#NEW Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams is planning on announcing a decision on running for U.S. Senate on Monday or Tuesday, two sources familiar with her plans have told ABC News
Unclear if any White House aspirations are part of this announcement.
— Jeffrey Cook (@JeffreyCook) April 26, 2019
Only two people in American history have received 65 million votes or more. One is black. One is a woman. https://t.co/4WvcbqgpgK
— Oliver Willis (@owillis) April 26, 2019
… Democrats have 19 candidates and counting to pick from ahead of 2020, the most diverse field in American history in terms of gender, race and sexuality. And while they try to pick whom they personally like, they are also doing some serious mental gymnastics around the question of electability — whom their fellow Americans might vote for.
Anita Burgess saw several candidates speak at the annual conference of the National Action Network, the Rev. Al Sharpton’s civil rights group, in New York City.
“I have a friend at work — she’s like, ‘You’re not progressive.’ She thinks that I don’t want a woman president,” Burgess said. “I do! But I don’t think they’re going to do it! And so I can’t waste my vote either, because we have to get the orange man out. I’m sorry — orange man got to go.” (She was referring to President Trump.)…
Alexandra Petri, at the Washington Post, with the rebuttal:
Let me begin by stating that I, personally, have no problems with any of the candidates. I am excited by all of them. So excited. Super excited and not even a tiny bit uncomfortable…
But you have to think about electability.
I just think people — again, not me, I’m on board, just … people — might not vote for this candidate. Because the candidate is a little, well, you know…
I think sexism, racism and homophobia are just about the worst things going. I don’t have a single relevant bone, organ or cartilaginous area in my body. But, of course, some people, you know, do, and it pains me as much as I am sure it pains you when I tell you that the average voter I am picturing is very much invested in all these terrible phenomena.
A shame. But that is just how it is, at least in this specific scenario I have decided to picture.
I think we can safely state that this voter wants a certain kind of person. Someone with that je ne sais quoi, that reassuring quality some candidates possess, where he would be welcome at a Starbucks even if he just used the restroom and left without purchasing anything, could display a picture of his spouse at work and you would high-five him, could talk for as long as he wished without being interrupted, or could walk into the room and say, “I’m your doctor!” and you would not consider it a surprising twist. Just that ineffable thingness…
I am just trying to imagine what this voter wants. You and I are not like him! (I am, of course, picturing a him.) Most of America, even, is not like him! Take heart in the majority of voters nationwide who were fine with a woman last time and a black man the time before. But the electoral college — which, by the way, I completely agree we should abolish — compels us to heed the preferences of (ugh!) these people…
satby
Petri is a treasure.
bago
Oooo0ooooo!
I’m a savvy insider!
bago
I spout conventional wisdom, and pretend to know the heartlland.
And stuff.
OzarkHillbilly
Sorry Alexandra, I got one thing to say, Blech.
You know who doesn’t worry about ‘electability’? Jill Stein voters. Libertarians. All the smug, self satisfied, purity ponies the world over who wouldn’t dare dirty their hands by voting for someone who is not up to their standards, is not as pure and righteous as they imagine themselves to be.
All of us, each and every one of us, worries about the vague and undefinable quality known as ‘electable’. If we weren’t worried about it we wouldn’t give so much money to our favorite candidates so that they can make themselves more ‘electable’. We wouldn’t spend hours and hours phone banking trying to make them more ‘electable’. Wouldn’t be wearing holes in our shoes, knocking on doors in an attempt to make them more ‘electable’.
And none of us would have been so heart broken, so devastated on November 9, 2016 when we found out that one of the most qualified persons to ever run for the White House and our preferred candidate was in fact NOT electable. Not in that election.
Anybody who says they don’t worry about ‘electability’? Say hello to Jill Stein. She’s not worried about it either.
Martin
We’re too polarized to get crossover votes. Woman of color if we want to win. You get 65 million votes when democrats turn out. They’re not going to turn out for Biden, and Republicans won’t cross over just for him. Nobody is on the fence here.
satby
@OzarkHillbilly: Petri is satirizing the people who use “electability” as a cover for their racism or misogyny, but you’re correct th at the purity ponies don’t. Because getting elected is often less valued than proving their point /demonstrating their virtue.
Raven
I’m waiting for the breakfast bar in the Jeklly Island Hampton Inn to open then down to the beach for a few hours of fishing before I head home. It’s fairly chilly but should warm up quickly when the sun comes up! I had dinner with old friends and there is nothing like the immediate bond no matter how long it’s been.
satby
@Martin: From Pew:
With about 40% not voting/suppressed from voting I suspect there might be a few on the fence. Link
satby
@Raven: sounds like you’re having a great time! Safe trip home raven.
Raven
@satby: yea, back for a week and then down to the gulf! The boss lady and the dogs didn’t come because of the rain forecast and it never rained at all!
OzarkHillbilly
@satby: As with all satirizations (I think I just made up a new word) she paints with a broad brush. One I have seen many people paint with to demean those among us who think this country can not survive a 2nd trump term and so do not want to “waste” their primary vote on somebody who can’t beat trump. I don’t blame them for that very real fear and having it inform their voting. It is among the many things I consider myself.
As for Petri, like you I think she is a treasure. I’m just tired of folks looking down on others for this reason.
bago
@bago: Love it.
OzarkHillbilly
@Raven: Tight lines! I learned long ago to never let the weather forecast dictate my plans, just inform them. (bring a rain jacket, etc)
rikyrah
Good Morning, Everyone ? ??
JPL
In other GA news, it appears that Tom Price is thinking about running for office again.
Baud
@rikyrah:
Good morning.
Baud
The only way I can interpret this to make sense is that Jeff thinks Stacy might announce that she is not running for Senate but not say whether it’s because she is running for president.
Because no one announces that they are running for Senate as a stepping stone to the White House.
OzarkHillbilly
@JPL: He misses the con.
OzarkHillbilly
@Baud: Jeff thinks the Presidency is central to everything everyone does because it is central to him.
Gvg
Last time we were in actuality, the majority and still didn’t “win”. There will probably be more voter suppression this time, so in order to win, we need to be sure of a much bigger margin. Electability is going to be a factor in my choices. However, we do have this drawn out process we call primaries, where some go first, and others can see, what the rest of us think of electability. Which is good, because I know I don’t get my fellow collective American’s minds. They surprise me in elections too often.
Prejudice is only one factor in that quality called electability. Scandals and skeletons play a part too. For me and some part of my fellow democrats, we are also looking for competence. Our foreign relations are going to need a huge amount of work….cleaning out the corrupted agencies and the judiciary needs goals and skills. The specific problems of now will make certain candidates look better than others. For instance I think the 2007 economic crisis cemented Obama’s electability over McCain specifically. The best candidate for the general has been different years because of what was going on right then. Anyway, it’s too early to eliminate say all but white male candidates. The polling as we go along will give us some clue as to what the non democrat voters think. The numbers of actual voters will also start to show how many are likely to vote D not R in the general.
Although, if the republicans actually don’t allow anyone to run against Trump in the primary, it will be harder to judge….might actually hurt them by hiding if they are still enthused or not. Could also surprises republican down ticket voting which is good. We need a lot of democrats in office.
OzarkHillbilly
POPCORN, POPCORN, GIT YER POPCORN HERE!!!!
Aussie Sheila
@OzarkHillbilly:
That seems to be what primaries are for. Forget trying to figure out who is electable and just vote for who you believe will deliver the policies and most importantly, employ the people in office who are closest to your policy preferences. Trying to guess who someone else might vote for is, if I may say so, both condescending and ultimately futile.
Above all, pin down every Dem candidate on what their plans are to ensure proper enfranchisement of the US working class.
I don’t think the world can sustain another four years of fascisms with nukes.
JR
@Gvg: I have my preferences, but they aren’t strong ones. I’m going to let the primary electorate make the selection. It may be imperfect but it is the best we’ve got. One thing I will demand is that the losing candidates campaign on behalf of the eventual winner.
We made fun of the Republicans toadying up to Trump but they did do it. And it helped legitimize him and that was critical for his electoral chances.
Lapassionara
@Aussie Sheila: I don’t think I will survive 4 more years of Trump.
About those primaries, SC’s is early, and it is an open primary, so Republicans can vote in it. They often do vote in it, to just mess with the outcome. I’m not sure we will learn much from it.
Betty Cracker
When I find myself fretting over a situation that is largely out of my control, my go-to remedy is to find an aspect where I can make a difference and focus on that instead. I’ve got one vote in the Democratic primary. Rather than tying myself in knots about who the nominee will be and driving myself mad with pointless speculation about what will happen in the general election, I’m focusing my volunteer efforts on increasing voter turnout.
If any of y’all are looking for an organization that is addressing the critical need for information and assistance with obtaining voter ID, I highly recommend VoteRiders.org. There are more than 20 million eligible voters who lack the proper ID, thanks to Republican initiatives to make it harder to vote, and many more who aren’t sure whether they’ve got the right ID or not. VoteRiders provides free information and assistance with obtaining ID, and they’re looking for volunteers.
OzarkHillbilly
Why am I not surprised?
Immanentize
Good morning All! I finally made up my mind about who I will vote for in the primary — it was tough, but I sorted through and I am definitely going to vote for the Democrat.
@Raven: Have a great time. Obviously the weather is there, wish I were beautiful.
Immanentize
@OzarkHillbilly:
If the NRA is weakened, we will be strengthened. Maybe Butina did more damage to them than we first realized?
OzarkHillbilly
@Immanentize: I think Ollie North was a hell of a choice for our Trojan Horse.
Baud
@OzarkHillbilly:
Almost as bad as expanding access to health insurance with no preexisting condition restrictions.
A lot of Trump voters will pull the lever for him with a heavier heart next year.
Immanentize
@Baud: You asked a Question yesterday about outrage driving people to the polls. Who knows? But it is likely, it seems, that the novelty of Trump plus the Hillary hatred did bring people to the polls who never before voted. I met one such guy at my polling place. I am pretty sure he will never both again.
Incumbants need to broaden their pool because there is more voter drop off in the second time around. Even Obama got fewer votes in his second run. Trump is doing nothing to broaden his base. Quite the opposite. I think (but can’t know) that original Trump voters will feel like they got what they wanted and don’t need to work to keep it. I am pondering ways to increase that feeling.
Mousebumples
Forgive my lack of coding skills from my phone, but I thought this was an interesting perspective on why Mayor Pete has attracted so much attention – http://www.honestgraft.com/2019/04/as-mayor-pete-shows-some-democrats-just.html?m=1
Quoting from there :
It seems strange that a measurable segment of the party would already be throwing its support behind a midsize-city mayor rather than any of the many federal or statewide officeholders in the race. But Buttigieg projects a Kennedyesque persona, and a Kennedyesque persona is a valuable asset in a Democratic primary contest.
Kennedyesque politicians are youthful, personable, and confident. They compensate for their relative inexperience with well-hyped intellectual credentials: Ivy League diplomas, pet policy passions, authorship of “serious” books, public displays of erudition. Their bouts of earnestness are balanced by expressions of humor and self-awareness. They are masters of the rhetoric of idealistic generalities, leading audiences to find them charismatic or even inspirational, but they don’t insist on doctrinal purity when it comes to the details. Indeed, the hope they offer—and “hope” is often what they explicitly promise—is that electing them will allow the nation to shed its messy ideological and partisan conflicts, progressing unencumbered into a new, brighter era of reason, civility, and mutual understanding. (One of the reasons why the Kennedy style doesn’t have the same appeal within the Republican Party is that in the Republican version of utopia, political enemies are simply defeated, not converted.)
***
(my comments now)
I’m not advocating for or against him with this post, but like others here, I was puzzled why Mayor Pete was getting so much support or attention… Without much in the way of substance in his policy proposals to date.
Seemed relevant to the thread, so just some food for thought, I suppose.
JPL
@Lapassionara: I’ve crossed over in GA before for that reason. It’s not worth it though because you get on the republican phone call list. Both trump and pence left me messages.
Immanentize
@satby:
Morning there! Did you get your tree planted?
Baud
@Immanentize:
I guess that’s the worry with impeachment, that it’ll reactivate those voters. I don’t know.
Immanentize
@JPL: Did Pence ask you to join him in prayer for the death of his enemies?
CindyH
Another voter support group is spreadthevote.org. I went to a meeting this past week and they are doing great work to help people get their voter IDs in states where that is or will be an issue. NC in my case.
Cheryl Rofer
What is electability? Petri’s main point is that fretting about it can be a cover for misogyny and racism, but figuring out what other people want is always dicey, and I would argue it’s more than dicey in this election.
Polls give some indication, but polls weren’t so helpful in 2016, partly because people don’t like to make their misogyny and racism so explicit. Maybe they will this time around.
And, as some have pointed out above, there are other things in electability, but I’ll be darned if I can figure them all out.
Do people want to continue as a democracy or are they more comfortable with autocracy? Do they think that Democrats should impeach or not? Do they think that MOAR WAR is a good thing? Those are all variables that are more important in this election than they’ve been before.
And if we decide something on electability now, will the circumstances still be the same in November 2020, or will King Orange upset another applecart that we haven’t even thought of?
trnc
@Immanentize:
I hope you’re right, but I do wonder what will fill the vacuum. I find it hard to believe any organization could be worse than the NRA, but I also found it hard to believe that any president could be worse than W.
Baud
@Mousebumples:
They are right and we are wrong.
If you want to convert bad people, you need to defeat them first.
OzarkHillbilly
@trnc:
Take your pick.
From what I have read, the Second Amendment Foundation is far worse.
debbie
@OzarkHillbilly:
Am I supposed to know who this guy is?
debbie
@OzarkHillbilly:
Knowing his history, I’m betting Ollie’s pissed those expense accounts weren’t his.
Immanentize
@debbie: He is an ABC political reporter/producer.
trnc
@Immanentize:
Incumbents have a record that can be highlighted (Bush) or twisted (Obama). Romney’s vulture capitalism was still unappealing so close to the recession, but wingnuts successfully misrepresented the ACA before most of the policies kicked in, so that dragged Obama down.
Amen. I managed to get in a comment to one of my DT voter coworkers about 6 casino bankruptcies = money laundering AND expand on it with no pushback whatsoever. Seemed like a pretty good day.
ETA: Re Obama 2nd run, I know a couple of people that turned from him after that one lousy debate performance (2nd debate?). Does anyone here know what his problem was that night?
OzarkHillbilly
@debbie: I don’t know who he is either but Baud does. ;-)
debbie
@Baud:
That’s exactly what will happen, whereas investigations would expose the rottenness and hopefully discourage moderate support.
debbie
@Immanentize:
Thanks. My sleepy eyes didn’t pick up that cyan text in his bio.
debbie
@OzarkHillbilly:
Baud Knows All.
Baud
@OzarkHillbilly:
Fucking Jeff. Don’t get me started on him.
trnc
@trnc:
The 2nd debate had the awesome “Please Proceed, Governor” line, so maybe it was the first debate that Obama looked like he had just come out of a coma.
Immanentize
@trnc: It was the first debate. CW was that he didn’t have his head in the game, thought he had it in the bag, didn’t even need to prepare, came to the stadium without his gear, etc.
In reality, it looked to me like Obama was utterly unprepared and surprised by Romney’s constant lying. It really was a preview of our new world.
DropDminus
@Immanentize: You are climbing up on my favorite hobby horse. How best to discourage anomalous Trump voter? They aren’t gettable votes. They vote from grievance but not from active pursuit of nationalist or explicitly racist goals. So any attention they receive from national Democrats should probably focus on Donnie the loser who failed to save them. There’s an interesting flip side to that voter here in PA that might be central to the electoral calculus. I ran into an old coworker the other day, white male in the oil and gas industry living in the redder part of the state . Apropos of nothing, he started talking politics (apparently he remembered my liberal tilt) and bemoaned the democratic candidates generally on the grounds that he was worried that none of them could beat Trump. He was resigned that maybe Biden was our only hope. After I left, I started thinking about that conversation. To me, it’s figuring out how to activate these guys, who have reasonably liberal views, but who have internalized their isms (especially sexism) to the point that they don’t even perceive the way they shape their worldview, that will be just as important here if there’s a chance that 2020 is as tight as 2016. It’s interesting to me because I think that someone like Kamala Harris or SPW will have to carefully tailor her message here to reach these guys and that messaging will likely not be as engaging to people like me who want truth and reconciliation committees and or Nuremberg tribunals.
debbie
Maybe we can get this Jeff guy to ask Trump to name one good anti-Semite. We already know about his predilection for white supremacists (King et al.).
Baud
@DropDminus:
The constant problem we have is that figuring out how to activate voter X without alienating voter Y.
No one really knows how to do this, but everyone has a strong opinion on how it should be done.
Cacti
@JR:
In 2016, our losing candidate did campaign on behalf of the Republican winner.
trnc
@Immanentize:
Thanks. This was one of my few grievances with PBO, and I assume it’s a common sentiment. During the ACA hearings, I was fully on board at first with him trying to work with Repubs, but at some point, it became clear that they were not working in good faith. I wondered why the hell he kept working with him after that. 3 years later, it really seemed inexcusable.
trnc
@Baud:
IMHO, quit worrying about voter Y. Don’t openly piss on them – IE, don’t refer to them as the racists and miscreants they are. DO sell our policies by explicitly pointing out that our policies will help EVERYONE, INCLUDING VOTER Y, and DO piss on the policies that attract voter Y to the racist party, but only by directly tying them to candidate Y. Pound the fact that it is unacceptable for candidate Y to support policies explicitly intended to hurt any group of voters.
satby
@Immanentize: no, I ended up with an emergency bridal shower order for 50 favors, which I totally rocked btw. But that tied me up all day.
Took the tree out of the water and put it back into its shipping bag with wet mulch. We’re having a freeze tonight, so it’s now going in Monday.
Baud
@trnc:
Voter Y isn’t necessarily the deplorables. It could be a strong Dem base voter who is pissed that Biden or Bernie or anyone else is spending time trying to reach out to the deplorables.
Baud
@trnc:
I’m not common then. Of anything, I’m sick and tired of the alternate history people have created and perpetuated where Obama would have certainly been more successful if he had acted differently.
rikyrah
New York Magazine (@NYMag) Tweeted:
The bodies of lonely people are markedly different from the bodies of non-lonely people https://t.co/gixt6fKl83 https://twitter.com/NYMag/status/1122093232614191104?s=17
trnc
@Baud: @Baud:
I didn’t say that or imply it, and I don’t subscribe to the green lantern theory. If, by “successful” you mean attract republicans or get them to work in good faith, I don’t believe that was possible. I meant that he should have treated professional republicans (again, leave the voters out of it) like the assholes they were.
gene108
@trnc:
Worse organizations already exist. A large number of gun nuts think the NRA are liberal squishes on gun rights. Some don’t forgive them for not stopping the 1934 and 1968 gun control laws.
Couple of groups that come to mind are Gun Owners of America and Second Amendment Foundation. Again, these are groups that were founded because the NRA did not do enough for gun nuts.
I am also convinced the GOA runs cover for white supremacists to stockpile home arsenals, which can arm small armies.
Adam L. Silverman would know more on other prominent groups.
germy
Bernie has signed the Unity Pledge.
The idea is to avoid circular firing squads. These are not normal times. Whoever gets the nomination will hopefully be lifted up by the rest of them.
Hopefully.
rikyrah
AJ+ (@ajplus) Tweeted:
UVA’s basketball team declined an invite to the White House, claiming scheduling issues.
15,000+ people signed a petition asking the national college champions to reject it over President Trump’s “reprehensible” comments after the 2017 Charlottesville white supremacist rally. https://t.co/6TNsBfWfdd https://twitter.com/ajplus/status/1121906904744075264?s=17
germy
@trnc:
Here’s a theory I’ve always had (without any proof or citations, I admit):
He was overly influenced by Doris Kearns Goodwin’s Team Of Rivals book. He really thought people like McConnell could be won over.
rikyrah
@germy:
Don’t believe him??
gene108
@trnc:
Obama’s re-election was bogged down by a still sluggish recovery.? Unemployment was around 6% to 7%, IIRC.
My mom, a regular Democratic voter, wasn’t planning on voting, because she wondered why Obama was focusing so much healthcare and not jobs, when so many people were not employed.
I believe Obama was re-elected with the highest or second highest unemployment rate for an incumbent (Reagan in 1984 may have had a higher rate, too lazy to look up).
When my mom heard Romney talk, she was so put off by him she decided to vote after all.
Cacti
@germy:
Did anyone but Bernie actually need to sign a unity pledge?
Baud
@trnc: To what end, though? For our entertainment?
He treats Republicans like assholes, and perhaps he loses all the blue dogs, and his legislative accomplishments look more like Trump’s.
Baud
@rikyrah:
This. But at least we can throw it in people’s faces when they ratfuck our nominee.
Betty Cracker
@DropDminus: Agree that pointing out Trump’s failure to do jackshit for the so-called “forgotten men and women” is the only oblique appeal the deplorables deserve from our eventual nominee. The fact is, most of them actually voted for Trump because he is open about his racism, misogyny and xenophobia in a way they found thrilling. Those voters are a lost cause, IMO.
The so-called “burn the house down” voters, otherwise known as Obama to Trump voters, may not be as lost a cause as the deplorables, and pointing out the fact that Trump promised things like better, cheaper healthcare and tax reform that would benefit them, then failed spectacularly to deliver may be effective with these folks. But I suspect they zigzag from party to party without a whole lot of thought or logic going into it.
rikyrah
Adam Serwer? (@AdamSerwer) Tweeted:
Yes, Lee only fought for VA. His refusal to manumit his own slaves until forced to, his enslavement of free black people during the war, his maltreatment of black soldiers, and his opposition to black suffrage after the war are all just a coincidence.
https://t.co/kY0oO3cFss https://twitter.com/AdamSerwer/status/1121871353949425665?s=17
Baud
@gene108:
It’s important to remember that the recovery didn’t even start until 6 months into his term with the passage of the stimulus. People say it would have helped if the stimulus were bigger, but the increase in job growth from then to the election wouldn’t have been that much higher because it takes time for the economy and job growth to turn around.
gene108
@germy:
Is Obama’s reading comprehension skills that bad? The rivals in the book were the top contenders for the 1860 Republican Presidential nominations, who Lincoln beat out. Nowhere does it say Lincoln worked with Democrats.
Anyway, I think Obama is very idealistic about what America is. This optimism is a great part of his appeal, but hurt him in dealing w/ McConnell and later Boehner
Baud
@gene108:
Maybe he thought voters would stand up to the GOP rather than endorse them.
Probably Hillary’s biggest mistake also.
Idealism kills.
Immanentize
@Baud: my favorite political cartoon of the time (which I quickly searched but couldn’t find) was two panels. In the first one, Obama is facing Boehner, hand outstretched to shake and says, “I’ll meet you half way.”. In the second panel, Obama is still in the same position and posture, but Boehner had taken a huge step backwards (leaving “half way where Boehner previously stood).
To me, Obama did everything he could in such an environment.
germy
gene108
@Baud:
A bigger stimulus would have helped. Doing more to prevent foreclosures would have helped.
But what bogged down the recovery was Republicans winning so many state races in 2010 and immediately slashing taxes for the rich, laying off a million or sow state employees, implementing austerity measures in those states, and refusing federal money for infrastructure projects that would have created jobs, because it wasn’t just Republicans in Congress that wanted to make Obama a one term President. Many Republican governors did their damndest to help.
During 2011 and 2012, the private sector had steady job growth, but that was offset by the massive job losses of public enployeees at the state level.
Immanentize
@Baud: Is anyone else worried that Commerce might be cooking the growth reports a bit? Considering up and down hiring, and contraction in big industries, 3.2% first quarter just seems a bit high?
#IANAEconomist
Kay
Oh, good. I’m sad she’s not governor though. She’s a voting rights advocate and expert and while federal law is obviously hugely important re: civil rights in voting, that backstop is more essential than even I would have imagined 10 years ago, a governor can enact immediate protections, often thru just administrative or executive action. I look at it as three prongs- federal, state and then courts. Federal is slowest, states are faster and courts (lawsuits) are an emergency. Long term, medium term and last hope. I would have liked her issuing orders. Speedy :)
Betty Cracker
@rikyrah: Sanders still claims he put 100% effort into electing Clinton after he lost the 2016 primary. We all know that’s bullshit. I was really proud of Clinton for calling Sanders out on that point. She noted that after losing an acrimonious primary in 2008, she put her disappointment and bitterness aside and worked her ass off to elect Obama, which is true, and she said she didn’t receive the same consideration from Sanders, also true.
It’s too late now, but this is why the Democratic Party needs to rethink allowing non-Democrats to run in its primary. I understand why Perez made the decisions he made — Sanders has a destructive cult following, and the number of non-affiliated voters is rising. Perez is trying not to alienate anyone. But now we see the importance of party loyalty: a personal stake in outcomes separate from one’s own campaign.
Baud
@Immanentize:
No one is perfect is hindsight. What I hate is when legitimate critiques become fodder for elaborate alternate realities where, of course, things would have worked out better if he had just done this thing!
It’s even worse when people take the next step and argue that everyone at the time knew this thing would have been successful and deliberately chose not to pursue it because they are corrupt or establishment or something.
Immanentize
@Baud: I am so with you.
Baud
@gene108: I agree. But we’re talking about whether there was a realistic way Obama could have prevented the 2010 election results in the first place.
Immanentize
@gene108:
I just wrote a long comment on this that got eaten. Upshot. So true. The feds did little and the states did less.
Liz Warren has this covered!
gene108
@Baud:
From what I remember reading at the time is that Obama and his advisers were shocked at how little pushback Republicans got for their obstruction.
Obama won by one of the largest margins, since Reagan in the 80’s.
Democrats increased their representation in the House and Senate. Obama had a 70% approval rating.
Yet there was no backlash against Republican Senators for obstruction. The ones who got a backlash were those, on the heels of an epic electoral loss, started talking about not being so conservative and finding ways to compromise
germy
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
In fairness, after the convention, I don’t recall Sanders himself making waves, although his surrogates and cult members did.
The biggest issue I remember after the convention is that Trump had taken up the rigged primary mantle and Sanders stood silent rather than admit it was all a fabrication.
MomSense
@trnc:
Obama talked about working with Republicans because that was (still is) the message that a lot of voters want to hear. It also created the conditions for Obama to say that he tried everything, even bucking his own party, and the Republicans still wouldn’t cooperate.
I was part of the OFA effort for the ACA and we never thought the Republicans would work with us but we did need Snowe’s input to make the Senate Finance Committee version of the ACA as close to the other versions as possible. She did that and voted for the bill in her committee. She was actually trying to keep a version of the public option alive over the objection of Baucus.
BTW the Senate Finance version is the one that became law.
People also forget that we wouldn’t have passed the stimulus without Snowe, Collins, and Specter.
Baud
@Immanentize:
Always possible, but I doubt it. I think it would leak if they did that.
Kay
@trnc:
One of the good things about Biden running (and perhaps one of the reasons he is running- I don’t know but I suspect) is he can explain this- he can defend the Obama Administration. I was reading one of his aides on Twitter and he addressed exactly this- vote counting for do or die things (stimulus and ACA) – the reality and thinking behind it- one of Biden’s roles was to bridge between executive branch and congress. Be the shuttling diplomat.
One thing Biden does is, he talks. We’ll hear more defenses of the Obama Administration, from someone who was in it. It may make more sense with that information. I do wonder if that’s part of the reason he’s in- to defend their record. Bill Clinton did this to great success, post-presidency- in many ways I think Clinton succeeded in giving himself a better record than he actually deserved after the fact. Obama has not done it, which is consistent with his personality but might make Biden feel he has to do it.
plato
@germy: Great responses to that sweet tweet.
germy
@Kay: I watched Biden on THE VIEW, and I found it interesting that the first question out of Meghan McCain’s mouth was “How are your policies different from Obama’s?”
I’m guessing her husband fed her that question, trying to drive a wedge between them early. These are shrewd devils. Maybe not Meghan, but the people who feed her the questions.
brantl
It’s time the democratic party starts talking about all peoples as people of PROMISE. Yes, they have various colors, yes they have different economic, ethnic. religious and cultural backgrounds, but they are all people of promise, each and every one, each and every kind. We stopped talking about the poor (the ONLY thing Edwards did right), and we started talking about the middle class exclusively, which is BULLSHIT. Until we show ourselves, again, as the party of all of the people, we are going to continue to walk on the edge of the popular vote, when we should be kicking those pukes’ asses by a 30% margin.
gene108
@Baud:
Not with the way Fox News put its thumb on the scale for the TEA Party.
Those 4/15/2009 demonstrations were small. But Fox News decided to give them wall-to-wall 24/7 coverage. They had people reporting live from various events.
After Fox kept pushing this after 4/15/09, the MSM decided, 2-3 days after the demonstrations, this must be big news and they were getting scooped by Fox News, so they also started with excessive coverage of these people and events.
After that publicity a lot of angry racist white people found an outlet, and the genie wasn’t going back in the bottle.
Also, didn’t help Democrats that instead of doing a victory lap about having passed healthcare reform, and other laws, they had a semi-finished healthcare bill struggling to get out of Max Baucus’s hands.
Pelosi and the House passed a bill that spring. Dodd had a bill ready to go out of his committee. But the person who should’ve been shepherding this through the Seanate,,Ted Kennedy, was indisposed with brain cancer. Hillary probably should have been Kennedy’s fallback for the Senate, but she was Sec of State. So it fell to Max Baucus, who dithered.
Kay
@germy:
Oh, I don’t think that will work at all. If she’s exploiting a division she ain’t gonna find one in Joe Biden. If Biden were running as the VP after Obama everyone would assume he would defend and promote their record. I assume he will do that. Perhaps Biden doesn’t want the Left’s or the Right’s version of Obama’s presidency to become the accepted record, which I completely get. I would feel the same way, I think. He was there.
gene108
@gene108:
ETA: Victory Lao during 2009 summer recess. Instead had the “summer of rage”.
tobie
@Immanentize: 51 Democratic Senators actually voted for a mortgage cramdown bill in 2009 but that wasn’t enough to overcome the filibuster. The article doesn’t give the breakdown of the vote but I’m sure the Blanche Lincoln’s, Nelson’s of Nebraska, and Liebersmuck’s of CT voted against it. Schumer wanted the cramdown bill passed.
Sab
@germy: Urk. The only reason marijuana could possibly be considered a gateway drug is that you get contacts with people who sell the dangerouse stuff.
I have a number of people in my family with illegal substance abuse problems (heroin, cocaine, meth.) Every single last one of them smokes cigarettes. That’s the real gateway drug ( let’s try this known to be an addictive carcinogen because my friends say it’s enjoyable.) Even the ones who have been clean for years still smoke cigarettes.
Biden seems like a sweet man and I respect that the Obamas seem to love him, but he is such a dinosaur.
johnnybuck
@gene108: Edwin Stanton, Gideon Welles, Montgomery Blair were all Democrats
germy
@Sab: It’s a gateway drug for police to violate citizens’ rights. They get to sniff and snoop around cars, frisk pockets and lock up POC. Oddly enough, the white smokers are mostly left alone.
Kay
@germy:
This sounds very “mom” but I do worry about the Left’s message with young people. It is so fucking unrelentingly GRIM. My youngest is a newly minted Lefty and he’s young so he’s wide open to influence and everything he reads is “you’re all gonna DIE”. One of the things I like about AOC is she has some JOY. I just could not operate on either the far Right or the Left at this point. It’s too negative. I find myself telling him things like “yes, climate change is huge and the robots are taking over but how about you and I just take this one day at a time and, you know, make an effort to enjoy HIGH SCHOOL, given that we’re all dying anyway, what the hell, go to the prom just to kill some time before the catastrophe”.
Dorothy A. Winsor
@germy: Admiration and nostalgia for the Obama administration is stronger because of the contrast to Trump. Biden doesn’t have to deny the connection.
Betty Cracker
@Baud: I’m thinking of his post-convention campaigning, which seemed more like rallies for himself than an effort to turn out votes for Clinton, and his failure to take adequate measures to rein in his cult — before, during and after the convention. The High Sparrow and his acolytes got their revenge — they helped prevent Clinton from becoming president. If there’s any justice, the memory of that will doom Sanders’ chances of winning the nomination this time around.
germy
@Dorothy A. Winsor: Biden admitted to Meghan McCain that he and Obama have differences when it comes to some policies, but that their core philosophy is the same. He spoke highly of Obama throughout the interview.
Betty Cracker
@germy: Yep. I think reasonable people can disagree on full legalization, but if Biden or any other primary candidate is against decriminalization, that’s a deal-breaker for me. (In the primary, of course.)
Sab
@MomSense: I think Obama talked and still talks about working across the aisle because he sincerely and deeply believes that’s how government should work, and how government does work when it’s healthy. If we close the door on trying to work with the other side, how do we fix this.
My mother was a moderate Republican who loved Obama and never regretted voting for him. One of the things she liked is that he never quit trying to reach out to people like her. She knew it was her party that was the problem, and she eventually stopped voting for them.
MomSense
@gene108:
Actually the Senate HELP committee’s bill was the first one voted out of committee. Then the house bills and the one that we all waited on was Senate Finance.
Dorothy A. Winsor
@Betty Cracker: His belief just flies in the face of most people’s experience.
Barbara
@germy: In this, Biden gets the benefit of the doubt. He was a loyal lieutenant for a long time. You know that any disagreement here is good faith, and not a way to distance himself from Obama.
The presence of Meghan McCain as an influential person is an enduring affront. I will not watch her, ever.
debbie
@rikyrah:
His idea of unity is people uniting with him, not him uniting with the Dems.
MomSense
@Sab:
I want to be able to work across the aisle but I’m not counting on it especially since the aisle is now the width of the Grand Canyon. All I am trying to say is that Obama talked about the ideal but he never ever counted on it or expected it. Just like his Presidential campaigns micro targeted voters down to the precinct, we microtargeted every vote in the House and Senate. Maine volunteers just happened to be at the epicenter of the effort because we had two of the only potentially swayable Republican votes.
ETA It matters that we got our senators to vote for the stimulus. Without the stimulus our Great Recession would have been a depression.
Kay
@germy:
I love how the nepotism is now so entrenched that McCain asks “how are your policies different than Obama’s?”
Who beat my dad.
And everyone has to act as if it’s real.
Kushner says “Russia? Nah. Had NO effect” On the presidential election of my father in law that I took credit for as the genius strategist.
debbie
@Immanentize:
The blame has to fall on the banks. The bailouts were supposed to stop foreclosures and business failures; instead, they held onto the funds to fatten themselves. This should have been foreseen, but I don’t think it really could have been stopped.
chopper
@OzarkHillbilly:
i will say, if “trump jacked up taxes on war widows” isn’t a successful talking point in this election then the democratic party just needs to fold it up and go home.
oldgold
This week, I have been slowly reading the Mueller Report and a lot of commentary. I highly recommend Ben Wittes’ diary/review at Lawfare.
I was surprised to find this sentence in the Report:
“The F.B.I. believes that this operation enabled the G.R.U. to gain access to the network of at least one Florida county government.”
But, the damn county is not named.
I seldom agree with Governor DeSantis, but I do agree with this statement from him: “They won’t tell us which county it was. Are you kidding me?”
The Report says, “at least one.” Could there have been more? Why is the Governor of the damn state being kept in the dark on this? What the Hell is going on?
It is becoming more and more obvious that it was a terrible mistake to investigate this as a criminal matter. We did not need a special prosecutor. We needed a special commission.
Kay
@oldgold:
The focus on secrecy in national security is so overwhelming they can’t perform practical, ordinary job functions, like telling us which county.
I think they have to conduct some kind of top to bottom review and ask themselves if they have become about keeping secrets, or about solving problems. I’m sick of it. They can’t even tell us why they can’t tell us- it’s a secret.
Kay
@oldgold:
Especially in the Trump Administration. If they aren’t going to do anything maybe they could give someone else some information so they could do something? It’s been three years. We can’t yet know which county?
J R in WV
@Aussie Sheila:
Far be it from me to remark on condescending when someone else can do it so much better than I…
We here in North America have to worry about our fascist with nuclear weapons. How to keep him from playing with them, how to replace him without blood shed, how to get his fascist toughs back into their holes.
You down under don’t have that unique worry about your pet fascists, who don’t have nukes to play with. Be glad.
Chyron HR
@chopper:
I see you’re firmly in the “62 million Republicans voted for a syphilitic nazi rapist? Clearly there’s something wrong with Democrats!” camp.
oldgold
@Kay:
Let the sunshine, let the sunshine in, the sunshine in
Let the sunshine, let the sunshine in, the sunshine in
Let the…
Of course, grand jury proceedings do just the opposite and take too much damn TIME.
JPL
@oldgold: True. They are hiding it because they don’t want to concern the public. There’s a good chance that Russia did change votes, and there’s a good chance they will again.
Kay
@oldgold:
Reading the Mueller report I think part of his “process” thinking was general agreement that one can’t indict the President. The idea there is one would be accusing someone who couldn’t defend in the regular way so the indictment would just be hanging out there, and that’s good! That’s fair. A respect for the rights of the defendant. It is a hard pill to swallow though, that this is applied to Trump and the Trump Administration who REGULARLY made and make outrageous claims about illegality about other people. While Mueller was carefully balancing Trump’s civil rights Trump was pressuring the attorney general to indict a political rival.
The “lock her up” gang got treated MUCH better than they do or would treat anyone else.
Betty Cracker
@Kay: I sometimes wonder if the federal intelligence and law enforcement communities (the permanent professionals, not the Trump toadies, to the extent that those are separate camps) haven’t become so focused on protecting sources and methods that they’ve lost sight of the purpose of developing those sources and methods in the first place: to protect the country.
Kay
@Betty Cracker:
Exactly. I wonder if it’s like any other workplace. They go in a direction until someone intervenes and sends them off the other way. The culture of secrecy becomes so much a part of the place that people are really risk averse – the default “safe” position for an employee is “don’t release”. That’s guaranteed not to get you in trouble. We saw how nuts it is and what a mess it is with Clinton’s (alleged) national security breaches. No one could even give a definitive answer on the state of the classifications. They were NOT classified and then they morphed and became retroactively classified…. ? There were whole dumb debates on what “c” means. No wonder their employees are risk averse. One error on the side of transparency can land you in prison.
oldgold
If you accept you cannot indict a sitting POTUS [something I do not agree with], then why in the hell proceed with a grand jury? All you do is burn time, face standards of proof that are damn steep, shroud everything in secrecy and in the end cannot indict the Big Fish.
oldgold
@Betty Cracker:
Exactly so!
FlipYrWhig
@Kay: I sort of want Democrats to run on promising to prosecute Trump and his cronies after kicking them out of office. LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP!
catclub
@Kay:
The turn of phrase I recently saw: Some people are protected by the law but not bound by it, others are bound by the law but not protected by it.
Omnes Omnibus
@oldgold: He won’t be president forever and I would argue that, if he cannot be indicted while he is in office, the statute of limitations on any of his alleged crimes must necessarily be tolled for the same period.
FlipYrWhig
@oldgold: I don’t agree with it at all either. It seems like the issue that could potentially arise is if a president were indicted for, say, war crimes while waging a war. There needs to be some differentiation between indictments for official duties and indictments for illegal acts of self-interest. Plus, there’s a VP! Our system already has a built in understudy for when the president is occupied!
oldgold
Here we go. From the NYT’s story on this:
[emphasis supplied]
This is Happy Horsesh!t
Baud
We have a new troll! Primary season is truly upon us.
FlipYrWhig
@Litany: Pelosi morphing into a “moderate” is one of the dumber developments in recent punditry.
MomSense
@Litany:
Fuck off. Bernie isn’t a Democrat. The states run the primaries and caucuses. The DNC has held the same number of debates for many cycles now. Bernie is a god damned problem because he criticizes Democrats more than Republicans. For an establishment member of Congress, going on 30 years in office, he has one hell of a pathetic record of legislative accomplishments – as in almost none.
Go try this nonsense with his low information supporters.
Brachiator
Coming late to the thread. Skimmed many comments and will go back and go through all of them.
The notion of “electability” was rendered pretty goddam moot by Obama. He didn’t just cross the political Rubicon, he surfed that muthafucka. Then Hillary did a perfect dive into it and brought 65 million voters with her.
The Democrats are the big tent diversity party. Period. And voters know it and have responded. Despite any false claims by pundits, all of the past calculations about gender, religion, sexuality are null and void.
This means that the Democrats have an advantage over the Republicans and can reach into a deeper bench of potential candidates, and if they are smart, can focus on quality.
I mentioned before that when Obama began his run for the nomination, I heard a wise, seasoned pundit insist that the natural order of political things meant that first we would have a woman president, then a Jewish man, and then after a few decades, finally a black president. Gay president was not even on the radar.
Reality has demolished that feeble fantasy. With Obama’s election, we have created a new political reality. Clinton’s popular vote smash confirms it.
And this takes the racial backlash against Obama.
This means that it is foolish for the Democrats to wring hands over any potential candidate because of electability based on identity bullshit. It’s pointless.
This also means that any notion that a particular candidate now “deserves” a turn because of his or her race, gender, sexuality or other characteristic is also bullshit.
The party just needs to get down to the business of getting a good contender.
And this is not happy slappy utopian unicorn wrangling. We see what Trump represents. Open racism and bigotry. You can’t challenge that with the naive fantasy that a nice white man might be a safe choice. That’s like saying that the Democrats need to choose a fool because Trump is stupid and that’s what people want.
The Democratic Party has the high ground. There is no reason to surrender it to bullshit conventional wisdom about “electability.”
Baud
@MomSense:
I won’t click because NYT, but if you read the excerpt carefully, it doesn’t say the meetings were about Bernie. It says that Bernie and the larger issue of party unity “hovered over” the meeting.
Smells like propaganda to me.
JPL
@Baud: I have Bernie supporters visiting next week.
MomSense
@Baud:
They’re desperate. Their favorite socialist millyanaire is not doing well.
H.E.Wolf
@Betty Cracker:
Quoted for truth. That’s where I’ve been focusing my volunteer efforts… which resulted in a volunteer gig at a Stacey Abrams event the other day.
Hearing her speak was great; sitting in a room which was ~ 50% African-American women of influence who were listening to her speak was awesome.
I intend to support and follow the lead of African-American women in the months ahead. [ETA to add: And I encourage others to join me.]
Baud
@JPL:
Drape your walls with photos of Hillary. They’ll get a hotel.
chopper
@Chyron HR:
no, i’m in the “trump raising taxes on war widows is an easy pitch” camp. you think we shouldn’t hammer the guy on that?
schrodingers_cat
@Baud: Great idea. I have one of those coming to visit later this summer. He is particularly dense about politics. Although he did vote for HRC, so still among the more enlightened BS bros.
Repatriated
@germy:
Biden’s quoted statement is from 2010. Just saying.
Miss Bianca
@H.E.Wolf: I am jealous that you got to meet Abrams in that context! She is hella impressive, and I wish to God she were Georgia’s governor right now – but so hoping her Senate campaign takes off! She would be a magnificent addition to the Senate.
Sebastian
@OzarkHillbilly:
Stupid Theresa Jones, she should have gotten herself a private jet so she could take advantage of all the great tax deductions in the new law!
Do we have to explain everything to the rubes?!
MomSense
Hey on an artistic note, there is a new Robert Johnson documentary on Netflix. I watched it last night/this morning during my insomnia session. So interesting and good.
Sure Lurkalot
@Kay:
I agree. A 20 something man approached me to sign the national public vote petition which I did, and he then went on to share that the state of the world made him question the wisdom of having children or planning for the future. I grew up in the tumultuous 60’s and didn’t feel this way. I can see how I might be contributing to this gloom and its eventual descent to apathy. Instead of imparting a sense of agency without the soul crushing reality of urgency.
schrodingers_cat
I was watching Made in Heaven yesterday, nice break from the cray cray. Its an Amazon Prime original (all female directors and writers) about two wedding planners and the cray cray world of Indian weddings. Every episode features a different wedding, and is a social commentary about the world it is set in, upper crust Delhi. Great material, plus the clothes are gorgeous.
Cheryl Rofer
There was a table for voter registration at the Farmers’ Market this morning.
germy
@Repatriated: Has he evolved on the subject? According to the linked article, there’s no indication he has. I hope he’s evolved. Wasn’t his daughter Ashley caught with a small amount?
schrodingers_cat
@MomSense: You will like Made in Heaven. 50% of the dialog is in English, plus there are subtitles.
Repatriated
@oldgold:
This is an indictmennt-analogue, not an Intel Community response plan. “At least one” is all that’s necessary to demonstrate actual electoral interference for the sake of prosecution on the cover-up.
There should have been a parallel response and coordination with the states, and it seems there wasn’t.
MomSense
@schrodingers_cat:
Ooh awesome. I’ve got 40 people coming to my house tomorrow so today I’ve got to buckle down and clean and cook – but tomorrow night I’m going to relax and watch it.
debbie
@MomSense:
I hope your son got to see it.
O/T: Last night, I saw your comment about mobile NPR rage and chuckled almost all evening. I got caught doing just that yesterday. Damn open windows!
Matt McIrvin
@Kay: In the 1980s I was convinced I was going to be killed within the next ten years or so, probably in a global nuclear war, if not then I’d be drafted into some smaller war in Central America and die there. I had friends my age who’d decided that on balance the nuclear war would be a good thing and they were hoping for it.
Curiously, if you talk to other GenXers about this, about a third of them say “oh, completely, me too” and the other two thirds don’t even know what you’re talking about–they didn’t feel this way at all AND never heard of anyone else feeling this way. So it’s a bit mysterious.
Repatriated
@germy: Don’t know, but I’d be surprised if he hasn’t changed on the issue over the last decade
Just wanted to give context, because I’ve seen that statement presented lately with the misleading insinuation that it’s something he said recently.
Omnes Omnibus
@Matt McIrvin: That’s kind of funny. I didn’t feel any sort of existential dread through the ’80s, nor, I think did most of my peers in college. Anti-nuke protests were not a big thing on my college campus but anti-Apartheid ones were. Despite this, I have been told on this very blog that I was either wrong or politically unaware.
germy
@Repatriated:
Major Major Major Major
@germy: I’m sure he’ll be forced to clarify his stance soon enough.
Kay
@Sure Lurkalot:
He reads Lefties- not electeds but the gloomy, dour opiners on the Left (or, even worse, the sneering sarcastic ones) so I deliberately steered him toward AOC for exactly that reason- agency. Love her or hate her she’s all about action and she doesn’t whine.
schrodingers_cat
@Kay: The world has always been ending for the purity left and the nut job right, and total revolution is always the answer.
Kay
@schrodingers_cat:
The far Right is worse for young people. OMFG, someone’s always coming for their STUFF. Immigrants, black people, the hordes are always right on the brink of taking what is rightfully theirs. They’re too fucking young to have anything! Shouldn’t they be tripping along unencumbered and delightfully shallow? Donald Trump himself is almost wholly negative. But- this is one area where it’s “both sides”. It’s probably a failing in me but I have to protect myself from such sad sacks. It’s contagious.
Major Major Major Major
@Kay: @schrodingers_cat: Apocalyptic thinking is quite popular in America, regardless of ideology. Something to do with our specific religious roots.
Litany
@Baud: Sure, but other parts of the article are full of operatives going on the record about Sanders being a problem and other Democrats needing to work together to defang his campaign sooner rather than later.
I didn’t know we were in full Trump mode where reporting from the NYT is now propaganda.
@MomSense:
You’re aware of the things like the joint fundraising agreement the Clinton campaign had with the DNC, right? The DNC was deeply in debt in 2015, and Hillary’s campaign promised to hook them up with cash in return for a substantial stake in hiring decisions. Giving one campaign the authority to present a slate of choices for communications director of the DNC which must be chosen from while also giving them advance notice and opportunity to suggest edits to any communications regarding any primary candidate doesn’t sound very neutral to me. There’s also small detail of the money laundering involved with the HVF: the Clinton campaign took the unprecedented step of starting joint fundraising well before securing the nomination, and state party leaders were under instructions directly shuttle the money they received back to the DNC and Hillary’s campaign. Politico found that state parties ultimately kept about 1% of the money nominally raised for them by the HVF, with almost 90% leaving their coffers within 2 days and the majority of that put towards things that directly benefited the Clinton campaign like web advertising.
To your final point, I’d rather vote for someone who has very few legislative accomplishments because until recently their views were unpopular rather than someone whose legislative accomplishments include some truly terrible decisions. Anyone who voted for the Iraq War should have been shown the door years ago. This year my first choice is Warren to be honest, but I remain disgusted at how cynical and relentless the Democratic party is when it comes to hippy-bashing, even at the expense of secondary goals like winning elections.
Omnes Omnibus
@Litany: When was Sanders ever a Democrat? Why should a political party hand over its future to someone who can’t be arsed to join it?
Major Major Major Major
@Litany:
You mean the same one the sanders campaign was offered and, as I recall, accepted? ffs can we not relitigate 2016
FlipYrWhig
@Litany: So DID the Clinton campaign force the DNC to hire, fire, or not fire someone? This is some thin gruel for a conspiracy. Meanwhile Team Sanders stole delegates from an internal process, then high fived about how clever that was, then when Team Clinton did it back to them they whined and moaned over how unfair it was. They suck. Top to bottom, clowns and bomb throwers who SHOULDN’T have any influence over anything.
Baud
@Litany:
The NYT is garbage.
patrick II
@trnc:
The first debate against Romney was the one that caused Obama trouble. He hadn’t yet adjusted to lyin’ Mitt. What Mitt had told his conservative audiences on the campaign trail was not what he answered in the national debate, leaving Obama with rebuttals to different answers. Obama adjusted before the next debate.
Someone over at Washington Monthly started tracking Mitt’s lies, which numbered in the hundreds. Small potatoes to Trump’s thousands, but still impressive in its own right.
Major Major Major Major
@Baud: I wish people would stop saying this. Taken as a whole, the NYT is one of the best journalistic organizations in the world.
Another Scott
@Major Major Major Major: Their coverage of US politics, Iraq, etc., has done a lot of damage to this country. The rest of their reporting doesn’t outweigh that.
My $0.02.
Cheers,
Scott.
Baud
@Major Major Major Major:
Their domestic political desk in a cancer on the rest of the enterprise.
Major Major Major Major
@Another Scott:
Nonetheless, within the context of the journalistic organizations of the world, it is one of the best.
@Baud:
Cancer spreads. Their domestic political desk doesn’t affect the rest of their coverage, which is most of what they actually do.
Baud
@Major Major Major Major:
It affects the paper’s brand.
The rest of the coverage is mostly fine, but I’m not going to stop calling out the paper until they make some fundamental changes in how they report on domestic politics in general and Democrats in particular.
Major Major Major Major
@Baud: ? fine to call out their domestic political coverage! I’m objecting to the “the NYT is garbage” framing.
schrodingers_cat
@Baud: @Major Major Major Major: Their reviews of Hindi movies are terrible. They are condescendingly orientalist, with the reviewers having little knowledge of the industry or the subject matter they are passing a judgment on from Olympian heights.
In comparison, among western reviewers, Variety and Guardian do a far better job.
They are pretty garbagey except for their recipes and food section. That I like and I miss since I stopped giving them page clicks.
FWIW, their coverage of Indian politics is bad. As is their coverage of econ. RWNJ paper WSJ is better if you want know about economics and the stock market.
At this pt they are just cashing on their past reputation.
Another Scott
@Major Major Major Major: Take a look at the front pages of FTFNYT and the WashingtonPost on the web right now. (I used a Private Browsing window, so no cookie contamination influencing the results.) Which is more garbage like, given the circumstances of the USA in 2019?
The NYTimes has too much influence on news coverage for historical reasons (going back 80+ years), and they don’t deserve it. I think Baud is right. The Times needs to get its act together.
Cheers,
Scott.
schrodingers_cat
@Major Major Major Major: Is that your new employer? I have never seen you defend Vichy Times before.
johnnybuck
@Major Major Major Major:
Well, you know man, when you’re going on tour and you don’t have any new material, have to break out the oldies.
Pity they didn’t succeed
MomSense
@Litany:
You’re an idiot.
Major Major Major Major
@schrodingers_cat: I would never opine on my employer or their industry without disclosing a connection. I’m sorry to hear you think otherwise, or that this is the only reason somebody might defend the Times from being called across-the-board garbage.
BC in Illinois
@MomSense:
Wow! Thanks for the heads-up.
I just started it, and I’m taking a break from BJ now to finish it.
Fascinating.
See it.
Betty Cracker
@Major Major Major Major: FWIW, I agree that The Times employs some of the best journalists in the business and puts out far more good reporting and analysis than bad. But the Beltway coverage has been so calamitously consequential that I don’t blame people for dismissing the whole enterprise as garbage.
debbie
@Major Major Major Major:
Thank you. Seconded.
ETA: It wasn’t the NYT readers who put Trump in office.
J R in WV
@germy:
I’m pretty sure that not long after the Notre Dame fire in Paris I saw that the Louisiana churches had raised $900,000 already. Not enough, but a far better start than $90,000. So a tweet probably not accurate as to numbers.
I’m sure Ms Clinton would have done what it took to help those folks out, however much it took.
TerryC
@Immanentize: Yep, he was unprepared for Rmoney’s lying in the first debate. It was so clear.
J R in WV
@Litany:
I actually do love that image, because Sanders is:
Not a Democrat
A pawn of the Russian security apparatus
A pawn of the NRA and gun industry
Not A Democrat
Responsible at least in part for Trump’s election
Not working for people of color or to help raise up women
Not a Democrat.
Sanders is a piece of work, and anything anyone does to keep him out of higher office is good for our country. You on the other hand… not so much!
ETA: I see that others have already visited this troll and it’s issues. Good job, everyone!!
jl
Good for Abrams, I think her best next move. And IMHO, shows more sense that O’Rourke.
schrodingers_cat
@debbie: No it was not the readers but the NYT reporters like MAGA Haberman, Healy, Peter Baker, Amy Chozick. Butter Emailz was a refrain they started and was picked up by the rest of the media. Their anti-HRC coverage >> than their T coverage. They covered T like a lovable New Yawk rogue. So rakish, so charming.. and HRC like the devil herself.
debbie
@schrodingers_cat:
They definitely weren’t impartial; I just don’t think they convinced a single person to vote for Trump.