said he was Putin’s “puppet”- not Putin’s stooge or Putin’s preferred candidate or the candidate Putin hates less, but his puppet. Clinton rivals Obama with specificity of language. She doesn’t use words loosely.

    She was the target (and victim) of the strategy and a former Sec of State. She’s really credible on this. If she thinks there’s something there, and she does, then I’ll take her over just about anyone else as an expert witness. I don’t see how they can investigate this without interviewing her. They should call her at the Senate hearing and have her testify publicly.

  243. 243
    Patricia Kayden says:

    @TriassicSands: I’d love to hear more from the 2% of Democrats who believe Trump over Comey. Ye gads!! LOL.

  244. 244
    Immanentize says:

    Others say, Law is our Fate;
    Others say, Law is our State;
    Others say, others say
    Law is no more,
    Law has gone away.

    And always the loud angry crowd,
    Very angry and very loud,
    Law is We,
    And always the soft idiot softly Me.

    — from: Law Like Love — WH Auden

  245. 245
    Immanentize says:

    @Kay:

    They should call her at the Senate hearing and have her testify publicly.

    Please FSM, please let this happen….

  246. 246
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Immanentize:

    Yes, it’s impossible for a party’s grassroots to oust their House leadership, which is why Eric Cantor is Speaker right now. Oh, wait…

  247. 247
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Ben from Virginia: The point is practically anyone you put up is going to get tarnished and made radioactive by the RW Wurlitzer. Why give in to GOP demands that we jettison an experienced legislator and leader?

  248. 248
    Mnemosyne says:

    @NR:

    The percentages show that liberals did not stay home at any higher rate than any other ideological group.

    But some of them did stay home. Which is what the actual argument is — some self-described liberals stayed home in 2010 — not that no self-described liberals showed up.

    Your claim of the moral high ground was that liberals didn’t stay home in 2010, not that they stayed home in the same percentages as everyone else. So, sorry, you don’t get extra brownie points for doing the same thing other Democrats did.

  249. 249
    Cacti says:

    Sorry to harsh the mellow of our new crop of righteous bros, but if Nancy Pelosi gets ousted because Republicans don’t like her…

    Only in progressive sparkle pony-land does she get replaced with someone to her left politically.

  250. 250
    TriassicSands says:

    @Steve in the ATL:
    My one-time next door neighbor was a lifelong Republican (in her early 80s) who lived in California for years. I tried to engage her in rational political discussions because it was clear to me that her policy positions lined up far better with Democrats than with Republicans. But there was one thing we could never get past — Nancy Pelosi.

  251. 251
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Patricia Kayden: There’s a persistent number of registered Democrats who vote for Republicans. Legacy Democrats, basically. Like same-sex-marriage-license denier Kim Davis. The kinds of people whose voting habits NR thinks are explained by their disappointment that Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were too _conservative._

  252. 252
    Immanentize says:

    @Ben from Virginia: One candidate — just one. Please. This should be easy peasy — as simple as pie.

    By the way, Eric Cantor lost his seat, not a leadership battle. Get with the facts, brother, they will help you.

    (Or are you suggesting we start going after powerful, effective sitting democrats in primaries in an effort to increase the number of sitting Democrats? Great strategy!)

  253. 253
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Ben from Virginia: I like how you consider yourself apart of the “party’s grassroots”. All you’re doing is unnecessarily tearing the party apart in the face of an authoritarian party seeking to transform this country into a Russia-like state with elections that only elect GOP pols in large enough numbers

  254. 254
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷:

    Oh they’ll target anybody, but what they do is uniquely effective against Pelosi with swing voters. Swing voters–not hard-core right wingers. Everyone admits this–including, first and foremost, Democratic strategists and candidates at the House level. The anti-Pelosi “San Francisco Liberal” ads are extremely effective in suburban swing districts. It’s a millstone around the neck of every single House candidate.You might lot like it, I don’t like it, but they are. It’s not as easy to demonize a leader from Nassau County, or Youngstown, or the Rio Grande Valley.

    The GOP got rid of Gingrich for the same reasons–he was a drag on the GOP ticket across the country by 1998, despite all he accomplished for the Republicans.

  255. 255
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Ben from Virginia: OK, let’s see what happens when you attempt to primary Nancy Pelosi.

    And you do realize that the Democratic leadership in Congress is elected _by the members of Congress_, right?

  256. 256
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Immanentize:

    Leadership battles? They essentially ran Bohener and Gingrich out of town on a rail when they decided they had had enough of those two. I’ve named three candidates, and yes, there’s also the Dreaded White Male Tim Ryan.

  257. 257
    LurkerNoLonger says:

    @NR: Do you get paid in dollars or rubles?

  258. 258

    Why are you guys arguing with a BernieBro on loan from r/mensrights?

  259. 259
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    Yes, it’s impossible for a party’s grassroots to oust their House leadership, which is why Eric Cantor is Speaker right now.

    Eric Cantor got voted out of office by the voters in his district. He is no longer in Congress at all.

    If you want Pelosi voted out of office entirely, that’s a totally different discussion.

  260. 260
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Ben from Virginia: George McGovern was a decorated war hero from South Dakota. Jimmy Carter was a Bible-thumping moralist. When Republicans were through with them, they were not only laughingstocks but two of history’s greatest monsters.

  261. 261
    martian says:

    @NR: What leftist arguments do you ever make? I’m not around here all day, every day, but all I ever see is you popping up to defend Sanders’ honour or you slagging on the “establishment”. And Bernie “Yeah, sure, drones are fine. We’ll just aim them at the *right* people! And also, too, reproductive rights are a distraction.” Sanders is not everybody’s idea of a leftie exemplar. You never seem to get that it’s possible to oppose Sanders for progressive reasons, and you never seem to argue actual left policies, you just show up and sneer a lot at all the supposed neoliberal sell-out Hillbots/Obamabots/insufficiently enlightened whomevers.

  262. 262
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Ben from Virginia: But won’t not Real Progressives like Tim Ryan and Steny Hoyer replace her? How could that be any better, from your point of view?

  263. 263
    NR says:

    @Mnemosyne: I’m not after “extra brownie points,” I’m pointing out that blaming liberals for the 2010 electoral disaster is bullshit. Which it is.

  264. 264
    Weaselone says:

    @SatanicPanic:
    This is a good point. Pelosi is comparable to Mitch McConnell although not an in dwelt turtle. Mitch isn’t popular, but he’s effective at leading Republicans in the Senate. It’s s one of the reasons we want him gone. He might be the last Republican capable of effectively leading the Senate. Republicans want Pelosi gone for the same reason She’s an awesome cat herder.

  265. 265
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I live in VA-10–a highly educated affluent and majority-white district that’s represented by one Barbara Comstock. Hillary won the district, but Comstock was reelected anyway.

    Guess which pol Comstock kept bringing up last year as a punching bag when defending her seat? I bet you’ll never figure it out!

  266. 266
    Immanentize says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    what they do is uniquely effective against Pelosi with swing voters.

    Please provide any back up for this incredible “fact.” Certain their must be data — some studies by academics of actual swing voters (an amazingly small percentage of voters). Also, if you could point me to at least two people anec-data even that suggests that people voted for Republicans because of Pelosi rather than because they were friggin’ die hard republicans. Anything. I am begging you! But your colloquial “fact” reporting is telling me that you get your news from Facebook friends.

  267. 267
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Weaselone:

    The Republican analogue to Pelosi isn’t McConnell, it’s Newt Gingrich circa 1998. Actually, worse than that–it would be like the Republicans keeping Gingrich straight through 2009.

  268. 268
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    The anti-Pelosi “San Francisco Liberal” ads are extremely effective in suburban swing districts.

    It’s a mug’s game to try and come up with a Democrat that the right wing won’t be able to demonize. That’s how we ended up with John Kerry running for president in 2004 — how would a party full of draft dodgers be able to successfully run against a decorated war vet?

  269. 269
    Patricia Kayden says:

    @Ben from Virginia: What makes Pelosi so radioactive? Because she’s liberal? Represents San Francisco? What has she done which has made her so radioactive that we need to chuck her out of office and treat her as an albatross?

    Again while the other side is rallying around their Bigoted Idiot in the White House, why should our side be focused on demonizing Pelosi? I don’t understand this at all since she has done nothing to deserve all of this hostility from our side.

    By the way, if Independents voted for Trump over Secretary Clinton, what makes you think that swapping out Pelosi will magically attract them to Democrats. Trump was the nastiest and most divisive political candidate in my lifetime. If someone like Trump is alright with Independents then they’re a lost cause.

  270. 270
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    It’s not as easy to demonize a leader from Nassau County

    Elite.

    or Youngstown

    Union thug.

    or the Rio Grande Valley

    OK, this PROVES you’re not even trying. “I’d like to see Republicans say one bad word about a politician from near the Mexican border!”

  271. 271
    Kay says:

    @Immanentize:

    Republicans and media will yell that she’s “biased” or “blaming” but that isn’t actually an evidence rule- they just have some vague notion that it is. Put her testimony in and then the listener can decide how much weight to give it. It certainly shouldn’t stay OUT because she was a central figure. That’s just wacky and also dumb. If you want to know what happened you ask the people in the middle of it, you don’t preemptively exclude them because they are “blamers” or have secret devious motives or some vague legally-sounding shit Trump pulls out of his ass. That doesn’t matter at all as far as in or out.

    The target and the victim also happens to have this very solid foreign policy background. I don’t know how they DON’T ask her.

  272. 272
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @N(R): All you ever do is complain. You never offer anything truly constructive here. And when someone tries to challenge you directly you run away. Just get fucked you little shit

  273. 273
    Immanentize says:

    @Major Major Major Major: I apologize, but it has been a tough week and sometimes you just need to feed the troll so you can beat it. Stopping now.

  274. 274
    SatanicPanic says:

    @TriassicSands: huh, I thought they’d be worse

  275. 275
    Cacti says:

    @martian:

    What leftist arguments do you ever make? I’m not around here all day, every day, but all I ever see is you popping up to defend Sanders’ honour or you slagging on the “establishment”. And Bernie “Yeah, sure, drones are fine. We’ll just aim them at the *right* people! And also, too, reproductive rights are a distraction.” Sanders is not everybody’s idea of a leftie exemplar. You never seem to get that it’s possible to oppose Sanders for progressive reasons, and you never seem to argue actual left policies, you just show up and sneer a lot at all the supposed neoliberal sell-out Hillbots/Obamabots/insufficiently enlightened whomevers.

    Speaking of Wilmer and those who know in their hearts how he “would have won”…

    Lady Jane is now lawyering up for the FBI investigation of her creative financial dealings at Burlington College, and Wilmer’s starting to get something other than the usual softball questions he faces.

    I’m sure the GOP would have been too gentlemanly to bring it up in the last election though.

  276. 276

    @Immanentize: You do you, I’m not blog hallway monitor. Complaining about you guys engaging trolls is my version of engaging trolls :P

  277. 277
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Cacti: Hopefully it takes down that little useless dilettante. Talk about being an albatross

  278. 278
    Mike J says:

    @Ben from Virginia: Comstock had $4.5M, Bennett had less than $2M. and came within 13k votes.

    Wolf owned that district for a long time and much of it was based on his impeccable constituent service. He won his last election ’12 by 70k votes.

  279. 279
    Cacti says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    OK, this PROVES you’re not even trying. “I’d like to see Republicans say one bad word about a politician from near the Mexican border!”

    FTW

  280. 280
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    Independents that were “soft” Trump voters can very much be won back with the right candidates and messaging.

  281. 281
    Mnemosyne says:

    @NR:

    We’re self-described liberals uniquely to blame? No. But they certainly weren’t blameless.

    An interesting statistic I remember Kevin Drum coming up with in the wake of the 2010 midterms — there was a small but noticeable surge of rural voters who had not voted in 2008 who showed up in 2010 specifically to vote against the Democrats because they hated Obama. That’s the group that Trump activated this year, too.

  282. 282
    ruemara says:

    @Major Major Major Major: Maybe everyone needs elevated blood pressure? Meanwhile, I recalled how to target a light onto an object in C4D and I think I have the graphics for the video I will shoot, ready. I love being pre-prepped!

  283. 283
    Peale says:

    @Mnemosyne: I haven’t figured out how to insert a table into a comment. Anyway in SC 5 there are about 70,000 somewhat reliable democratic voters. Had all 70,000 of them showed up, they would have won. As it was, about 20,000 of those voters didn’t come, so we lost by about 5,500 votes. Ergo, we needed about 30% or 6,000 of those democrats to show up. How to find them, well that’s the problem. I’m using my own personal definition of Democrats as “people who actually vote democrat” in elections.

    As for the percentages. The original media story was that Parnell did “Better” and Ossoff because he had 47% of the vote. But once the final tallies came in, it turned out the Ossoff did do better than Parnell. By a whopping 0.2% margin.

    The actual million dollar question is: In district GA-5, Ossoff managed to get out about 100% of the voters who voted in the presidential election for the “no name, no money” Democratic candidate for congress in 2016. They aren’t actually all base democratic voters (those show up in mid terms), but the fact that they voted for a “no name, no money, no campaign” Democrat in 2016 kind of outs them as Democratic voters. You can’t get more reliable than voting for some guy who you know is going to lose who hasn’t put an add on TV or made a public appearance. Any D would do! Anyway, all of those voters showed up. 100% of them (give or take a few). In SC 6, there was still a high turnout, but far fewer of the voters who showed up in 2016 showed up in 2017. So I guess the question is, to keep Democrats riled up enough so that all of the available voting kind of democrats how up, does it take millions of dollars, like Ossoff Spent? Does not having that kind of money mean that we’ll see results like GA6-which looked a lot more like mid-term Democrat turnout than Presidential Democrat turnout.

  284. 284
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    I worry that the Democratic party likes to spend millions of dollars backing non-ideological civility-bots in wealthy suburbs instead of competing everywhere. I’m not against backing candidates like Ossoff but I’m against not really backing candidates like Parnell.

    Very late to this thread, but…. did the “Democratic Party” make this decision? Ossify had strong poll numbers, an endorsement from John Lewis, a near-victory in the first round of an unusual run-off system. Donations, as far as I know, flooded in from all over the country. Neither the KS candidate, whose name I can never remember, nor Parnell ever had, that I saw, anything that caught people’s imagination like that.

    Has anybody ever settled the debate yesterday as to whether Parnell was a… whatever it is Doug and Atkins were calling the kind of candidate they say we need? Uncivil and ideological?

  285. 285

    @Cacti: Lord knows I’m no Wilmer fan but I’m not exactly gonna trust the DoJ here either.

  286. 286
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    “Bernie bro”? Who needs to actually read what I’ve written when they’ve got their pre-canned narrative ready to go? Quick, make a smart-ass comment about how I have a penis! That’ll show me!

  287. 287
    ruemara says:

    @Peale: I like what you said, but it think it’s a mistake to consider it “riled”. Far more aware is what I’d say. And when it becomes a life and death choice for you, you tend to stay aware.

  288. 288
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @Crashman06: It might be. Like Will Rogers used to say “I’m not a member of any organized political party — I’m a Democrat!”

    But the way I look at it is, people have to get it out of their system. This is a pretty good place to do that. And after a bit of back and forth, everyone will eventually realize that I’m right about everything and that they should just do as I tell them to do. It’s really the only way.

    :)

  289. 289
    Immanentize says:

    @Kay: I think this is a great insight. I could shoot Whitehouse a message and ask (neighbor state Senator).

  290. 290
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    “Bernie bro”? Did you even bother to read anything I’ve written? JFC…

  291. 291

    @Ben from Virginia:

    Did you even bother to read anything I’ve written?

    No, I stopped at comment #20.

  292. 292
    Immanentize says:

    @Major Major Major Major: “Me doing me” is not always the most productive path….

  293. 293
    TriassicSands says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    They may still be nursing a grudge for Comey’s handling of the email scandal. It did get him fired, you know. (Laughing even harder.)

  294. 294
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    Well, that’d explain why you think I hold political views that I, well, don’t.

  295. 295
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    The right messaging is, “Trump lied to you and now we need to stop him.”

    The wrong messaging is, “We’re going to put white guys on top again, just like you want.”

    Given that all of the candidates who’ve lost these special elections have been white men, maybe we need to branch out and give some people of color and/or women a shot, hmm? The white guys haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory so far.

  296. 296
    The Moar You Know says:

    Just get fucked you little shit

    @🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷: What’s your problem with him? Yeah, it gets tiresome, all the talk of pie 24/7/365, but he’s harmless. Just likes pie I guess. A lot. If you get tired of him talking about pie, just add him to the pie filter.

  297. 297
    Chief Oshkosh says:

    @Steve in the ATL: Hey, even I have standards.

  298. 298
  299. 299
    Ken says:

    @Ben from Virginia: Younger? Last I saw the millenials were rallying around a 75 year old hippie from Vermont. Nancy’s doing fine. You’re upset because we didn’t win 5 red seats in red states?

  300. 300
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    Who needs to actually read what I’ve written when they’ve got their pre-canned narrative ready to go?

    Sorry, the guy who’s whining about “Social Justice” ruining everything is making this complaint?

  301. 301

    @Immanentize: I’m not productivity czar neither!

  302. 302
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Ben from Virginia: The anti-Pelosi “San Francisco Liberal” ads are extremely effective in suburban swing districts. It’s a millstone around the neck of every single House candidate.You might lot like it, I don’t like it, but they are. It’s not as easy to demonize a leader from Nassau County, or Youngstown, or the Rio Grande Valley.

    who are these three candidates for Leader, and what evidence do you have they’d be as effective as Pelosi?

  303. 303
    TriassicSands says:

    @SatanicPanic:

    Well, Trump is a pretty believable guy. When he says, “Believe me,” all doubts in my mind are cast aside and I know that I’m hearing the perfect truth.

  304. 304
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Major Major Major Major: on topic, who’s the incivility czar?

  305. 305
    martian says:

    @Cacti: “Lady” Jane isn’t the top reason that Bern lost my vote in the primaries, but she was certainly in the mix. The way that supporters would go off and freak out about how it wasn’t “fair” when when people criticized her about rolled my eyes right outta my head. I hope the investigation is fair and above board but, given the apparent facts, it looks dicey for her.

  306. 306
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @The Moar You Know: I hate entitled whiners. Can you use the pie filter on an android?

  307. 307
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Given that all of the candidates who’ve lost these special elections have been white men, maybe we need to branch out and give some people of color and/or women a shot, hmm?

    It would depend on the candidate. Claire McCaskill? Great candidate to run in Missouri for US Senate! Wendy Davis for Governor of Texas? Not so much…

    Justin Fairfax for LT Governor? Great choice. If we had nominated the head of Virginia BLM? Electoral suicide.

  308. 308

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: Like, the person tasked with keeping us uncivil?

    @🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka Junior G-Man) 🗳 🌷:

    Can you use the pie filter on an android?

    Coming soon!!

  309. 309
    Mike J says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    who’s the incivility czar?

    If you don’t know, fuck you.

  310. 310
    Patricia Kayden says:

    @Ben from Virginia: We’ll have to agree to disagree then because I love Nancy Pelosi. She can resign when she’s good and ready and not a moment sooner. I’m sick of Democrats demonizing our own folks based on Rightwing nonsense. This is especially galling as Republicans rally around the Bigot-in-Chief.

  311. 311
  312. 312
    The Moar You Know says:

    I’d love to hear more from the 2% of Democrats who believe Trump over Comey. Ye gads!! LOL.

    @Patricia Kayden: I might be one of them. Don’t get me wrong. I don’t believe a word Trump says. About anything. But look.
    Comey is not trustworthy. Sure, he’s on the side of the angels right now, but he wouldn’t have to be if he hadn’t deliberately called a news conference to throw the election in the first place. Which he succeeded in doing, I might add. Threw the fucking election to Trump. On purpose.

    At least with Trump I know when he’s lying, which is always. That’s actually very easy to deal with. Comey lies when it suits Comey, and he’s a professional at it. Literally. And that kind of liar is FAR harder to deal with, because most of the time they’ll tell you the truth, and you’ll never know if they’re lying or not.

  313. 313
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Major Major Major Major: so Dwight and NR share the crown? Or DougJ, under the theory that he is AllTroll?

    @Mike J: Ha!

  314. 314
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    This is especially galling as Republicans rally around the Bigot-in-Chief.

    But in districts like GA-06, they’re really not. Handel never mentioned Trump by name the entire campaign for example.

  315. 315
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: What surprises me about this is the idea that there ISN’T a Democrat who would be demonized as soon as they entered a leadership position. With the exception of someone like Lieberman (who would still be attacked) any Democrat is always going to be attacked as the liberalist liberal that ever liberalled, who wants to steal your money to fund black gay marriages and aborting white children. Even someone from Texas or whatever is going to be labeled as having “San Francisco values”.

    Dems need to do more to bring younger people into leadership. But kicking out Pelosi because the Right hates her is idiotic.

  316. 316
  317. 317
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Major Major Major Major: you might be hurting Corner STone’s feelings (assuming…), and I think he has seniority.

  318. 318

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: You didn’t list him either. And yes, seniority matters, but so should volume and immediacy. It’s not a lifetime appointment(?).

  319. 319
    Mike J says:

    @MisterForkbeard:

    But kicking out Pelosi because the Right hates her is idiotic.

    And starting this fight on the day the Senate Republicans introduce a bill that will kill a projected 40,000 Americans a year is a)moronic and/or 2)actively working for the Republicans.

  320. 320
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @MisterForkbeard: before the campaign kicked into high gear, around the time of the great “Why won’t Obama have drink with McConnell” clusterfart, Republicans would troll Democrats by saying if they had one of those nice, reasonable Clintons, they could Get Something Done. Tweety was muttering about Dems having “buyer’s remorse” from 2008

  321. 321
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Major Major Major Major: It’s not a lifetime appointment(?).

    I think we would have to consult the Incivility Boyars and the Incivility Patriarch. Maybe Gogol’s Wife has the tables we need to consult

  322. 322
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @MisterForkbeard:

    Of course they will! But the question is: will it be effective? Will swing voters believe it?

    Look, I get that Republicans try to do that to everybody–look at this turd the Virginia Republicans launched against our statewide ticket this year. But the difference is, while that kind of ad would be believable to swing voters against Nancy Pelosi, it looks fucking ridiculous when launched against an army doctor from the Eastern Shore like Northam.

  323. 323
    Eljai says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: My understanding is that Seth Moulton, Tim Ryan and Kathleen Rice were trying to stir things up yesterday. The thing is, there was already a vote for the party leadership between Pelosi and Ryan last fall and Tim Ryan got his ass handed to him. So they decided to attempt a coup on the day the republicans are trying to KILL us. That alone disqualifies these idiots, IMHO.

  324. 324
    Kay says:

    @Immanentize:

    The victim of the crime speaks!
    It’s United States versus whomever if it goes that far but she’d be just the victim/ witness if we’re putting this in an evidence frame, and we are because that’s why Trump wants everyone excluded for “bias” and that’s why she was preemptively excluded – because she’s a big blamer. Victims tend to blame the perpetrator. We’ll all know that going in. Duly noted.

  325. 325
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Eljai: So they decided to attempt a coup on the day the republicans are trying to KILL us. That alone disqualifies these idiots, IMHO.

    Hear, hear. Fucking morons. I hope somebody pointed this out, with lots of expletives. I wonder if Pelosi has somebody to call dumb motherfuckers in her own caucus dumb motherfuckers.

  326. 326
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Ben from Virginia: If it worked on George McGovern, or, if that’s too long ago for you, Howard Dean and then John Kerry, it can work on anybody.

  327. 327
  328. 328
    Patricia Kayden says:

    @Mike J: Yep. Instead of focusing on getting Trump Care defeated, some Democrats are focused on demonizing Pelosi as if that would change anything.

    In other news, Dean Heller from Nevada is a no on Trump Care so perhaps it won’t pass (given that four other Republican Senators have already come out against it).

  329. 329
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    John Kerry actually ran a very good campaign against Bush all things considered–very hard to unseat an incumbent in wartime with a (then) decent enough economy. We should have seen the swiftboat stuff coming though–many of the things John Kerry said after coming back from Vietnam were going to be turnoffs to a lot of people.

    He still came within a few thousand votes of winning Ohio and the presidency.

  330. 330
  331. 331
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @Ben from Virginia: Voters will absolutely believe it. Especially Trump voters.

    Look, the people who approve of Trump and the job he’s doing are the exact same people who get incensed about Pelosi. And you can’t reach them with another Democrat. They literally believe whatever Trump says, because it’s parroted by Fox News, their churches, conservative media, etc. You could put Prolife McTaxCuts in charge of the Democratic party and the Conservative voters would still believe they’re the devil. And low information voters would still believe there had to be something to all the accusations of liberality and corruption, or the media wouldn’t cover it.

    It’s not a solvable problem without fixing our entire media structure in this country.

  332. 332
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    Whoever heard of walking a chewing gum a the same time? Impossible!

  333. 333
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @MisterForkbeard:

    How did Obama win twice then, and comfortably? How did Clinton win in the ’90s?

    And I’m not talking about going after voters who actually approve of Trump–the 35% is a lost cause. Rather, I’m talking about those voters who “held their nose” for Trump and now disapprove of the job he’s doing. By keeping people like Pelosi as the face of the party we make it way too easy for the GOP to turn them from anti-Trump to anti-anti-Trump.

  334. 334
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @Patricia Kayden: Right. Anyone who’s out there distracting from Republicans literally killing american citizens by removing their health care to feed tax cuts for the rich needs to shut up right now. Either they’re so stupid they can’t see why this is a bad idea, they’re trying to take down the party (and damage those same american citizens) for their own personal gain, or they’re working for the republicans.

    There’s NO reason to do this now.

  335. 335
    ruemara says:

    @Patricia Kayden: I would regard any Republican “no”s with a huge or yuuge grain of salt. Those are the people I don’t trust.

    @Ben from Virginia: Let me be blunt. As a clean respectable ne gro, he was either going to be their type of ne gro, which would mean republican lite or he would fail which would take the sting out of the Bush years and usher back in Republicans. Being better did not make the hate go away, it magnified it.

  336. 336
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Mike J:

    And starting this fight on the day the Senate Republicans introduce a bill that will kill a projected 40,000 Americans a year is a) moronic and/or 2) actively working for the Republicans.

    Ding ding ding. You win a cigar.

  337. 337
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @Ben from Virginia: Are you trying to insinuate that republican voters who believe the “San Francisco Values” crap actually liked Obama? Or Bill Clinton? I’m not buying that.

    The problem is that the people inside the conservative media bubble don’t care who the Democrat in question is, they hate them and will believe literally anything about them. The people out of that bubble might vote Democratic… but the “Pelosi is liberal!” effect isn’t going to majorly affect their vote either. If it does, then they’ll hate any Democrat in power and aren’t worth chasing after. A change in leadership wouldn’t affect their vote.

    ETA: More to the point, people who “held their nose” and voted for Trump aren’t really reachable. If you can vote for the obvious pile of awful that is Trump because you… dislike Nancy Pelosi, then you’re not a particularly reachable person.

    You might be able to persuade me that what we need are they people who sat out the Presidential election, but then you have to make the case that moderates see Pelosi differently than they see any other Democrat in power that is constantly attacked by Republicans. That’s a hard case to make.

  338. 338
    Immanentize says:

    @Kay: Gotta attend to other stuff, but that is a brilliant take. Love it. Will try to pass it along….

  339. 339
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Ben from Virginia: Whoever heard of walking a chewing gum a the same time? Impossible!

    Is the health care bill that ruins (at least) 20 million lives, including handicapped people dependent on Medicaid dismissed as “walking” or “chewing gum”?

    In any case, Ben, thanks for identifying yourself as both a fucking moron and a fucking asshole. But note I did not call you a misogynist.

  340. 340
    martian says:

    @MisterForkbeard: I remember when Kerry got the nom and Dean supporters were told it was for the best because Dean was a draft dodger who went skiing and Kerry was a genuine war hero, yessiree, that’s our ticket against aWol. How swiftly our hopes were sunk.

    Seriously, I do wonder how so many of us never seem to learn that the rules are different for Democrats. People keep acting like there is some kind of underlying fairness or justice behind what happens, and if Democrats would only stop wearing short skirts and walking down dark alleys that bad electoral things would stop happening. No. Lies will do if the truth won’t. Every Democrat will be smeared. If a Democrat hasn’t yet been smeared, it’s because they haven’t given Republicans cause for worry.

  341. 341
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    How did Obama win twice then, and comfortably? How did Clinton win in the ’90s?

    No Citizens United SuperPAC money — which started rolling in January of 2010, just in time for the 2010 midterms — and no gutting of the Voting Rights Act.

    As the Brennan Center points out, this is the first presidential election since the Supreme Court’s decision where voters have not had the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and, magically, the Republicans just happen to win the Electoral College. Quite a co-inkydink, don’t you agree?

  342. 342
    Immanentize says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    But note I did not call you a misogynist.

    Heart.

  343. 343
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @MisterForkbeard:

    Are you trying to insinuate that republican voters who believe the “San Francisco Values” crap actually liked Obama? Or Bill Clinton?

    There’s a certain subset in places like GA-06, VA-10, etc, yes, though they call themselves independents but have Republican leanings. I know many personally. I know people who liked Obama but can’t stand Hillary Clinton, too. People who voted for Trump but did so unenthusiastically and do not like him. These people are out there and they’re convertible. They say a lot of things that would make you and I cringe, they are not down-the-line liberal progressives, but they’re at least open to voting for a Democratic candidate under the right circumstances. What we can’t let happen is have anti-anti-Trumpism overtake their anti-Trumpism.

  344. 344
    Mike J says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    No Citizens United SuperPAC money — which started rolling in January of 2010, just in time for the 2010 midterms — and no gutting of the Voting Rights Act.

    Eight years of Bush certainly helped. I’d just rather not have the country go through that before they get another good president.

  345. 345
    Immanentize says:

    @martian:

    when Kerry won more delegates in more states than any other candidate and thereafter got the nomination of the Democratic party

    FTFY

  346. 346
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Metaphors, how the fuck do they work?

  347. 347
    martian says:

    @Ben from Virginia: We should have seen Swiftboat coming? Are you fucking kidding? Swiftboat was a complete fucking fabrication. Kerry’s hippie war protesting ways were a separate issue. Other than knowing Kerry would be smeared, how were we supposed to predict the form ahead of time?

  348. 348
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @ruemara:

    So Obama-Obama-Trump voters aren’t reachable? They’re forever lost to Republicans?

  349. 349
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @martian:

    Sorry, I was referring more to the hippie war protesting stuff than the completely fabricated smears about him faking his war record etc. I was using “Swiftboating” as a shorthand for all anti-Kerry attacks which muddied the water.

    But Kerry came within a few thousand votes of winning, still. Something tells me that doesn’t happen with a Howard Dean nomination, let alone a Carol Moesly Braun candidacy.

  350. 350
    Kay says:

    @Immanentize:

    I feel like there’s real resistance to finding out what happened, for a number of reasons, some well-intentioned, some not.

    A lot of people could look bad – the FBI, the Obama Administration, media for not covering it, the Clinton campaign, and then there’s the real legal issues for the Trumpsters if they “coordinated”- obviously they’re in the most hot water.

    I’m just sick of that. We do too much of it. We’re so busy propping up “legitimacy” and “keeping order” we make things worse by never going THRU anything- we go around.

    Let the chips fall. If civil society and Our Institutions are fragile enough that a real airing would break them then they were weak and subject to failing anyway. We can’t keep doing “mistakes were made” and that’s where this is headed. The FBI are already planting stories about how it’s not their fault and Trump is out there working the refs. The lack of order and process allows this scramble for ass-covering to continue and the biggest douchebags always win those races. It’s a simple question: “what happened?” She knows part of the answer.

  351. 351
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Ben from Virginia: you’re clearly very shrewd and savvy about politics, as well as having a jim-dandy of a moral compass. and we should listen to you often and take you seriously

  352. 352
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Immanentize:

    I thought maybe Russia too?

    Russians, Republicans–the difference is negligible these days

  353. 353
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    In other words, you should re-take 9th Grade English. Good to know.

  354. 354
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Ben from Virginia: , let alone a Carol Moesly Braun candidacy.

    Huh. How not at all telling that hers would be the short-lived candidacy from the ’04 primary you pull out of your ass. Not Gephart, Lieberman, Kucinich or Dodd.

  355. 355
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @NR: Girl?

  356. 356
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Gephardt, are you kidding me? She would have done far, far worse than him. Worse than even Lieberman, too. Kucinich I’ll grant probably would have gone down to a similarly McGovern-like defeat. Dodd didn’t run in ’04.

  357. 357
    martian says:

    @Immanentize: Why did it need fixing? I didn’t imply that the process was unfair or that Kerry shouldn’t have won. Point of fact, I poured my heart into working for Kerry’s campaign in the general election and travelled to the nearest battleground state to drive voters to the polls for him. The whole argument about finding a candidate that couldn’t be smeared like Gore was definitely a part of primary scene, though, and Kerry vs. Dean strikes me as the civility-bot vs. the progressive firebrand argument of its day.

  358. 358
    Ben from Virginia says:

    @martian:

    Kerry was the strongest available candidate though. Again, if we had nominated Braun or Kucinuch or whatever it would have been ’72 and ’84 all over again. Yes, Republicans will smear anyone, but it’s easier to smear some candidates than others.

  359. 359
    martian says:

    @Ben from Virginia: I’m not sure what argument you’re trying to have with me since I’m not arguing that Kerry wasn’t the strongest candidate. Braun and Kucinich as candidates were weak on their own merits. And “Dean woulda won” is basically “Bernie woulda won” so far as I’m concerned, and I was a Deaniac.

    Picking candidates out of fear based on what they might be smeared with is a defensive fool’s game, though. Baseless lies are hard to predict.

  360. 360
    Tom Q says:

    So, an observation: In the thread below, Adam elaborates on the Washington Post story displaying a memo of Putin’s describing explicit plans to influence the US election in favor of Trump and against Clinton. The story also backs up the previously-known fact that Obama was hamstrung by McConnell and others who threatened to trash Obama as trying to influence the election if he took strong steps.

    This seemingly seismic subject gets about 250 comments.

    But here, a chance to do more intra-party sniping, we rocketed past 300 and show no signs of stopping.

    Sub-observation: has anyone noticed that, when these let’s-burn-the-party-down bros show up, they post tirelessly? They’re good for a post every 2-5 spots, and rarely do fewer than 100 apiece.

    Moral? Ignore them. They might be Russian bots for all we know. They’re certainly no help, and they waste our time and energy.

  361. 361
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Tom Q: quit trying to keep us down, neoliberal shill for the DNC!

  362. 362
    Immanentize says:

    @martian: But you made it a cause and effect which was not true — or at least you seriously implied a chronology:

    when Kerry got the nom and Dean supporters were told it was for the best

    So, Kerry got the overwhelming support of the party, then Dean supporters were told … something. I was a Dean supporter and I have LOTS of grievances, but this is not one.

    ETA But so few people mean what they say anymore, so I forgive all.

  363. 363

    @Steve in the ATL: I wanna know how they find this place.

  364. 364
    Tom Q says:

    @Steve in the ATL: Ha — unmasked!

  365. 365
    DCF says:

    @joel hanes:
    Goodbye, and Good Riddance, to Centrism
    http://www.rollingstone.com/po.....sm-w487628

    This cannot be stressed enough: It does not matter what the Republicans say as long as the Democrats don’t agree with them. If the Republicans claim that health care and public services are “extreme” or “communism” or “far-left” or “unrealistic” or “budget-busting”, any meaningful opposition party must and will argue the case that they are wrong, that in fact these views are mainstream, democratic, supported by the vast majority of the country – which they are. That’s the real reality-based approach to politics that our so-called “pragmatists” refuse to take. If Democrats want to pass good policy, they will argue for good policy, not constantly tell us why we can’t have good policy.

    Thomas Frank on the Demise of the Democratic Party
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUkA-5Vd3E0

    Katie Halper interviews Thomas Frank, author of ‘Listen Liberal’, who says the Democratic Party has become the party of affluent professionals and has lost touch with workers and the poor

  366. 366
    Mnemosyne says:

    @DCF:

    Thomas Frank, the guy who refuses to believe that racism still exists?

  367. 367
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Tom Q:

    Ironically, I think this ended up being an more productive intraparty thread than usual, even if we did do a little shouting.

  368. 368
    martian says:

    @Immanentize: Yes, there was a chronology, but I’m talking about the futility of choosing candidates based on who is somehow scandal proof, not challenging the legitimacy of Kerry’s win. The scandal machine came first for Dean, is all, but Kerry might well have beat him anyway. Kerry won fair and square. I don’t have a grievance about the chatter after Kerry’s win, I took it for the usual clumsy winners’ cajoling to get the loser’s supporters enthusiastically on board – “Let me tell you why it’s a good thing your guy lost!”

    Worrying over which candidate can be smeared and how, and who might be somehow scandal proof, and candidates worrying about actually being scandal proof is becoming a huge and, in my opinion, self-defeating part of Democratic primaries and campaigns, though. I think the degree to which Republicans are colonizing our brain space and getting a say in how we choose our people is a huge problem. I think you can see it as far back as Gore keeping Clinton at arm’s length during his run and, probably, in the choice of that pious weasel Lieberman – famous for his chastisement of Clinton – as running mate. Seems to me we’re letting Republicans vet our candidates for us in a way.

    Maybe what I’m saying only makes sense in my head? I didn’t think I was being so unclear.

  369. 369
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @DCF: yes, all the affluent professionals who got subsidies for health insurance and qualified for Medicaid. Of course, Thomas Frank knows far more affluent professionals and UVa/ Overland Park types than he does actual workers and poor people.

  370. 370
    DCF says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:
    Well, you asked for it – these will make your head explode….
    How The Democratic Party BETRAYED Workers & Its Base – THOMAS FRANK Interview Parts 1 – 4
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9u2aR19P3g
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TnS_P4JGDc
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9sGI5kiRbE
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JONbGkQaq8Q
    Full Show 3/18/16: Thomas Frank on the State of the Democratic Party
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwHXhr0MWoo
    Thomas Frank Interview with Cenk Uygur on The Young Turks
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4VxmAIzKCM

  371. 371
    DCF says:

    @Mnemosyne:
    Cite your reference (read: proof) of that statement’s veracity – you can’t, can you?

  372. 372
    DCF says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:
    Thomas Frank Interview with Cenk Uygur on The Young Turks
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4VxmAIzKCM

  373. 373
    Mnemosyne says:

    @DCF:

    Of course I can.

    The fact that anyone in 2016 could do an entire interview using the word “inequality” over and over again without ever once using the word “race” shows that he doesn’t think racism is a factor in our society anymore. And he did that interview shortly before Donald Trump won the presidency on a platform of white supremacy and xenophobia.

    People like Frank and Sanders tried to pretend that racism wasn’t a factor in American politics anymore while an out and proud white supremacist was running for president. That’s a blind spot the size of Jupiter.

  374. 374
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @DCF: BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
    Do Susan Sarandon and Cornel West make cameo? How ’bout that halfwit Roseann DeMoro? Does she still think trump will bring single-payer?

    there’s just an endless feast of self-righteous morons for you to link to with your little bold font, isn’t there, Skeeter?

  375. 375
    DCF says:

    Nothing Left: The Long, Slow Surrender of American Liberals (w/ Adolph Reed Jr.)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMAPVHF0XRs

  376. 376
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    I think the only people who still try to claim that white people voted for Trump because of “economic anxiety” are DCF and the Young Turks, and that’s only because they’re clinging to their feeling about the election and not looking at the actual facts.

    The #1 predictor of whether or not someone voted for Trump was whether or not they held racist beliefs. Period. And the most “economically anxious” whites — the ones who make less than $30K a year — voted for Hillary.

  377. 377
    DCF says:

    @Mnemosyne:
    So using the word ‘inequality’ – a euphemism, among other things, for racism – doesn’t pass your terminology ‘purity test’?

  378. 378
    SgrAstar says:

    @Ben from Virginia:

    I’d take a pro-life Democratic Senator from Nebraska over Ben Sasse any day of the week.

    Well isn’t that nice. You are obviously not a woman….but you are an asshole. Abortion is a non-negotiable civil right.

  379. 379
    Mnemosyne says:

    @DCF:

    Except that Frank specifically excludes race from his equation and only talks about economic inequality as felt by white people. For him, race isn’t a factor in inequality.

    But I realize that you will continue to believe until the day you die that Hillary lost because she was too corporate and not because Vladimir Putin personally ordered his hackers to ensure Trump’s victory. You’re so far down your own white supremacist asshole that you don’t know what reality looks like anymore.

  380. 380
    DCF says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:
    Well, Jethro…it’s clear you have no argument, only reactive rage….
    In a strange way, it’s comforting to know that in a chaotic and dysfunctional political environment, individuals such as you can be counted on – as sure as the sun rises in the East – to defend the rightward shift of the Democratic party and mock the progressive path(s) to remedy those failings….

  381. 381
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @DCF: “inequality” is not a euphemism for racism you stupid, stupid shit. “Inequality” to all the blithering blinkered fuckfaces you always cite means “banks are bad.”

  382. 382
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @DCF: you’re hilarious. I’ll offer you the challenge I offer to St Wilmer and his ilk: Move to the Ohio River Valley, or West Virginia, or Western Wisconsin. Run for Congress. Offer your can’t-fail platform of free college, single-payer, and the taxes they would require. Bring Moore and West and Wilmer and dear, darling Susan in to campaign for you. Get back to us when one of you wins a House seat.

  383. 383
    DCF says:

    @Mnemosyne:
    If you had a clue as to how wrong you are here, I’d offer it to you – but it would be a failed effort….
    Given the hive mind of Clintonistas on his site, it’s a wonder the Democratic party isn’t worse off than it already is…not to worry, though, the real progressive movement will right the ship and move it forward toward the future….

  384. 384
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @DCF: Oh yeah, smart folks like you can’t fail
    OAKLAND — As Washington grapples with health care policy again, the head of the 185,000-member National Nurses United is turning her attention to a seemingly unlikely advocate for a single-payer system. “The one I’m counting on the most is Trump,” RoseAnn DeMoro said,
    DeMoro, who serves as executive director of both the Oakland-based National Nurses United and the California Nurses Association, told POLITICO California on Thursday that she is “disgusted” with Democrats like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and believes that the president-elect may actually get action.
    “He’s a businessman, he has an international perspective — and his wife comes from a country where they have single payer,’’ said DeMoro, who also is an AFL-CIO national vice president and executive board member. “I think that Donald Trump is not about either party; he’s about something very different. He’s the one who can actually rise above this and do what’s right, and he knows as a businessman, it’s the most cost effective,’’ she said
    Real Progressive!

  385. 385
    DCF says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:
    Given the failures of your beloved centrists over the past thirty-five-plus years, I’d ask you this: How’s the same old same old working for you (or the 90% of the country who are falling further and further behind)?
    Or is it that the status quo is working well enough for you that concern isn’t an issue?

  386. 386
  387. 387
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @DCF: Win some seats and prove your case. Otherwise you’re just a bunch of politically onanistic children indulging in a massive circle jerk and singing along to a drum circle your own righteousness

  388. 388
    Mnemosyne says:

    @DCF:

    Your beloved voice of the working class, Thomas Frank, is a PhD from the richest town in Kansas, which is also has one of the highest median incomes in the United States. He’s a former College Republican who only broke with the Republican Party after the invasion of Iraq.

    Who are the three men he critiques by name as being “elitists” in that Bill Moyers interview? Bill Clinton, who dragged himself up from a trailer in Arkansas; Deval Patrick, a Black politician who went to elite schools; and Barack Obama, who grew up with a single mother in Hawaii.

    Frank’s main beef with all three men is that they came from nothing and worked their way into elite schools, while Frank came from a rich family and had to compete with people like Clinton, Patrick, and Obama on an equal basis.

    Frank is the worst kind of snob — the guy born with a silver spoon in his mouth who prefers the people that stayed in their place to the people who worked so hard to better themselves that they surpassed him with all his privileges.

    It burned him when white trash Bill Clinton became president, and it burned him when Black thug Barack Obama became president, because they surpassed him, Thomas Frank, the elite son of a rich family, who deserved to be important because of who his family was.

  389. 389
    Doug! says:

    @amk:

    I stopped raising for Ossoff when I thought there was enough money spent there already, and I said so at the time. We raised more for Quist + Parnell than for Ossoff. The DCCC gave fives times as much to Ossoff at to Parnell + Quist.

Comments are closed.