[For the record: I had this in draft *before* BettyC’s last post.]
.@MsTaraDowdell: The Democratic party is super-diverse. We're diverse racially. We're diverse religiously. We're diverse economically. We're diverse culturally. We're diverse ethnically… When you have that kind of diversity of course there are going to be skirmishes. #AMJoy pic.twitter.com/TnJ1iDcXJp
— AM Joy w/Joy Reid (@amjoyshow) July 20, 2019
Asked if Democrats need to be more careful about their language, Adam Schiff responds: "We're not inciting crowds to chant 'send them back'. This is coming from the president."
Via CBS pic.twitter.com/6T8Mwp3maN
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) July 21, 2019
In the New Yorker, Isaac Chotiner — who is usually smarter than this — get his lunch handed to him: “Barney Frank Defends Nancy Pelosi from Her Critics“:
… To discuss the state of the Democratic Party, and Pelosi’s leadership, I spoke by phone on Monday with Barney Frank, the former congressman, who represented his district in Massachusetts for more than three decades in the House before retiring, in 2013. He is best known for his outspokenness and his role in crafting the eponymous Dodd-Frank Act, which sought to regulate the financial industry after the crash last decade. During our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity, we discussed why he thinks the criticism of Pelosi is unfair, whether there is a divide in the Democratic Party, and his belief that this dispute is not really a generational one.
What have you made of the internal split between Pelosi and some of her members?
I’m disappointed by it. I think the first thing to say is that it is not nearly as big a split as people think. They are a fraction, a splinter. The overwhelming majority of the Democrats agree with [Pelosi]. Frankly, I think there is a conspiracy among Ocasio-Cortez, the media, and the Republican Party to make her look much more influential than she is. Every time I debate a Republican, they want to talk about them. And I think, in fact, that there is not such a big splinter. There have always been, on the Democratic side—Howard Dean, etc.—people who are very passionate and are frustrated because reality isn’t as pliable as they wish. They are people who I think make the fundamental mistake—I often agree with them on substance—but they make the fundamental mistake of thinking the general public is much more in agreement with them than it is, and forget about or just reject the notion of trying to figure out how to get things done.
I agree with you that Ocasio-Cortez represents a minority of the Party, even though I think she is probably fairly similar on politics to [Bernie] Sanders and [Elizabeth] Warren, who I think combined make up a somewhat—
No, here’s the fundamental difference. I said I agree with a lot of them on substance. The issue is not substance. I have worked very closely with Elizabeth Warren. The fundamental difference is that these people—certainly Ocasio-Cortez—they appear to think that the majority is ready to adopt what they want, and it’s a strategic and tactical difference.
Elizabeth Warren would never have had a sit-in protesting Nancy Pelosi. It’s a matter of how you go about things. It is their view that the only reason that their platform isn’t being adopted is the political timidity, maybe the malign influence of money. The notion that there is significant political opposition among many people, including maybe a majority on some issues, they disregard that and denounce other Democrats, saying they don’t have the courage. It’s not the courage. We don’t have the votes sometimes. Sanders did that a little bit more. Elizabeth never does that…
I understand not wanting to do impeachment, even if you think the President deserves to be impeached. I understand—
By the way, two-thirds of the House Democrats agree with [Pelosi].
Yes. Let me just finish. I think she has seemed bored and uninterested in public about the idea of investigating Trump, and given off a vibe that she is just not even, forget impeachment, just—
Nonsense. Nonsense. It’s nonsense on stilts, as Jeremy Bentham said. The fact is that you have the Democratic House committees working very hard at it. She said he ought to go to prison. She is working very hard on the substance and has done a great job of getting things through, but she has also [been] working closely with the committees, Elijah Cummings and others. Part of the problem is what the TV chooses to run. They like controversy. So she is more often quoted when she is disagreeing on impeachment than when she is making her own critiques.
If you monitor her statements closely, I find her—she has been very critical of Trump and she has got the Democrats doing oversight…
Let me just ask you a broader—
What do you think she should have done? I know it’s nice to always just be critical of what other people do, but what do you think she should have done?
I am not sure on the substance, but—
Of course not. Because it is hard and it gets criticized. Whatever.
I was talking about the way she has been acting publicly, but I see your point. But let me—
She said he should go to prison. She has made a lot of other very negative statements. You are just cherry-picking to make a point…
… You greatly exaggerate Ocasio-Cortez’s—there’s four of them. There aren’t very many, including many of the younger people. By the way, the Democrats that Pelosi is most concerned about are younger ones. She is working very hard with the thirty- and forty-year-olds who won the marginal seats. The difference is not age. It is your perception of the electorate’s position. If you believe the electorate is raring to go with all this left agenda—as I said, much of which I agree with, the difference I have with them is more strategic—then you take some of their positions. If you believe that it is a much harder sell, then you have a different approach. . . . But if you look at the freshmen, by definition the younger ones, overwhelmingly, they are on Pelosi’s side. But they won Republican or marginal seats…
When you watch the [Democratic Presidential-primary] debates, do you not think there are ways that the Party is moving left in substantive ways?
Can I tell you for the third time that I agree with much of them on substance? I’m sorry, that’s frustrating to me. I agree with them on much of the substance. I said that several times! The Party is moving to the left and I think that it should move to the left. I just talked about some of these areas. But the point I am making is that the difference is not substantive so much as it is strategic and tactical. So I don’t know why you would ask me that. By the way, I also take exception to you saying that I think they are in the minority. They are overwhelmingly, statistically, clearly in a minority in the House.
For the record, I will state that they are in a minority in the House.…
Read the whole thing — it’s not that long…
At the end the interviewer says "do you remember me?" And Frank says "no." 😆😆😆😆
— Elizabeth Rogers (@ahumorlessfem) July 22, 2019